| < draft-chakrabarti-nordmark-6man-efficient-nd-00.txt | draft-chakrabarti-nordmark-6man-efficient-nd-01.txt > | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| INTAREA WG S. Chakrabarti | INTAREA WG S. Chakrabarti | |||
| Internet-Draft Ericsson | Internet-Draft Ericsson | |||
| Updates: 4861 (if approved) E. Nordmark | Updates: 4861 (if approved) E. Nordmark | |||
| Intended status: Standards Track Cisco Systems | Intended status: Standards Track Cisco Systems | |||
| Expires: April 15, 2013 M. Wasserman | Expires: May 25, 2013 M. Wasserman | |||
| Painless Security | Painless Security | |||
| October 12, 2012 | November 21, 2012 | |||
| Efficiency aware IPv6 Neighbor Discovery Optimizations | Efficiency aware IPv6 Neighbor Discovery Optimizations | |||
| draft-chakrabarti-nordmark-6man-efficient-nd-00 | draft-chakrabarti-nordmark-6man-efficient-nd-01 | |||
| Abstract | Abstract | |||
| IPv6 Neighbor Discovery (RFC 4861) protocol has been designed for | IPv6 Neighbor Discovery (RFC 4861) protocol has been designed for | |||
| neighbor's address resolution, unreachability detection, address | neighbor's address resolution, unreachability detection, address | |||
| autoconfiguration, router advertisement and solicitation. With the | autoconfiguration, router advertisement and solicitation. With the | |||
| progress of Internet adoption on various industries including home, | progress of Internet adoption on various industries including home, | |||
| wireless, m2m and Cellular(LTE) networks, there is a desire for | wireless, m2m and Cellular(LTE) networks, there is a desire for | |||
| optimizing legacy IPv6 Neighbor Discovery protocol to be more | optimizing the legacy IPv6 Neighbor Discovery protocol. This | |||
| efficient in terms of number of signaling messages in the network. | document describes a method of optimization by reducing multicast | |||
| This document describes a method of optimization by reducing periodic | messages and introducing an IPv6 address Registration mechanism. | |||
| multicast messages, frequent Neighbor Solicitation messages and | ||||
| supports interoperability with legacy IPv6 nodes and avoids Duplicate | ||||
| Address Detection by introducing an address Registration mechanism. | ||||
| Efficient IPv6 Neighbor Discovery protocol is useful for energy- | Efficient IPv6 Neighbor Discovery protocol is useful for energy- | |||
| efficient IPv6 networks as well as Data Center and Home Networks. | efficient IPv6 networks and as well as Data Center and Home Networks. | |||
| The solution is capable of handling existing legacy IPv6 nodes in the | ||||
| network. | ||||
| Status of this Memo | Status of this Memo | |||
| This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the | This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the | |||
| provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. | provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. | |||
| Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | |||
| Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute | Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute | |||
| working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- | working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- | |||
| Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. | Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. | |||
| Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months | Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months | |||
| and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any | and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any | |||
| time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference | time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference | |||
| material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." | material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." | |||
| This Internet-Draft will expire on April 15, 2013. | This Internet-Draft will expire on May 25, 2013. | |||
| Copyright Notice | Copyright Notice | |||
| Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | |||
| document authors. All rights reserved. | document authors. All rights reserved. | |||
| This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal | This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal | |||
| Provisions Relating to IETF Documents | Provisions Relating to IETF Documents | |||
| (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | |||
| publication of this document. Please review these documents | publication of this document. Please review these documents | |||
| carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect | carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect | |||
| to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must | to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must | |||
| include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of | include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of | |||
| the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as | the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as | |||
| described in the Simplified BSD License. | described in the Simplified BSD License. | |||
| Table of Contents | Table of Contents | |||
| 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | |||
| 2. Definition Of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | 2. Definition Of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | |||
| 3. Assumptions for efficiency-aware Neighbor Discovery . . . . . 7 | 3. Assumptions for efficiency-aware Neighbor Discovery . . . . . 7 | |||
| 4. The set of Requirements for efficiency and optimization . . . 7 | 4. The set of Requirements for efficiency and optimization . . . 7 | |||
| 5. Basic Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | 5. Basic Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | |||
| 6. Applicability Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | 6. Applicability Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | |||
| 7. New Neighbor Discovery Options and Messages . . . . . . . . . 9 | 7. New Neighbor Discovery Options and Messages . . . . . . . . . 9 | |||
| 7.1. Address Registration Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | 7.1. Address Registration Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | |||
| 7.2. Refresh and De-registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 | 7.2. Refresh and De-registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | |||
| 7.3. A New Router Advertisement Flag . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 | 7.3. A New Router Advertisement Flag . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 | |||
| 8. efficiency-aware Neighbor Discovery Messages . . . . . . . . . 12 | 8. Efficiency-aware Neighbor Discovery Messages . . . . . . . . . 11 | |||
| 9. efficiency-aware Host Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | 9. Efficiency-aware Host Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | |||
| 10. The Energy Aware Default Router (NEAR) Behavior . . . . . . . 14 | 10. The Energy Aware Default Router (NEAR) Behavior . . . . . . . 13 | |||
| 10.1. Router Configuration Modes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | 10.1. Router Configuration Modes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | |||
| 11. NCE Management in efficiency-aware Routers . . . . . . . . . . 15 | 11. NCE Management in efficiency-aware Routers . . . . . . . . . . 15 | |||
| 11.1. Handling ND DOS Attack . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | 11.1. Handling ND DOS Attack . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 | |||
| 12. Mixed-Mode Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | 12. Mixed-Mode Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 | |||
| 13. Bootstrapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | 13. Bootstrapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 | |||
| 14. Handling Sleepy Nodes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | 14. Handling Sleepy Nodes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | |||
| 15. Duplicate Address Detection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | 15. Duplicate Address Detection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | |||
| 16. Use Case Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | 16. Use Case Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | |||
| 16.1. Data Center Routers on the link . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | 16.1. Data Center Routers on the link . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 | |||
| 16.2. Edge Routers and Home Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | 16.2. Edge Routers and Home Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | |||
| 16.3. M2M Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | 16.3. M2M Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | |||
| 16.4. Cellular and Wi-fi Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | 16.4. Cellular and Wi-fi Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | |||
| 17. Mobility Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | 17. Mobility Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 | |||
| 18. Other Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | 18. Other Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | |||
| 18.1. Detecting Network Attachment(DNA) . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | 18.1. Detecting Network Attachment(DNA) . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | |||
| 18.2. ND-Proxy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 | 18.2. Proxying for Efficiency-Aware hosts . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | |||
| 18.3. DHCPv6 Interaction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 | 18.3. DHCPv6 Interaction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 | |||
| 19. Updated Neighbor Discovery Constants . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 | 19. Updated Neighbor Discovery Constants . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 | |||
| 20. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | 20. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 | |||
| 21. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | 21. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 | |||
| 22. Changelog . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | 22. Changelog . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 | |||
| 23. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | 23. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | |||
| 24. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 | 24. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | |||
| 24.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 | 24.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 | |||
| 24.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 | 24.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 | |||
| Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 | Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 | |||
| 1. Introduction | 1. Introduction | |||
| IPv6 ND [ND] is based on multicast signaling messages on the local | IPv6 ND [ND] is based on multicast signaling messages on the local | |||
| link in order to avoid broadcast messages. Following power-on and | link in order to avoid broadcast messages. Following power-on and | |||
| initialization of the network in IPv6 Ethernet networks, a node joins | initialization of the network in IPv6 Ethernet networks, a node joins | |||
| the solicited-node multicast address on the interface and then | the solicited-node multicast address on the interface and then | |||
| performs duplicate address detection (DAD) for the acquired link- | performs duplicate address detection (DAD) for the acquired link- | |||
| skipping to change at page 4, line 35 ¶ | skipping to change at page 4, line 35 ¶ | |||
| destination node is always powered and generally available. | destination node is always powered and generally available. | |||
| The periodic RA messages in IPv6 ND [ND], and NS/NA messages require | The periodic RA messages in IPv6 ND [ND], and NS/NA messages require | |||
| all IPv6 nodes in the link to be in listening mode even when they are | all IPv6 nodes in the link to be in listening mode even when they are | |||
| in idle cycle. It requires energy for the sleepy nodes which may | in idle cycle. It requires energy for the sleepy nodes which may | |||
| otherwise be sleeping during the idle period. Non-sleepy nodes also | otherwise be sleeping during the idle period. Non-sleepy nodes also | |||
| save energy if instead of continuous listening, they actually pro- | save energy if instead of continuous listening, they actually pro- | |||
| actively synchronize their states with one or two entities in the | actively synchronize their states with one or two entities in the | |||
| network. With the explosion of Internet-of-things and machine to | network. With the explosion of Internet-of-things and machine to | |||
| machine communication, more and more devices would be using IPv6 | machine communication, more and more devices would be using IPv6 | |||
| addresses in the near future. Today, most electricity usage in | addresses in the near future. | |||
| United States and in developing countries are in the home buildings | ||||
| and commercial buildings; the electronic Internet appliances/tablets | ||||
| etc. are gaining popularities in the modern home networks. These | ||||
| network of nodes must be conscious about saving energy in order to | ||||
| reduce user-cost. This will eventually reduce stress on electrical | ||||
| grids and carbon foot-print. | ||||
| IPv6 Neighbor Discovery Optimization for 6LoWPAN [6LOWPAN-ND] | IPv6 Neighbor Discovery Optimization for 6LoWPAN [6LOWPAN-ND] | |||
| addresses many of the concerns described above by optimizing the | addresses many of the concerns described above by optimizing the | |||
| Router advertisement, minimizing periodic multicast packets in the | Router advertisement, minimizing periodic multicast packets in the | |||
| network and introducing two new options - one for node registration | network and introducing two new options - one for node registration | |||
| and another for prefix dissemination in a network where all nodes in | and another for prefix dissemination in a network where all nodes in | |||
| the network are uniquely identified by their 64-bit Interface | the network are uniquely identified by their 64-bit Interface | |||
| Identifier. EUI-64 identifiers are recommended as unique Interface | Identifier. EUI-64 identifiers are recommended as unique Interface | |||
| Identifiers, however if the network is isolated from the Internet, | Identifiers, however if the network is isolated from the Internet, | |||
| uniqueness of the identifiers may be obtained by other mechanisms | uniqueness of the identifiers may be obtained by other mechanisms | |||
| skipping to change at page 5, line 4 ¶ | skipping to change at page 4, line 47 ¶ | |||
| IPv6 Neighbor Discovery Optimization for 6LoWPAN [6LOWPAN-ND] | IPv6 Neighbor Discovery Optimization for 6LoWPAN [6LOWPAN-ND] | |||
| addresses many of the concerns described above by optimizing the | addresses many of the concerns described above by optimizing the | |||
| Router advertisement, minimizing periodic multicast packets in the | Router advertisement, minimizing periodic multicast packets in the | |||
| network and introducing two new options - one for node registration | network and introducing two new options - one for node registration | |||
| and another for prefix dissemination in a network where all nodes in | and another for prefix dissemination in a network where all nodes in | |||
| the network are uniquely identified by their 64-bit Interface | the network are uniquely identified by their 64-bit Interface | |||
| Identifier. EUI-64 identifiers are recommended as unique Interface | Identifier. EUI-64 identifiers are recommended as unique Interface | |||
| Identifiers, however if the network is isolated from the Internet, | Identifiers, however if the network is isolated from the Internet, | |||
| uniqueness of the identifiers may be obtained by other mechanisms | uniqueness of the identifiers may be obtained by other mechanisms | |||
| such as a random number generator with lowest collision rate. | such as a random number generator with lowest collision rate. | |||
| Although, the ND optimization [6LOWPAN-ND] applies to 6LoWPAN | Although, the ND optimization [6LOWPAN-ND] applies to 6LoWPAN | |||
| [LOWPAN] network, the concept is mostly applicable to a power-aware | [LOWPAN] network, the concept is mostly applicable to a power-aware | |||
| IPv6 network. Therefore, this document generalizes the address | IPv6 network. Therefore, this document generalizes the address | |||
| registration and multicast reduction in [6LOWPAN-ND] to all IPv6 | registration and multicast reduction in [6LOWPAN-ND] to all IPv6 | |||
| links. | links. | |||
| Thus optimizing the regular IPv6 Neighbor Discovery [ND] to minimize | Thus optimizing the regular IPv6 Neighbor Discovery [ND] to minimize | |||
| total number of related signaling messages without losing generality | total number of related signaling messages without losing generality | |||
| of Neighbor Discovery, autoconfiguration and reliable host-router | of Neighbor Discovery, autoconfiguration and reliable host-router | |||
| communication, are desirable in any efficient IPv6 networks such as | communication, are desirable in any efficient IPv6 networks such as | |||
| Home, Enterprise networks, Data Centers and Operator's radio | Home, Enterprise networks, Data Centers and Operator's Cellular/ | |||
| networks. | Wireless networks. | |||
| The optimization will be highly effective for links and nodes which | The optimization will be highly effective for links and nodes which | |||
| do not support multicast and as well as for a multicast network | do not support multicast and as well as for a multicast network | |||
| without MLD snooping switches. Moreover, in the MLD-snooping | without MLD snooping switches. Moreover, in the MLD-snooping | |||
| networks the MLD switches will deal with less number of multicasts. | networks the MLD switches will deal with less number of multicasts. | |||
| The goal of this document is to provide an efficient Neighbor | The goal of this document is to provide an efficient Neighbor | |||
| Discovery Protocol in classic IPv6 subnets and links. Research | Discovery Protocol in classic IPv6 subnets and links. Research | |||
| indicates that often networked- nodes require more energy than stand- | indicates that often networked-nodes require more energy than stand- | |||
| alone nodes because a node's energy usage depends on network messages | alone nodes because a node's energy usage depends on network messages | |||
| it receives and responds. While reducing energy consumption is | it receives and responds. While reducing energy consumption is | |||
| essential for battery operated nodes in some machines, saving energy | essential for battery operated nodes in some machines, saving energy | |||
| actually a cost factor in business in general as the explosion of | actually a cost factor in business in general as the explosion of | |||
| more device usage is leading to usage of more servers and network | more device usage is leading to usage of more servers and network | |||
| infrastructure in all sectors of the society and business. Thus this | infrastructure in all sectors of the society and business. Thus this | |||
| document introduces the node registration concept discussed in | document introduces the node registration concept discussed in | |||
| 6LoWPAN [LOWPAN], without handling the 'multi-level subnets' | 6LoWPAN [LOWPAN], without handling the 'multi-level subnets' | |||
| scenarios that are not the typical usecases in classic IPv6 subnets. | scenarios that are not the typical usecases in classic IPv6 subnets. | |||
| skipping to change at page 10, line 27 ¶ | skipping to change at page 10, line 18 ¶ | |||
| | Type | Length = 2 | Status | Reserved | | | Type | Length = 2 | Status | Reserved | | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| | Reserved | Registration Lifetime | | | Reserved | Registration Lifetime | | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| | | | | | | |||
| + EUI-64 or equivalent + | + EUI-64 or equivalent + | |||
| | | | | | | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| Fields: | Fields: | |||
| Type: TBD1 ( See [6LOWPAN-ND] ) | Type: 33 ( See [6LOWPAN-ND] ) | |||
| Length: 8-bit unsigned integer. The length of the option in | Length: 8-bit unsigned integer. The length of the option in | |||
| units of 8 bytes. Always 2. | units of 8 bytes. Always 2. | |||
| Status: 8-bit unsigned integer. Indicates the status of a | Status: 8-bit unsigned integer. Indicates the status of a | |||
| registration in the NA response. MUST be set to 0 in | registration in the NA response. MUST be set to 0 in | |||
| NS messages. See below. | NS messages. See below. | |||
| Reserved: This field is unused. It MUST be initialized to zero | Reserved: This field is unused. It MUST be initialized to zero | |||
| by the sender and MUST be ignored by the receiver. | by the sender and MUST be ignored by the receiver. | |||
| Registration Lifetime: 16-bit unsigned integer. The amount of time | Registration Lifetime: 16-bit unsigned integer. The amount of time | |||
| in a unit of 10 seconds that the router should retain | in a unit of 60 seconds that the router should retain | |||
| the Neighbor Cache entry for the sender of the NS that | the Neighbor Cache entry for the sender of the NS that | |||
| includes this option. | includes this option. | |||
| EUI-64: 64 bits. This field is used to uniquely identify the | EUI-64: 64 bits. This field is used to uniquely identify the | |||
| interface of the registered address by including the | interface of the registered address by including the | |||
| EUI-64 identifier assigned to it unmodified. | EUI-64 identifier assigned to it unmodified. | |||
| The Status values used in Neighbor Advertisements are: | The Status values used in Neighbor Advertisements are: | |||
| +--------+--------------------------------------------+ | +--------+--------------------------------------------+ | |||
| | Status | Description | | | Status | Description | | |||
| skipping to change at page 12, line 6 ¶ | skipping to change at page 11, line 35 ¶ | |||
| Discovery as per this document. All other cases E bit is 0. | Discovery as per this document. All other cases E bit is 0. | |||
| The legacy IPv6 hosts will ignore the E bit in RA advertisement. All | The legacy IPv6 hosts will ignore the E bit in RA advertisement. All | |||
| EAH MUST look for E bit in RA in order to determine the efficiency- | EAH MUST look for E bit in RA in order to determine the efficiency- | |||
| aware support in the default router in the link. | aware support in the default router in the link. | |||
| This document assumes that an implementation will have configuration | This document assumes that an implementation will have configuration | |||
| knobs to determine whether it is running in classical IPv6 ND [ND] or | knobs to determine whether it is running in classical IPv6 ND [ND] or | |||
| Optimized Energy Aware ND (this document) mode or both(Mixed mode). | Optimized Energy Aware ND (this document) mode or both(Mixed mode). | |||
| 8. efficiency-aware Neighbor Discovery Messages | 8. Efficiency-aware Neighbor Discovery Messages | |||
| Router Advertisement(RA): Periodic RAs SHOULD be avoided. Only | Router Advertisement(RA): Periodic RAs SHOULD be avoided. Only | |||
| solicited RAs are RECOMMENDED. An RA MUST | solicited RAs are RECOMMENDED. An RA MUST | |||
| contain the Source Link-layer Address option | contain the Source Link-layer Address option | |||
| containing Router's link-layer address (this | containing Router's link-layer address (this | |||
| is optional in [ND]. An RA MUST carry Prefix | is optional in [ND]. An RA MUST carry Prefix | |||
| information option with L bit being unset, so | information option with L bit being unset, so | |||
| that hosts do not multicast any NS messages | that hosts do not multicast any NS messages | |||
| as part of address resolution. A new flag | as part of address resolution. A new flag | |||
| (E-flag) is introduced in the RA in order to | (E-flag) is introduced in the RA in order to | |||
| skipping to change at page 13, line 17 ¶ | skipping to change at page 13, line 4 ¶ | |||
| Address Resolution: No NS/NA are sent as the prefixes are treated | Address Resolution: No NS/NA are sent as the prefixes are treated | |||
| as off-link. Thus no address resolution is | as off-link. Thus no address resolution is | |||
| performed at the hosts. The routers keep | performed at the hosts. The routers keep | |||
| track of Neighbor Solicitations with Address | track of Neighbor Solicitations with Address | |||
| Registration options(ARO) and create an | Registration options(ARO) and create an | |||
| extended neighbor cache of reachable | extended neighbor cache of reachable | |||
| addresses. The router also knows the nexthop | addresses. The router also knows the nexthop | |||
| link-local address and corresponding link- | link-local address and corresponding link- | |||
| layer address when it wants to route a | layer address when it wants to route a | |||
| packet. | packet. | |||
| Neighbor Unreachability Detection(NUD): NUD is performed in | Neighbor Unreachability Detection(NUD): NUD is performed in | |||
| "forward-progress" fashion as described in | "forward-progress" fashion as described in | |||
| section 7.3.1 of RFC 4861[ND]. However, if | section 7.3.1 of RFC 4861[ND]. However, if | |||
| Address Registration Option is used, the NUD | Address Registration Option is used, the NUD | |||
| SHOULD be combined with the Re-registration | SHOULD be combined with the Re-registration | |||
| of the node. This way no extra message for | of the node. This way no extra message for | |||
| NUD is required. | NUD is required. | |||
| 9. efficiency-aware Host Behavior | 9. Efficiency-aware Host Behavior | |||
| A host sends Router Solicitation at the system startup and also when | A host sends Router Solicitation at the system startup and also when | |||
| it suspects that one of its default routers have become | it suspects that one of its default routers have become | |||
| unreachable(after NUD fails). The EAH MUST process the E-bit in RA | unreachable(after NUD fails). The EAH MUST process the E-bit in RA | |||
| as described in this document. The EAH MUST use ARO option to | as described in this document. The EAH MUST use ARO option to | |||
| register with the neighboring NEAR router. | register with the neighboring NEAR router. | |||
| A host SHOULD be able to autoconfigure its IPv6 addresses using the | A host SHOULD be able to autoconfigure its IPv6 addresses using the | |||
| IPv6 prefix obtained from Router Advertisement. The host SHOULD form | IPv6 prefix obtained from Router Advertisement. The host SHOULD form | |||
| its link-local address from the EUI-64 as specified by IEEE | its link-local address from the EUI-64 as specified by IEEE | |||
| skipping to change at page 18, line 32 ¶ | skipping to change at page 18, line 16 ¶ | |||
| 13. Bootstrapping | 13. Bootstrapping | |||
| If the network is a efficiency-aware IPv6 subnet, and the efficiency- | If the network is a efficiency-aware IPv6 subnet, and the efficiency- | |||
| aware Neighbor Discovery mechansim is used by the hosts and routers | aware Neighbor Discovery mechansim is used by the hosts and routers | |||
| as described in this document. At the start, the node uses its link- | as described in this document. At the start, the node uses its link- | |||
| local address to send Router Solicitation and then it sends the Node | local address to send Router Solicitation and then it sends the Node | |||
| Registration message as described in this document in order to form | Registration message as described in this document in order to form | |||
| the address. The Duplicate address detection process should be | the address. The Duplicate address detection process should be | |||
| skipped if the network is guaranteed to have unique interface | skipped if the network is guaranteed to have unique interface | |||
| identifiers which is used to form the IPv6 address. | identifiers which is used to form an IPv6 address. | |||
| Node Router | Node Router | |||
| | | | 0. |[Forms LL IPv6 addr] | | |||
| 1. | ---------- Router Solicitation --------> | | 1. | ---------- Router Solicitation --------> | | |||
| | [SLLAO] | | | [SLLAO] | | |||
| 2. | <-------- Router Advertisement --------- | | 2. | <-------- Router Advertisement --------- | | |||
| | [PIO + SLLAO] | | | [PIO + SLLAO] | | |||
| | | | | | | |||
| skipping to change at page 20, line 28 ¶ | skipping to change at page 19, line 43 ¶ | |||
| assignment of alternate IPv6 address is out of scope of this | assignment of alternate IPv6 address is out of scope of this | |||
| document. | document. | |||
| 16. Use Case Analysis | 16. Use Case Analysis | |||
| This section provides applicability scenarios where the efficiency- | This section provides applicability scenarios where the efficiency- | |||
| aware Neighbor Discovery will be most beneficial. | aware Neighbor Discovery will be most beneficial. | |||
| 16.1. Data Center Routers on the link | 16.1. Data Center Routers on the link | |||
| efficiency-aware Routers and hosts are useful in IPv6 networks in the | Efficiency-aware Routers and hosts are useful in IPv6 networks in the | |||
| Data Center as they produce less signaling and also provides ways to | Data Center as they produce less signaling and also provides ways to | |||
| minimize the ND flood of messages. Moreover, this mechanism will | minimize the ND flood of messages. Moreover, this mechanism will | |||
| work with data-center nodes which are deliberately in sleep mode for | work with data-center nodes which are deliberately in sleep mode for | |||
| saving energy. | saving energy. | |||
| This solution will work well in Data Center Virtual network and VM | This solution will work well in Data Center Virtual network and VM | |||
| scenarios where number of VLANs are very high and ND signalings are | scenarios where number of VLANs are very high and ND signalings are | |||
| undesirably high due the multicast messaging and periodic Router | undesirably high due the multicast messaging and periodic Router | |||
| Advertisments and Neighbor Unreachability detections. | Advertisments and Neighbor Unreachability detections. | |||
| skipping to change at page 21, line 32 ¶ | skipping to change at page 20, line 48 ¶ | |||
| The cellular and Wi-fi IPv6 devices can act as efficiency-aware hosts | The cellular and Wi-fi IPv6 devices can act as efficiency-aware hosts | |||
| and register with their nearest default router. This will reduce | and register with their nearest default router. This will reduce | |||
| number of signalings and the registration method(ARO) will provide | number of signalings and the registration method(ARO) will provide | |||
| operators a mechanism for tracking the nodes in the default router. | operators a mechanism for tracking the nodes in the default router. | |||
| 17. Mobility Considerations | 17. Mobility Considerations | |||
| If the hosts move from one subnet to another, they MUST first de- | If the hosts move from one subnet to another, they MUST first de- | |||
| register and then register themselves in the new subnet or network. | register and then register themselves in the new subnet or network. | |||
| Otherwise, the regular IPv6 Mobility [IPV6M]behavior applies. | If a node moves away without de-registration and returns to the | |||
| network before the registration lifetime expires, its registration is | ||||
| still considered valid. For run-away nodes the registration expires | ||||
| after the lifetime expiry or due to unreachablity whichever comes | ||||
| first. Otherwise, the regular IPv6 Mobility [IPV6M]behavior applies. | ||||
| 18. Other Considerations | 18. Other Considerations | |||
| 18.1. Detecting Network Attachment(DNA) | 18.1. Detecting Network Attachment(DNA) | |||
| IPv6 DNA[DNA] uses unicast ND probes and link-layer indications to | IPv6 DNA[DNA] uses unicast ND probes and link-layer indications to | |||
| detect movement of its network attachments. Upon detecting link- | detect movement of its network attachments. Upon detecting link- | |||
| layer indication, it sends a all-routers Solicitation message. | layer indication, it sends a all-routers Solicitation message. When | |||
| However DNA [DNA] optimizes the IPv6 address operability while a node | the node implements this document along with DNA, it MUST send ARO | |||
| is moving and its network attachments are changing with respect to | option with its Neighbor Solicitation unicast message if the | |||
| the neighboring routers. This document does not expect Router | candidate router advertisement indicates that the router is a NEAR | |||
| Advertisements from the neighboring routers, thus this solution will | router. If the candiate router is a legacy router then and it is the | |||
| rely on the ND probes for movement detection and as well as link- | only choice then the EAH host adapt to the legacy behavior. However | |||
| layer indication. When the node implements this document along with | if EAH node implements DNA host capability as well, then it SHOULD | |||
| DNA, it MUST send ARO option with its Neighbor Solicitation unicast | give preference to the NEAR routers in its candidate list of routers. | |||
| message if the candidate router advertisement indicates that the | ||||
| router is a NEAR router. If the candiate router is a legacy router | ||||
| then and it is the only choice then the EAH host adapt to the legacy | ||||
| behavior. However if EAH node implements DNA host capability as | ||||
| well, then it SHOULD give preference to the NEAR routers in its | ||||
| candidate list of routers. | ||||
| 18.2. ND-Proxy | Thus the ND optimization solution will work seamlessly with DNA | |||
| implementations and no change is required in DNA solution because of | ||||
| Neighbor Discovery updates. It is a deployment and configuration | ||||
| consideration as to run the network in mixed mode or efficient-mode. | ||||
| ND proxy support in mixed-mode operation: The ND Proxy will continue | 18.2. Proxying for Efficiency-Aware hosts | |||
| to support the legacy IPv6 Neighbor Solicitation requests in the | ||||
| mixed mode. The NEAR router SHOULD act as the ND proxy on behalf of | The efficient-ND SHOULD continue to support the legacy IPv6 Neighbor | |||
| EAH hosts for the legacy nodes' NS requests for EAH. | Solicitation requests in the mixed mode. The NEAR router SHOULD act | |||
| as the ND proxy on behalf of EAH hosts for the legacy nodes' NS | ||||
| requests for EAH. | ||||
| 18.3. DHCPv6 Interaction | 18.3. DHCPv6 Interaction | |||
| Co-existence with DHCP: For classical IPv6, if DHCPv6 or central | Co-existence with DHCP: For classical IPv6, if DHCPv6 or central | |||
| address allocation mechanism is used, then Neighbor Discovery | address allocation mechanism is used, then Neighbor Discovery | |||
| autoconfiguration is not used for global address allocation. | autoconfiguration is not used for global address allocation. | |||
| However, link-local duplicate address detection, Neighbor | However, link-local duplicate address detection, Neighbor | |||
| solicitation, Neighbor unreachability detection are still used. Upon | solicitation, Neighbor unreachability detection are still used. Upon | |||
| assignment of the IPv6-address from DHCPv6, a EAH node SHOULD then | assignment of the IPv6-address from DHCPv6, a EAH node SHOULD then | |||
| register the IP-address with the default router for avoiding | register the IP-address with the default router for avoiding | |||
| skipping to change at page 22, line 40 ¶ | skipping to change at page 22, line 11 ¶ | |||
| Although the solution described in this document prevents unnecesary | Although the solution described in this document prevents unnecesary | |||
| multicast messages in the IPv6 ND procedure, it does not affect | multicast messages in the IPv6 ND procedure, it does not affect | |||
| normal IPv6 multicast packets and ability of nodes to join and leave | normal IPv6 multicast packets and ability of nodes to join and leave | |||
| the multicast group or forwarding multicast traffic or responding to | the multicast group or forwarding multicast traffic or responding to | |||
| multicast queries. | multicast queries. | |||
| 19. Updated Neighbor Discovery Constants | 19. Updated Neighbor Discovery Constants | |||
| This section discusses the updated default values of ND constants | This section discusses the updated default values of ND constants | |||
| based on [ND] section 10. New and changed constants are listed only | based on [ND] section 10. New and changed constants are listed only | |||
| for efficiency-aware-nd implementation. | for efficiency-aware-nd implementation. These values SHOULD be | |||
| configurable and tunable to fit implementations and deployment. | ||||
| Router Constants: | Router Constants: | |||
| MAX_RTR_ADVERTISEMENTS(NEW) 3 transmissions | MAX_RTR_ADVERTISEMENTS(NEW) 3 transmissions | |||
| MIN_DELAY_BETWEEN_RAS(CHANGED) 1 second | MIN_DELAY_BETWEEN_RAS(CHANGED) 1 second | |||
| TENTATIVE_LEGACY_NCE_LIFETIME(NEW) 30 seconds | TENTATIVE_LEGACY_NCE_LIFETIME(NEW) 30 seconds | |||
| Host Constants: | Host Constants: | |||
| MAX_RTR_SOLICITATION_INTERVAL(NEW) 60 seconds | MAX_RTR_SOLICITATION_INTERVAL(NEW) 60 seconds | |||
| Also refer to [ENH-ND] , [IMPAT-ND] and [6LOWPAN-ND] for further | ||||
| tuning of ND constants. | ||||
| 20. Security Considerations | 20. Security Considerations | |||
| These optimizations are not known to introduce any new threats | These optimizations are not known to introduce any new threats | |||
| against Neighbor Discovery beyond what is already documented for IPv6 | against Neighbor Discovery beyond what is already documented for IPv6 | |||
| [RFC 3756]. | [RFC 3756]. | |||
| Section 11.2 of [ND] applies to this document as well. | Section 11.2 of [ND] applies to this document as well. | |||
| This mechanism minimizes the possibility of ND /64 DOS attacks in | This mechanism minimizes the possibility of ND /64 DOS attacks in | |||
| efficiency-aware mode. See Section 11.1. | efficiency-aware mode. See Section 11.1. | |||
| skipping to change at page 24, line 7 ¶ | skipping to change at page 23, line 28 ¶ | |||
| The inspiration of such a IPv6 generic document came from Margaret | The inspiration of such a IPv6 generic document came from Margaret | |||
| Wasserman who saw a need for such a document at the IOT workshop at | Wasserman who saw a need for such a document at the IOT workshop at | |||
| Prague IETF. | Prague IETF. | |||
| The authors acknowledge the ND denial of service issues and key | The authors acknowledge the ND denial of service issues and key | |||
| causes mentioned in the draft-halpern-6man-nddos-mitigation document | causes mentioned in the draft-halpern-6man-nddos-mitigation document | |||
| by Joel Halpern. Thanks to Joel Halpern for pinpointing the problems | by Joel Halpern. Thanks to Joel Halpern for pinpointing the problems | |||
| that are now addressed in the NCE management section. | that are now addressed in the NCE management section. | |||
| The authors like to thank Dave Thaler, Jari Arkko, Ylva Jading, | The authors like to thank Dave Thaler, Jari Arkko, Ylva Jading, | |||
| Niklas J. Johnsson for their useful comments on this work. | Niklas J. Johnsson, Reda Nedjar, Purvi Shah, Jaume Rius Riu, Fredrik | |||
| Garneij for their useful comments on this work. | ||||
| 24. References | 24. References | |||
| 24.1. Normative References | 24.1. Normative References | |||
| [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate | [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate | |||
| Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. | Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. | |||
| [RFC2434] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an | [RFC2434] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an | |||
| IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 2434, | IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 2434, | |||
| October 1998. | October 1998. | |||
| [6LOWPAN-ND] | [6LOWPAN-ND] | |||
| Shelby, Z., Chakrabarti, S., and E. Nordmark, "ND | Shelby, Z., Chakrabarti, S., Nordmark, E., and C. Bormann, | |||
| Optimizations for 6LoWPAN", draft-ietf-6lowpan-nd-17.txt | "ND Optimizations for 6LoWPAN", RFC 6775, November 2012. | |||
| (work in progress), June 2011. | ||||
| [ND] Narten, T., Nordmark, E., Simpson, W., and H. Soliman, | [ND] Narten, T., Nordmark, E., Simpson, W., and H. Soliman, | |||
| "Neighbor Discovery for IP version 6", RFC 4861, | "Neighbor Discovery for IP version 6", RFC 4861, | |||
| September 2007. | September 2007. | |||
| [LOWPAN] Montenegro, G. and N. Kushalnagar, "Transmission of IPv6 | [LOWPAN] Montenegro, G. and N. Kushalnagar, "Transmission of IPv6 | |||
| Packets over IEEE 802.15.4 networks", RFC 4944, | Packets over IEEE 802.15.4 networks", RFC 4944, | |||
| September 2007. | September 2007. | |||
| [LOWPANG] Kushalnagar, N. and G. Montenegro, "6LoWPAN: Overview, | [LOWPANG] Kushalnagar, N. and G. Montenegro, "6LoWPAN: Overview, | |||
| skipping to change at page 25, line 15 ¶ | skipping to change at page 24, line 38 ¶ | |||
| [AUTOADHOC] | [AUTOADHOC] | |||
| Baccelli, E. and M. Townsley, "IP Addressing Model in | Baccelli, E. and M. Townsley, "IP Addressing Model in | |||
| Adhoc Networks", RFC 5889, September 2010. | Adhoc Networks", RFC 5889, September 2010. | |||
| [NDDOS-halpern] | [NDDOS-halpern] | |||
| Halpern, J., "IP Addressing Model in Adhoc Networks", | Halpern, J., "IP Addressing Model in Adhoc Networks", | |||
| draft-halpern-6man-nddos-mitigation-00.txt (work in | draft-halpern-6man-nddos-mitigation-00.txt (work in | |||
| progress), October 2011. | progress), October 2011. | |||
| [ENH-ND] Kumari, W., Gashinsky, I., Jaeggli, J., and K. | ||||
| Chittimaneni, "Neighbor Discovery Enhancement for DOS | ||||
| mitigation", draft-gashinsky-6man-v6nd-enhance-02 (work in | ||||
| progress), October 2012. | ||||
| [IMPAT-ND] | ||||
| Nordmark, E. and I. Gashinsky, "Neighbor Unreachability | ||||
| Detection is too impatient", | ||||
| draft-ietf-6man-impatient-nud-05 (work in progress), | ||||
| October 2012. | ||||
| [IEEE] IEEE Computer Society, "IEEE Std. 802.15.4-2003", , | [IEEE] IEEE Computer Society, "IEEE Std. 802.15.4-2003", , | |||
| October 2003. | October 2003. | |||
| [PD] Miwakawya, S., "Requirements for Prefix Delegation", | [PD] Miwakawya, S., "Requirements for Prefix Delegation", | |||
| RFC 3769, June 2004. | RFC 3769, June 2004. | |||
| [RF] Haberman, B. and B. Hinden, "IPv6 Router Advertisement | [RF] Haberman, B. and B. Hinden, "IPv6 Router Advertisement | |||
| Flags option", RFC 5175, March 2008. | Flags option", RFC 5175, March 2008. | |||
| [ULA] "Unique Local IPv6 Addresses", RFC 4193. | [ULA] "Unique Local IPv6 Addresses", RFC 4193. | |||
| End of changes. 37 change blocks. | ||||
| 74 lines changed or deleted | 84 lines changed or added | |||
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/ | ||||