idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-mboned-rfc3171bis-02.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** It looks like you're using RFC 3978 boilerplate. You should update this to the boilerplate described in the IETF Trust License Policy document (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info), which is required now. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3979, Section 5, paragraph 1 on line 422. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3979, Section 5, paragraph 2 on line 429. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3979, Section 5, paragraph 3 on line 435. ** Found boilerplate matching RFC 3978, Section 5.4, paragraph 1 (on line 387), which is fine, but *also* found old RFC 2026, Section 10.4C, paragraph 1 text on line 38. ** The document claims conformance with section 10 of RFC 2026, but uses some RFC 3978/3979 boilerplate. As RFC 3978/3979 replaces section 10 of RFC 2026, you should not claim conformance with it if you have changed to using RFC 3978/3979 boilerplate. ** The document seems to lack an RFC 3978 Section 5.1 IPR Disclosure Acknowledgement. ** This document has an original RFC 3978 Section 5.4 Copyright Line, instead of the newer IETF Trust Copyright according to RFC 4748. ** The document seems to lack an RFC 3978 Section 5.4 Reference to BCP 78 -- however, there's a paragraph with a matching beginning. Boilerplate error? ** The document seems to lack an RFC 3978 Section 5.5 (updated by RFC 4748) Disclaimer -- however, there's a paragraph with a matching beginning. Boilerplate error? Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == No 'Intended status' indicated for this document; assuming Proposed Standard Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** There are 4 instances of too long lines in the document, the longest one being 6 characters in excess of 72. == There are 1 instance of lines with non-RFC6890-compliant IPv4 addresses in the document. If these are example addresses, they should be changed. == There are 15 instances of lines with multicast IPv4 addresses in the document. If these are generic example addresses, they should be changed to use the 233.252.0.x range defined in RFC 5771 -- The document has examples using IPv4 documentation addresses according to RFC6890, but does not use any IPv6 documentation addresses. Maybe there should be IPv6 examples, too? 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 (March 2004) is 7318 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: 'RFC2780' is mentioned on line 233, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'RFC 2119' is mentioned on line 99, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'RFC2328' is mentioned on line 127, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'RFC2030' is mentioned on line 140, but not defined ** Obsolete undefined reference: RFC 2030 (Obsoleted by RFC 4330) == Missing Reference: 'RFC2730' is mentioned on line 140, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'RFC2974' is mentioned on line 232, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'SDR' is mentioned on line 170, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'RFC2770' is mentioned on line 202, but not defined ** Obsolete undefined reference: RFC 2770 (Obsoleted by RFC 3180) == Missing Reference: 'RFC3138' is mentioned on line 208, but not defined ** Obsolete undefined reference: RFC 3138 (Obsoleted by RFC 5771) == Missing Reference: 'RFC1930' is mentioned on line 209, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'RFC330' is mentioned on line 308, but not defined == Unused Reference: 'RFC2119' is defined on line 344, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC2026' is defined on line 358, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC2028' is defined on line 361, but no explicit reference was found in the text ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 3330 (Obsoleted by RFC 5735) -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 2028 (Obsoleted by RFC 9281) -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 2434 (Obsoleted by RFC 5226) Summary: 12 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 19 warnings (==), 8 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 INTERNET-DRAFT Z. Albanna 3 draft-ietf-mboned-rfc3171bis-02.txt K. Almeroth 4 M. Cotton 5 D. Meyer 6 Category Best Current Practice 7 Expires: September 2004 March 2004 9 IANA Guidelines for IPv4 Multicast Address Assignments 10 12 Status of this Document 14 This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with 15 all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. 17 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 18 Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that 19 other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- 20 Drafts. 22 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 23 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 24 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 25 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 27 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at 28 http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt 30 The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at 31 http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. 33 This document is a product of the ABC working group. Comments should 34 be addressed to the authors, or the mailing list at 36 Copyright Notice 38 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). All Rights Reserved. 40 Abstract 42 The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority is charged with allocating 43 parameter values for fields in protocols which have been designed, 44 created or are maintained by the Internet Engineering Task Force. 45 This document provides guidelines for the assignment of the IPv4 IP 46 multicast address space. 48 Table of Contents 50 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 51 2. Definition of Current Assignment Practice. . . . . . . . . . . 4 52 3. Local Network Control Block (224.0.0/24) . . . . . . . . . . . 5 53 3.1. Assignment Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 54 4. Internetwork Control Block (224.0.1/24). . . . . . . . . . . . 5 55 4.1. Assignment Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 56 5. AD-HOC Block (224.0.2/24 - 224.0.255/24) . . . . . . . . . . . 5 57 5.1. Assignment Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 58 6. SDP/SAP Block (224.2/16) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 59 6.1. Assignment Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 60 7. Source Specific Multicast Block (232/8). . . . . . . . . . . . 6 61 7.1. Assignment Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 62 8. GLOP Block (233/8) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 63 8.1. Assignment Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 64 9. Administratively Scoped Address Block (239/8). . . . . . . . . 7 65 9.1. Assignment Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 66 9.1.1. Relative Offsets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 67 10. Annual Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 68 10.1. Address Reclamation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 69 11. Usable IPv4 Multicast Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 70 11.1. IGMP-snooping switches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 71 11.2. Unusable Inter-domain Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 72 11.2.1. Administratively Scoped Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . 9 73 11.2.2. Special Use IPv4 Source Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . 10 74 12. Use of IANA Reserved Addresses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 75 13. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 76 14. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 77 15. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 78 16. Normative References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 79 17. Informative References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 80 18. Author's Addresses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 81 19. Full Copyright Statement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 82 20. Intellectual Property . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 83 21. Acknowledgement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 85 1. Introduction 87 The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) (www.iana.org) is 88 charged with allocating parameter values for fields in protocols 89 which have been designed, created or are maintained by the Internet 90 Engineering Task Force (IETF). RFC 2780 [RFC2780] provides the IANA 91 guidance in the assignment of parameters for fields in newly 92 developed protocols. This memo expands on section 4.4.2 of RFC 2780 93 and attempts to codify existing IANA practice used in the assignment 94 IPv4 multicast addresses. 96 The key words "MUST"", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 97 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 98 document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC 2119]. 100 2. Definition of Current Assignment Practice 102 Unlike IPv4 unicast address assignment, where blocks of addresses are 103 delegated to regional registries, IPv4 multicast addresses are 104 assigned directly by the IANA. Current assignments appear as follows 105 [IANA]: 107 224.0.0.0 - 224.0.0.255 (224.0.0/24) Local Network Control Block 108 224.0.1.0 - 224.0.1.255 (224.0.1/24) Internetwork Control Block 109 224.0.2.0 - 224.0.255.0 AD-HOC Block 110 224.1.0.0 - 224.1.255.255 (224.1/16) RESERVED 111 224.2.0.0 - 224.2.255.255 (224.2/16) SDP/SAP Block 112 224.3.0.0 - 231.255.255.255 RESERVED 113 232.0.0.0 - 232.255.255.255 (232/8) Source Specific Multicast Block 114 233.0.0.0 - 233.255.255.255 (233/8) GLOP Block 115 234.0.0.0 - 238.255.255.255 RESERVED 116 239.0.0.0 - 239.255.255.255 (239/8) Administratively Scoped Block 118 The IANA generally assigns addresses from the Local Network Control, 119 Internetwork Control, and AD-HOC blocks. Assignment guidelines for 120 each of these blocks, as well as for the Source Specific Multicast, 121 GLOP and Administratively Scoped Blocks, are described below. 123 3. Local Network Control Block (224.0.0/24) 125 Addresses in the Local Network Control block are used for protocol 126 control traffic that is not forwarded off link. Examples of this type 127 of use include OSPFIGP All Routers (224.0.0.5) [RFC2328]. 129 3.1. Assignment Guidelines 131 Pursuant to section 4.4.2 of RFC 2780 [RFC2780], assignments from the 132 Local Network Control block follow an Expert Review, IESG Approval or 133 Standards Action process. See [IANA] for the current set of 134 assignments. 136 4. Internetwork Control Block (224.0.1/24) 138 Addresses in the Internetwork Control block are used for protocol 139 control that must be forwarded through the Internet. Examples include 140 224.0.1.1 (NTP [RFC2030]) and 224.0.1.68 (mdhcpdiscover [RFC2730]). 142 4.1. Assignment Guidelines 144 Pursuant to section 4.4.2 of RFC 2780 [RFC2780], assignments from the 145 Internetwork Control block follow an Expert Review, IESG Approval or 146 Standards Action process. See [IANA] for the current set of 147 assignments. 149 5. AD-HOC Block (224.0.2/24 - 224.0.255/24) 151 Addresses in the AD-HOC block have traditionally been assigned for 152 those applications that don't fit in either the Local or Internetwork 153 Control blocks. These addresses are globally routed and are typically 154 used by applications that require small blocks of addressing (e.g., 155 less than a /24). 157 5.1. Assignment Guidelines 159 In general, the IANA SHOULD NOT assign addressing in the AD-HOC 160 Block. However, the IANA may under special special circumstances, 161 assign addressing from this block. Pursuant to section 4.4.2 of RFC 162 2780 [RFC2780], assignments from the AD-HOC block follow an Expert 163 Review, IESG Approval or Standards Action process. See [IANA] for the 164 current set of assignments. 166 6. SDP/SAP Block (224.2/16) 168 Addresses in the SDP/SAP block are used by applications that receive 169 addresses through the Session Announcement Protocol [RFC2974] for use 170 via applications like the session directory tool (such as SDR [SDR]). 172 6.1. Assignment Guidelines 174 Since addresses in the SDP/SAP block are chosen randomly from the 175 range of addresses not already in use [RFC2974], no IANA assignment 176 policy is required. Note that while no additional IANA assignment is 177 required, addresses in the SDP/SAP block are explicitly for use by 178 SDP/SAP and MUST NOT be used for other purposes. 180 7. Source Specific Multicast Block (232/8) 182 The Source Specific Multicast (SSM) is an extension of IP Multicast 183 in which traffic is forwarded to receivers from only those multicast 184 sources for which the receivers have explicitly expressed interest, 185 and is primarily targeted at one-to-many (broadcast) applications. 186 Note that this block as initially assigned to the VMTP transient 187 groups [IANA]. 189 7.1. Assignment Guidelines 191 Because the SSM model essentially makes the entire multicast address 192 space local to the host, no IANA assignment policy is required. Note, 193 however, that while no additional IANA assignment is required, 194 addresses in the SSM block are explicitly for use by SSM and MUST NOT 195 be used for other purposes. 197 8. GLOP Block (233/8) 199 Addresses in the GLOP block are globally scoped statically assigned 200 addresses. The assignment is made by mapping a domain's autonomous 201 system number into the middle two octets of 233.X.Y.0/24. The mapping 202 and assignment is defined in [RFC2770]. 204 8.1. Assignment Guidelines 206 Because addresses in the GLOP block are algorithmically pre-assigned, 207 no IANA assignment policy is required. In addition, RFC 3138 208 [RFC3138] delegates assignment of the GLOP sub-block mapped by the 209 RFC 1930 [RFC1930] private AS space (233.252.0.0 - 233.255.255.255) 210 to the Internet Routing Registries. Note that while no additional 211 IANA assignment is required, addresses in the GLOP block are 212 assigned for use as defined in RFC 2770 and MUST NOT be used for 213 other purposes. 215 9. Administratively Scoped Address Block (239/8) 217 Addresses in the Administratively Scoped Address block are for local 218 use within a domain and are described in [RFC2365]. 220 9.1. Assignment Guidelines 222 Since addresses in this block are local to a domain, no IANA 223 assignment policy is required. 225 9.1.1. Relative Offsets 227 The relative offsets [RFC2365] are used to ensure that a service can 228 be located independent of the extent of the enclosing scope (see RFC 229 2770 for details). Since there are only 256 such offsets, the IANA 230 should only assign a relative offset to a protocol that provides an 231 infrastructure supporting service. Examples of such services include 232 the Session Announcement Protocol [RFC2974]. Pursuant to section 233 4.4.2 of RFC 2780 [RFC2780], assignments of Relative Offsets follow 234 an Expert Review, IESG Approval or Standards Action process. See 235 [IANA] for the current set of assignments. 237 10. Annual Review 239 Given the dynamic nature of IPv4 multicast and its associated 240 infrastructure, and the previously undocumented IPv4 multicast 241 address assignment guidelines, the IANA should conduct an annual 242 review of currently assigned addresses. 244 10.1. Address Reclamation 246 During the review described above, addresses that were mis-assigned 247 should, where possible, be reclaimed or reassigned. 249 The IANA should also review assignments reclaim those addresses that 250 are not in use on the global Internet (i.e, those applications which 251 can use SSM, GLOP, or Administratively Scoped addressing, or are not 252 globally routed). 254 11. Usable IPv4 Multicast Addresses 256 Multicast datagrams that match the criteria in this section SHOULD 257 NOT be used, even on local, unrouted subnetworks. 259 11.1. IGMP-snooping switches 261 RFC 1112 [RFC1112] describes the mapping of IPv4 Multicast Group 262 addresses to Ethernet MAC addresses, as follows: 264 An IP host group address is mapped to an Ethernet multicast 265 address by placing the low-order 23-bits of the IP address into 266 the low-order 23 bits of the Ethernet multicast address 267 01-00-5E-00-00-00 (hex). Because there are 28 significant bits 268 in an IP host group address, more than one host group address 269 may map to the same Ethernet multicast address. 271 Now, note that multicast group addresses in the 224.0.0.0/24 range 272 are used for local subnetwork control (see section 3 above). Under 273 the RFC 1112 mapping, this maps to the Ethernet multicast address 274 range 01-00-5E-00-00-XX, where XX is 00 through FF. Ethernet frames 275 within this range are always processed in the control plane of many 276 popular network devices, such as IGMP-snooping switches. 278 Because of the many-to-one mapping of IPv4 Multicast Group Addresses 279 to Ethernet MAC addresses, it is possible to overwhelm the control 280 plane of network devices by sending to group addresses that map into 281 the 01-00-5E-00-00-XX (hex) range. 283 IGMP-snooping network devices must also flood these frames to all 284 outgoing ports, so the damage may extend to end systems and routers. 286 11.2. Unusable Inter-domain Groups 288 Multicast datagrams that match the criteria in this section SHOULD 289 NOT be routed between administrative domains. 291 11.2.1. Administratively Scoped Addresses 293 RFC 2365 [RFC2365] defines 239.0.0.0/8 for use within an 294 administrative domain. As such, datagrams with group addresses that 295 match 239.0.0.0/8 SHOULD NOT be passed between administrative 296 domains. 298 11.2.2. Special Use IPv4 Source Addresses 300 RFC 1918 [RFC1918] defines certain ranges of IPv4 unicast addresses 301 that can be used within an administrative domain. Multicast 302 datagrams are no exception to the rule that datagrams addressed 303 within these ranges SHOULD NOT be passed between administrative 304 domains. Examples include 127.0.0.0/8, which is widely used for 305 internal host addressing, and is generally not valid on datagrams 306 passed between hosts. 0.0.0.0/8 and 169.254.0.0/16 are also valid 307 only in the context of local links. Such source addresses are not 308 valid for datagrams passed between networks[RFC330]. Finally 309 192.0.2.0/24 is reserved for documentation and example code. 310 [RFC3330]. 312 12. Use of IANA Reserved Addresses 314 Applications MUST NOT use addressing in the IANA reserved blocks. 316 13. IANA Considerations 318 This document provides guidelines for the IANA to use in assigning 319 IPv4 multicast addresses. It does not create any new namespaces for 320 the IANA to manage [RFC2434]. 322 14. Acknowledgments 324 The authors would like to thank Scott Bradner, Randy Bush, John 325 Meylor, Thomas Narten, Joe St. Sauver, and Beau Williamson for their 326 constructive feedback and comments. Bill Nickless contributed the 327 text in section 11 describing IPv4 multicast unusable group and 328 source addresses. 330 15. Security Considerations 332 The assignment guidelines described in this document do not alter the 333 security properties of either the Any Source or Source Specific 334 multicast service models. 336 16. Normative References 338 [RFC1112] Deering, S., "Host extensions for IP 339 multicasting", RFC 1112, August, 1989. 341 [RFC1918] Rekhter, Y. et. al., "Address Allocation for 342 Private Internets", RFC 1918, February, 1996. 344 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to 345 Indicate Requirement Levels", RFC 2119, March, 346 1997. 348 [RFC2365] Meyer, D., "Administratively Scoped IP 349 Multicast", RFC 2365, July 1998. 351 [RFC3330] IANA, "Special-Use IPv4 Addresses", RFC 3330, 352 September, 2002. 354 17. Informative References 356 [IANA] http://www.iana.org/assignments/multicast-addresses 358 [RFC2026] Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- 359 Revision 3", RFC 2026/BCP 9, October, 1996. 361 [RFC2028] Hovey, R. and S. Bradner, "The Organizations 362 Involved in the IETF Standards Process", RFC 363 2028/BCP 11, October, 1996. 365 [RFC2434] Narten, T., and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for 366 Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", 367 RFC 2434/BCP 26, October 1998. 369 18. Author's Addresses 371 Zaid Albanna 372 Email: zaid@juniper.net 374 Kevin Almeroth 375 Email: almeroth@cs.ucsb.edu 377 David Meyer 378 Email: dmm@1-4-5.net 380 Michelle S. Cotton 381 Email: iana@iana.org 383 19. Full Copyright Statement 385 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). This document is subject 386 to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78 and 387 except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights. 389 This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to 390 others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it 391 or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published 392 and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any 393 kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are 394 included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this 395 document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing 396 the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other 397 Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of 398 developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for 399 copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be 400 followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than 401 English. 403 The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be 404 revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns. 406 This document and the information contained herein is provided on an 407 "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING 408 TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING 409 BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION 410 HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF 411 MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. 413 20. Intellectual Property 415 The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any 416 Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to 417 pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in 418 this document or the extent to which any license under such rights 419 might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has 420 made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information 421 on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be 422 found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. 424 Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any 425 assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an 426 attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of 427 such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this 428 specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at 429 http://www.ietf.org/ipr. 431 The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any 432 copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary 433 rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement 434 this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at ietf- 435 ipr@ietf.org. 437 21. Acknowledgement 439 Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the 440 Internet Society.