< draft-ietf-6man-multicast-scopes-05.txt		draft-ietf-6man-multicast-scopes-06.txt >
	Internet Engineering Task Force R. Droms		Internet Engineering Task Force R. Droms
	Internet-Draft Cisco		Internet-Draft Cisco
	Updates: 4007, 4291 (if approved) May 16, 2014		Updates: 4007, 4291 (if approved) June 3, 2014
	Intended status: Standards Track		Intended status: Standards Track
	Expires: November 17, 2014		Expires: December 5, 2014
	IPv6 Multicast Address Scopes		IPv6 Multicast Address Scopes
	draft-ietf-6man-multicast-scopes-05.txt		draft-ietf-6man-multicast-scopes-06.txt
	Abstract		Abstract
	This document updates the definitions of IPv6 multicast scopes. This		This document updates the definitions of IPv6 multicast scopes. This
	document updates RFC 4007 and RFC 4291		document updates RFC 4007 and RFC 4291
	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.
	skipping to change at page 1, line 32 ¶		skipping to change at page 1, line 32 ¶
	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 November 17, 2014.		This Internet-Draft will expire on December 5, 2014.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the		Copyright (c) 2014 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
	skipping to change at page 3, line 5 ¶		skipping to change at page 3, line 5 ¶
	draft-ietf-roll-trickle-mcast [I-D.ietf-roll-trickle-mcast] desires		draft-ietf-roll-trickle-mcast [I-D.ietf-roll-trickle-mcast] desires
	to use multicast scop 3 for transport of multicast traffic scoped to		to use multicast scop 3 for transport of multicast traffic scoped to
	a network of nodes connected in a mesh. The use of this scop value		a network of nodes connected in a mesh. The use of this scop value
	is to accommodate a multicast scope that is greater than Link-Local		is to accommodate a multicast scope that is greater than Link-Local
	but is also automatically determined by the network architecture.		but is also automatically determined by the network architecture.
	2. Definition of IPv6 Multicast Address Scopes (Updates RFC 4291)		2. Definition of IPv6 Multicast Address Scopes (Updates RFC 4291)
	The following table updates the definitions in RFC 4291:		The following table updates the definitions in RFC 4291:
	+------+--------------------------+		+------+--------------------------+--------------------+
	| scop | NAME |		| scop | NAME | REFERENCE |
	+------+--------------------------+		+------+--------------------------+--------------------+
	| 0 | reserved |		| 0 | Reserved | [ RFC-to-be ] |
	| 1 | Interface |		| 1 | Interface | [ RFC-to-be ] |
	| 2 | Link-Local scope |		| 2 | Link-Local scope | [ RFC-to-be ] |
	| 3 | Realm-Local scope |		| 3 | Realm-Local scope | [ RFC-to-be ] |
	| 4 | Admin-Local scope |		| 4 | Admin-Local scope | [ RFC-to-be ] |
	| 5 | Site-Local scope |		| 5 | Site-Local scope | [ RFC-to-be ] |
	| 6 | (unassigned) |		| 6 | Unassigned | |
	| 7 | (unassigned) |		| 7 | Unassigned | |
	| 8 | Organization-Local scope |		| 8 | Organization-Local scope | [ RFC-to-be ] |
	| 9 | (unassigned) |		| 9 | Unassigned | |
	| A | (unassigned) |		| A | Unassigned | |
	| B | (unassigned) |		| B | Unassigned | |
	| C | (unassigned) |		| C | Unassigned | |
	| D | (unassigned) |		| D | Unassigned | |
	| E | Global scope |		| E | Global scope | [ RFC-to-be ] |
	| F | reserved |		| F | Reserved | [ RFC-to-be ] |
	+------+--------------------------+		+------+--------------------------+--------------------+
	The following change is applied to section 2.7 of RFC 4291:		The following change is applied to section 2.7 of RFC 4291:
	OLD:		OLD:
	Admin-Local scope is the smallest scope that must be		Admin-Local scope is the smallest scope that must be
	administratively configured, i.e., not automatically derived		administratively configured, i.e., not automatically derived
	from physical connectivity or other, non-multicast-related		from physical connectivity or other, non-multicast-related
	configuration.		configuration.
	skipping to change at page 4, line 38 ¶		skipping to change at page 4, line 38 ¶
	to ensure that inclusion contraint is met.		to ensure that inclusion contraint is met.
	3. Definition of Realm-Local scopes		3. Definition of Realm-Local scopes
	The definition of any Realm-Local scope for a particular network		The definition of any Realm-Local scope for a particular network
	technology should be published in an RFC. For example, such a scope		technology should be published in an RFC. For example, such a scope
	definition would be appropriate for publication in an "IPv6-over-foo"		definition would be appropriate for publication in an "IPv6-over-foo"
	RFC.		RFC.
	Any RFCs that include the definition of a Realm-Local scope will be		Any RFCs that include the definition of a Realm-Local scope will be
	listed in the IANA "IPv6 Multicast Address Scopes" registry.		added to the IANA 'IPv6 Multicast Address Scopes' registry under the
			Realm-Local scope entry.
	Section 5 gives the definition of scop 3 for IEEE 802.15.4		Section 5 gives the definition of scop 3 for IEEE 802.15.4
	[IEEE802.15.4] networks.		[IEEE802.15.4] networks.
	4. Definition of automatic and administratively configured scopes		4. Definition of automatic and administratively configured scopes
	(updates RFC 4007)		(updates RFC 4007)
	Section 5 of RFC 4007 [RFC4007] and section 2.7 of RFC 4291 disagree		Section 5 of RFC 4007 [RFC4007] and section 2.7 of RFC 4291 disagree
	about the way in which multicast scope 3 is configured. To resolve		about the way in which multicast scope 3 is configured. To resolve
	that disagreement, change the last bullet in the list in section 5 of		that disagreement, change the last bullet in the list in section 5 of
	skipping to change at page 5, line 27 ¶		skipping to change at page 5, line 27 ¶
	When used in an IP-over-IEEE802.15.4 network, "scop 3" is defined to		When used in an IP-over-IEEE802.15.4 network, "scop 3" is defined to
	include all interfaces sharing a PAN ID.		include all interfaces sharing a PAN ID.
	6. IANA Considerations		6. IANA Considerations
	IANA is asked to establish a sub-registry titled "IPv6 Multicast		IANA is asked to establish a sub-registry titled "IPv6 Multicast
	Address Scopes" in the existing "Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6)		Address Scopes" in the existing "Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6)
	Multicast Address Allocations" registry. The new registry is to be		Multicast Address Allocations" registry. The new registry is to be
	populated with the scope values given in Section 2. New definitions		populated with the scope values given in Section 2. New definitions
	for scop values will be made with "IETF Review" policy. The registry		for scop values will be made with "IETF Review" policy. IANA will
	will have a note associated with scope 3 listing all RFCs that define		add a note to the top of this registry:
	Realm-Local scoping rules that use scope 3.
			The definition of any Realm-Local scope for a particular network
			technology should be published in an RFC. For example, such a
			scope definition would be appropriate for publication in an
			'IPv6- over-foo' RFC.
			Any RFCs that include the definition of a Realm-Local scope will
			be listed in this registry."
	7. Acknowledgments		7. Acknowledgments
	Robert Cragie, Kerry Lynn, Jinmei Tatuya, Dave Thaler and Stig Venaas		Robert Cragie, Kerry Lynn, Jinmei Tatuya, Dave Thaler and Stig Venaas
	all contributed text and/or review to ensure that the updates to RFC		all contributed text and/or review to ensure that the updates to RFC
	4007 and RFC 4291 are correct		4007 and RFC 4291 are correct
	8. Security Considerations		8. Security Considerations
	This document has no security considerations beyond those in RFC 4007		This document has no security considerations beyond those in RFC 4007
End of changes. 7 change blocks.
	28 lines changed or deleted		36 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/