idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-radext-delegated-prefix-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 3978, Section 5.1 on line 15. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3978, Section 5.5 on line 279. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3979, Section 5, paragraph 1 on line 290. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3979, Section 5, paragraph 2 on line 297. -- Found old boilerplate from RFC 3979, Section 5, paragraph 3 on line 303. ** This document has an original RFC 3978 Section 5.4 Copyright Line, instead of the newer IETF Trust Copyright according to RFC 4748. ** This document has an original RFC 3978 Section 5.5 Disclaimer, instead of the newer disclaimer which includes the IETF Trust according to RFC 4748. 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 RFC 3978 Section 5.4 Copyright Line does not match the current year -- 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 (July 10, 2006) is 6500 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 3633 (ref. '2') (Obsoleted by RFC 8415) -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 3588 (ref. '5') (Obsoleted by RFC 6733) -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 4005 (ref. '6') (Obsoleted by RFC 7155) Summary: 4 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 1 warning (==), 9 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group J. Salowey 3 Internet-Draft R. Droms 4 Intended status: Standards Track Cisco Systems, Inc. 5 Expires: January 11, 2007 July 10, 2006 7 RADIUS Delegated-IPv6-Prefix Attribute 8 draft-ietf-radext-delegated-prefix-02.txt 10 Status of this Memo 12 By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any 13 applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware 14 have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes 15 aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79. 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 Internet-Draft will expire on January 11, 2007. 35 Copyright Notice 37 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006). 39 Abstract 41 This document defines a RADIUS (Remote Authentication Dial In User 42 Service) attribute that carries an IPv6 prefix that is to be 43 delegated to the user. This attribute is usable within either RADIUS 44 or Diameter. 46 1. Introduction 48 The Delegated-IPv6-Prefix is a RADIUS attribute [1] that carries an 49 IPv6 prefix to be delegated to the user, for use in the user's 50 network. For example, the prefix in a Delegated-IPv6-Prefix 51 attribute can be delegated to another node through DHCP Prefix 52 Delegation [2]. 54 The Framed-IPv6-Prefix attribute [4] serves a similar purpose, but 55 may also be used for other purposes other than delegating a prefix 56 for use in a user's network. Definition of the Delegated-IPv6-Prefix 57 allows the simultaneous use of the Framed-IPv6-Prefix for other 58 purposes and the Delegated-IPv6-Prefix for prefix delegation. 60 2. Terminology 62 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 63 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 64 document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [3]. 66 3. Attribute format 68 The format of the Delegated-IPv6-Prefix is: 70 0 1 2 3 71 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 72 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 73 | Type | Length | Reserved | Prefix-Length | 74 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 75 Prefix 76 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 77 Prefix 78 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 79 Prefix 80 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 81 Prefix | 82 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 84 Type 86 TBD for Delegated-IPv6-Prefix 88 Length 90 The length of the entire attribute, in bytes. At least 4 91 (to hold Type/Length/Reserved/Prefix-Length for a 0-bit 92 prefix), and no larger than 20 (to hold Type/Length/ 93 Reserved/Prefix-Length for a 128-bit prefix) 95 Reserved 97 Always set to zero by sender; ignored by receiver 99 Prefix-Length 101 The length of the prefix being delegated, in bits. At least 102 0 and no larger than 128 bits (identifying a single IPv6 103 address) 105 Note that the prefix field is only required to be long enough to hold 106 the prefix bits and can be shorter than 16 bytes. Any bits in the 107 prefix field that are not part of the prefix MUST be zero. 109 The definition of the Delegated-IPv6-Prefix Attribute is based on the 110 Framed-IPv6-Prefix attribute [4]. 112 The Delegated-IPv6-Prefix MAY appear in an Access-Accept packet, and 113 can appear multiple times. It MAY appear in an Access-Request packet 114 as a hint by the NAS to the server that it would prefer these 115 prefix(es), but the server is not required to honor the hint. 117 The Delegated-IPv6-Prefix attribute MAY appear in an Accounting- 118 Request packet. 120 The Delegated-IPv6-Prefix MUST NOT appear in any other RADIUS 121 packets. 123 The following table describes which messages the Delegated-IPv6- 124 Prefix attribute can appear in and in what quantity. 126 +------------------------------------------------------+ 127 | Request Accept Accounting # Attribute | 128 | Request | 129 | 0+ 0+ 0+ TBD Delegated-IPv6-Prefix | 130 +------------------------------------------------------+ 132 In this table 0+ means that zero or more instances of this attribute 133 MAY be present in packet. This attribute MUST NOT appear in any 134 packet not listed in the table. 136 4. Diameter Considerations 138 When used in Diameter, the attribute defined in this specification 139 can be used as a Diameter AVP from the Code space 1-255, i.e., RADIUS 140 attribute compatibility space. No additional Diameter Code values 141 are therefore allocated. The data types of the attributes are as 142 follows: 144 Delegated-IPv6-Prefix OctetString 146 The attribute in this specification has no special translation 147 requirements for Diameter to RADIUS or RADIUS to Diameter gateways, 148 i.e., the attribute is copied as is, except for changes relating to 149 headers, alignment, and padding. See also RFC 3588 [5], Section 4.1, 150 and RFC 4005 [6], Section 9. 152 The text in this specification describing the applicability of the 153 Delegated-IPv6-Prefix attribute for RADIUS Access-Request applies in 154 Diameter to AA-Request [6] or Diameter-EAP-Request [7]. 156 The text in this specification describing the applicability of the 157 Delegated-IPv6-Prefix attribute for RADIUS Access-Accept applies in 158 Diameter to AA-Answer or Diameter-EAP-Answer that indicates success. 160 The text in this specification describing the applicability of the 161 Delegated-IPv6-Prefix attribute for RADIUS Accounting-Request applies 162 to Diameter Accounting-Request [6] as well. 164 5. IANA Considerations 166 IANA is requested to assign a Type value, TBD, for this attribute 167 from the RADIUS Attribute Types registry. 169 6. Security Considerations 171 Known security vulnerabilities of the RADIUS protocol are discussed 172 in RFC 2607 [8], RFC 2865 [1] and RFC 2869 [9]. Use of IPsec [10] 173 for providing security when RADIUS is carried in IPv6 is discussed in 174 RFC 3162. 176 Security considerations for the Diameter protocol are discussed in 177 RFC 3588 [5]. 179 7. Change Log 181 This section to be removed before publication as an RFC. 183 The following changes were made in revision -01 of this document: 184 o Added additional details to Abstract; defined that this attribute 185 can be used in both RADIUS and Diameter. (Issue 188) 186 o Moved and clarified text describing which packets this attribute 187 can appear in adjacent to table in section 3. (Issue 188) 188 o Fixed RFC 2119 boilerplate in section 2. (Issue 185) 189 o Fixed table in section 3 to clarify which packets this attribute 190 cannot appear in. (Issue 188) 191 o Added section 4, Diameter Considerations. (Issue 188) 192 o Made some references in section 6, Security Considerations, 193 Informative rather than Normative. (Issue 188) 194 o Updated reference to RFC 2401 [9] to RFC 4301. (Issue 188) 195 o Changed "IP SEC" to "IPsec" in section 6. (Issues 185 and 188) 197 The following changes were made in revision -02 of this document: 198 o Added a second paragraph to the Introduction, referencing the 199 Framed-IPv6-Prefix attribute 200 o Improved description of attribute fields in section 3 201 o Added border to table in section 3 202 o Updated Section 4, Diameter Considerations, to describe how this 203 attribute would be used in Diameter. 204 o Added reference to RFC 3588 in Section 6, Security Considerations. 206 8. References 208 8.1. Normative References 210 [1] Rigney, C., Willens, S., Rubens, A., and W. Simpson, "Remote 211 Authentication Dial In User Service (RADIUS)", RFC 2865, 212 June 2000. 214 [2] Troan, O. and R. Droms, "IPv6 Prefix Options for Dynamic Host 215 Configuration Protocol (DHCP) version 6", RFC 3633, 216 December 2003. 218 [3] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement 219 Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 221 8.2. Non-normative References 223 [4] Aboba, B., Zorn, G., and D. Mitton, "RADIUS and IPv6", 224 RFC 3162, August 2001. 226 [5] Calhoun, P., Loughney, J., Guttman, E., Zorn, G., and J. Arkko, 227 "Diameter Base Protocol", RFC 3588, September 2003. 229 [6] Calhoun, P., Zorn, G., Spence, D., and D. Mitton, "Diameter 230 Network Access Server Application", RFC 4005, August 2005. 232 [7] Eronen, P., Hiller, T., and G. Zorn, "Diameter Extensible 233 Authentication Protocol (EAP) Application", RFC 4072, 234 August 2005. 236 [8] Aboba, B. and J. Vollbrecht, "Proxy Chaining and Policy 237 Implementation in Roaming", RFC 2607, June 1999. 239 [9] Rigney, C., Willats, W., and P. Calhoun, "RADIUS Extensions", 240 RFC 2869, June 2000. 242 [10] Kent, S. and K. Seo, "Security Architecture for the Internet 243 Protocol", RFC 4301, December 2005. 245 Authors' Addresses 247 Joe Salowey 248 Cisco Systems, Inc. 249 2901 Third Avenue 250 Seattle, WA 98121 251 USA 253 Phone: +1 206.310.0596 254 Email: jsalowey@cisco.com 256 Ralph Droms 257 Cisco Systems, Inc. 258 1414 Massachusetts Avenue 259 Boxborough, MA 01719 260 USA 262 Phone: +1 978.936.1674 263 Email: rdroms@cisco.com 265 Full Copyright Statement 267 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006). 269 This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions 270 contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors 271 retain all their rights. 273 This document and the information contained herein are provided on an 274 "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS 275 OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET 276 ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, 277 INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE 278 INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED 279 WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. 281 Intellectual Property 283 The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any 284 Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to 285 pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in 286 this document or the extent to which any license under such rights 287 might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has 288 made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information 289 on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be 290 found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. 292 Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any 293 assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an 294 attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of 295 such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this 296 specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at 297 http://www.ietf.org/ipr. 299 The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any 300 copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary 301 rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement 302 this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at 303 ietf-ipr@ietf.org. 305 Acknowledgment 307 Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF 308 Administrative Support Activity (IASA).