< draft-fenner-iana-exp-2780-04.txt   draft-fenner-iana-exp-2780-05.txt >
Network Working Group B. Fenner Network Working Group B. Fenner
Internet-Draft AT&T Labs - Research Internet-Draft AT&T Labs - Research
Expires: October 3, 2006 April 2006 Expires: December 16, 2006 June 14, 2006
Experimental Values In IPv4, IPv6, ICMPv4, ICMPv6, UDP and TCP Headers Experimental Values In IPv4, IPv6, ICMPv4, ICMPv6, UDP and TCP Headers
draft-fenner-iana-exp-2780-04 draft-fenner-iana-exp-2780-05
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79. aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
skipping to change at page 1, line 33 skipping to change at page 1, line 33
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."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on October 3, 2006. This Internet-Draft will expire on December 16, 2006.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006). Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).
Abstract Abstract
When experimenting with or extending protocols, it is often necessary When experimenting with or extending protocols, it is often necessary
to use some sort of protocol number or constant in order to actually to use some sort of protocol number or constant in order to actually
test or experiment with the new function, even when testing in a test or experiment with the new function, even when testing in a
skipping to change at page 2, line 27 skipping to change at page 2, line 27
Note: while [RFC3692] says that it may not be necessary to allocate Note: while [RFC3692] says that it may not be necessary to allocate
values for UDP and TCP ports, sections 6 and 7.1 explicitly reserve values for UDP and TCP ports, sections 6 and 7.1 explicitly reserve
ports for this purpose to avoid any possible conflict. ports for this purpose to avoid any possible conflict.
2. Fields in the IPv4 header 2. Fields in the IPv4 header
The IPv4 header [RFC0791] contains the following fields that carry The IPv4 header [RFC0791] contains the following fields that carry
values assigned by the IANA: Version, Type of Service, Protocol, values assigned by the IANA: Version, Type of Service, Protocol,
Source Address, Destination Address, and Option Type. Source Address, Destination Address, and Option Type.
2.1. IPv4 IP Version field 2.1. IP Version field in the IPv4 header
The IPv4 Version field is always 4. The Version field in IPv4 packets is always 4.
2.2. IPv4 Type of Service field 2.2. IPv4 Type of Service field
[RFC2474] defines Pool 2 (all code points xxxx11, where 'x' refers to [RFC2474] defines Pool 2 (all code points xxxx11, where 'x' refers to
either '0' or '1') as Experimental / Local Use, so no additional code either '0' or '1') as Experimental / Local Use, so no additional code
points should be needed. The ECN field [RFC3168] has no free code points should be needed. The ECN field [RFC3168] has no free code
points to assign. points to assign.
2.3. IPv4 Protocol field 2.3. IPv4 Protocol field
skipping to change at page 3, line 5 skipping to change at page 3, line 5
2.4. IPv4 Source and Destination addresses 2.4. IPv4 Source and Destination addresses
2.4.1. IPv4 Unicast 2.4.1. IPv4 Unicast
No experimental IPv4 addresses are defined. For certain experiments, No experimental IPv4 addresses are defined. For certain experiments,
the address ranges set aside for Private Internets in [RFC1918] may the address ranges set aside for Private Internets in [RFC1918] may
be useful. It is not appropriate to use other special-purpose IPv4 be useful. It is not appropriate to use other special-purpose IPv4
addresses [RFC3330] for experimentation. addresses [RFC3330] for experimentation.
At the time of this writing, some Internet Registries have policies
allowing experimental assignments from number spaces that they
control. Depending on the experiment, the registry, and their
policy, this may be an appropriate path to pursue.
2.4.2. IPv4 Multicast 2.4.2. IPv4 Multicast
The globally routable group 224.0.1.20 is set aside for The globally routable group 224.0.1.20 is set aside for
experimentation. For certain experiments, the administratively experimentation. For certain experiments, the administratively
scoped multicast groups defined in [RFC2365] may be useful. This scoped multicast groups defined in [RFC2365] may be useful. This
document assigns a single link-local scoped group, 224.0.0.TBD, and a document assigns a single link-local scoped group, 224.0.0.TBD, and a
single scope-relative group, TBD. single scope-relative group, TBD.
2.5. IPv4 Option Type field 2.5. IPv4 Option Type field
skipping to change at page 3, line 26 skipping to change at page 3, line 31
of the "copy" and "class" fields, resulting in four distinct option of the "copy" and "class" fields, resulting in four distinct option
type codes. See Section 8 for the assigned values. type codes. See Section 8 for the assigned values.
3. Fields in the IPv6 header 3. Fields in the IPv6 header
The IPv6 header [RFC2460] contains the following fields that carry The IPv6 header [RFC2460] contains the following fields that carry
values assigned from IANA-managed name spaces: Version, Traffic values assigned from IANA-managed name spaces: Version, Traffic
Class, Next Header, Source and Destination Address. In addition, the Class, Next Header, Source and Destination Address. In addition, the
IPv6 Hop-by-Hop Options and Destination Options extension headers IPv6 Hop-by-Hop Options and Destination Options extension headers
include an Option Type field with values assigned from an IANA- include an Option Type field with values assigned from an IANA-
managed name space. managed name space. The IPv6 Routing Header contains a Type field
for which there is not currently an explicit IANA assignment policy.
3.1. IPv6 Version field 3.1. IP Version field in the IPv6 header
The IPv6 Version field is always 6. The Version field in IPv6 packets is always 6.
3.2. IPv6 Traffic Class field 3.2. IPv6 Traffic Class field
[RFC2474] defines Pool 2 (all code points xxxx11, where 'x' refers to [RFC2474] defines Pool 2 (all code points xxxx11, where 'x' refers to
either '0' or '1') as Experimental / Local Use, so no additional code either '0' or '1') as Experimental / Local Use, so no additional code
points should be needed. The ECN field [RFC3168] has no free code points should be needed. The ECN field [RFC3168] has no free code
points to assign. points to assign.
3.3. IPv6 Next Header field 3.3. IPv6 Next Header field
skipping to change at page 4, line 17 skipping to change at page 4, line 24
experimental usage to support activities such as the 6bone, and experimental usage to support activities such as the 6bone, and
for new approaches like exchanges. for new approaches like exchanges.
However, at this writing, there are no RFC3692-style experimental However, at this writing, there are no RFC3692-style experimental
IPv6 addresses assigned. [I-D.huston-ipv6-iana-specials] creates an IPv6 addresses assigned. [I-D.huston-ipv6-iana-specials] creates an
IANA registry which may in the future contain such assignments. For IANA registry which may in the future contain such assignments. For
certain experiments, Unique Local Addresses [RFC4193] may be useful. certain experiments, Unique Local Addresses [RFC4193] may be useful.
It is not appropriate to use addresses in the documentation prefix It is not appropriate to use addresses in the documentation prefix
[RFC3849] for experimentation. [RFC3849] for experimentation.
At the time of this writing, some Internet Registries have policies
allowing experimental assignments from number spaces that they
control. Depending on the experiment, the registry, and their
policy, this may be an appropriate path to pursue.
3.4.2. IPv6 Multicast Addresses 3.4.2. IPv6 Multicast Addresses
The group FF0X::114 is set aside for experimentation at all scope The group FF0X::114 is set aside for experimentation at all scope
levels. Smaller scopes may be particularly useful for levels. Smaller scopes may be particularly useful for
experimentation, since they are defined not to leak out of a given experimentation, since they are defined not to leak out of a given
defined boundary which can be set to be the boundary of the defined boundary which can be set to be the boundary of the
experiment. For certain experiments, other multicast addresses with experiment. For certain experiments, other multicast addresses with
the T (non-permanently-assigned or "transient" address) bit [RFC4291] the T (non-permanently-assigned or "transient" address) bit [RFC4291]
set may be useful. set may be useful.
3.5. IPv6 Hop-by-Hop and Destination Option Fields 3.5. IPv6 Hop-by-Hop and Destination Option Fields
This document assigns a single option type, with all possible values This document assigns a single option type, with all possible values
of the "act" and "chg" fields, resulting in eight distinct option of the "act" and "chg" fields, resulting in eight distinct option
type codes. See Section 8 for the assigned values. type codes. See Section 8 for the assigned values.
3.6. IPv6 Neighbor Discovery Fields 3.6. IPv6 Routing Header Routing Type
This document assigns two values for the Routing Type field in the
IPv6 Routing Header, TBDY and TBDZ.
4. Fields in the IPv4 ICMP header
This document assigns two ICMPv4 type numbers, TBD3 and TBD4. ICMPv4
code values are allocated per-type, so it's not feasible to assign
experimental values in this document.
5. Fields in the IPv6 ICMP header
[I-D.ietf-ipngwg-icmp-v3] includes experimental ICMPv6 type values
for Informational (200, 201) and Error (100, 101) message types.
ICMPv6 code values are allocated per-type, so it's not feasible to
assign experimental values in this document.
5.1. IPv6 Neighbor Discovery Fields
The IPv6 Neighbor Discovery header [RFC2461] contains the following The IPv6 Neighbor Discovery header [RFC2461] contains the following
fields that carry values assigned from IANA-managed name spaces: fields that carry values assigned from IANA-managed name spaces:
Type, Code and Option Type. Type, Code and Option Type.
3.6.1. IPv6 Neighbor Discovery Type 5.1.1. IPv6 Neighbor Discovery Type
The Neighbor Discovery Type field is the same as the ICMPv6 Type The Neighbor Discovery Type field is the same as the ICMPv6 Type
field. See Section 5 for those code points. field. See Section 5 for those code points.
3.6.2. IPv6 Neighbor Discovery Code 5.1.2. IPv6 Neighbor Discovery Code
The ICMPv6 Code field is not used in IPv6 Neighbor Discovery, so no The ICMPv6 Code field is not used in IPv6 Neighbor Discovery, so no
experimental code points are necessary. experimental code points are necessary.
3.6.3. IPv6 Neighbor Discovery Option Type 5.1.3. IPv6 Neighbor Discovery Option Type
This document assigns two IPv6 Neighbor Discovery Option Types, TBD1 This document assigns two IPv6 Neighbor Discovery Option Types, TBD1
and TBD2. and TBD2.
3.7. IPv6 Routing Header Routing Type
This document assignes two values for the Routing Type field in the
IPv6 Routing Header, TBDY and TBDZ.
4. Fields in the IPv4 ICMP header
This document assigns two ICMPv4 type numbers, TBD3 and TBD4. ICMPv4
code values are allocated per-type, so it's not feasible to assign
experimental values in this document.
5. Fields in the IPv6 ICMP header
[I-D.ietf-ipngwg-icmp-v3] includes experimental ICMPv6 type values
for Informational (200, 201) and Error (100, 101) message types.
ICMPv6 code values are allocated per-type, so it's not feasible to
assign experimental values in this document.
6. Fields in the UDP header 6. Fields in the UDP header
Two system ports, TBD5 and TBD6, have been reserved for Two system ports, TBD5 and TBD6, have been reserved for
experimentation for UDP and TCP. experimentation for UDP and TCP.
7. Fields in the TCP header 7. Fields in the TCP header
7.1. TCP Source and Destination Port fields 7.1. TCP Source and Destination Port fields
Two system ports, TBD5 and TBD6, have been reserved for Two system ports, TBD5 and TBD6, have been reserved for
skipping to change at page 7, line 4 skipping to change at page 7, line 18
0x??_[0x1e]_ 00 0 ????? 0x??_[0x1e]_ 00 0 ?????
0x??_[0x3e]_ 00 1 ????? 0x??_[0x3e]_ 00 1 ?????
0x??_[0x5e]_ 01 0 ????? 0x??_[0x5e]_ 01 0 ?????
0x??_[0x7e]_ 01 1 ????? 0x??_[0x7e]_ 01 1 ?????
0x??_[0x9e]_ 10 0 ????? 0x??_[0x9e]_ 10 0 ?????
0x??_[0xbe]_ 10 1 ????? 0x??_[0xbe]_ 10 1 ?????
0x??_[0xde]_ 11 0 ????? 0x??_[0xde]_ 11 0 ?????
0x??_[0xfe]_ 11 1 ????? 0x??_[0xfe]_ 11 1 ?????
[suggest ????? = 11110] [suggest ????? = 11110]
Could be represented in registry as: Could be represented in registry as:
b BINARY b BINARY
HEX act chg rest HEX act chg rest
--- --- --- ----- --- --- --- -----
... ...
1E,3E,5E,7E, [x = don't care] 1E,3E,5E,7E, [x = don't care]
9E,BE,DE,FE xx x ????? RFC3692-style Experiment (*) [ref-to-this-doc] 9E,BE,DE,FE xx x ????? RFC3692-style Experiment (*) [ref-to-this-doc]
IPv6 Neighbor Discovery Option Formats (icmpv6-parameters) IPv6 Neighbor Discovery Option Formats (icmpv6-parameters)
(Section 3.6.3) (Section 5.1.3)
Type Description Type Description
---- ------------------------------ ---- ------------------------------
TBD1 RFC3692-style Experiment 1 (*) TBD1 RFC3692-style Experiment 1 (*)
TBD2 RFC3692-style Experiment 2 (*) TBD2 RFC3692-style Experiment 2 (*)
IPv6 Routing Header Routing Types (ipv6-parameters section 5.c.) IPv6 Routing Header Routing Types (ipv6-parameters section 5.c.)
(Section 3.7) (Section 3.6)
+------+--------------------------------+ +------+--------------------------------+
| Type | Description | | Type | Description |
+------+--------------------------------+ +------+--------------------------------+
| TBDY | RFC3692-style Experiment 1 (*) | | TBDY | RFC3692-style Experiment 1 (*) |
| TBDZ | RFC3692-style Experiment 2 (*) | | TBDZ | RFC3692-style Experiment 2 (*) |
+------+--------------------------------+ +------+--------------------------------+
ICMPv4 Type Numbers (icmp-parameters) (Section 4) ICMPv4 Type Numbers (icmp-parameters) (Section 4)
skipping to change at page 8, line 42 skipping to change at page 9, line 11
for one to authenticate their use. Experimenters ought to keep this for one to authenticate their use. Experimenters ought to keep this
in mind when designing their experiments. Users of the experimental in mind when designing their experiments. Users of the experimental
IPv6 options defined in Section 3.5 can choose whether or not the IPv6 options defined in Section 3.5 can choose whether or not the
option is included in the AH calculations by choosing the value of option is included in the AH calculations by choosing the value of
the "chg" field. the "chg" field.
When experimental code points are deployed within an administratively When experimental code points are deployed within an administratively
self-contained network domain, the network administrators should self-contained network domain, the network administrators should
ensure that each code point is used consistently to avoid ensure that each code point is used consistently to avoid
interference between experiments. When experimental code points are interference between experiments. When experimental code points are
used in traffic that crosses multiple adminstrative domains, the used in traffic that crosses multiple administrative domains, the
experimenters should assume that there is a risk of the same code experimenters should assume that there is a risk of the same code
points being used simultaneously by other experiments and thus that points being used simultaneously by other experiments and thus that
there is a possibility that the experiments will interfere. there is a possibility that the experiments will interfere.
Particular attention should be given to security threats that such Particular attention should be given to security threats that such
interference might create. interference might create.
10. References 10. References
10.1. Normative References 10.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-ipngwg-icmp-v3] [I-D.ietf-ipngwg-icmp-v3]
Conta, A., "Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMPv6) for Conta, A., "Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMPv6) for
the Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Specification", the Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Specification",
draft-ietf-ipngwg-icmp-v3-07 (work in progress), I-D draft-ietf-ipngwg-icmp-v3-07 (work in progress), I-D
Status iesg, IETF Datatracker State RFC Ed Queue, Intended Status iesg, IETF Datatracker State RFC Ed Queue, Intended
Status Draft Standard, Responsible AD Margaret Wasserman, Status Draft Standard, Responsible AD Margaret Wasserman,
RFC-Editor Queue State RFC-EDITOR, July 2005. RFC-Editor Queue State RFC-EDITOR, July 2005.
skipping to change at page 10, line 36 skipping to change at page 11, line 5
[RFC4291] Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "IP Version 6 Addressing [RFC4291] Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "IP Version 6 Addressing
Architecture", RFC 4291, Was Internet-Draft Architecture", RFC 4291, Was Internet-Draft
draft-ietf-ipv6-addr-arch-v4-04, Current Status DRAFT draft-ietf-ipv6-addr-arch-v4-04, Current Status DRAFT
STANDARD, February 2006. STANDARD, February 2006.
[RFC4302] Kent, S., "IP Authentication Header", RFC 4302, Was [RFC4302] Kent, S., "IP Authentication Header", RFC 4302, Was
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-ipsec-rfc2402bis-10, Current Internet-Draft draft-ietf-ipsec-rfc2402bis-10, Current
Status PROPOSED STANDARD, December 2005. Status PROPOSED STANDARD, December 2005.
10.2. References 10.2. Informative References
[I-D.huston-ipv6-iana-specials] [I-D.huston-ipv6-iana-specials]
Huston, G., "Administration of the IANA Special Purpose Huston, G., "Administration of the IANA Special Purpose
Address Block", draft-huston-ipv6-iana-specials-01 (work Address Block", draft-huston-ipv6-iana-specials-01 (work
in progress), I-D Status iesg, IETF Datatracker State AD in progress), I-D Status iesg, IETF Datatracker State AD
Evaluation, Intended Status Informational, Responsible Evaluation, Intended Status Informational, Responsible
AD David Kessens, December 2005. AD David Kessens, December 2005.
Appendix A. Change History Appendix A. Change History
(To be removed before publication) (To be removed before publication)
A.1. Changes from -01 A.1. Changes from -01
o Added refs to 3849 and 3330 for things not to use in unicast o Added refs to 3849 and 3330 for things not to use in unicast
addresses. addresses.
o Updated ULA ref to be 4193. o Updated ULA ref to be 4193.
o Changed multiple "TBD1+TBD2" to TBD1 thru TBD8 o Changed multiple "TBD1+TBD2" to TBD1 through TBD8
o Added IPv6 multicast addresses with T bit. o Added IPv6 multicast addresses with T bit.
o Added footnote to be included in all IANA registrations. o Added footnote to be included in all IANA registrations.
o Added link-local and scope-relative v4 multicast addresses o Added link-local and scope-relative v4 multicast addresses
A.2. Changes from -02 A.2. Changes from -02
o Added IPsec AH discussion in security considerations o Added IPsec AH discussion in security considerations
o Added mention of the IPv6 special use unicast address block. o Added mention of the IPv6 special use unicast address block.
o Added IPv6 Routing Header TBDY and TBDZ o Added IPv6 Routing Header TBDY and TBDZ
o Point out that even though RFC3692 gives UDP/TCP ports as an o Point out that even though RFC3692 gives UDP/TCP ports as an
example where reserving values isn't necessary, we do anyway since example where reserving values isn't necessary, we do anyway since
it allows avoiding conflicts. it allows avoiding conflicts.
A.3. Changes from -03
o Moved mention of reserving UDP/TCP ports to introduction, to avoid
inconsistency of mentioning it in Section 6 and not Section 7.1.
A.4. Changes from -04
o Mention that registries are possible places to get unicast
addresses.
o Fixed title of Informative References section.
o Fixed some speling errurs.
o Changed titles of sections 2.1 and 3.1.
o Moved Section 5.1 to a more sensible place under Section 5.
Author's Address Author's Address
Bill Fenner Bill Fenner
AT&T Labs - Research AT&T Labs - Research
75 Willow Rd 75 Willow Rd
Menlo Park, CA 94025 Menlo Park, CA 94025
USA USA
Phone: +1 650 330-7893 Phone: +1 650 330-7893
Email: fenner@research.att.com Email: fenner@research.att.com
 End of changes. 23 change blocks. 
35 lines changed or deleted 65 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/