idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-6man-multicast-scopes-07.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 (Using the creation date from RFC4007, updated by this document, for RFC5378 checks: 2003-06-25) -- The document seems to contain a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, and may have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008. The disclaimer is necessary when there are original authors that you have been unable to contact, or if some do not wish to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust. If you are able to get all authors (current and original) to grant those rights, you can and should remove the disclaimer; otherwise, the disclaimer is needed and you can ignore this comment. (See the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.) -- The document date (June 12, 2014) is 3606 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to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) == Missing Reference: 'RFC-to-be' is mentioned on line 162, but not defined == Outdated reference: A later version (-12) exists of draft-ietf-roll-trickle-mcast-09 Summary: 0 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 3 warnings (==), 2 comments (--).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: 4007, 4291 (if approved) June 12, 2014 5 Intended status: Standards Track 6 Expires: December 14, 2014 8 IPv6 Multicast Address Scopes 9 draft-ietf-6man-multicast-scopes-07.txt 11 Abstract 13 This document updates the definitions of IPv6 multicast scopes. This 14 document updates RFC 4007 and RFC 4291 16 Status of This Memo 18 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 19 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 21 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 22 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 23 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 24 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 26 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 27 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 28 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 29 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 31 This Internet-Draft will expire on December 14, 2014. 33 Copyright Notice 35 Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 36 document authors. All rights reserved. 38 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 39 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 40 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 41 publication of this document. Please review these documents 42 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 43 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 44 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 45 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 46 described in the Simplified BSD License. 48 This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF 49 Contributions published or made publicly available before November 50 10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this 51 material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow 52 modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process. 53 Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling 54 the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified 55 outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may 56 not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format 57 it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other 58 than English. 60 1. Introduction 62 RFC 4291 [RFC4291] defines "scop is a 4-bit multicast scope value 63 used to limit the scope of the multicast group." scop 3 is defined as 64 "reserved" in RFC 4291. The multicast protocol specification in 65 draft-ietf-roll-trickle-mcast [I-D.ietf-roll-trickle-mcast] desires 66 to use multicast scop 3 for transport of multicast traffic scoped to 67 a network of nodes connected in a mesh. The use of this scop value 68 is to accommodate a multicast scope that is greater than Link-Local 69 but is also automatically determined by the network architecture. 71 2. Definition of IPv6 Multicast Address Scopes (Updates RFC 4291) 73 The following table updates the definitions in RFC 4291: 75 +------+--------------------------+-------------------------+ 76 | scop | NAME | REFERENCE | 77 +------+--------------------------+-------------------------+ 78 | 0 | Reserved | [RFC4291],[ RFC-to-be ] | 79 | 1 | Interface-Local | [RFC4291],[ RFC-to-be ] | 80 | 2 | Link-Local scope | [RFC4291],[ RFC-to-be ] | 81 | 3 | Realm-Local scope | [RFC4291],[ RFC-to-be ] | 82 | 4 | Admin-Local scope | [RFC4291],[ RFC-to-be ] | 83 | 5 | Site-Local scope | [RFC4291],[ RFC-to-be ] | 84 | 6 | Unassigned | | 85 | 7 | Unassigned | | 86 | 8 | Organization-Local scope | [RFC4291],[ RFC-to-be ] | 87 | 9 | Unassigned | | 88 | A | Unassigned | | 89 | B | Unassigned | | 90 | C | Unassigned | | 91 | D | Unassigned | | 92 | E | Global scope | [RFC4291],[ RFC-to-be ] | 93 | F | Reserved | [RFC4291],[ RFC-to-be ] | 94 +------+--------------------------+-------------------------+ 96 The following change is applied to section 2.7 of RFC 4291: 98 OLD: 100 Admin-Local scope is the smallest scope that must be 101 administratively configured, i.e., not automatically derived 102 from physical connectivity or other, non-multicast-related 103 configuration. 105 NEW: 107 Interface-Local, Link-Local, and Realm-Local scope 108 boundaries are automatically derived from physical 109 connectivity or other, non-multicast related configuration. 110 Global scope has no boundary. The boundaries of all other 111 non-reserved scopes of Admin-Local or larger are 112 administratively configured. For reserved scopes, the way 113 of configuring their boundaries will be defined when the 114 semantics of the scope is defined. 116 According to RFC 4007 [RFC4007], the zone of a Realm-Local 117 scope must fall within zones of larger scope. Because the 118 zone of a Realm-Local scope is configured automatically, 119 while the zones of larger scopes are configured manually, 120 care must be taken in the definition of those larger scopes 121 to ensure that inclusion constraint is met. 123 Realm-Local scopes created by different network technologies 124 are considered to be independent and will have different zone 125 indices (see RFC 4007, section 6). A router with interfaces 126 on links using different network technologies does not forward 127 traffic between the Realm-Local multicast scopes defined by 128 those technologies. 130 3. Definition of Realm-Local scopes 132 The definition of any Realm-Local scope for a particular network 133 technology should be published in an RFC. For example, such a scope 134 definition would be appropriate for publication in an "IPv6-over-foo" 135 RFC. 137 Any RFCs that include the definition of a Realm-Local scope will be 138 added to the IANA 'IPv6 Multicast Address Scopes' registry under the 139 Realm-Local scope entry, and those specifications must include such a 140 request in their IANA Considerations. 142 Section 5 of this document gives the definition of scop 3 for IEEE 143 802.15.4 [IEEE802.15.4] networks. 145 4. Definition of automatic and administratively configured scopes 146 (updates RFC 4007) 148 Section 5 of RFC 4007 [RFC4007] and section 2.7 of RFC 4291 disagree 149 about the way in which multicast scope 3 is configured. To resolve 150 that disagreement, change the last bullet in the list in section 5 of 151 RFC 4007 as follows: 153 OLD: 155 o The boundaries of zones of a scope other than interface-local, 156 link-local, and global must be defined and configured by network 157 administrators. 159 NEW: 161 o The boundaries of zones of a scope are defined by the IPv6 162 addressing architecture [RFC4291] and updated by [RFC-to-be]. 164 5. Definition of Realm-Local Scope for IEEE 802.15.4 166 When used in an IP-over-IEEE802.15.4 network, "scop 3" is defined to 167 include all interfaces sharing a PAN ID. 169 6. IANA Considerations 171 IANA is requested to establish a sub-registry titled "IPv6 Multicast 172 Address Scopes" in the existing "Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6) 173 Multicast Address Allocations" registry. The new registry is to be 174 populated with the scope values given in Section 2. New definitions 175 for scop values will be made with "IETF Review" policy. 177 IANA is requested to add a reference to the Realm-Local scope entry 178 (scop 3) in the "IPv6 Multicast Address Scopes" registry for each 179 future RFC that defines a Realm-Local scope for new network 180 technologies. Such RFCs are expected to make an explicit request to 181 IANA for inclusion in the registry. 183 IANA is requested to include a note to the top of the "IPv6 Multicast 184 Address Scopes" registry: 186 The definition of any Realm-Local scope for a particular network 187 technology should be published in an RFC. For example, such a 188 scope definition would be appropriate for publication in an 189 'IPv6-over-foo' RFC. 191 Any RFCs that define a Realm-Local scope will be listed in this 192 registry as an additional reference in the Realm-Local scope 193 entry. Such RFCs are expected to make an explicit request to 194 IANA for inclusion in this registry. 196 7. Acknowledgments 198 Robert Cragie, Kerry Lynn, Jinmei Tatuya, Dave Thaler and Stig Venaas 199 all contributed text and/or review to ensure that the updates to RFC 200 4007 and RFC 4291 are correct. 202 8. Security Considerations 204 This document has no security considerations beyond those in RFC 4007 205 [RFC4007] and RFC 4291 [RFC4291]. 207 9. References 209 9.1. Normative References 211 [RFC4007] Deering, S., Haberman, B., Jinmei, T., Nordmark, E., and 212 B. Zill, "IPv6 Scoped Address Architecture", RFC 4007, 213 March 2005. 215 [RFC4291] Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "IP Version 6 Addressing 216 Architecture", RFC 4291, February 2006. 218 9.2. Informative References 220 [I-D.ietf-roll-trickle-mcast] 221 Hui, J. and R. Kelsey, "Multicast Protocol for Low power 222 and Lossy Networks (MPL)", draft-ietf-roll-trickle- 223 mcast-09 (work in progress), April 2014. 225 [IEEE802.15.4] 226 IEEE Std 802.15.4-2006, "IEEE Standard for Information 227 technology - Telecommunications and information exchange 228 between systems - Local and metropolitan area networks - 229 Specific requirements; Part 15.4: Wireless Medium Access 230 Control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications for 231 Low-Rate Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs)", October 232 2006. 234 Author's Address 236 Ralph Droms 237 Cisco 238 1414 Massachusetts Avenue 239 Boxborough, MA 01719 240 USA 242 Phone: +1 978 936 1674 243 Email: rdroms.ietf@gmail.com