idnits 2.17.1 draft-horley-v6ops-expand-doc-01.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year == The document seems to lack the recommended RFC 2119 boilerplate, even if it appears to use RFC 2119 keywords -- however, there's a paragraph with a matching beginning. Boilerplate error? (The document does seem to have the reference to RFC 2119 which the ID-Checklist requires). -- The document date (July 27, 2021) is 1004 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Informational ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == Unused Reference: 'RFC3513' is defined on line 208, but no explicit reference was found in the text -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 3513 (Obsoleted by RFC 4291) Summary: 0 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 3 warnings (==), 2 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group E. Horley 3 Internet-Draft T. Coffeen 4 Intended status: Informational S. Hogg 5 Expires: January 28, 2022 HexaBuild 6 N. Buraglio 7 C. Cummings 8 Energy Sciences Network 9 K. Myers 10 IP ArchiTechs 11 R. White 12 Juniper Networks 13 July 27, 2021 15 Reserving Additional IPv6 Address Prefixes for Use in Documentation 16 draft-horley-v6ops-expand-doc-01 18 Abstract 20 To reduce the likelihood of conflict and confusion when relating 21 documented examples to deployed systems, the IPv6 unicast address 22 prefix 2001:db8::/32 is reserved for use in examples in documentation 23 including RFCs, books, articles, vendor manuals, etc. This document 24 proposes the reservation of additional IPv6 prefixes for this 25 purpose; specifically, 3ffe::/16 (formerly 6bone) and fec0::/10 26 (formerly site-local). 28 Status of This Memo 30 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 31 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 33 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 34 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 35 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 36 Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 38 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 39 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 40 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 41 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 43 This Internet-Draft will expire on January 28, 2022. 45 Copyright Notice 47 Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 48 document authors. All rights reserved. 50 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 51 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 52 (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 53 publication of this document. Please review these documents 54 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 55 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 56 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 57 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 58 described in the Simplified BSD License. 60 Table of Contents 62 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 63 2. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 64 3. Documentation IPv6 Address Prefixes . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 65 4. Operational Implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 66 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 67 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 68 7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 69 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 70 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 71 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 72 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 74 1. Introduction 76 The address architecture for IPv6 [RFC4291] does not specifically 77 allocate any IPv6 address prefixes for documentation purposes. The 78 current IPv6 documentation prefix of 2001:db8::/32 defined in 79 [RFC6890] is not large enough for many design and documentation 80 requirements. No additional documentation prefix(es) were allocated 81 in the most recent IPv6 Specification [RFC8200]. 83 These are example use cases that require a documentation IPv6 prefix 84 larger than a /32: 86 o Ability to document network architectures (including addressing 87 plans) larger than a /32 (Service Providers, Enterprise, 88 Government, IoT, Energy), 90 o Ability to document mergers and acquisitions designs for large 91 networks (multiple /32 prefix space or larger, plus networks with 92 multiple ASNs), 94 o Reduction of operational impacts by having sufficiently large IPv6 95 prefixes dedicated for documenting and sharing designs and best 96 practices, 98 o Ability to depict unique IPv6 prefix identification (simple visual 99 representation to identify separate networks) 101 The following existing criteria are beneficially extended to the 102 additional documentation prefixes: 104 o Filters are already commonly in use to block the existing 105 documentation prefix from the Internet. 107 o There are no operational impacts to IANA or the RIRs with 108 documentation prefix space. 110 2. Requirements Language 112 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 113 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and 114 "OPTIONAL" in this document are to are to be interpreted as described 115 in BCP 14 [RFC2119] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, 116 as shown here. 118 3. Documentation IPv6 Address Prefixes 120 The additional IPv6 address prefixes allocated for documentation 121 purposes are 3ffe::/16 (formerly 6bone - [RFC3701]) and fec0::/10 122 (formerly site-local - [RFC3879]), resulting in the following 123 prefixes for use in documentation: 125 o fec0::/10 127 o 3ffe::/16 129 o 2001:db8::/32 - existing as defined in [RFC3879] 131 4. Operational Implications 133 The addition of IPv6 address prefixes for documentation implies that 134 IPv6 network operators should add these address prefixes to their 135 lists of non-routable/bogon IPv6 address space. If packet filters 136 are deployed in live networks, these address prefixes should be added 137 to those filters intended to prevent any public routing of such 138 address space. 140 Because the 3ffe::/16 address prefix was previously used for the 141 subsequently decommissioned 6bone network, this address prefix is 142 included in many existing non-routable prefix filters and lists. Its 143 precedence value per [RFC6724] is 1, which limits its usability in 144 production networks. In addition, the 3ffe::/16 address prefix was 145 returned to IANA and is available to be reserved for documentation 146 purposes. 148 Similarly the fec0::/10 address prefix was previously used for site- 149 local addressing, and thus is already included in many non-routable 150 prefix filters and lists. Its precedence value per [RFC6724] is 1, 151 which limits its usability in production networks. In addition, the 152 fec0::/10 address prefix was returned to IANA and is available to be 153 reserved for documentation purposes. 155 As a documentation prefix, the former site-local scope of fec0::/10 156 is considered deprecated and filters may be required and used with 157 any scope. 159 5. IANA Considerations 161 These documentation prefixes have limited impact on IANA and no 162 impact on any RIRs. 164 IANA is to record the allocation of the IPv6 global unicast address 165 prefix 3ffe::/16 and fec0::/10 as documentation-only prefixes in the 166 IPv6 address registry. No end-user or service provider/LIR is to be 167 assigned these addresses. 169 6. Security Considerations 171 IPv6 addressing documentation has no direct impact on Internet 172 security. 174 However, the assignment of a new address space for documentation 175 purposes does mean, as indicated above, that these addresses SHOULD 176 be added to any filters required by individual operators to prevent 177 their use for globally routed destinations. 179 7. Acknowledgements 181 The authors acknowledge the work of Geoff Huston, assisted by Anne 182 Lord, and Philip Smith, in authoring the previous proposal for the 183 IPv6 documentation prefix. 185 8. References 186 8.1. Normative References 188 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 189 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, 190 DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, 191 . 193 [RFC3701] Fink, R. and R. Hinden, "6bone (IPv6 Testing Address 194 Allocation) Phaseout", RFC 3701, DOI 10.17487/RFC3701, 195 March 2004, . 197 [RFC3879] Huitema, C. and B. Carpenter, "Deprecating Site Local 198 Addresses", RFC 3879, DOI 10.17487/RFC3879, September 199 2004, . 201 [RFC8200] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6 202 (IPv6) Specification", STD 86, RFC 8200, 203 DOI 10.17487/RFC8200, July 2017, 204 . 206 8.2. Informative References 208 [RFC3513] Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "Internet Protocol Version 6 209 (IPv6) Addressing Architecture", RFC 3513, 210 DOI 10.17487/RFC3513, April 2003, 211 . 213 [RFC4291] Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "IP Version 6 Addressing 214 Architecture", RFC 4291, DOI 10.17487/RFC4291, February 215 2006, . 217 [RFC6724] Thaler, D., Ed., Draves, R., Matsumoto, A., and T. Chown, 218 "Default Address Selection for Internet Protocol Version 6 219 (IPv6)", RFC 6724, DOI 10.17487/RFC6724, September 2012, 220 . 222 [RFC6890] Cotton, M., Vegoda, L., Bonica, R., Ed., and B. Haberman, 223 "Special-Purpose IP Address Registries", BCP 153, 224 RFC 6890, DOI 10.17487/RFC6890, April 2013, 225 . 227 Authors' Addresses 229 Ed Horley 230 HexaBuild 232 Email: ed@hexabuild.io 233 Tom Coffeen 234 HexaBuild 236 Email: tom@hexabuild.io 238 Scott Hogg 239 HexaBuild 241 Email: scott@hexabuild.io 243 Nick Buraglio 244 Energy Sciences Network 246 Email: buraglio@es.net 248 Chris Cummings 249 Energy Sciences Network 251 Email: chriscummings@es.net 253 Kevin Myers 254 IP ArchiTechs 256 Email: kevin.myers@iparchitechs.com 258 Russ White 259 Juniper Networks 261 Email: russ@riw.us