idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-6man-multicast-scopes-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 : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The 'Updates: ' line in the draft header should list only the _numbers_ of the RFCs which will be updated by this document (if approved); it should not include the word 'RFC' in the list. -- The draft header indicates that this document updates RFC4291, but the abstract doesn't seem to mention this, which it should. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year (Using the creation date from RFC4291, updated by this document, for RFC5378 checks: 2003-10-10) -- The document seems to lack a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, but may have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008. If you have contacted all the original authors and they are all willing to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust, then this is fine, and you can ignore this comment. If not, you may need to add the pre-RFC5378 disclaimer. (See the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.) -- The document date (November 04, 2013) is 3826 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) == Outdated reference: A later version (-12) exists of draft-ietf-roll-trickle-mcast-05 Summary: 0 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 3 warnings (==), 3 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Internet Engineering Task Force R. Droms 3 Internet-Draft Cisco 4 Updates: RFC 4291 (if approved) November 04, 2013 5 Intended status: Standards Track 6 Expires: May 08, 2014 8 IPv6 Multicast Address Scopes 9 draft-ietf-6man-multicast-scopes-01.txt 11 Abstract 13 This document updates the definitions of IPv6 multicast scopes. 15 Status of This Memo 17 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 18 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 20 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 21 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 22 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 23 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 25 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 26 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 27 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 28 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 30 This Internet-Draft will expire on May 08, 2014. 32 Copyright Notice 34 Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 35 document authors. All rights reserved. 37 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 38 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 39 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 40 publication of this document. Please review these documents 41 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 42 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 43 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 44 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 45 described in the Simplified BSD License. 47 1. Definition of IPv6 Multicast Address Scopes (Updates RFC 4291) 48 RFC 4291 [RFC4291] defines "scop is a 4-bit multicast scope value 49 used to limit the scope of the multicast group." scop 3 is defined as 50 "reserved" in RFC 4291. The multicast protocol specification in 51 draft-ietf-roll-trickle-mcast [I-D.ietf-roll-trickle-mcast] desires 52 to use multicast scop 3 for transport of multicast traffic scoped to 53 a network of nodes connected in a mesh. The use of this scop value 54 is to accommodate a multicast scope that is greater than Link-Local 55 but is also automatically determined by the network architecture; for 56 example, all of the hosts and routers in a multi-link subnet RPL 57 realm. 59 The following table updates the definitions in RFC 4291: 61 0 reserved 63 1 Interface-Local scope 65 2 Link-Local scope 67 3 Realm-Local scope 69 4 Admin-Local scope 71 5 Site-Local scope 73 6 (unassigned) 75 7 (unassigned) 77 8 Organization-Local scope 79 9 (unassigned) 81 A (unassigned) 83 B (unassigned) 85 C (unassigned) 87 D (unassigned) 89 E Global scope 91 F reserved 93 The following change is applied to section 2.7 of RFC 4291: 95 OLD: 97 Admin-Local scope is the smallest scope that must be 98 administratively configured, i.e., not automatically derived 99 from physical connectivity or other, non-multicast-related 100 configuration. 102 NEW: 104 Interface-Local, Link-Local, and Realm-Local scope 105 boundaries are automatically derived from physical 106 connectivity or other, non-multicast related configuration. 107 Global scope has no boundary. The boundaries of all other 108 non-reserved scopes of Admin-Local or larger are 109 administratively configured. For reserved scopes, the way 110 of configuring their boundaries will be defined when the 111 semantics of the scope is defined. 113 According to RFC 4007 [RFC4007], the zone of a Realm-Local 114 scope must fall within zones of larger scope. Because the 115 zone of a Realm-Local scope is configured automatically, 116 while the zones of larger scopes are configured manually, 117 care must be taken in the definition of those larger scopes 118 to ensure that inclusion contraint is met. 120 2. Definition of Realm-Local scopes 122 The definition of any Realm-Local scope for a particular network 123 technology should be published in an RFC. For example, such a scope 124 definition would be appropriate for publication in an "IPv6-over-foo" 125 RFC. 127 Any RFCs that include the definition of a Realm-Local scope will be 128 listed in the IANA "IPv6 Multicast Address Scopes" registry. 130 3. Definition of automatic and administratively configures scopes 131 (updates RFC 4007) 133 Section 5 of RFC 4007 [RFC4007] and section 2.7 of RFC 4291 disagree 134 about the way in which multicast scope 3 is configured. To resolve 135 that disagreement, change the last bullet in the list in section 5 of 136 RFC 4007 as follows: 138 OLD: 140 o The boundaries of zones of a scope other than interface-local, 141 link-local, and global must be defined and configured by network 142 administrators. 144 NEW: 146 o The boundaries of zones of a scope are defined by the IPv6 147 addressing architecture [RFC4291]. 149 4. IANA Considerations 151 IANA is asked to establish a sub-registry titled "IPv6 Multicast 152 Address Scopes" in the existing "Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6) 153 Multicast Address Allocations" registry. The "IPv6 Multicast Address 154 Scopes" is to be populated with the scope values given in section 1, 155 with a note associated with scope 3 listing all RFCs that define 156 Realm-Local scoping rules that use scope 3. 158 5. Acknowledgments 160 Robert Cragie, Kerry Lynn, Jinmei Tatuya, Dave Thaler and Stig Venaas 161 all contributed to enuring that the updates to RFC 4007 and RFC 4291 162 are correct 164 6. Security Considerations 166 This document has no security considerations beyond those in RFC 4291 167 [RFC4291]. 169 7. References 171 7.1. Normative References 173 [RFC4007] Deering, S., Haberman, B., Jinmei, T., Nordmark, E., and 174 B. Zill, "IPv6 Scoped Address Architecture", RFC 4007, 175 March 2005. 177 [RFC4291] Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "IP Version 6 Addressing 178 Architecture", RFC 4291, February 2006. 180 7.2. Informative References 182 [I-D.ietf-roll-trickle-mcast] 183 Hui, J. and R. Kelsey, "Multicast Protocol for Low power 184 and Lossy Networks (MPL)", draft-ietf-roll-trickle- 185 mcast-05 (work in progress), August 2013. 187 Author's Address 189 Ralph Droms 190 Cisco 191 1414 Massachusetts Avenue 192 Boxborough, MA 01719 193 US 195 Phone: +1 978 936 1674 196 Email: rdroms@cisco.com