PCP Working GroupInternet Engineering Task Force (IETF) M. BoucadairInternet-DraftRequest for Comments: 7291 France TelecomIntended status:Category: Standards Track R. PennoExpires: October 16, 2014ISSN: 2070-1721 D. Wing CiscoApril 14,July 2014 DHCP Options for the Port Control Protocol (PCP)draft-ietf-pcp-dhcp-13Abstract This document specifies DHCP (IPv4 and IPv6) options to configure hosts with Port Control Protocol (PCP) server IP addresses. The use of DHCPv4 or DHCPv6 depends on the PCP deployment scenarios. The set of deployment scenarios to whichuse ofDHCPv4 or DHCPv6apply arecan be applied is outside the scope of this document.Requirements Language The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].Status of This Memo ThisInternet-Draftissubmitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. Internet-Drafts are working documentsan Internet Standards Track document. This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF).Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The listIt represents the consensus ofcurrent Internet- Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Internet-Drafts are draft documents validthe IETF community. It has received public review and has been approved fora maximumpublication by the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 5741. Information about the current status ofsix monthsthis document, any errata, and how to provide feedback on it may beupdated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documentsobtained atany time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." This Internet-Draft will expire on October 16, 2014.http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7291. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. DHCPv6 PCP Server Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3.1. Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3.2. DHCPv6 Client Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4. DHCPv4 PCP Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .54 4.1. Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .54 4.2. DHCPv4 Client Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5. DHCP Server Configuration Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 6. Dual-Stack Hosts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .87 7. Hosts with Multiple Interfaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .87 8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 9.1. DHCPv6 Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 9.2. DHCPv4 Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 10. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .98 11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109 1. Introduction This document defines DHCPv4 [RFC2131] and DHCPv6 [RFC3315] options that can be used to configure hosts with PCP server [RFC6887] IP addresses. This specification assumes a PCP server is reachable with one or multiple IP addresses. As such, a list of IP addresses can be returned in the DHCP PCP server option. This specification allows returning one or multiple lists of PCP server IP addresses. This is used as a hint to guide the PCP client when determining whether to send PCP requests to one or multiple PCP servers. Concretely, the PCP client needs an indication to decide whether entries need to be instantiated in all PCP servers (e.g., multi-homing, multiple PCP-controlled devices providing distinctservices ,services, etc.) orusinguse one IP address from the list (e.g., redundancy group scenario, proxy-based model, etc.). Refer to[I-D.boucadair-pcp-deployment-cases][PCP-DEPLOYMENT] for a discussion on PCP deployment scenarios. For guidelines on how a PCP client can use multiple IP addresses and multiple PCP servers, see[I-D.ietf-pcp-server-selection].[PCP-SERVER]. 1.1. Requirements Language The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. 2. Terminology This document makes use of the following terms: oPCP server"PCP server" denotes a functional element that receives and processes PCP requests from a PCP client. A PCP server can be co- located with or be separated from the function (e.g., NAT, Firewall) it controls. Refer to [RFC6887]. oPCP client"PCP client" denotes a PCP software instance responsible for issuing PCP requests to a PCP server. Refer to [RFC6887]. oDHCP"DHCP" refers to both DHCPv4 [RFC2131] and DHCPv6 [RFC3315]. oDHCP client"DHCP client" denotes a node that initiates requests to obtain configuration parameters from one or more DHCP servers. oDHCP server"DHCP server" refers to a node that responds to requests from DHCP clients. 3. DHCPv6 PCP Server Option 3.1. Format The DHCPv6 PCP server option can be used to configure a list of IPv6 addresses of a PCP server. The format of this option is shown in Figure 1. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | OPTION_V6_PCP_SERVER | Option-length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | |ipv6-address | | | | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | | ipv6-addressPCP Server IPv6 Address | | | | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | ... | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Figure 1: DHCPv6 PCPserver optionServer Option The fields of the option shown in Figure 1 are as follows: o Option-code: OPTION_V6_PCP_SERVER(TBA,(86; see Section 9.1) o Option-length: Length of the'PCP server IP Address(es)'"PCP Server IPv6 Address(es)" field in octets. MUST be a multiple of 16. o PCPserverServer IPv6 Addresses: Includes one or more IPv6 addresses [RFC4291] of the PCP server to be used by the PCP client. Note, IPv4-mapped IPv6 addresses (Section 2.5.5.2 of [RFC4291]) are allowed to be included in this option. To return more than one PCP server to the DHCPv6 client (as opposed to more than one address for a single PCP server), the DHCPv6 server returns multiple instances of OPTION_V6_PCP_SERVER. 3.2. DHCPv6 Client Behavior To discover one or more PCP servers, the DHCPv6 client requests PCP server IP addresses by including OPTION_V6_PCP_SERVER in an Option Request Option (ORO), as described in Section 22.7 of [RFC3315]. The DHCPv6 client MUST be prepared to receive multiple instances of OPTION_V6_PCP_SERVER; each instance is to be treated as a separate PCP server. If an IPv4-mapped IPv6 address is received in OPTION_V6_PCP_SERVER, it indicates that the PCP server has the corresponding IPv4 address. Note: When presented with the IPv4-mapped prefix, current versions of Windows and Mac OS generate IPv4packets,packets but will not send IPv6 packets [RFC6052]. Representing IPv4 addresses as IPv4-mapped IPv6 addresses follows the same logic as insectionSection 5 of [RFC6887]. The DHCPv6 client MUST silently discard multicast and host loopback addresses [RFC6890] conveyed in OPTION_V6_PCP_SERVER. 4. DHCPv4 PCP Option 4.1. Format The DHCPv4 PCP server option can be used to configure a list of IPv4 addresses of a PCP server. The format of this option is illustrated in Figure 2. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Code | Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | List-Length | List of | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ PCPserverServer | / IPv4 Addresses / +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ --- | List-Length | List of | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ PCPserverServer | | / IPv4 Addresses / | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | . ... . optional +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | List-Length | List of | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ PCPserverServer | | / IPv4 Addresses / | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ --- Figure 2: DHCPv4 PCPserver optionServer Option Thedescriptiondescriptions of the fieldsisare as follows: o Code: OPTION_V4_PCP_SERVER(TBA,(158; see Section 9.2); o Length: Length of all included data in octets. The minimum length is 5. o List-Length: Length of the "List of PCPserverServer IPv4 Addresses" field inoctets;octets. MUST be a multiple of 4. o List of PCPserverServer IPv4 Addresses: Contains one or more IPv4 addresses of the PCP server to be used by the PCP client. The format of this field is shown in Figure 3.o OPTION_V4_PCP_SERVER can include multiple lists of PCP server IPv4 addresses; each list is treated as a separate PCP server. When several lists of PCP server IPv4 addresses are to be included, "List-Length" and "PCP server IPv4 Addresses" fields are repeated.0 8 16 24 32 40 48 +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-- | a1 | a2 | a3 | a4 | a1 | a2 | ... +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-- IPv4 Address 1 IPv4 Address 2 ... This format assumes that an IPv4 address is encoded as a1.a2.a3.a4. Figure 3: Format of the List of PCPserverServer IPv4 Addresses OPTION_V4_PCP_SERVER can include multiple lists of PCP server IPv4 addresses; each list is treated as a separate PCP server. When several lists of PCP server IPv4 addresses are to be included, the "List-Length" and "List of PCP Server IPv4 Addresses" fields are repeated. OPTION_V4_PCP_SERVER is a concatenation-requiring option. As such, the mechanism specified in [RFC3396] MUST be used if OPTION_V4_PCP_SERVER exceeds the maximum DHCPv4 option size of 255 octets. 4.2. DHCPv4 Client Behavior To discover one or more PCP servers, the DHCPv4 client requests PCP server IP addresses by including OPTION_V4_PCP_SERVER in a Parameter Request ListOptionoption [RFC2132]. The DHCPv4 client MUST be prepared to receive multiple lists of PCP server IPv4 addresses in the same DHCPv4 PCP server option; each list is to be treated as a separate PCP server. The DHCPv4 client MUST silently discard multicast and host loopback addresses [RFC6890] conveyed in OPTION_V4_PCP_SERVER. 5. DHCP Server Configuration Guidelines DHCP servers supporting the DHCP PCP server option can be configured with a list of IP addresses of the PCP server(s). If multiple IP addresses are configured, the DHCP server MUST be explicitly configured whether all or some of these addresses refer to: 1. the same PCP server: the DHCP server returns multiple addresses in the same instance of the DHCP PCP server option. 2. distinct PCP servers: the DHCP server returns multiple lists of PCP server IP addresses to the requesting DHCP client (encoded as multipleOPTION_V6_PCP_SERVEROPTION_V6_PCP_SERVERs or in the same OPTION_V4_PCP_SERVER); each list is referring to a distinct PCP server. For example, multiple PCP servers may be configured to a PCP client in some deployment contexts such as multi-homing. It is out of the scope of this document to enumerate all deployment scenarios that require multiple PCP servers to be returned. Precisely how DHCP servers are configured to separate lists of IP addresses according to which PCP server they address is out of the scopeforof this document. However, DHCP servers MUST NOT combine the IP addresses of multiple PCP servers and return them to the DHCP client as if they belong to a single PCP server, and DHCP servers MUST NOT separate the addresses of a single PCP server and return them as if theybelongedbelong to distinct PCP servers. For example, if an administrator configures the DHCP server by providing a Fully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN) for a PCP server, even if that FQDN resolves to multiple addresses, the DHCP server MUST deliver them within a single server address block. DHCPv6 servers that implement this option and that can populate the option by resolving FQDNs will need a mechanism for indicating whether to query for A records or only AAAA records. When a query returns A records, the IP addresses in those records are returned in the DHCPv6 response as IPv4-mapped IPv6 addresses. Discussion: The motivation for this design is to accommodate deployment cases where an IPv4 connectivity service is provided while only DHCPv6 is in use (e.g., an IPv4-only PCP server in aDS-LiteDual-Stack Lite (DS-Lite) context [RFC6333]). Since this option requires support for IPv4-mapped IPv6 addresses, a DHCPv6 server implementation will not be complete if it does not query for A records and represent any that are returned as IPv4-mapped IPv6 addresses in DHCPv6 responses. This behavior is neither required nor suggested for DHCPv6 options in general: it is specific to OPTION_V6_PCP_SERVER. The mechanism whereby DHCPv6 implementations provide this functionality is beyond the scope of this document. For guidelines on providing context-specific configuration information (e.g., returning a regional-basedconfiguration),configuration) and information on how a DHCP server might be configured with FQDNs that get resolved on demand, see[I-D.ietf-dhc-topo-conf].[DHC-CONFIG]. 6. Dual-Stack Hosts ADual-Stackdual-stack host might receive a PCP server option via both DHCPv4 and DHCPv6. For guidance on how a DHCP client can handle PCP server IP lists for the same network but obtained via different mechanisms, see[I-D.ietf-pcp-server-selection].[PCP-SERVER]. 7. Hosts with Multiple Interfaces A host may have multiple network interfaces(e.g,(e.g., 3G, IEEE 802.11,etc.);etc.), each configured differently. Each PCP server learned MUST be associated with the interface via which it was learned. Refer to[I-D.ietf-pcp-server-selection][PCP-SERVER] and Section 8.4 of [RFC6887] for more discussion on multi-interface considerations. 8. Security Considerations The security considerations in [RFC2131] and [RFC3315] are to be considered. PCP-related security considerations are discussed in [RFC6887]. The PCPServerserver optiontargets mainlydefined here is applicable when operating under the simple threat model (Section 18.1 of [RFC6887]).It is out of scope of this document to discuss potential implications of the use of this option inOperation under the advanced threat model (Section 18.2 of[RFC6887]).[RFC6887]) may or may not be appropriate; analysis of this question is out of the scope of this document. 9. IANA Considerations 9.1. DHCPv6 Option IANAis requested to assignhas assigned the following new DHCPv6 Option Code in the registry maintained inhttp://www.iana.org/assignments/ dhcpv6-parameters:<http://www.iana.org/assignments/dhcpv6-parameters>: Option Name Value -------------------- ----- OPTION_V6_PCP_SERVERTBA86 9.2. DHCPv4 Option IANAis requested to assignhas assigned the following new DHCPv4 Option Code in the registry maintained inhttp://www.iana.org/assignments/bootp- dhcp-parameters/:<http://www.iana.org/assignments/bootp-dhcp-parameters>: Option NameValueTag DatalengthLength Meaning ---------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- OPTION_V4_PCP_SERVERTBA158 Variable; Includes one or multiple lists the minimum of PCP server IP addresses; each length iseachlist is treated as a5.separate 5. PCP server. 10. Acknowledgements Many thanks to C. Jacquenet, R. Maglione, D. Thaler, T. Mrugalski, T. Reddy, S. Cheshire, M. Wasserman, C. Holmberg, A. Farrel, S. Farrel, B. Haberman, and P. Resnick for their review and comments. Special thanks to T. Lemon and B. Volz forthe reviewtheir reviews and theireffortefforts to enhance this specification. 11. References 11.1. Normative References [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. [RFC2131] Droms, R., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol", RFC 2131, March 1997. [RFC2132] Alexander, S. and R. Droms, "DHCP Options and BOOTP Vendor Extensions", RFC 2132, March 1997. [RFC3315] Droms, R., Bound, J., Volz, B., Lemon, T., Perkins, C., and M. Carney, "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6)", RFC 3315, July 2003. [RFC3396] Lemon, T. and S. Cheshire, "Encoding Long Options in the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCPv4)", RFC 3396, November 2002. [RFC4291] Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture", RFC 4291, February 2006. [RFC6887] Wing, D., Cheshire, S., Boucadair, M., Penno, R., and P. Selkirk, "Port Control Protocol (PCP)", RFC 6887, April 2013. [RFC6890] Cotton, M., Vegoda, L., Bonica, R., and B. Haberman, "Special-Purpose IP Address Registries", BCP 153, RFC 6890, April 2013. 11.2. Informative References[I-D.boucadair-pcp-deployment-cases] Boucadair, M., "PCP Deployment Models", draft-boucadair- pcp-deployment-cases-01 (work in progress), December 2013. [I-D.ietf-dhc-topo-conf][DHC-CONFIG] Lemon, T. and T. Mrugalski, "Customizing DHCP Configuration on the Basis of Network Topology",draft- ietf-dhc-topo-conf-01 (workWork inprogress),Progress, February 2014.[I-D.ietf-pcp-server-selection][PCP-DEPLOYMENT] Boucadair, M., "Port Control Protocol (PCP) Deployment Models", Work in Progress, April 2014. [PCP-SERVER] Boucadair, M., Penno, R., Wing, D., Patil, P., and T. Reddy, "PCP Server Selection",draft-ietf-pcp-server- selection-02 (workWork inprogress), JanuaryProgress, April 2014. [RFC6052] Bao, C., Huitema, C., Bagnulo, M., Boucadair, M., and X. Li, "IPv6 Addressing of IPv4/IPv6 Translators", RFC 6052, October 2010. [RFC6333] Durand, A., Droms, R., Woodyatt, J., and Y. Lee, "Dual- Stack Lite Broadband Deployments Following IPv4 Exhaustion", RFC 6333, August 2011. Authors' Addresses Mohamed Boucadair France Telecom Rennes 35000 FranceEmail:EMail: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com Reinaldo Penno Cisco USAEmail:EMail: repenno@cisco.com Dan Wing Cisco Systems, Inc. 170 West Tasman Drive San Jose, California 95134 USAEmail:EMail: dwing@cisco.com