< draft-ietf-dots-multihoming-01.txt   draft-ietf-dots-multihoming-02.txt >
Network Working Group M. Boucadair Network Working Group M. Boucadair
Internet-Draft Orange Internet-Draft Orange
Intended status: Standards Track T. Reddy Intended status: Standards Track T. Reddy
Expires: July 25, 2019 McAfee Expires: January 23, 2020 McAfee
January 21, 2019 W. Pan
Huawei Technologies
July 22, 2019
Multi-homing Deployment Considerations for Distributed-Denial-of-Service Multi-homing Deployment Considerations for Distributed-Denial-of-Service
Open Threat Signaling (DOTS) Open Threat Signaling (DOTS)
draft-ietf-dots-multihoming-01 draft-ietf-dots-multihoming-02
Abstract Abstract
This document discusses multi-homing considerations for Distributed- This document discusses multi-homing considerations for Distributed-
Denial-of-Service Open Threat Signaling (DOTS). The goal is to Denial-of-Service Open Threat Signaling (DOTS). The goal is to
provide some guidance for DOTS clients/gateways when multihomed. provide some guidance for DOTS clients/gateways when multihomed.
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
skipping to change at page 1, line 34 skipping to change at page 1, line 36
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 https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at https://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 July 25, 2019. This Internet-Draft will expire on January 23, 2020.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2019 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
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (https://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 2, line 18 skipping to change at page 2, line 20
2. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Multi-Homing Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4. Multi-Homing Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.1. Residential Single CPE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4.1. Residential Single CPE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.2. Multi-Homed Enterprise: Single CPE, Multiple Upstream 4.2. Multi-Homed Enterprise: Single CPE, Multiple Upstream
ISPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 ISPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.3. Multi-homed Enterprise: Multiple CPEs, Multiple Upstream 4.3. Multi-homed Enterprise: Multiple CPEs, Multiple Upstream
ISPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 ISPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.4. Multi-homed Enterprise with the Same ISP . . . . . . . . 7 4.4. Multi-homed Enterprise with the Same ISP . . . . . . . . 7
5. DOTS Deployment Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5. DOTS Deployment Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5.1. Residential CPE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5.1. Residential CPE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5.2. Multi-Homed Enterprise: Single CPE, Multiple Upstream 5.2. Multi-Homed Enterprise: Single CPE, Multiple Upstream
ISPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 ISPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.3. Multi-Homed Enterprise: Multiple CPEs, Multiple Upstream 5.3. Multi-Homed Enterprise: Multiple CPEs, Multiple Upstream
ISPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 ISPs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.4. Multi-Homed Enterprise: Single ISP . . . . . . . . . . . 12 5.4. Multi-Homed Enterprise: Single ISP . . . . . . . . . . . 12
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
In many deployments, it may not be possible for a network to In many deployments, it may not be possible for a network to
determine the cause of a distributed Denial-of-Service (DoS) attack determine the cause of a distributed Denial-of-Service (DoS) attack
[RFC4732]. Rather, the network may just realize that some resources [RFC4732]. Rather, the network may just realize that some resources
seem to be under attack. To improve such situation, the IETF is seem to be under attack. To improve such situation, the IETF is
specifying the DDoS Open Threat Signaling (DOTS) specifying the DDoS Open Threat Signaling (DOTS)
[I-D.ietf-dots-architecture]architecture, where a DOTS client can [I-D.ietf-dots-architecture]architecture, where a DOTS client can
inform a DOTS server that the network is under a potential attack and inform a DOTS server that the network is under a potential attack and
skipping to change at page 13, line 12 skipping to change at page 13, line 39
and Christian Jacquenet for sharing their comments on the mailing and Christian Jacquenet for sharing their comments on the mailing
list. list.
Thanks to Kirill Kasavchenko for the comments. Thanks to Kirill Kasavchenko for the comments.
9. References 9. References
9.1. Normative References 9.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-dots-architecture] [I-D.ietf-dots-architecture]
Mortensen, A., Andreasen, F., K, R., Teague, N., Compton, Mortensen, A., K, R., Andreasen, F., Teague, N., and R.
R., and c. christopher_gray3@cable.comcast.com, Compton, "Distributed-Denial-of-Service Open Threat
"Distributed-Denial-of-Service Open Threat Signaling Signaling (DOTS) Architecture", draft-ietf-dots-
(DOTS) Architecture", draft-ietf-dots-architecture-10 architecture-14 (work in progress), May 2019.
(work in progress), December 2018.
[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, Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC6724] Thaler, D., Ed., Draves, R., Matsumoto, A., and T. Chown, [RFC6724] Thaler, D., Ed., Draves, R., Matsumoto, A., and T. Chown,
"Default Address Selection for Internet Protocol Version 6 "Default Address Selection for Internet Protocol Version 6
(IPv6)", RFC 6724, DOI 10.17487/RFC6724, September 2012, (IPv6)", RFC 6724, DOI 10.17487/RFC6724, September 2012,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6724>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6724>.
skipping to change at page 13, line 41 skipping to change at page 14, line 18
9.2. Informative References 9.2. Informative References
[I-D.boucadair-dots-server-discovery] [I-D.boucadair-dots-server-discovery]
Boucadair, M., K, R., and P. Patil, "Distributed-Denial- Boucadair, M., K, R., and P. Patil, "Distributed-Denial-
of-Service Open Threat Signaling (DOTS) Server Discovery", of-Service Open Threat Signaling (DOTS) Server Discovery",
draft-boucadair-dots-server-discovery-05 (work in draft-boucadair-dots-server-discovery-05 (work in
progress), October 2018. progress), October 2018.
[I-D.ietf-dots-data-channel] [I-D.ietf-dots-data-channel]
Boucadair, M., K, R., Nishizuka, K., Xia, L., Patil, P., Boucadair, M. and R. K, "Distributed Denial-of-Service
Mortensen, A., and N. Teague, "Distributed Denial-of- Open Threat Signaling (DOTS) Data Channel Specification",
Service Open Threat Signaling (DOTS) Data Channel draft-ietf-dots-data-channel-30 (work in progress), July
Specification", draft-ietf-dots-data-channel-24 (work in 2019.
progress), December 2018.
[I-D.ietf-dots-signal-channel] [I-D.ietf-dots-signal-channel]
K, R., Boucadair, M., Patil, P., Mortensen, A., and N. K, R., Boucadair, M., Patil, P., Mortensen, A., and N.
Teague, "Distributed Denial-of-Service Open Threat Teague, "Distributed Denial-of-Service Open Threat
Signaling (DOTS) Signal Channel Specification", draft- Signaling (DOTS) Signal Channel Specification", draft-
ietf-dots-signal-channel-26 (work in progress), December ietf-dots-signal-channel-35 (work in progress), July 2019.
2018.
[I-D.ietf-dots-use-cases] [I-D.ietf-dots-use-cases]
Dobbins, R., Migault, D., Fouant, S., Moskowitz, R., Dobbins, R., Migault, D., Fouant, S., Moskowitz, R.,
Teague, N., Xia, L., and K. Nishizuka, "Use cases for DDoS Teague, N., Xia, L., and K. Nishizuka, "Use cases for DDoS
Open Threat Signaling", draft-ietf-dots-use-cases-17 (work Open Threat Signaling", draft-ietf-dots-use-cases-18 (work
in progress), January 2019. in progress), July 2019.
[RFC3582] Abley, J., Black, B., and V. Gill, "Goals for IPv6 Site- [RFC3582] Abley, J., Black, B., and V. Gill, "Goals for IPv6 Site-
Multihoming Architectures", RFC 3582, Multihoming Architectures", RFC 3582,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3582, August 2003, DOI 10.17487/RFC3582, August 2003,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3582>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3582>.
[RFC4116] Abley, J., Lindqvist, K., Davies, E., Black, B., and V. [RFC4116] Abley, J., Lindqvist, K., Davies, E., Black, B., and V.
Gill, "IPv4 Multihoming Practices and Limitations", Gill, "IPv4 Multihoming Practices and Limitations",
RFC 4116, DOI 10.17487/RFC4116, July 2005, RFC 4116, DOI 10.17487/RFC4116, July 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4116>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4116>.
skipping to change at line 661 skipping to change at page 15, line 27
Email: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com Email: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
Tirumaleswar Reddy Tirumaleswar Reddy
McAfee, Inc. McAfee, Inc.
Embassy Golf Link Business Park Embassy Golf Link Business Park
Bangalore, Karnataka 560071 Bangalore, Karnataka 560071
India India
Email: TirumaleswarReddy_Konda@McAfee.com Email: TirumaleswarReddy_Konda@McAfee.com
Wei Pan
Huawei Technologies
Email: william.panwei@huawei.com
 End of changes. 11 change blocks. 
24 lines changed or deleted 23 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/