idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-nisconfig-03.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** Looks like you're using RFC 2026 boilerplate. This must be updated to follow RFC 3978/3979, as updated by RFC 4748. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == No 'Intended status' indicated for this document; assuming Proposed Standard == The page length should not exceed 58 lines per page, but there was 5 longer pages, the longest (page 6) being 61 lines Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** There is 1 instance of too long lines in the document, the longest one being 1 character in excess of 72. ** The abstract seems to contain references ([3]), which it shouldn't. Please replace those with straight textual mentions of the documents in question. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the RFC 3978 Section 5.4 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. (The document does seem to have the reference to RFC 2119 which the ID-Checklist requires). -- 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 (15 Oct 2003) is 7498 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) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 3315 (ref. '1') (Obsoleted by RFC 8415) Summary: 4 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 4 warnings (==), 2 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 Network Working Group A.K. Vijayabhaskar 2 Internet-Draft Hewlett-Packard 3 Expires: April 16, 2004 15 Oct 2003 5 NIS Configuration Options for DHCPv6 6 draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-opt-nisconfig-03.txt 8 Status of this Memo 10 This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with 11 all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. 13 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 14 Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that 15 other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- 16 Drafts. 18 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 19 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 20 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 21 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 23 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at 24 http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. 26 The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at 27 http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. 29 This Internet-Draft will expire on April 16, 2004. 31 Copyright Notice 33 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). All Rights Reserved. 35 Abstract 37 This document describes four options for NIS-related configuration 38 information in DHCPv6: NIS Servers [3], NIS+ Servers [3], NIS Client 39 Domain Name [3], NIS+ Client Domain name [3]. 41 1. Introduction 43 This document describes four options for configuration information 44 related to Network Information Service (NIS) in DHCPv6 [1]. 46 2. Requirements 48 The keywords MUST, MUST NOT, REQUIRED, SHALL, SHALL NOT, SHOULD, 49 SHOULD NOT, RECOMMENDED, MAY, and OPTIONAL, when they appear in this 50 document, are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [2] 52 3. Terminology 54 This document uses terminology specific to IPv6 and DHCPv6 as defined 55 in "Terminology" section of the DHCPv6 specification [1]. 57 4. Network Information Service (NIS) Servers option 59 The Network Information Service (NIS) [3] Servers option provides a 60 list of one or more IPv6 addresses of NIS servers available to the 61 client. The NIS servers SHOULD be listed in the order of preference. 63 The format of the Network Information Service Servers option is as 64 as shown below: 66 0 1 2 3 67 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 68 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 69 | OPTION_NIS_SERVERS | option-len | 70 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 71 | | 72 | NIS server (IPv6 address) | 73 | | 74 | | 75 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 76 | | 77 | NIS server (IPv6 address) | 78 | | 79 | | 80 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 81 | ... | 82 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 84 option-code: OPTION_NIS_SERVERS (tbd) 86 option-len: Length of the 'NIS server' fields in octets; It must be 87 a multiple of 16 89 NIS server: IPv6 address of NIS server 91 5. Network Information Service V2 (NIS+) Servers option 93 The Network Information Service V2 (NIS+) [3] Servers option provides 94 a list of one or more IPv6 addresses of NIS+ servers available to 95 the client. The NIS+ servers SHOULD be listed in the order of 96 preference. 98 The format of the Network Information Service V2 (NIS+) Servers 99 option is as shown below: 101 0 1 2 3 102 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 1 103 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 104 | OPTION_NISP_SERVERS | option-len | 105 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 106 | | 107 | NIS+ server (IPv6 address) | 108 | | 109 | | 110 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 111 | | 112 | NIS+ server (IPv6 address) | 113 | | 114 | | 115 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 116 | ... | 117 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 119 option-code: OPTION_NISP_SERVERS (tbd) 121 option-len: Length of the 'NIS+ server' fields in octets; It must be 122 a multiple of 16 124 NIS+ server: IPv6 address of NIS+ server 126 6. Network Information Service (NIS) Domain Name option 128 The Network Information Service (NIS) [3] Domain Name option is used 129 by the server to convey client's NIS Domain Name info to the 130 client. 132 The format of the NIS Domain Name option is as shown below: 134 0 1 2 3 135 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 1 136 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 137 | OPTION_NIS_DOMAIN_NAME | option-len | 138 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 139 | nis-domain-name | 140 | ... | 141 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 143 option-code: OPTION_NIS_DOMAIN_NAME (tbd) 145 option-len: Length of the 'nis-domain-name' field in octets 147 nis-domain-name: NIS Domain name for client 149 The 'nis-domain-name' MUST be encoded as specified in section 150 "Representation and Use of domain names" of the DHCPv6 151 specification [1]. 153 7. Network Information Service V2 (NIS+) Domain Name option 155 The Network Information Service V2 (NIS+) [3] Domain Name option is 156 used by the server to convey client's NIS+ Domain Name info to the 157 client. 159 The format of the NIS+ Domain Name option is as shown below: 161 0 1 2 3 162 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 1 163 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 164 | OPTION_NISP_DOMAIN_NAME | option-len | 165 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 166 | nisp-domain-name | 167 | ... | 168 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 170 option-code: OPTION_NISP_DOMAIN_NAME (tbd) 172 option-len: Length of the 'nisp-domain-name' field in octets 174 nisp-domain-name: NIS+ Domain name for client 176 The 'nisp-domain-name' MUST be encoded as specified in section 177 "Representation and Use of domain names" of the DHCPv6 178 specification [1]. 180 8. Appearance of these options 182 The NIS servers, NIS+ servers, NIS domain name and NIS+ domain name 183 options MUST NOT appear in other than the following messages: Solicit, 184 Advertise, Request, Renew, Rebind, Information-Request and Reply. 186 The option number for these options MAY appear in the Option Request 187 Option [1] in the following messages: Solicit, Request, Renew, 188 Rebind, Information-Request and Reconfigure. 190 9. Security Considerations 192 The NIS servers, NIS+ servers, NIS domain name and NIS+ domain name 193 options may be used by an intruder DHCPv6 server to assign invalid 194 NIS parameters, resulting in clients unable to use NIS service. 196 To avoid attacks through these options, the DHCP client SHOULD use 197 authenticated DHCP (see section "Authentication of DHCP messages" 198 in the DHCPv6 specification [1]). 200 10. IANA Considerations 202 IANA is requested to assign an option code to the following options 203 from the option-code space defined in "DHCPv6 Options" section of the 204 DHCPv6 specification [1]. 206 Option Name Value Described in 207 OPTION_NIS_SERVERS tbd Section 4 208 OPTION_NISP_SERVERS tbd Section 5 209 OPTION_NIS_DOMAIN_NAME tbd Section 6 210 OPTION_NISP_DOMAIN_NAME tbd Section 7 212 11. Normative References 214 [1] Bound, J., Carney, M., Perkins, C., Lemon, T., Volz, B. and R. 215 Droms (ed.), "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 216 (DHCPv6)", RFC 3315, July 2003. 218 12. Informative References 220 [2] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement 221 Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 223 [3] Sun Microsystems, "System and Network Administration", 224 March 1990. 226 Author's Address 228 Vijayabhaskar A K 229 Hewlett-Packard STSD-I 230 29, Cunningham Road 231 Bangalore - 560052 232 India 234 Phone: +91-80-2053085 235 E-Mail: vijayak@india.hp.com 237 Full Copyright Statement 239 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003). All Rights Reserved. 241 This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to 242 others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it 243 or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published 244 and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any 245 kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are 246 included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this 247 document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing 248 the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other 249 Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of 250 developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for 251 copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be 252 followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than 253 English. 255 The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be 256 revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns. 258 This document and the information contained herein is provided on an 259 "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING 260 TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING 261 BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION 262 HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF 263 MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. 265 Acknowledgement 267 Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the 268 Internet Society. Thanks to the DHC Working Group for their time and 269 input into the specification. In particular, thanks to (in 270 alphabetical order) Bernie Volz, Jim Bound, Ralph Droms and Thomas 271 Narten for their thorough review.