idnits 2.17.1 draft-gray-rfc1888bis-03.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** It looks like you're using RFC 3978 boilerplate. You should update this to the boilerplate described in the IETF Trust License Policy document (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info), which is required now. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3978, Section 5.1 on line 16. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3978, Section 5.5 on line 359. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3979, Section 5, paragraph 1 on line 372. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3979, Section 5, paragraph 2 on line 379. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3979, Section 5, paragraph 3 on line 385. ** This document has an original RFC 3978 Section 5.4 Copyright Line, instead of the newer IETF Trust Copyright according to RFC 4748. ** This document has an original RFC 3978 Section 5.5 Disclaimer, instead of the newer disclaimer which includes the IETF Trust according to RFC 4748. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** There are 2 instances of too long lines in the document, the longest one being 1 character in excess of 72. -- The draft header indicates that this document obsoletes RFC1888, but the abstract doesn't seem to directly say this. It does mention RFC1888 though, so this could be OK. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the RFC 3978 Section 5.4 Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document seems to lack a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, but may have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008. If you have contacted all the original authors and they are all willing to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust, then this is fine, and you can ignore this comment. If not, you may need to add the pre-RFC5378 disclaimer. (See the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.) -- The document date (December 2005) is 6700 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) == Unused Reference: 'BCP78' is defined on line 295, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'BCP79' is defined on line 298, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'NSAP' is defined on line 308, but no explicit reference was found in the text ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 3667 (ref. 'BCP78') (Obsoleted by RFC 3978) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 3979 (ref. 'BCP79') (Obsoleted by RFC 8179) -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. 'NSAP' ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 2434 (Obsoleted by RFC 5226) -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 1888 (Obsoleted by RFC 4048) -- Duplicate reference: RFC1888, mentioned in '4048', was also mentioned in '1888'. -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 1888 (ref. '4048') (Obsoleted by RFC 4048) Summary: 7 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 4 warnings (==), 12 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 Network Working Group Eric Gray 2 Internet Draft John Rutemiller 3 Obsoletes: 1888 Marconi Corporation, plc. 4 Category: Standards Track George Swallow 5 Expiration Date: June 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. 6 December 2005 8 Internet Code Point Assignments for NSAP Addresses 9 draft-gray-rfc1888bis-03 11 Status of this Memo 13 By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any 14 applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware 15 have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes 16 aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79. 18 This document may not be modified, and derivative works of it may 19 not be created, except to publish it as an RFC, reformat it for 20 readability or translate it into languages other than English. 22 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 23 Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that 24 other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- 25 Drafts. 27 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six 28 months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents 29 at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 30 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress". 32 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at: 33 http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html 35 The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at: 36 http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html 38 Abstract 40 This document is intended to accomplish two highly inter-related 41 tasks: to establish an "initial" Internet Code Point (ICP) assignment 42 for each of IPv4 and IPv6 address encoding in Network Service Access 43 Point (NSAP) Addresses, and to recommend an IANA assignment policy 44 for currently unassigned ICP values. In the first task, this document 45 is a partial replacement for RFC 1888 - particularly for section 6 of 46 RFC 1888. In the second task, this document incorporates wording and 47 specifications from ITU recommendation X.213 and further recommends 48 that IANA use the "IETF consensus" assignment policy in making future 49 ICP assignments. 51 Gray, et al Internet Code Point Assignments December 2005 53 TABLE OF CONTENTS 55 1. Introduction .................................................. 2 56 1.1. Conventions ................................................. 3 57 1.2. Acronyms and Terminology .................................... 3 58 2. IANA Considerations ........................................... 3 59 3. Initial Allocations and Uses .................................. 4 60 3.1. IPv4 Address Encoding in an NSAPA ........................... 4 61 3.2. IPv6 Address Encoding in an NSAPA ........................... 5 62 4. Security Considerations ....................................... 6 63 5. References .................................................... 6 64 5.1 Normative References ......................................... 6 65 5.2 Informative References ....................................... 6 66 6. Author Information ............................................ 7 67 7. Copyright Notice .............................................. 7 68 8. Intellectual Property Notice .................................. 8 69 9. Acknowledgement ............................................... 8 71 1. Introduction 73 Section 6 of RFC 1888 [1888] previously provided for assignment of 74 the initial Internet Code Point (ICP) value '0' for encoding an IPv6 75 address in a Network Service Access (or Attachment) Point (NSAP) 76 address. RFC 1888 also defined multiple means for restricted encoding 77 of an NSAP address in an IPv6 address. 79 The means RFC 1888 defined for encoding NSAP addresses in IPv6 80 address format, was heavily annotated with warnings and limitations 81 that apply should this encoding be used. Possibly as a result, these 82 encodings are not used and appear never to have been used in any IPv6 83 deployment. In addition, section 6 contains minor errors. As a result 84 of these various considerations, RFC 1888 [1888] has been obsoleted 85 and declared Historic by RFC 4048 [4048]. 87 It is the belief of the authors of this document that the errors in 88 section 6 of RFC 1888 were - at least in part - the result of the 89 fact that the ITU specification [X.213] that originally assigned 90 Authority and Format Indentifier (AFI) 35 to IANA was not freely 91 publicized, nor was it incorporated or explained using the mechanism 92 commonly used in the IETF - i.e. - via an RFC. 94 It is therefore part of the purpose of this document to provide that 95 explanation. 97 In addition, because there are other documents that refer to the IPv6 98 ICP assignment in RFC 1888, it is necessary for the errors in section 99 6 of RFC 1888 to be corrected - irrespective of the RFC's ultimate 100 status. 102 Finally, no previous RFC - including RFC 1888 - has ever formalized 104 Gray, et al Internet Code Point Assignments December 2005 106 an assignment of an IPv4 ICP. This may have been - in part - because 107 of a lack of formal definition of an IANA assignment policy for ICP 108 values under the IANA allocated AFI (35). 110 This document replaces section 6 of RFC 1888 in defining the ICP for 111 IPv6 address encoding in an NSAP address - and - formalizes the ICP 112 assignment for IPv4 address encoding in an NSAP address. 114 1.1. Conventions 116 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 117 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 118 document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [2119]. 120 1.2. Acronyms and Terminology 122 AFI - Authority and Format Identifier 123 BCD - Binary Coded Decimal 124 DSP - Domain Specific Part 125 IANA - Internet Assigned Number Authority 126 ICP - Internet Code Point 127 IDI - Initial Domain Identifier 128 IDP - Initial Domain Part 129 IETF - Internet Engineering Task Force 130 ISO - International Standardization Organization 131 NSAP - Network Service Access (or Attachment) Point (often NSAPA) 132 NSAPA - NSAP Address; 20 Octet Address Format 133 OSI - Open Systems Interconnect 134 RFC - Request For Comments 135 WIP - Work In Progress 137 2. IANA Considerations 139 An ITU Recommendation [X.213] has allocated two AFI designating IANA 140 as the assignment authority. One of these two AFI ('34') is allocated 141 for assignment of NSAPA in Decimal Numeric Format. This document does 142 not address allocation for this AFI as it is not clear what - if any 143 - use can be made of this encoding format at this time. The other AFI 144 ('35') is to be used for binary encoding except as noted below. 146 The NSAPA format consists of an Initial Domain Part (IDP) and Domain 147 Specific Part (DSP). The IDP, in turn, consists of an Authority and 148 Format Identifier (AFI) and an Initial Domain Identifier (IDI). The 149 AFI is defined to be a binary octet and the IDI is defined to be four 150 decimal encoded in two octets using Binary Coded Decimal format. 151 Each nibble of the IDI is used to represent a decimal digit - using 152 binary value '0000' through '1001'. 154 In assigning allocation authority for AFI '35' to IANA, ITU-T 156 Gray, et al Internet Code Point Assignments December 2005 158 [X.213] recommendation specifies that the two octet IDI will be used 159 to hold an Internet Code Point (ICP) which - because of the decimal 160 encoding - MUST be in the decimal range from '0' to '9999'. 162 The ITU recommendation assumes the assignment of ICP '0' (zero) for 163 IPv6 address encoding in an Network Service Access Point Address 164 (NSAPA or - often - NSAP). In addition, ITU-T assumed that IANA 165 would assign an ICP for IPv4 address encoding in an NSAPA and X.213 166 assumes that the ICP value for this purpose would be '1'. 168 In an NSAPA, the DSP is the remaining octets after the IDP. For AFI 169 '35', this is 17 octets having a format as defined by IANA - or as 170 defined by another party and published with IANA consent. 172 IANA - as the Authority responsible for the Authority and Format 173 Identifier (AFI) '35' - SHOULD NOT assign an ICP unless there is 174 a corresponding defined, and published, format at the time of the 175 code point assignment. 177 Given consent of IANA, the following ICP values are assigned on 178 approval of this document: 180 ICP Value Address Encoding Format Definition 181 ---------- ----------------- ---------------------------- 182 '0' IPv6 , section 3.2 183 '1' IPv4 , section 3.1 185 Remaining decimal values '2' through '9999' MUST be assigned on an 186 IETF consensus basis [2434]. 188 3. Initial Allocations and Uses 190 This document continues the ICP assignment and format definition as 191 previously defined in RFC 1888, and formalizes the allocation of ICP 192 value '1' for IPv4 encoding and the format to be used. The sections 193 below describe the specific IPv4 and IPv6 address encoding formats. 195 3.1. IPv4 Address Encoding in an NSAPA 197 If it is required, for whatever reason, to embed an IPv4 address 198 inside a 20-octet NSAP address, then the following format MUST be 199 used. Note: alignment is an artifact of existing NSAPA usage. 201 A specific possible use of this embedding is to express an IP address 202 within the ATM Forum address format. Another possible use would be 203 to allow CLNP packets that encapsulate IPv4 packets to be routed in a 204 CLNP network using the IPv4 address architecture. Several leading 205 octets of the IPv4 address could be used as a CLNP routing prefix. 207 Gray, et al Internet Code Point Assignments December 2005 209 An NSAPA with an AFI value of '35' and an ICP value of '1' (one) 210 encodes a 4 octet IPv4 address in the first 4 octets of the DSP. 211 The last 13 octets of the DSP are unspecified in this document. To 212 maintain compatibility with both NSAP format and IPv4 addressing, 213 these octets MUST be present, but have no intrinsic significance 214 for IPv4. The default values for the unspecified octets is zero. 216 0 1 2 3 217 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 1 218 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 219 0-3 | AFI = 0x35 | ICP = 0001 | IPv4 (octet 0)| 220 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 221 4-7 | IPv4 (octets 1-3) | | 222 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 223 8-11 | | 224 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 225 12-15| | 226 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 227 16-19| | 228 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 230 An NSAPA with the IANA AFI code and ICP set to '1' (one) is converted 231 to an IPv4 address by stripping off the first 3 and the last 13 232 octets. If the NSAP addressed contents are passed to a higher layer, 233 the last 13 octets SHOULD be presented to the higher layer as well. 235 If an NSAP address using this encoding is used for routing in an IPv4 236 routing architecture, only the 4 octet IPv4 address MAY be considered. 238 3.2. IPv6 Address Encoding in an NSAPA 240 If it is required, for whatever reason, to embed an IPv6 address 241 inside a 20-octet NSAP address, then the following format MUST be 242 used. Note: alignment is an artifact of existing NSAPA usage. 244 A specific possible use of this embedding is to express an IP address 245 within the ATM Forum address format. Another possible use would be 246 to allow CLNP packets that encapsulate IPv6 packets to be routed in a 247 CLNP network using the IPv6 address architecture. Several leading 248 octets of the IPv6 address could be used as a CLNP routing prefix. 250 An NSAPA with an AFI value of '35' and an ICP value of '0' (zero) 251 encodes a 16 octet IPv6 address in the first 16 octets of the DSP. 252 The last octet of the DSP is a selector. To maintain compatibility 253 with both NSAP format and IPv6 addressing, this octet MUST be 254 present, but it has no intrinsic significance for IPv6. Its default 255 value is zero, but other values may be used as specified for any 256 specific application. For example, this octet may be used to specify 257 one of 255 possible port numbers. 259 Gray, et al Internet Code Point Assignments December 2005 261 0 1 2 3 262 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 1 263 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 264 0-3 | AFI = 0x35 | ICP = 0000 | IPv6 (octet 0)| 265 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 266 4-7 | IPv6 (octets 1-4) | 267 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 268 8-11 | IPv6 (octets 5-8) | 269 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 270 12-15| IPv6 (octets 9-12) | 271 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 272 16-19| IPv6 (octets 13-15) | | 273 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 275 An NSAPA with the IANA AFI code and ICP set to '0' (zero) is 276 converted to an IPv6 address by stripping off the first three and the 277 twentieth octets. If the NSAP addressed contents are passed to a 278 higher layer, the last octet SHOULD be presented to the higher layer 279 as well. 281 If an NSAP address using this encoding is used for routing in an IPv6 282 routing architecture, only the 16 octet IPv6 address MAY be 283 considered. 285 4. Security Considerations 287 The NSAP encoding of IPv4 and IPv6 addresses is compatible with the 288 corresponding security mechanisms of RFC 2401 [2401], hence this 289 document introduces no new security exposure in the Internet. 291 5. References 293 5.1 Normative References 295 [BCP78] BCP 78/RFC 3667, "IETF Rights in Contributions", Scott 296 Bradner, February 2004. 298 [BCP79] BCP 79/RFC 3979, "Intellectual Property Rights in IETF 299 Technology, Scott Bradner, March 2005. 301 [2401] Successor to RFC 2401, "Security Architecture for the 302 Internet Protocol" (draft-ietf-ipsec-rfc2401bis-06), 303 Work in Progress, Stephen Kent and Karen Seo, March 2005. 305 [2119] RFC 2119 / BCP 14, "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 306 Requirement Levels", Scott Bradner, March 1997. 308 [NSAP] International Standardization Organization, "Information 309 technology - Open Systems Interconnection - Network service 310 Definition", ISO/IEC 8348:2002, 2002. 312 Gray, et al Internet Code Point Assignments December 2005 314 [X.213] ITU-T Recommendation X.213, X-Series Recommendations, Data 315 Networks and Open Systems Communications, October, 2001. 317 [2434] RFC 2434, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations 318 Section in RFCs", Thomas Narten and Harald Alvestrand, 319 October 1998. 321 5.2 Informative References 323 [1888] RFC 1888, "OSI NSAPs and IPv6", J. Bound, et al, August 1996. 325 [4048] RFC 4048, "RFC 1888 is Obsolete", Brian Carpenter, April 2005. 327 6. Author Information 329 Eric Gray 330 Marconi Corporation, plc. 331 900 Chelmsford Street 332 Lowell, MA, 01851 333 E-Mail: Eric.Gray@Marconi.com 335 John Rutemiller 336 Marconi Corporation, plc. 337 3000 Marconi Drive 338 Warrendale, PA, 15086-7502 339 E-Mail: John.Rutemiller@Marconi.com 341 George Swallow 342 Cisco Systems, Inc. 343 1414 Massachusetts Avenue 344 Boxborough, MA, 01719 345 E-Mail: swallow@cisco.com 347 7. Copyright Notice 349 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005). This document is subject 350 to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and 351 except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights. 353 This document and the information contained herein are provided on an 354 "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS 355 OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET 356 ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, 357 INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE 358 INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED 359 WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. 361 Gray, et al Internet Code Point Assignments December 2005 363 8. Intellectual Property Notice 365 The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any 366 Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to 367 pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in 368 this document or the extent to which any license under such rights 369 might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has 370 made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information 371 on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be 372 found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. 374 Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any 375 assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an 376 attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of 377 such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this 378 specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at 379 http://www.ietf.org/ipr. 381 The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any 382 copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary 383 rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement 384 this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at ietf- 385 ipr@ietf.org. 387 9. Acknowledgement 389 Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the 390 Internet Society.