Network Working Group J. Bharatia Internet-Draft Nortel Networks Expires: September 4, 2006 K. Chowdhury Starent Networks A. Lior Bridgewater Systems K. Leung Cisco Systems March 3, 2006 MIPv4 Extension for Configuration Options Exchange draft-ietf-mip4-gen-ext-00.txt Status of this Memo By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- Drafts. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. This Internet-Draft will expire on September 4, 2006. Copyright Notice Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006). Abstract This document describes the mechanism for providing the host configuration information during Mobile IP registration. One or more Configuration Options Exchange Extensions may be included in the Bharatia, et al. Expires September 4, 2006 [Page 1] Internet-Draft March 2006 registration message to provide the Mobile Node the configuration parameters needed for network service usage (e.g. DNS). Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.1. Glossary of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.2. Conventions used in this document . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Configuration Options Exchange Extension . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. Processing of Configuration Options Exchange Extension . . . . 6 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 6. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 12 Bharatia, et al. Expires September 4, 2006 [Page 2] Internet-Draft March 2006 1. Introduction Mobile IPv4 lacks the capability to dynamically configure the interface parameters (e.g. home subnet mask) and network service elements (e.g. DNS servers) on the Mobile Node. These information are required to be manually configured today. There are possible ways to deliver foreign network's configuration information to the Mobile Node, but there is no method for the home network (where the Mobile Node is logically anchored) to provide these parameters. To configure the Mobile Node with the configuration parameters at the time of MIPv4 registration an extension should be defined to carry such information. This document defines this MIPv4 extension. 1.1. Glossary of Terms DNS - Domain Name System [RFC 1035] DHCP - Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol [RFC 2131] 1.2. Conventions used in this document 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 [RFC2119]. Bharatia, et al. Expires September 4, 2006 [Page 3] Internet-Draft March 2006 2. Configuration Options Exchange Extension The Mobile IPv4 extension has the format shown in this section to carry configuration information. This extension MAY be included as a part of Mobile IP Registration Request or Registration Reply. 0 1 2 3 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type | Length | Entity-Type | Sub-Type | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Config-Data +-+-+-+-+-+-... Figure 1: Configuration Options Exchange Extension Type IPV4-CONF-OPTIONS-EXT-TYPE (This extension value will be assigned by IANA from the numbering space defined in [RFC3344] for skippable extensions) Length Indicates the length (in bytes) of the data field within this Extension. The length does NOT include the Type and Length bytes. This field MUST be set to 2 plus the total length of the Config-Data field. Entity-Type This field indicates which Mobility Agent was asked or inserted the extension in the Registration Request or Registration Reply, respectively. The Home Agent or Foreign Agent may include the extension in the Registration Reply, whereas the Mobile Node may append the extension in the Registration Request to ask the Home Agent and/or Foreign Agent for configuration information. Currently the following types are defined: Home Agent = 1 (to be assigned by IANA) Foreign Agent = 2 (to be assigned by IANA) Sub-Type Bharatia, et al. Expires September 4, 2006 [Page 4] Internet-Draft March 2006 At this time the following values are defined: 0: Reserved. 1: DHCP Options. All other values are reserved for future use. Config-Data The configuration parameters are packed in DHCP-based formats in the Config-Data field. Since the size of the Config-Data field is limited to 253 bytes, the Mobility Agent needs to add multiple extensions with this subtype when the configuration information exceeds the boundary. The DHCP option must be contained within one extension and never split up across multiple extensions. Bharatia, et al. Expires September 4, 2006 [Page 5] Internet-Draft March 2006 3. Processing of Configuration Options Exchange Extension The Mobile Node may request values for specific configuration parameters from the Home Agent and/or Foreign Agent by including the 'Parameter Request List' option in the Registration Request. The list of requested parameters is specified as a string of octets, where each octet is a valid DHCP option code as defined in [RFC2132]. If this extension is included in the Registration Request, the Home Agent or Foreign Agent (indicated in the Entity-Type field) should provide requested information in the Registration Reply. The Configuration Options Exchange extension should be repeated in the Registration Request for parameter(s) request based on the Entity- Type. If there are no Configuration Options Exchange Extension in the Registration Request, it's up to the Home Agent or Foreign Agent to decide which configuration parameter to include in the Configuration Options Exchange extension. The configuration parameter(s) should not be overwritten by the Foreign Agent if the Home Agent has included them in the Configuration Options Exchange extension. The Entity-Type field is set to the Mobility Agent that appended the extension in the Registration Reply. When a network entity (identified in the Entity-Type field of the extension) adds a Configuration Options Exchange Extension to a Registration Request or Registration Reply message, this extension MUST appear prior to any authentication extensions added by that entity. Example: Mobile Node wants to obtain the home network prefix mask and DNS servers' IP addresses from its Home Agent during registration. The Registration Request would contain the following values in the Configuration Options Exchange Extension. 0 1 2 3 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | =6 | =1 | =0 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | =55 | =2 | =1 | =6 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Figure 2: Requested Configuration Parameters Home Agent sends a Registration Reply that contains the following values in the Configuration Options Exchange Extension. Bharatia, et al. Expires September 4, 2006 [Page 6] Internet-Draft March 2006 0 1 2 3 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | =18 | =1 | =0 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | =1 | =4 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ... | =6 | =8 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Figure 3: Configuration Values in Response Bharatia, et al. Expires September 4, 2006 [Page 7] Internet-Draft March 2006 4. IANA Considerations This draft defines new Mobile IPv4 extension of types IPV4-CONF- OPTIONS-EXT-TYPE as defined in Section 2 of this document. This value MUST be assigned by IANA from the Mobile IP numbering space for skippable extensions. Bharatia, et al. Expires September 4, 2006 [Page 8] Internet-Draft March 2006 5. Security Considerations There are no additional security aspects imposed by this document in addition to the one defined in [RFC3344]. Bharatia, et al. Expires September 4, 2006 [Page 9] Internet-Draft March 2006 6. Acknowledgments Authors like to thank Curtis Provost, Tom Hiller, Henrik Levkowetz and Sri Gundavelli for their valuable input to this document. 7. 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. [RFC3344] Perkins, C., "IP Mobility Support for IPv4", RFC 3344, August 2002. Bharatia, et al. Expires September 4, 2006 [Page 10] Internet-Draft March 2006 Authors' Addresses Jayshree Bharatia Nortel Networks 2221, Lakeside Blvd Richardson, TX 75082 Phone: +1 972-684-5767 Email: jayshree@nortelnetworks.com Kuntal Chowdhury Starent Networks 30 International Place Tewksbury, MA 01876 Phone: +1 214-550-1416 Email: kchowdhury@starentnetworks.com Avi Lior Bridgewater Systems 303 Terry Fox Drive, Suite 100 Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K2K 3J1 Phone: +1 613-591-6655 Email: avi@bridgewatersystems.com Kent Leung Cisco Systems 170 West Tasman Drive San Jose, CA 95134 Phone: +1 408-526-5030 Email: kleung@cisco.com Bharatia, et al. Expires September 4, 2006 [Page 11] Internet-Draft March 2006 Intellectual Property Statement The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in this document or the extent to which any license under such rights might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at http://www.ietf.org/ipr. The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-ipr@ietf.org. Disclaimer of Validity This document and the information contained herein are provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Copyright Statement Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006). This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights. Acknowledgment Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the Internet Society. Bharatia, et al. Expires September 4, 2006 [Page 12]