| < draft-ietf-homenet-naming-architecture-dhc-options-13.txt | draft-ietf-homenet-naming-architecture-dhc-options-14.txt > | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Homenet D. Migault | Homenet D. Migault | |||
| Internet-Draft Ericsson | Internet-Draft Ericsson | |||
| Intended status: Standards Track R. Weber | Intended status: Standards Track R. Weber | |||
| Expires: November 14, 2021 Akamai | Expires: November 14, 2021 Akamai | |||
| T. Mrugalski | T. Mrugalski | |||
| Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. | Internet Systems Consortium, Inc. | |||
| May 13, 2021 | May 13, 2021 | |||
| DHCPv6 Options for Home Network Naming Authority | DHCPv6 Options for Home Network Naming Authority | |||
| draft-ietf-homenet-naming-architecture-dhc-options-13 | draft-ietf-homenet-naming-architecture-dhc-options-14 | |||
| Abstract | Abstract | |||
| This document defines DHCPv6 options so an agnostic Homenet Naming | This document defines DHCPv6 options so an agnostic Homenet Naming | |||
| Authority (HNA) can automatically proceed to the appropriate | Authority (HNA) can automatically proceed to the appropriate | |||
| configuration and outsource the authoritative naming service for the | configuration and outsource the authoritative naming service for the | |||
| home network. In most cases, the outsourcing mechanism is | home network. In most cases, the outsourcing mechanism is | |||
| transparent for the end user. | transparent for the end user. | |||
| Status of This Memo | Status of This Memo | |||
| skipping to change at page 2, line 11 ¶ | skipping to change at page 2, line 11 ¶ | |||
| 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. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 | 1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 | |||
| 2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | 2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 | |||
| 3. Protocol Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | 3. Procedure Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | |||
| 4. Payload Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | 4. DHCPv6 Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | |||
| 4.1. Registered Homenet Domain Option . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | 4.1. Registered Homenet Domain Option . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | |||
| 4.2. Distribution Manager Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | 4.2. Distribution Manager Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | |||
| 4.2.1. Supported Transport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | 4.2.1. Supported Transport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | |||
| 4.3. Reverse Distribution Manager Server Option . . . . . . . 6 | 4.3. Reverse Distribution Manager Server Option . . . . . . . 6 | |||
| 5. DHCP Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | 5. DHCPv6 Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | |||
| 5.1. DHCPv6 Server Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | 5.1. DHCPv6 Server Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | |||
| 5.2. DHCPv6 Client Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | 5.2. DHCPv6 Client Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | |||
| 5.3. DHCPv6 Relay Agent Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | 5.3. DHCPv6 Relay Agent Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | |||
| 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | |||
| 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | |||
| 8. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | 8. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | |||
| 9. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | 9. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | |||
| 10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | 10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | |||
| 10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | 10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 | |||
| 10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | 10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 | |||
| skipping to change at page 2, line 44 ¶ | skipping to change at page 2, line 44 ¶ | |||
| Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | |||
| 1. Terminology | 1. Terminology | |||
| The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", | The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", | |||
| "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and | "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and | |||
| "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in | "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in | |||
| BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all | BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all | |||
| capitals, as shown here. | capitals, as shown here. | |||
| The reader is expected to be familiar with | The reader should be familiar with | |||
| [I-D.ietf-homenet-front-end-naming-delegation] and its terminology | [I-D.ietf-homenet-front-end-naming-delegation]. | |||
| section. | ||||
| 2. Introduction | 2. Introduction | |||
| [I-D.ietf-homenet-front-end-naming-delegation] specifies how an | [I-D.ietf-homenet-front-end-naming-delegation] specifies how an | |||
| entity designated as the Homenet Naming Authority (HNA) outsources a | entity designated as the Homenet Naming Authority (HNA) outsources a | |||
| Public Homenet Zone to an Outsourcing DNS Infrastructure (DOI). | Public Homenet Zone to an Outsourcing DNS Infrastructure (DOI). | |||
| This document shows how an ISP can provision automatically the HNA | This document describes how a network can provision the HNA with a | |||
| with a specific DOI. Most likely the DOI will be - at least partly | specific DOI. This could be particularly useful for a DOI partly | |||
| be - managed or provided by its ISP, but other cases may envision the | managed by an ISP, or to make home networks resilient to HNA | |||
| ISP storing some configuration so the homenet becomes resilient to | replacement. The ISP delegates an IP prefix to the home network as | |||
| HNA replacement. | well as the associated reverse zone. The ISP is thus aware of the | |||
| owner of that IP prefix, and as such becomes a natural candidate for | ||||
| The ISP delegates the home network an IP prefix it owns as well as | hosting the Homenet Reverse Zone - that is the Reverse Distribution | |||
| the associated reverse zone. The ISP is well aware of the owner of | Manager (RDM) and potentially the Reverse Public Authoritative | |||
| that prefix, and as such becomes a natural candidate for hosting the | Servers. | |||
| Homenet Reverse Zone - that is the Reverse Distribution Manager (RDM) | ||||
| and potentially the Reverse Public Authoritative Servers. | ||||
| In addition, the ISP often identifies the home network with a name. | In addition, ISPs often identify the line of the home network with a | |||
| In most cases, the name is used by the ISP for its internal network | name. Such name is used for their internal network management | |||
| management operations and is not a name the home network owner has | operations and is not a name the home network owner has registered | |||
| registered to. The ISP may thus leverage such infrastructure and | to. ISPs may leverage such infrastructure and provide the homenet | |||
| provide the homenet a specific domain name designated as per | with a specific domain name designated as per | |||
| [I-D.ietf-homenet-front-end-naming-delegation] a Homenet Registered | [I-D.ietf-homenet-front-end-naming-delegation] a Homenet Registered | |||
| Domain. Similarly to the reverse zone, the ISP is well aware of who | Domain. Similarly to the reverse zone, ISPs are aware of who owns | |||
| owns that domain name and may become a natural candidate for hosting | that domain name and may become a natural candidate for hosting the | |||
| the Homenet Zone - that is the Distribution Manager (DM) and the | Homenet Zone - that is the Distribution Manager (DM) and the Public | |||
| Public Authoritative Servers. | Authoritative Servers. | |||
| This document describes DHCPv6 options that enables the ISP to | This document describes DHCPv6 options that enable an ISP to provide | |||
| provide the necessary parameters to the HNA, to proceed. More | the necessary parameters to the HNA, to proceed. More specifically, | |||
| specifically, the ISP provides the Registered Homenet Domain, | the ISP provides the Registered Homenet Domain, necessary information | |||
| necessary information on the DM and the RDM so the HNA can manage and | on the DM and the RDM so the HNA can manage and upload the Public | |||
| upload the Public Homenet Zone and the Reverse Public Homenet Zone as | Homenet Zone and the Reverse Public Homenet Zone as described in | |||
| described in [I-D.ietf-homenet-front-end-naming-delegation]. | [I-D.ietf-homenet-front-end-naming-delegation]. | |||
| The use of DHCPv6 options makes the configuration completely | The use of DHCPv6 options may make the configuration completely | |||
| transparent to the end user and provides a similar level of trust as | transparent to the end user and provides a similar level of trust as | |||
| the one used to provide the IP prefix. | the one used to provide the IP prefix - when provisioned via DHCP. | |||
| 3. Protocol Overview | 3. Procedure Overview | |||
| This section illustrates how a HNA receives the necessary information | This section illustrates how a HNA receives the necessary information | |||
| via DHCPv6 options to outsource its authoritative naming service to | via DHCPv6 options to outsource its authoritative naming service to | |||
| the DOI. For the sake of simplicity, and similarly to | the DOI. For the sake of simplicity, and similarly to | |||
| [I-D.ietf-homenet-front-end-naming-delegation], this section assumes | [I-D.ietf-homenet-front-end-naming-delegation], this section assumes | |||
| that the HNA and the home network DHCPv6 client are collocated on the | that the HNA and the home network DHCPv6 client are collocated on the | |||
| CPE. Note also that this is not mandatory and specific | Customer Edge (CE) router [RFC7368]. Note also that this is not | |||
| communications between the HNA and the DHCPv6 client only are needed. | mandatory and the DHCPv6 client may instruct remotely the HNA and the | |||
| In addition, this section assumes the responsible entity for the | DHCPv6 either with a proprietary protocol or a protocol that will be | |||
| DHCPv6 server is able to configure the DM and RDM. In our case, this | defined in the future. In addition, this section assumes the | |||
| means a Registered Homenet Domain can be associated to the DHCP | responsible entity for the DHCPv6 server is configured with the DM | |||
| client. | and RDM. This means a Registered Homenet Domain can be associated to | |||
| the DHCPv6 client. | ||||
| This scenario has been chosen as it is believed to be the most | This scenario is believed to be the most popular scenario. This | |||
| popular scenario. This document does not ignore scenarios where the | document does not ignore scenarios where the DHCPv6 server does not | |||
| DHCP Server does not have privileged relations with the DM or RDM. | have privileged relations with the DM or RDM. These cases are | |||
| These cases are discussed latter in Appendix A. Such scenarios do | discussed in Appendix A. Such scenarios do not necessarily require | |||
| not necessarily require configuration for the end user and can also | configuration for the end user and can also be zero-config. | |||
| be zero-config. | ||||
| The scenario considered in this section is as follows: | The scenario considered in this section is as follows: | |||
| 1. The HNA is willing to outsource the Public Homenet Zone or | 1. The HNA is willing to outsource the Public Homenet Zone or | |||
| Homenet Reverse Zone and configures its DHCP Client to include in | Homenet Reverse Zone. The DHCPv6 client is configured to include | |||
| its Option Request Option (ORO) the Registered Homenet Domain | in its Option Request Option (ORO) the Registered Homenet Domain | |||
| Option (OPTION_REGISTERED_DOMAIN), the Distribution Manager | Option (OPTION_REGISTERED_DOMAIN), the Distribution Manager | |||
| Option (OPTION_DIST_MANAGER) and the Reverse Distribution Manager | Option (OPTION_DIST_MANAGER) and the Reverse Distribution Manager | |||
| Option (OPTION_REVERSE_DIST_MANAGER) option codes. | Option (OPTION_REVERSE_DIST_MANAGER) option codes. | |||
| 2. The DHCP Server responds to the HNA with the requested DHCPv6 | 2. The DHCPv6 server responds to the HNA with the requested DHCPv6 | |||
| options based on the identified homenet. The DHCP Client | options based on the identified homenet. The DHCPv6 client | |||
| transmits the information to the HNA. | passes the information to the HNA. | |||
| 3. The HNA is able to get authenticated by the DM and the RDM. The | 3. The HNA is authenticated (eventually by a self signed | |||
| HNA builds the Homenet Zone ( resp. the Homenet Reverse Zone) and | certificate) by the DM and the RDM. The HNA builds the Homenet | |||
| proceed as described in | Zone (or the Homenet Reverse Zone) and proceed as described in | |||
| [I-D.ietf-homenet-front-end-naming-delegation]. The DHCPv6 | [I-D.ietf-homenet-front-end-naming-delegation]. The DHCPv6 | |||
| options provide the necessary and non optional parameters | options provide the necessary non optional parameters described | |||
| described in section 14 of | in Section 14 of [I-D.ietf-homenet-front-end-naming-delegation]. | |||
| [I-D.ietf-homenet-front-end-naming-delegation]. The HNA MAY set | The HNA may complement the configurations with additional | |||
| complement the configurations with additional parameters. | parameters via means not yet defined. Section 14 of | |||
| Section 14 of [I-D.ietf-homenet-front-end-naming-delegation] | [I-D.ietf-homenet-front-end-naming-delegation] describes such | |||
| describes such parameters that MAY take a default value. | parameters that MAY take some specific non default value. | |||
| 4. Payload Description | 4. DHCPv6 Option | |||
| This section details the payload of the DHCPv6 options. | This section details the payload of the DHCPv6 options. | |||
| 4.1. Registered Homenet Domain Option | 4.1. Registered Homenet Domain Option | |||
| The Registered Domain Option (OPTION_REGISTERED_DOMAIN) indicates the | The Registered Domain Option (OPTION_REGISTERED_DOMAIN) indicates the | |||
| FQDN associated to the home network. | FQDN associated to the home network. | |||
| 0 1 2 3 | 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 | 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 | |||
| skipping to change at page 5, line 18 ¶ | skipping to change at page 5, line 18 ¶ | |||
| | OPTION_REGISTERED_DOMAIN | option-len | | | OPTION_REGISTERED_DOMAIN | option-len | | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| | | | | | | |||
| / Registered Homenet Domain / | / Registered Homenet Domain / | |||
| | | | | | | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| Figure 1: Registered Domain Option | Figure 1: Registered Domain Option | |||
| o option-code (16 bits): OPTION_REGISTERED_DOMAIN, the option code | o option-code (16 bits): OPTION_REGISTERED_DOMAIN, the option code | |||
| for the Registered Homenet Domain (TBD2). | for the Registered Homenet Domain (TBD1). | |||
| o option-len (16 bits): length in octets of the option-data field as | o option-len (16 bits): length in octets of the Registered Homenet | |||
| described in [RFC8415]. | Domain field as described in [RFC8415]. | |||
| o Registered Homenet Domain (variable): the FQDN registered for the | o Registered Homenet Domain (variable): the FQDN registered for the | |||
| homenet encoded as described in section 10 of [RFC8415]. | homenet encoded as described in Section 10 of [RFC8415]. | |||
| 4.2. Distribution Manager Option | 4.2. Distribution Manager Option | |||
| The Distributed Manager Option (OPTION_DIST_MANAGER) provides the HNA | The Distributed Manager Option (OPTION_DIST_MANAGER) provides the HNA | |||
| to FQDN of the DM as well as the transport protocol for the | with the FQDN of the DM as well as the transport protocols for the | |||
| transaction between the HNA and the DM. | communication between the HNA and the DM. | |||
| 0 1 2 3 | 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 | 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 | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| | OPTION_DIST_MANAGER | option-len | | | OPTION_DIST_MANAGER | option-len | | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| | Supported Transport | | | | Supported Transport | | | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | |||
| | | | | | | |||
| / Distribution Manager FQDN / | / Distribution Manager FQDN / | |||
| | | | | | | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| Figure 2: Distribution Manager Option | Figure 2: Distribution Manager Option | |||
| o option-code (16 bits): OPTION_DIST_MANAGER, the option code for | o option-code (16 bits): OPTION_DIST_MANAGER, the option code for | |||
| the Distribution Manager Option (TBD2). | the Distribution Manager Option (TBD2). | |||
| o option-len (16 bits): length in octets of the option-data field as | o option-len (16 bits): length in octets of the enclosed data as | |||
| described in [RFC8415]. | described in [RFC8415]. | |||
| o Supported Transport (16 bits): defines the supported transport by | o Supported Transport (16 bits): defines the supported transport by | |||
| the DM. Each bit represents a supported transport, and a DM MAY | the DM (see Section 4.2.1). Each bit represents a supported | |||
| indicate the support of multiple modes. The bit for DNS over TLS | transport, and a DM MAY indicate the support of multiple modes. | |||
| [RFC7858] MUST be set. | The bit for DNS over TLS [RFC7858] MUST be set. | |||
| o Distribution Manager FQDN (variable): the FQDN of the DM encoded | o Distribution Manager FQDN (variable): the FQDN of the DM encoded | |||
| as described in section 10 of [RFC8415]. | as described in Section 10 of [RFC8415]. | |||
| 4.2.1. Supported Transport | 4.2.1. Supported Transport | |||
| The Supported Transport filed of the DHCPv6 option indicates the | The Supported Transport field of the DHCPv6 option indicates the | |||
| supported transport protocol. Each bit represents a specific | supported transport protocols. Each bit represents a specific | |||
| transport mechanism. The bit sets to 1 indicates the associated | transport mechanism. A bit sets to 1 indicates the associated | |||
| transport protocol is supported. The corresponding bits are assigned | transport protocol is supported. The corresponding bits are assigned | |||
| as described in Figure 3. | as described in Figure 3 and Section 6. | |||
| Bit | Transport Protocol | Reference | Bit Position | Transport Protocol | Reference | |||
| ----+--------------------+----------- | -------------+--------------------+----------- | |||
| 0 | DNS over TLS | This-RFC | 0 | DNS over TLS | This-RFC | |||
| 1-15| unallocated | | 1-15 | unallocated | | |||
| Figure 3: Supported Transport | Figure 3: Supported Transport | |||
| o DNS over TLS: indicates the support of DNS over TLS as described | DNS over TLS: indicates the support of DNS over TLS as described in | |||
| in [RFC7858]. | [RFC7858]. | |||
| 4.3. Reverse Distribution Manager Server Option | 4.3. Reverse Distribution Manager Server Option | |||
| The Reverse Distribution Manager Server Option | The Reverse Distribution Manager Option (OPTION_REVERSE_DIST_MANAGER) | |||
| (OPTION_REVERSE_DIST_MANAGER) provides the HNA to FQDN of the DM as | provides the HNA with the FQDN of the DM as well as the transport | |||
| well as the transport protocol for the transaction between the HNA | protocols for the communication between the HNA and the DM. | |||
| and the DM. | ||||
| 0 1 2 3 | 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 | 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 | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| | OPTION_REVERSE_DIST_MANAGER | option-len | | | OPTION_REVERSE_DIST_MANAGER | option-len | | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| | Supported Transport | | | | Supported Transport | | | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | |||
| | | | | | | |||
| / Reverse Distribution Manager FQDN / | / Reverse Distribution Manager FQDN / | |||
| skipping to change at page 7, line 12 ¶ | skipping to change at page 7, line 12 ¶ | |||
| Figure 4: Reverse Distribution Manager Option | Figure 4: Reverse Distribution Manager Option | |||
| o option-code (16 bits): OPTION_REVERSE_DIST_MANAGER, the option | o option-code (16 bits): OPTION_REVERSE_DIST_MANAGER, the option | |||
| code for the Reverse Distribution Manager Option (TBD3). | code for the Reverse Distribution Manager Option (TBD3). | |||
| o option-len (16 bits): length in octets of the option-data field as | o option-len (16 bits): length in octets of the option-data field as | |||
| described in [RFC8415]. | described in [RFC8415]. | |||
| o Supported Transport (16 bits): defines the supported transport by | o Supported Transport (16 bits): defines the supported transport by | |||
| the RDM. Each bit represents a supported transport, and a DM MAY | the RDM (see Section 4.2.1). Each bit represents a supported | |||
| indicate the support of multiple modes. The bit for DoT MUST be | transport, and a RDM MAY indicate the support of multiple modes. | |||
| set. | The bit for DNS over TLS [RFC7858] MUST be set. | |||
| o Reverse Distribution Manager FQDN (variable): the FQDN of the RDM | o Reverse Distribution Manager FQDN (variable): the FQDN of the RDM | |||
| encoded as described in section 10 of [RFC8415]. | encoded as described in section 10 of [RFC8415]. | |||
| 5. DHCP Behavior | 5. DHCPv6 Behavior | |||
| 5.1. DHCPv6 Server Behavior | 5.1. DHCPv6 Server Behavior | |||
| Sections 17.2.2 and 18.2 of [RFC8415] govern server operation in | Sections 17.2.2 and 18.2 of [RFC8415] govern server operation in | |||
| regards to option assignment. As a convenience to the reader, we | regards to option assignment. As a convenience to the reader, we | |||
| mention here that the server will send option foo only if configured | mention here that the server will send option foo only if configured | |||
| with specific values for foo and if the client requested it. In | with specific values for foo and if the client requested it. In | |||
| particular, when configured the DHCP Server sends the Registered | particular, when configured the DHCPv6 server sends the Registered | |||
| Homenet Domain Option, Distribution Manager Option, the Reverse | Homenet Domain Option, Distribution Manager Option, the Reverse | |||
| Distribution Manager Option when requested by the DHCPv6 client by | Distribution Manager Option when requested by the DHCPv6 client by | |||
| including necessary option codes in its ORO. | including necessary option codes in its ORO. | |||
| 5.2. DHCPv6 Client Behavior | 5.2. DHCPv6 Client Behavior | |||
| The DHCPv6 client sends a ORO with the necessary option codes: | The DHCPv6 client includes Registered Homenet Domain Option, | |||
| Registered Homenet Domain Option, Distribution Manager Option, the | Distribution Manager Option, the Reverse Distribution Manager Option | |||
| Reverse Distribution Manager Option. | in an ORO as specified in Sections 18.2.1, 18.2.2, 18.2.4, 18.2.5, | |||
| 18.2.6, and 21.7 of [RFC8415]. | ||||
| Upon receiving a DHCP option described in this document in the Reply | Upon receiving a DHCPv6 option described in this document in the | |||
| message, the HNA SHOULD proceed as described in | Reply message, the HNA SHOULD proceed as described in | |||
| [I-D.ietf-homenet-front-end-naming-delegation]. | [I-D.ietf-homenet-front-end-naming-delegation]. | |||
| 5.3. DHCPv6 Relay Agent Behavior | 5.3. DHCPv6 Relay Agent Behavior | |||
| There are no additional requirements for the DHCP Relay agents. | There are no additional requirements for the DHCPv6 Relay agents. | |||
| 6. IANA Considerations | 6. IANA Considerations | |||
| IANA is requested to assign the following new DHCPv6 Option Codes in | IANA is requested to assign the following new DHCPv6 Option Codes in | |||
| the registry maintained in: https://www.iana.org/assignments/dhcpv6- | the registry maintained in: https://www.iana.org/assignments/dhcpv6- | |||
| parameters/dhcpv6-parameters.xhtml#dhcpv6-parameters-2. | parameters/dhcpv6-parameters.xhtml#dhcpv6-parameters-2. | |||
| Value Description Client ORO Singleton Option | Value Description Client ORO Singleton Option | |||
| TBD1 OPTION_REGISTERED_DOMAIN Yes Yes | TBD1 OPTION_REGISTERED_DOMAIN Yes No | |||
| TBD2 OPTION_DIST_MANAGER Yes Yes | TBD2 OPTION_DIST_MANAGER Yes Yes | |||
| TBD3 OPTION_REVERSE_DIST_MANAGER Yes Yes | TBD3 OPTION_REVERSE_DIST_MANAGER Yes Yes | |||
| IANA is requested to maintain a new number space of Supported | IANA is requested to maintain a new number space of Supported | |||
| Transport parameter in the Distributed Manager Option | Transport parameter in the Distributed Manager Option | |||
| (OPTION_DIST_MANAGER) or the Reverse Distribution Manager Server | (OPTION_DIST_MANAGER) or the Reverse Distribution Manager Option | |||
| Option (OPTION_REVERSE_DIST_MANAGER). The different parameters are | (OPTION_REVERSE_DIST_MANAGER). The different parameters are defined | |||
| defined in Figure 3 in Section 4.2.1. Future code points are | in Figure 3 in Section 4.2.1. Future code points are assigned under | |||
| assigned under Specification Required as per [RFC8126]. | Specification Required as per [RFC8126]. | |||
| 7. Security Considerations | 7. Security Considerations | |||
| The security considerations in [RFC2131] and [RFC8415] are to be | The security considerations in [RFC8415] are to be considered. The | |||
| considered. The use of DHCPv6 options provides a similar level of | use of DHCPv6 options provides a similar level of trust as the one | |||
| trust as the one used to provide the IP prefix. The link between the | used to provide the IP prefix. The link between the HNA and the | |||
| HNA and the DHCPv6 server may benefit from additional security for | DHCPv6 server may benefit from additional security for example by | |||
| example by using [I-D.ietf-dhc-sedhcpv6]. | using [I-D.ietf-dhc-sedhcpv6]. | |||
| 8. Acknowledgments | 8. Acknowledgments | |||
| We would like to thank Marcin Siodelski, Bernie Volz and Ted Lemon | We would like to thank Marcin Siodelski, Bernie Volz and Ted Lemon | |||
| for their comments on the design of the DHCPv6 options. We would | for their comments on the design of the DHCPv6 options. We would | |||
| also like to thank Mark Andrews, Andrew Sullivan and Lorenzo Colliti | also like to thank Mark Andrews, Andrew Sullivan and Lorenzo Colliti | |||
| for their remarks on the architecture design. The designed solution | for their remarks on the architecture design. The designed solution | |||
| has been largely been inspired by Mark Andrews's document | has been largely been inspired by Mark Andrews's document | |||
| [I-D.andrews-dnsop-pd-reverse] as well as discussions with Mark. We | [I-D.andrews-dnsop-pd-reverse] as well as discussions with Mark. We | |||
| also thank Ray Hunter for its reviews, its comments and for | also thank Ray Hunter for its reviews, its comments and for | |||
| skipping to change at page 8, line 46 ¶ | skipping to change at page 8, line 46 ¶ | |||
| 9. Contributors | 9. Contributors | |||
| The co-authors would like to thank Chris Griffiths and Wouter | The co-authors would like to thank Chris Griffiths and Wouter | |||
| Cloetens that provided a significant contribution in the early | Cloetens that provided a significant contribution in the early | |||
| versions of the document. | versions of the document. | |||
| 10. References | 10. References | |||
| 10.1. Normative References | 10.1. Normative References | |||
| [RFC1034] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - concepts and facilities", | [I-D.ietf-homenet-front-end-naming-delegation] | |||
| STD 13, RFC 1034, DOI 10.17487/RFC1034, November 1987, | Migault, D., Weber, R., Richardson, M., and R. Hunter, | |||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1034>. | "Simple Provisioning of Public Names for Residential | |||
| Networks", draft-ietf-homenet-front-end-naming- | ||||
| delegation-14 (work in progress), April 2021. | ||||
| [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>. | |||
| [RFC2131] Droms, R., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol", | ||||
| RFC 2131, DOI 10.17487/RFC2131, March 1997, | ||||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2131>. | ||||
| [RFC2181] Elz, R. and R. Bush, "Clarifications to the DNS | ||||
| Specification", RFC 2181, DOI 10.17487/RFC2181, July 1997, | ||||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2181>. | ||||
| [RFC6672] Rose, S. and W. Wijngaards, "DNAME Redirection in the | ||||
| DNS", RFC 6672, DOI 10.17487/RFC6672, June 2012, | ||||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6672>. | ||||
| [RFC7858] Hu, Z., Zhu, L., Heidemann, J., Mankin, A., Wessels, D., | [RFC7858] Hu, Z., Zhu, L., Heidemann, J., Mankin, A., Wessels, D., | |||
| and P. Hoffman, "Specification for DNS over Transport | and P. Hoffman, "Specification for DNS over Transport | |||
| Layer Security (TLS)", RFC 7858, DOI 10.17487/RFC7858, May | Layer Security (TLS)", RFC 7858, DOI 10.17487/RFC7858, May | |||
| 2016, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7858>. | 2016, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7858>. | |||
| [RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for | [RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for | |||
| Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, | Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, | |||
| RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017, | RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017, | |||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126>. | |||
| skipping to change at page 10, line 5 ¶ | skipping to change at page 9, line 42 ¶ | |||
| [I-D.andrews-dnsop-pd-reverse] | [I-D.andrews-dnsop-pd-reverse] | |||
| Andrews, M., "Automated Delegation of IP6.ARPA reverse | Andrews, M., "Automated Delegation of IP6.ARPA reverse | |||
| zones with Prefix Delegation", draft-andrews-dnsop-pd- | zones with Prefix Delegation", draft-andrews-dnsop-pd- | |||
| reverse-02 (work in progress), November 2013. | reverse-02 (work in progress), November 2013. | |||
| [I-D.ietf-dhc-sedhcpv6] | [I-D.ietf-dhc-sedhcpv6] | |||
| Li, L., Jiang, S., Cui, Y., Jinmei, T., Lemon, T., and D. | Li, L., Jiang, S., Cui, Y., Jinmei, T., Lemon, T., and D. | |||
| Zhang, "Secure DHCPv6", draft-ietf-dhc-sedhcpv6-21 (work | Zhang, "Secure DHCPv6", draft-ietf-dhc-sedhcpv6-21 (work | |||
| in progress), February 2017. | in progress), February 2017. | |||
| [I-D.ietf-homenet-front-end-naming-delegation] | ||||
| Migault, D., Weber, R., Richardson, M., and R. Hunter, | ||||
| "Simple Provisioning of Public Names for Residential | ||||
| Networks", draft-ietf-homenet-front-end-naming- | ||||
| delegation-14 (work in progress), April 2021. | ||||
| [I-D.sury-dnsext-cname-dname] | [I-D.sury-dnsext-cname-dname] | |||
| Sury, O., "CNAME+DNAME Name Redirection", draft-sury- | Sury, O., "CNAME+DNAME Name Redirection", draft-sury- | |||
| dnsext-cname-dname-00 (work in progress), April 2010. | dnsext-cname-dname-00 (work in progress), April 2010. | |||
| [RFC1034] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - concepts and facilities", | ||||
| STD 13, RFC 1034, DOI 10.17487/RFC1034, November 1987, | ||||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1034>. | ||||
| [RFC2181] Elz, R. and R. Bush, "Clarifications to the DNS | ||||
| Specification", RFC 2181, DOI 10.17487/RFC2181, July 1997, | ||||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2181>. | ||||
| [RFC6672] Rose, S. and W. Wijngaards, "DNAME Redirection in the | ||||
| DNS", RFC 6672, DOI 10.17487/RFC6672, June 2012, | ||||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6672>. | ||||
| [RFC7368] Chown, T., Ed., Arkko, J., Brandt, A., Troan, O., and J. | ||||
| Weil, "IPv6 Home Networking Architecture Principles", | ||||
| RFC 7368, DOI 10.17487/RFC7368, October 2014, | ||||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7368>. | ||||
| Appendix A. Scenarios and impact on the End User | Appendix A. Scenarios and impact on the End User | |||
| This section details various scenarios and discuss their impact on | This section details various scenarios and discuss their impact on | |||
| the end user. This section is not normative and limits the | the end user. This section is not normative and limits the | |||
| description of a limited scope of scenarios that are assumed to be | description of a limited scope of scenarios that are assumed to be | |||
| representative. Many other scenarios may be derived from these. | representative. Many other scenarios may be derived from these. | |||
| Appendix B. Base Scenario | Appendix B. Base Scenario | |||
| The base scenario is the one described in Section 3 in which an ISP | The base scenario is the one described in Section 3 in which an ISP | |||
| manages the DHCP Server, the DM and RDM. | manages the DHCPv6 server, the DM and RDM. | |||
| The end user subscribes to the ISP (foo), and at subscription time | The end user subscribes to the ISP (foo), and at subscription time | |||
| registers for example.foo as its Registered Homenet Domain | registers for example.foo as its Registered Homenet Domain | |||
| example.foo. | example.foo. | |||
| In this scenario, the DHCP Server, DM and RDM are managed by the ISP | In this scenario, the DHCPv6 server, DM and RDM are managed by the | |||
| so the DHCP Server and as such can provide authentication credentials | ISP so the DHCPv6 server and as such can provide authentication | |||
| of the HNA to enable secure authenticated transaction with the DM and | credentials of the HNA to enable secure authenticated transaction | |||
| the Reverse DM. | with the DM and the Reverse DM. | |||
| The main advantage of this scenario is that the naming architecture | The main advantage of this scenario is that the naming architecture | |||
| is configured automatically and transparently for the end user. The | is configured automatically and transparently for the end user. The | |||
| drawbacks are that the end user uses a Registered Homenet Domain | drawbacks are that the end user uses a Registered Homenet Domain | |||
| managed by the ISP and that it relies on the ISP naming | managed by the ISP and that it relies on the ISP naming | |||
| infrastructure. | infrastructure. | |||
| B.1. Third Party Registered Homenet Domain | B.1. Third Party Registered Homenet Domain | |||
| This section considers the case when the end user wants its home | This section considers the case when the end user wants its home | |||
| skipping to change at page 12, line 11 ¶ | skipping to change at page 12, line 11 ¶ | |||
| no additional configuration is needed anymore. More specifically, | no additional configuration is needed anymore. More specifically, | |||
| the HNA may be changed, the zone can be updated as in Appendix B | the HNA may be changed, the zone can be updated as in Appendix B | |||
| without any additional configuration from the end user. | without any additional configuration from the end user. | |||
| The main advantage of this scenario is that the end user benefits | The main advantage of this scenario is that the end user benefits | |||
| from the Zero Configuration of the Base Scenario Appendix B. Then, | from the Zero Configuration of the Base Scenario Appendix B. Then, | |||
| the end user is able to register for its home network an unlimited | the end user is able to register for its home network an unlimited | |||
| number of domain names provided by an unlimited number of different | number of domain names provided by an unlimited number of different | |||
| third party providers. The drawback of this scenario may be that the | third party providers. The drawback of this scenario may be that the | |||
| end user still rely on the ISP naming infrastructure. Note that the | end user still rely on the ISP naming infrastructure. Note that the | |||
| only case this may be inconvenient is when the DNS Servers provided | only case this may be inconvenient is when the DNS servers provided | |||
| by the ISPs results in high latency. | by the ISPs results in high latency. | |||
| B.2. Third Party DNS Infrastructure | B.2. Third Party DNS Infrastructure | |||
| This scenario considers that the end user uses example.com as a | This scenario considers that the end user uses example.com as a | |||
| Registered Homenet Domain, and does not want to rely on the | Registered Homenet Domain, and does not want to rely on the | |||
| authoritative servers provided by the ISP. | authoritative servers provided by the ISP. | |||
| In this section we limit the outsourcing to the DM and Public | In this section we limit the outsourcing to the DM and Public | |||
| Authoritative Server(s) to a third party. The Reverse Public | Authoritative Server(s) to a third party. The Reverse Public | |||
| Authoritative Server(s) and the RDM remain managed by the ISP as the | Authoritative Server(s) and the RDM remain managed by the ISP as the | |||
| IP prefix is managed by the ISP. | IP prefix is managed by the ISP. | |||
| Outsourcing to a third party DM can be performed in the following | Outsourcing to a third party DM can be performed in the following | |||
| ways: | ways: | |||
| 1. Updating the DHCP Server Information. One can imagine a GUI | 1. Updating the DHCPv6 server Information. One can imagine a GUI | |||
| interface that enables the end user to modify its profile | interface that enables the end user to modify its profile | |||
| parameters. Again, this configuration update is done once-for- | parameters. Again, this configuration update is done once-for- | |||
| ever. | ever. | |||
| 2. Upload the configuration of the DM to the HNA. In some cases, | 2. Upload the configuration of the DM to the HNA. In some cases, | |||
| the provider of the CPE hosting the HNA may be the registrar and | the provider of the CE router hosting the HNA may be the | |||
| provide the CPE already configured. In other cases, the CPE may | registrar and provide the CE router already configured. In other | |||
| request the end user to log into the registrar to validate the | cases, the CE router may request the end user to log into the | |||
| ownership of the Registered Homenet Domain and agree on the | registrar to validate the ownership of the Registered Homenet | |||
| necessary credentials to secure the communication between the HNA | Domain and agree on the necessary credentials to secure the | |||
| and the DM. As described in | communication between the HNA and the DM. As described in | |||
| [I-D.ietf-homenet-front-end-naming-delegation], such settings | [I-D.ietf-homenet-front-end-naming-delegation], such settings | |||
| could be performed in an almost automatic way as to limit the | could be performed in an almost automatic way as to limit the | |||
| necessary interactions with the end user. | necessary interactions with the end user. | |||
| B.3. Multiple ISPs | B.3. Multiple ISPs | |||
| This scenario considers a HNA connected to multiple ISPs. | This scenario considers a HNA connected to multiple ISPs. | |||
| Suppose the HNA has been configured each of its interfaces | Suppose the HNA has been configured each of its interfaces | |||
| independently with each ISPS as described in Appendix B. Each ISP | independently with each ISPS as described in Appendix B. Each ISP | |||
| skipping to change at page 13, line 20 ¶ | skipping to change at page 13, line 20 ¶ | |||
| document. | document. | |||
| If a HNA is not able to handle multiple Registered Homenet Domains, | If a HNA is not able to handle multiple Registered Homenet Domains, | |||
| the HNA may remain connected to multiple ISP with a single Registered | the HNA may remain connected to multiple ISP with a single Registered | |||
| Homenet Domain. In this case, one entity is chosen to host the | Homenet Domain. In this case, one entity is chosen to host the | |||
| Registered Homenet Domain. This entity may be one of the ISP or a | Registered Homenet Domain. This entity may be one of the ISP or a | |||
| third party. Note that having multiple ISPs can be motivated for | third party. Note that having multiple ISPs can be motivated for | |||
| bandwidth aggregation, or connectivity fail-over. In the case of | bandwidth aggregation, or connectivity fail-over. In the case of | |||
| connectivity fail-over, the fail-over concerns the access network and | connectivity fail-over, the fail-over concerns the access network and | |||
| a failure of the access network may not impact the core network where | a failure of the access network may not impact the core network where | |||
| the DM Server and Public Authoritative Primaries are hosted. In that | the DM and Public Authoritative Primaries are hosted. In that sense, | |||
| sense, choosing one of the ISP even in a scenario of multiple ISPs | choosing one of the ISP even in a scenario of multiple ISPs may make | |||
| may make sense. However, for sake of simplicity, this scenario | sense. However, for sake of simplicity, this scenario assumes that a | |||
| assumes that a third party has been chosen to host the Registered | third party has been chosen to host the Registered Homenet Domain. | |||
| Homenet Domain. Configuration is performed as described in | Configuration is performed as described in Appendix B.1 and | |||
| Appendix B.1 and Appendix B.2. | Appendix B.2. | |||
| With the configuration described in Appendix B.1, the HNA is expect | With the configuration described in Appendix B.1, the HNA is expect | |||
| to be able to handle multiple Homenet Registered Domain, as the third | to be able to handle multiple Homenet Registered Domain, as the third | |||
| party redirect to one of the ISPs Servers. With the configuration | party redirect to one of the ISPs servers. With the configuration | |||
| described in Appendix B.2, DNS zone are hosted and maintained by the | described in Appendix B.2, DNS zone are hosted and maintained by the | |||
| third party. A single DNS(SEC) Homenet Zone is built and maintained | third party. A single DNS(SEC) Homenet Zone is built and maintained | |||
| by the HNA. This latter configuration is likely to match most HNA | by the HNA. This latter configuration is likely to match most HNA | |||
| implementations. | implementations. | |||
| The protocol and DHCPv6 options described in this document are fully | The protocol and DHCPv6 options described in this document are fully | |||
| compatible with a HNA connected to multiple ISPs. To configure or | compatible with a HNA connected to multiple ISPs. To configure or | |||
| not and how to configure the HNA depends on the HNA facilities. | not and how to configure the HNA depends on the HNA facilities. | |||
| Appendix B and Appendix B.1 require the HNA to handle multiple | Appendix B and Appendix B.1 require the HNA to handle multiple | |||
| Registered Homenet Domain, whereas Appendix B.2 does not have such | Registered Homenet Domain, whereas Appendix B.2 does not have such | |||
| End of changes. 50 change blocks. | ||||
| 151 lines changed or deleted | 149 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/ | ||||