draft-ietf-6man-node-req-bis-07.txt   draft-ietf-6man-node-req-bis-08.txt 
Internet Engineering Task Force E. Jankiewicz Internet Engineering Task Force E. Jankiewicz
Internet-Draft SRI International, Inc. Internet-Draft SRI International, Inc.
Intended status: Informational J. Loughney Intended status: Informational J. Loughney
Expires: June 19, 2011 Nokia Expires: September 12, 2011 Nokia
T. Narten T. Narten
IBM Corporation IBM Corporation
December 16, 2010 March 11, 2011
IPv6 Node Requirements RFC 4294-bis IPv6 Node Requirements RFC 4294-bis
draft-ietf-6man-node-req-bis-07.txt draft-ietf-6man-node-req-bis-08.txt
Abstract Abstract
This document defines requirements for IPv6 nodes. It is expected This document defines requirements for IPv6 nodes. It is expected
that IPv6 will be deployed in a wide range of devices and situations. that IPv6 will be deployed in a wide range of devices and situations.
Specifying the requirements for IPv6 nodes allows IPv6 to function Specifying the requirements for IPv6 nodes allows IPv6 to function
well and interoperate in a large number of situations and well and interoperate in a large number of situations and
deployments. deployments.
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
skipping to change at page 1, line 37 skipping to change at page 1, line 37
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on June 19, 2011. This Internet-Draft will expire on September 12, 2011.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2010 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
skipping to change at page 2, line 31 skipping to change at page 2, line 31
1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.1. Scope of This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.1. Scope of This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.2. Description of IPv6 Nodes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.2. Description of IPv6 Nodes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3. Abbreviations Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3. Abbreviations Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. Sub-IP Layer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4. Sub-IP Layer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. IP Layer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5. IP Layer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5.1. Internet Protocol Version 6 - RFC 2460 . . . . . . . . . . 7 5.1. Internet Protocol Version 6 - RFC 2460 . . . . . . . . . . 7
5.2. Neighbor Discovery for IPv6 - RFC 4861 . . . . . . . . . . 7 5.2. Neighbor Discovery for IPv6 - RFC 4861 . . . . . . . . . . 7
5.3. SEcure Neighbor Discovery (SEND) - RFC 3971 . . . . . . . 8 5.3. Default Router Preferences and More-Specific Routes -
5.4. IPv6 Router Advertisement Flags Option - RFC 5175 . . . . 9 RFC 4191 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5.5. Path MTU Discovery and Packet Size . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5.4. SEcure Neighbor Discovery (SEND) - RFC 3971 . . . . . . . 8
5.5.1. Path MTU Discovery - RFC 1981 . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5.5. IPv6 Router Advertisement Flags Option - RFC 5175 . . . . 9
5.6. IPv6 Jumbograms - RFC 2675 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5.6. Path MTU Discovery and Packet Size . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.7. ICMP for the Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) - RFC 5.6.1. Path MTU Discovery - RFC 1981 . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.7. IPv6 Jumbograms - RFC 2675 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.8. ICMP for the Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) - RFC
4443 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 4443 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.8. Addressing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5.9. Addressing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.8.1. IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture - RFC 4291 . . . 9 5.9.1. IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture - RFC 4291 . . . 10
5.8.2. IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration - RFC 4862 . 10 5.9.2. IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration - RFC 4862 . 10
5.8.3. Privacy Extensions for Address Configuration in 5.9.3. Privacy Extensions for Address Configuration in
IPv6 - RFC 4941 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 IPv6 - RFC 4941 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.8.4. Default Address Selection for IPv6 - RFC 3484 . . . . 11 5.9.4. Default Address Selection for IPv6 - RFC 3484 . . . . 11
5.8.5. Stateful Address Autoconfiguration . . . . . . . . . . 11 5.9.5. Stateful Address Autoconfiguration . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.9. Multicast Listener Discovery (MLD) for IPv6 - RFC 2710 . . 11 5.10. Multicast Listener Discovery (MLD) for IPv6 . . . . . . . 11
6. DHCP vs. Router Advertisement Options for Host 6. DHCP vs. Router Advertisement Options for Host
Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
7. DNS and DHCP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 7. DNS and DHCP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
7.1. DNS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 7.1. DNS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
7.2. Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6) 7.2. Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6)
- RFC 3315 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 - RFC 3315 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
7.2.1. Other Configuration Information . . . . . . . . . . . 13 7.2.1. Other Configuration Information . . . . . . . . . . . 13
7.2.2. Use of Router Advertisements in Managed 7.2.2. Use of Router Advertisements in Managed
Environments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Environments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
7.3. IPv6 Router Advertisement Options for DNS 7.3. IPv6 Router Advertisement Options for DNS
Configuration - RFC 6106 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Configuration - RFC 6106 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
8. IPv4 Support and Transition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 8. IPv4 Support and Transition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
8.1. Transition Mechanisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 8.1. Transition Mechanisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
8.1.1. Basic Transition Mechanisms for IPv6 Hosts and 8.1.1. Basic Transition Mechanisms for IPv6 Hosts and
Routers - RFC 4213 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Routers - RFC 4213 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
9. Application Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 9. Application Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
9.1. Textual Representation of IPv6 Addresses - RFC 5952 . . . 14 9.1. Textual Representation of IPv6 Addresses - RFC 5952 . . . 14
10. Mobility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 9.2. Application Program Interfaces (APIs) . . . . . . . . . . 14
11. Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 10. Mobility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
11.1. Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 11. Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
11.2. Transforms and Algorithms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 11.1. Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
12. Router-Specific Functionality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 11.2. Transforms and Algorithms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
12.1. General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 12. Router-Specific Functionality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
12.1.1. IPv6 Router Alert Option - RFC 2711 . . . . . . . . . 16 12.1. General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
12.1.2. Neighbor Discovery for IPv6 - RFC 4861 . . . . . . . . 16 12.1.1. IPv6 Router Alert Option - RFC 2711 . . . . . . . . . 17
13. Network Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 12.1.2. Neighbor Discovery for IPv6 - RFC 4861 . . . . . . . . 17
13.1. Management Information Base Modules (MIBs) . . . . . . . . 17 13. Network Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
13.1.1. IP Forwarding Table MIB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 13.1. Management Information Base Modules (MIBs) . . . . . . . . 18
13.1.1. IP Forwarding Table MIB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
13.1.2. Management Information Base for the Internet 13.1.2. Management Information Base for the Internet
Protocol (IP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Protocol (IP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
14. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 14. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
15. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 15. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
16. Authors and Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 16. Authors and Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
16.1. Authors and Acknowledgments (Current Document) . . . . . . 17 16.1. Authors and Acknowledgments (Current Document) . . . . . . 18
16.2. Authors and Acknowledgments From RFC 4279 . . . . . . . . 17 16.2. Authors and Acknowledgments From RFC 4279 . . . . . . . . 19
17. Appendix: Changes from -06 to -07 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 17. Appendix: Changes from -07 to -08 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
18. Appendix: Changes from -05 to -06 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 18. Appendix: Changes from -06 to -07 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
19. Appendix: Changes from -04 to -05 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 19. Appendix: Changes from -05 to -06 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
20. Appendix: Changes from -03 to -04 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 20. Appendix: Changes from -04 to -05 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
21. Appendix: Changes from RFC 4294 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 21. Appendix: Changes from -03 to -04 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
22. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 22. Appendix: Changes from RFC 4294 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
22.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 23. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
22.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 23.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 23.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
1. Requirements Language 1. Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
2. Introduction 2. Introduction
The goal of this document is to define the common functionality The goal of this document is to define the common functionality
skipping to change at page 6, line 43 skipping to change at page 6, line 43
- Transmission of IPv6 Packets over IEEE 802.15.4 Networks [RFC4944] - Transmission of IPv6 Packets over IEEE 802.15.4 Networks [RFC4944]
- Transmission of IPv6 via the IPv6 Convergence Sublayer over IEEE - Transmission of IPv6 via the IPv6 Convergence Sublayer over IEEE
802.16 Networks [RFC5121] 802.16 Networks [RFC5121]
- IP version 6 over PPP [RFC5072] - IP version 6 over PPP [RFC5072]
In addition to traditional physical link-layers, it is also possible In addition to traditional physical link-layers, it is also possible
to tunnel IPv6 over other protocols. Examples include: to tunnel IPv6 over other protocols. Examples include:
- Teredo: Tunneling IPv6 over UDP through Network Address - Teredo: Tunneling IPv6 over UDP through Network Address
Translations (NATs) [RFC4380] Translations (NATs) [RFC4380]
- Transmission of IPv6 over IPv4 Domains without Explicit Tunnels - Section 3 of "Basic IPv6 Transition Mechanisms" [RFC4213]
[RFC2529]
5. IP Layer 5. IP Layer
5.1. Internet Protocol Version 6 - RFC 2460 5.1. Internet Protocol Version 6 - RFC 2460
The Internet Protocol Version 6 is specified in [RFC2460]. This The Internet Protocol Version 6 is specified in [RFC2460]. This
specification MUST be supported. specification MUST be supported.
Unrecognized options in Hop-by-Hop Options or Destination Options Unrecognized options in Hop-by-Hop Options or Destination Options
extensions MUST be processed as described in RFC 2460. extensions MUST be processed as described in RFC 2460.
skipping to change at page 8, line 39 skipping to change at page 8, line 39
are only useful on networks supporting hosts. In core networks are only useful on networks supporting hosts. In core networks
dominated by routers, redirects are typically disabled. The sending dominated by routers, redirects are typically disabled. The sending
of redirects SHOULD be disabled by default on backbone routers. They of redirects SHOULD be disabled by default on backbone routers. They
MAY be enabled by default on routers intended to support hosts on MAY be enabled by default on routers intended to support hosts on
edge networks. edge networks.
"IPv6 Host-to-Router Load Sharing" [RFC4311] includes additional "IPv6 Host-to-Router Load Sharing" [RFC4311] includes additional
recommendations on how to select from a set of available routers. recommendations on how to select from a set of available routers.
RFC 4311 SHOULD be supported. RFC 4311 SHOULD be supported.
5.3. SEcure Neighbor Discovery (SEND) - RFC 3971 5.3. Default Router Preferences and More-Specific Routes - RFC 4191
"Default Router Preferences and More-Specific Routes" [RFC5942]
provides support for nodes attached to multiple (different) networks
each advertising its own default route(s). Nodes (routers or hosts)
MAY wish to implement this functionality.
5.4. SEcure Neighbor Discovery (SEND) - RFC 3971
SEND [RFC3971] and Cryptographically Generated Address (CGA) SEND [RFC3971] and Cryptographically Generated Address (CGA)
[RFC3972] provide a way to secure the message exchanges of Neighbor [RFC3972] provide a way to secure the message exchanges of Neighbor
Discovery. SEND is a new technology, in that it has no IPv4 Discovery. SEND is a new technology, in that it has no IPv4
counterpart but it has significant potential to address certain counterpart but it has significant potential to address certain
classes of spoofing attacks. While there have been some classes of spoofing attacks. While there have been some
implementations of SEND, there has been only limited deployment implementations of SEND, there has been only limited deployment
experience to date in using the technology. In addition, the IETF experience to date in using the technology. In addition, the IETF
working group Cga & Send maIntenance (csi) is currently working on working group Cga & Send maIntenance (csi) is currently working on
additional extensions intended to make SEND more attractive for additional extensions intended to make SEND more attractive for
deployment. deployment.
At this time, SEND is considered optional and IPv6 nodes MAY provide At this time, SEND is considered optional and IPv6 nodes MAY provide
SEND functionality. SEND functionality.
5.4. IPv6 Router Advertisement Flags Option - RFC 5175 5.5. IPv6 Router Advertisement Flags Option - RFC 5175
Router Advertisements include an 8-bit field of single-bit Router Router Advertisements include an 8-bit field of single-bit Router
Advertisement flags. The Router Advertisement Flags Option extends Advertisement flags. The Router Advertisement Flags Option extends
the number of available flag bits by 48 bits. At the time of this the number of available flag bits by 48 bits. At the time of this
writing, 6 of the original 8 bit flags have been assigned, while 2 writing, 6 of the original 8 bit flags have been assigned, while 2
remain available for future assignment. No flags have been defined remain available for future assignment. No flags have been defined
that make use of the new option, and thus strictly speaking, there is that make use of the new option, and thus strictly speaking, there is
no requirement to implement the option today. However, no requirement to implement the option today. However,
implementations that are able to pass unrecognized options to a implementations that are able to pass unrecognized options to a
higher level entity that may be able to understand them (e.g., a higher level entity that may be able to understand them (e.g., a
user-level process using a "raw socket" facility), MAY take steps to user-level process using a "raw socket" facility), MAY take steps to
handle the option in anticipation of a future usage. handle the option in anticipation of a future usage.
5.5. Path MTU Discovery and Packet Size 5.6. Path MTU Discovery and Packet Size
5.5.1. Path MTU Discovery - RFC 1981 5.6.1. Path MTU Discovery - RFC 1981
From [RFC2460]: "Path MTU Discovery" [RFC1981] SHOULD be supported. From [RFC2460]:
It is strongly recommended that IPv6 nodes implement Path MTU It is strongly recommended that IPv6 nodes implement Path MTU
Discovery [RFC1981], in order to discover and take advantage of Discovery [RFC1981], in order to discover and take advantage of
path MTUs greater than 1280 octets. However, a minimal IPv6 path MTUs greater than 1280 octets. However, a minimal IPv6
implementation (e.g., in a boot ROM) may simply restrict itself to implementation (e.g., in a boot ROM) may simply restrict itself to
sending packets no larger than 1280 octets, and omit sending packets no larger than 1280 octets, and omit
implementation of Path MTU Discovery. implementation of Path MTU Discovery.
The rules in [RFC2460] and [RFC5722] MUST be followed for packet The rules in [RFC2460] and [RFC5722] MUST be followed for packet
fragmentation and reassembly. fragmentation and reassembly.
5.6. IPv6 Jumbograms - RFC 2675 5.7. IPv6 Jumbograms - RFC 2675
IPv6 Jumbograms [RFC2675] MAY be supported. IPv6 Jumbograms [RFC2675] MAY be supported.
5.7. ICMP for the Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) - RFC 4443 5.8. ICMP for the Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) - RFC 4443
ICMPv6 [RFC4443] MUST be supported. "Extended ICMP to Support Multi- ICMPv6 [RFC4443] MUST be supported. "Extended ICMP to Support Multi-
Part Messages" [RFC4884] MAY be supported. Part Messages" [RFC4884] MAY be supported.
5.8. Addressing 5.9. Addressing
5.8.1. IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture - RFC 4291 5.9.1. IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture - RFC 4291
The IPv6 Addressing Architecture [RFC4291] MUST be supported. The IPv6 Addressing Architecture [RFC4291] MUST be supported.
5.8.2. IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration - RFC 4862 5.9.2. IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration - RFC 4862
Hosts MUST support IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration as Hosts MUST support IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration as
defined in [RFC4862]. Static address may be supported as well. defined in [RFC4862]. Static address may be supported as well.
Nodes that are routers MUST be able to generate link local addresses Nodes that are routers MUST be able to generate link local addresses
as described in RFC 4862 [RFC4862]. as described in RFC 4862 [RFC4862].
From 4862: From 4862:
The autoconfiguration process specified in this document applies The autoconfiguration process specified in this document applies
skipping to change at page 10, line 34 skipping to change at page 10, line 40
All nodes MUST implement Duplicate Address Detection. Quoting from All nodes MUST implement Duplicate Address Detection. Quoting from
Section 5.4 of RFC 4862: Section 5.4 of RFC 4862:
Duplicate Address Detection MUST be performed on all unicast Duplicate Address Detection MUST be performed on all unicast
addresses prior to assigning them to an interface, regardless of addresses prior to assigning them to an interface, regardless of
whether they are obtained through stateless autoconfiguration, whether they are obtained through stateless autoconfiguration,
DHCPv6, or manual configuration, with the following [exceptions DHCPv6, or manual configuration, with the following [exceptions
noted therein]. noted therein].
5.8.3. Privacy Extensions for Address Configuration in IPv6 - RFC 4941 "Optimistic Duplicate Address Detection (DAD) for IPv6" [RFC4429]
specifies a mechanism to reduce delays associated with generating
addresses via stateless address autoconfiguration [RFC4862]. RFC
4429 was developed in conjunction with Mobile IPv6 in order to reduce
the time needed to acquire and configure addresses as devices quickly
move from one network to another, and it is desirable to minimize
transition delays. For general purpose devices, RFC 4429 is not
considered to be necessary at this time.
5.9.3. Privacy Extensions for Address Configuration in IPv6 - RFC 4941
Privacy Extensions for Stateless Address Autoconfiguration [RFC4941] Privacy Extensions for Stateless Address Autoconfiguration [RFC4941]
addresses a specific problem involving a client device whose user is addresses a specific problem involving a client device whose user is
concerned about its activity or location being tracked. The problem concerned about its activity or location being tracked. The problem
arises both for a static client and for one that regularly changes arises both for a static client and for one that regularly changes
its point of attachment to the Internet. When using Stateless its point of attachment to the Internet. When using Stateless
Address Autoconfiguration [RFC4862], the Interface Identifier portion Address Autoconfiguration [RFC4862], the Interface Identifier portion
of formed addresses stays constant and is globally unique. Thus, of formed addresses stays constant and is globally unique. Thus,
although a node's global IPv6 address will change if it changes its although a node's global IPv6 address will change if it changes its
point of attachment, the Interface Identifier portion of those point of attachment, the Interface Identifier portion of those
addresses remain the same, making it possible for servers to track addresses remain the same, making it possible for servers to track
the location of an individual device as it moves around, or its the location of an individual device as it moves around, or its
pattern of activity if it remains in one place. This may raise pattern of activity if it remains in one place. This may raise
privacy concerns as described in [RFC4862]. privacy concerns as described in [RFC4862].
In such situations, RFC4941 SHOULD be implemented. In other cases, In such situations, RFC4941 SHOULD be implemented. In other cases,
such as with dedicated servers in a data center, RFC4941 provides such as with dedicated servers in a data center, RFC4941 provides
limited or no benefit. limited or no benefit.
5.8.4. Default Address Selection for IPv6 - RFC 3484 Implementors of "RFC4941 should be aware that certain addresses are
reserved and should not be chosen for use as temporary addresses.
Consult "Reserved IPv6 Interface Identifiers" [RFC5453] for more
details.
5.9.4. Default Address Selection for IPv6 - RFC 3484
The rules specified in the Default Address Selection for IPv6 The rules specified in the Default Address Selection for IPv6
[RFC3484] document MUST be implemented. IPv6 nodes will need to deal [RFC3484] document MUST be implemented. IPv6 nodes will need to deal
with multiple addresses configured simultaneously. with multiple addresses configured simultaneously.
5.8.5. Stateful Address Autoconfiguration 5.9.5. Stateful Address Autoconfiguration
DHCP can be used to obtain and configure addresses. In general, a DHCP can be used to obtain and configure addresses. In general, a
network may provide for the configuration of addresses through Router network may provide for the configuration of addresses through Router
Advertisements, DHCP or both. At the present time, the configuration Advertisements, DHCP or both. At the present time, the configuration
of stateless address autoconfiguraiton is more widely implemented in of stateless address autoconfiguration is more widely implemented in
hosts than address configuration through DHCP. However, some hosts than address configuration through DHCP. However, some
environments may require the use of DHCP and may not support the environments may require the use of DHCP and may not support the
configuration of addresses via RAs. Implementations should be aware configuration of addresses via RAs. Implementations should be aware
of what operating environment their devices will be deployed. Hosts of what operating environment their devices will be deployed. Hosts
MAY implement address configuration via DHCP. MAY implement address configuration via DHCP.
In the absence of a router, IPv6 nodes using DHCP for address In the absence of a router, IPv6 nodes using DHCP for address
assignment MAY initiate DHCP to obtain IPv6 addresses and other assignment MAY initiate DHCP to obtain IPv6 addresses and other
configuration information, as described in Section 5.5.2 of configuration information, as described in Section 5.5.2 of
[RFC4862]. [RFC4862].
5.9. Multicast Listener Discovery (MLD) for IPv6 - RFC 2710 5.10. Multicast Listener Discovery (MLD) for IPv6
Nodes that need to join multicast groups MUST support MLDv1 Nodes that need to join multicast groups MUST support MLDv1
[RFC2710]. MLDv1 is needed by any node that is expected to receive [RFC2710]. MLDv1 is needed by any node that is expected to receive
and process multicast traffic. Note that Neighbor Discovery (as used and process multicast traffic. Note that Neighbor Discovery (as used
on most link types -- see Section 5.2) depends on multicast and on most link types -- see Section 5.2) depends on multicast and
requires that nodes join Solicited Node multicast addresses. requires that nodes join Solicited Node multicast addresses.
Nodes that need to join multicast groups SHOULD also implement MLDv2 Nodes that need to join multicast groups SHOULD also implement MLDv2
[RFC3810]. Specifically, if the node has applications that need [RFC3810]. Specifically, if the node has applications that need
support for Source-Specific Multicast [RFC3569], the node MUST support for Source-Specific Multicast [RFC3569], the node MUST
skipping to change at page 14, line 22 skipping to change at page 14, line 42
4213 4213
If an IPv6 node implements dual stack and tunneling, then [RFC4213] If an IPv6 node implements dual stack and tunneling, then [RFC4213]
MUST be supported. MUST be supported.
9. Application Support 9. Application Support
9.1. Textual Representation of IPv6 Addresses - RFC 5952 9.1. Textual Representation of IPv6 Addresses - RFC 5952
Software that allows users and operators to input IPv6 addresses in Software that allows users and operators to input IPv6 addresses in
text form SHOULD suppport "A Recommendation for IPv6 Address Text text form SHOULD support "A Recommendation for IPv6 Address Text
Representation" [RFC5952]. Representation" [RFC5952].
9.2. Application Program Interfaces (APIs)
There are a number of IPv6-related APIs. This document does not
mandate the use of any, because the choice of API does not directly
relate to on-the-wire behavior of protocols. Implementors, however,
would be advised to consider providing a common API, or reviewing
exising APIs for the type of functionality they provide to
applications.
"Basic Socket Interface Extensions for IPv6" [RFC3493] provides IPv6
functionality used by typical applications. Implementors should note
that RFC3493 has been picked up and further standardized by POSIX
[POSIX].
"Advanced Sockets Application Program Interface (API) for IPv6"
[RFC3542] provides access to advanced IPv6 features needed by
diagnostic and other more specialized applications.
"IPv6 Socket API for Source Address Selection" [RFC5014] provides
facilities that allow an application to override the default Source
Address Selection rules of [RFC2434].
"Socket Interface Extensions for Multicast Source Filters" [RFC3678]
provides support for expressing source filters on multicast group
memberships.
"Extension to Sockets API for Mobile IPv6" [RFC4584] provides
application support for accessing and enabling Mobile IPv6 features.
[RFC3775]
10. Mobility 10. Mobility
Mobile IPv6 [RFC3775] and associated specifications [RFC3776] Mobile IPv6 [RFC3775] and associated specifications [RFC3776]
[RFC4877] allow a node to change its point of attachment within the [RFC4877] allow a node to change its point of attachment within the
Internet, while maintaining (and using) a permanent address. All Internet, while maintaining (and using) a permanent address. All
communication using the permanent address continues to proceed as communication using the permanent address continues to proceed as
expected even as the node moves around. The definition of Mobile IP expected even as the node moves around. The definition of Mobile IP
includes requirements for the following types of nodes: includes requirements for the following types of nodes:
- mobile nodes - mobile nodes
skipping to change at page 17, line 13 skipping to change at page 18, line 17
even if they do not implement Home Agent functionality. even if they do not implement Home Agent functionality.
13. Network Management 13. Network Management
Network Management MAY be supported by IPv6 nodes. However, for IPv6 Network Management MAY be supported by IPv6 nodes. However, for IPv6
nodes that are embedded devices, network management may be the only nodes that are embedded devices, network management may be the only
possible way of controlling these nodes. possible way of controlling these nodes.
13.1. Management Information Base Modules (MIBs) 13.1. Management Information Base Modules (MIBs)
The following two MIBs SHOULD be supported by nodes that support an The following two MIB modules SHOULD be supported by nodes that
SNMP agent. support an SNMP agent.
13.1.1. IP Forwarding Table MIB 13.1.1. IP Forwarding Table MIB
IP Forwarding Table MIB [RFC4292] SHOULD be supported by nodes that IP Forwarding Table MIB [RFC4292] SHOULD be supported by nodes that
support an SNMP agent. support an SNMP agent.
13.1.2. Management Information Base for the Internet Protocol (IP) 13.1.2. Management Information Base for the Internet Protocol (IP)
IP MIB [RFC4293] SHOULD be supported by nodes that support an SNMP IP MIB [RFC4293] SHOULD be supported by nodes that support an SNMP
agent. agent.
skipping to change at page 18, line 38 skipping to change at page 19, line 43
dthaler@windows.microsoft.com dthaler@windows.microsoft.com
Juha Wiljakka Juha Wiljakka
juha.wiljakka@Nokia.com juha.wiljakka@Nokia.com
The authors would like to thank Ran Atkinson, Jim Bound, Brian The authors would like to thank Ran Atkinson, Jim Bound, Brian
Carpenter, Ralph Droms, Christian Huitema, Adam Machalek, Thomas Carpenter, Ralph Droms, Christian Huitema, Adam Machalek, Thomas
Narten, Juha Ollila, and Pekka Savola for their comments. Thanks to Narten, Juha Ollila, and Pekka Savola for their comments. Thanks to
Mark Andrews for comments and corrections on DNS text. Thanks to Mark Andrews for comments and corrections on DNS text. Thanks to
Alfred Hoenes for tracking the updates to various RFCs. Alfred Hoenes for tracking the updates to various RFCs.
17. Appendix: Changes from -06 to -07 17. Appendix: Changes from -07 to -08
1. Dropped reference to "Transmission of IPv6 over IPv4 Domains
without Explicit Tunnels" [RFC2429] in favor of a reference to
tunneling via Basic IPv6 Transition Mechanisms (RFC4313).
2. Added reference to "Default Router Preferences and More-Specific
Routes" [RFC5942] as a MAY.
3. Added reference to "Optimistic Duplicate Address Detection (DAD)
for IPv6" (RFC4429).
4. Added reference to RFC4941 ""Reserved IPv6 Interface Identifiers"
5. Added Section on APIs. References are FYI, and node are
required.
6. Added text that "IPv6 Host-to-Router Load Sharing" [RFC4311]
SHOULD be implemented
7. Added reference to RFC5722 (Overlapping Fragments), made it a
MUST to implement.
8. Made "A Recommendation for IPv6 Address Text Representation"
[RFC5952] a SHOULD.
18. Appendix: Changes from -06 to -07
1. Added recommendation that routers implement Section 7.3 and 7.5 1. Added recommendation that routers implement Section 7.3 and 7.5
of RFC 3775. of RFC 3775.
2. "IPv6 Router Advertisement Options for DNS Configuration" (RFC 2. "IPv6 Router Advertisement Options for DNS Configuration" (RFC
6106) has been published. 6106) has been published.
3. Further clarifications to the MLD recommendation. 3. Further clarifications to the MLD recommendation.
4. "Extended ICMP to Support Multi- Part Messages" [RFC4884] added 4. "Extended ICMP to Support Multi- Part Messages" [RFC4884] added
as a MAY. as a MAY.
5. Added pointer to subnet clarification document (RFC 5942). 5. Added pointer to subnet clarification document (RFC 5942).
6. Added text that "IPv6 Host-to-Router Load Sharing" [RFC4311] 6. Added text that "IPv6 Host-to-Router Load Sharing" [RFC4311]
skipping to change at page 19, line 4 skipping to change at page 20, line 29
1. Added recommendation that routers implement Section 7.3 and 7.5 1. Added recommendation that routers implement Section 7.3 and 7.5
of RFC 3775. of RFC 3775.
2. "IPv6 Router Advertisement Options for DNS Configuration" (RFC 2. "IPv6 Router Advertisement Options for DNS Configuration" (RFC
6106) has been published. 6106) has been published.
3. Further clarifications to the MLD recommendation. 3. Further clarifications to the MLD recommendation.
4. "Extended ICMP to Support Multi- Part Messages" [RFC4884] added 4. "Extended ICMP to Support Multi- Part Messages" [RFC4884] added
as a MAY. as a MAY.
5. Added pointer to subnet clarification document (RFC 5942). 5. Added pointer to subnet clarification document (RFC 5942).
6. Added text that "IPv6 Host-to-Router Load Sharing" [RFC4311] 6. Added text that "IPv6 Host-to-Router Load Sharing" [RFC4311]
SHOULD be implemented SHOULD be implemented
7. Added reference to RFC5722 (Overlapping Fragments), made it a 7. Added reference to RFC5722 (Overlapping Fragments), made it a
MUST to implement. MUST to implement.
8. Made "A Recommendation for IPv6 Address Text Representation"
[RFC5952] a SHOULD.
18. Appendix: Changes from -05 to -06 19. Appendix: Changes from -05 to -06
1. Completely revised IPsec/IKEv2 section. Text has been discussed 1. Completely revised IPsec/IKEv2 section. Text has been discussed
by 6man and saag. by 6man and saag.
2. Added text to introduction clarifying that this document applies 2. Added text to introduction clarifying that this document applies
to general nodes and that other profiles may be more specific in to general nodes and that other profiles may be more specific in
their requirements their requirements
3. Editorial cleanups in Neighbor Discovery section in particular. 3. Editorial cleanups in Neighbor Discovery section in particular.
Text made more crisp. Text made more crisp.
4. Moved some of the DHCP text around. Moved stateful address 4. Moved some of the DHCP text around. Moved stateful address
discussion to Section 5.8.5. discussion to Section 5.8.5.
5. Added additional nuance to the redirect requirements w.r.t. 5. Added additional nuance to the redirect requirements w.r.t.
default configuration setting. default configuration setting.
19. Appendix: Changes from -04 to -05 20. Appendix: Changes from -04 to -05
1. Cleaned up IPsec section, but key questions (MUST vs. SHOULD) 1. Cleaned up IPsec section, but key questions (MUST vs. SHOULD)
still open. still open.
2. Added background section on DHCP vs. RA options. 2. Added background section on DHCP vs. RA options.
3. Added SHOULD recommendation for DNS configuration vi RAs 3. Added SHOULD recommendation for DNS configuration vi RAs
(RFC5006bis). (RFC5006bis).
4. Cleaned up DHCP section, as it was referring to the M&O bits. 4. Cleaned up DHCP section, as it was referring to the M&O bits.
5. Cleaned up the Security Considerations Section. 5. Cleaned up the Security Considerations Section.
20. Appendix: Changes from -03 to -04 21. Appendix: Changes from -03 to -04
1. Updated the Introduction to indicate document is an applicability 1. Updated the Introduction to indicate document is an applicability
statement statement
2. Updated the section on Mobility protocols 2. Updated the section on Mobility protocols
3. Changed Sub-IP Layer Section to just list relevant RFCs, and 3. Changed Sub-IP Layer Section to just list relevant RFCs, and
added some more RFCs. added some more RFCs.
4. Added Section on SEND (make it a MAY) 4. Added Section on SEND (make it a MAY)
5. Redid Section on Privacy Extensions (RFC4941) to add more nuance 5. Redid Section on Privacy Extensions (RFC4941) to add more nuance
to recommendation to recommendation
6. Redid section on Mobility, and added additional RFCs [ 6. Redid section on Mobility, and added additional RFCs [
21. Appendix: Changes from RFC 4294 22. Appendix: Changes from RFC 4294
There have been many editorial clarifications as well as significant
additions and updates. While this section highlights some of the
changes, readers should not rely on this section for a comprehensive
list of all changes.
This appendix keeps track of the chances from RFC 4294 This appendix keeps track of the chances from RFC 4294
1. Section 5.1, removed "and DNAME" from the discussion about RFC- 1. Updated the Introduction to indicate document is an applicability
3363. statement and that this document is aimed at general nodes.
2. RFC 2463 references updated to RFC 4443. 2. Significantly updated the section on Mobility protocols, adding
references and downgrading previous SHOULDs to MAY.
3. RFC 3513 references updated to RFC 4291. 3. Changed Sub-IP Layer Section to just list relevant RFCs, and
added some more RFCs.
4. RFC 3152 references updated to RFC 3596. 4. Added Section on SEND (made it a MAY)
5. RFC 2893 references updated to RFC 4213. 5. Redid Section on Privacy Extensions (RFC4941) to add more nuance
to recommendation.
6. AH [RFC4302] support chanced from MUST to MAY. 6. Completely revised IPsec/IKEv2 Section, downgrading overall
recommendation to a SHOULD.
7. The reference for RFC 3152 has been deleted, as the RFC has been 7. Added background section on DHCP vs RA options, added SHOULD
obsoleted, and has been incorporated into RFC 3596. recommendation sfor DNS configuration via RAs (RFC 6106), cleaned up
DHCP recommendations
8. The reference for RFC 3879 has been removed as the material from 8. Added recommendation that routers implement Section 7.3 and 7.5
RFC 3879 has been incorporated into RFC 4291. of RFC 3775.
22. References 9. Clarified recommendations on MLD.
22.1. Normative References 10. Added pointer to subnet clarification document (RFC 5942).
11. Added text that "IPv6 Host-to-Router Load Sharing" [RFC4311]
SHOULD be implemented
12. Added reference to RFC5722 (Overlapping Fragments), made it a
MUST to implement.
13. Made "A Recommendation for IPv6 Address Text Representation"
[RFC5952] a SHOULD.
14. Removed mention of "DNAME" from the discussion about RFC-3363.
15. Numerous updates to reflect newer versions of IPv6 documents,
including 4443, 4291, 3596, 4213.
16. Removed discussion of "Managed" and "Other" flags in RAs. There
is no consensus at present on how to process these flags and
discussion of their semantics was removed in the most recent update
of Stateless Address Autoconfiguration (RFC 4862).
Added many more references to optional IPv6 documents.
Made "A Recommendation for IPv6 Address Text Representation"
[RFC5952] a SHOULD.
Added reference to RFC5722 (Overlapping Fragments), made it a MUST to
implement.
23. References
23.1. Normative References
[DODv6] DISR IPv6 Standards Technical Working Group, "DoD IPv6 [DODv6] DISR IPv6 Standards Technical Working Group, "DoD IPv6
Standard Profiles For IPv6 Capable Products Version 5.0", Standard Profiles For IPv6 Capable Products Version 5.0",
July 2010, July 2010,
<http://jitc.fhu.disa.mil/apl/ipv6/pdf/disr_ipv6_50.pdf>. <http://jitc.fhu.disa.mil/apl/ipv6/pdf/disr_ipv6_50.pdf>.
[POSIX] IEEE, "IEEE Std. 1003.1-2001 Standard for Information
Technology -- Portable Operating System Interface (POSIX),
ISO/IEC 9945:2002", December 2001,
<http://www.opengroup.org/austin>.
[RFC1035] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and [RFC1035] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and
specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987. specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987.
[RFC1981] McCann, J., Deering, S., and J. Mogul, "Path MTU Discovery [RFC1981] McCann, J., Deering, S., and J. Mogul, "Path MTU Discovery
for IP version 6", RFC 1981, August 1996. for IP version 6", RFC 1981, August 1996.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2434] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 2434,
October 1998.
[RFC2460] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6 [RFC2460] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6
(IPv6) Specification", RFC 2460, December 1998. (IPv6) Specification", RFC 2460, December 1998.
[RFC2671] Vixie, P., "Extension Mechanisms for DNS (EDNS0)", [RFC2671] Vixie, P., "Extension Mechanisms for DNS (EDNS0)",
RFC 2671, August 1999. RFC 2671, August 1999.
[RFC2710] Deering, S., Fenner, W., and B. Haberman, "Multicast [RFC2710] Deering, S., Fenner, W., and B. Haberman, "Multicast
Listener Discovery (MLD) for IPv6", RFC 2710, Listener Discovery (MLD) for IPv6", RFC 2710,
October 1999. October 1999.
skipping to change at page 21, line 31 skipping to change at page 24, line 8
IPv6 (DHCPv6)", RFC 3315, July 2003. IPv6 (DHCPv6)", RFC 3315, July 2003.
[RFC3363] Bush, R., Durand, A., Fink, B., Gudmundsson, O., and T. [RFC3363] Bush, R., Durand, A., Fink, B., Gudmundsson, O., and T.
Hain, "Representing Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6) Hain, "Representing Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6)
Addresses in the Domain Name System (DNS)", RFC 3363, Addresses in the Domain Name System (DNS)", RFC 3363,
August 2002. August 2002.
[RFC3484] Draves, R., "Default Address Selection for Internet [RFC3484] Draves, R., "Default Address Selection for Internet
Protocol version 6 (IPv6)", RFC 3484, February 2003. Protocol version 6 (IPv6)", RFC 3484, February 2003.
[RFC3493] Gilligan, R., Thomson, S., Bound, J., McCann, J., and W.
Stevens, "Basic Socket Interface Extensions for IPv6",
RFC 3493, February 2003.
[RFC3542] Stevens, W., Thomas, M., Nordmark, E., and T. Jinmei,
"Advanced Sockets Application Program Interface (API) for
IPv6", RFC 3542, May 2003.
[RFC3590] Haberman, B., "Source Address Selection for the Multicast [RFC3590] Haberman, B., "Source Address Selection for the Multicast
Listener Discovery (MLD) Protocol", RFC 3590, Listener Discovery (MLD) Protocol", RFC 3590,
September 2003. September 2003.
[RFC3596] Thomson, S., Huitema, C., Ksinant, V., and M. Souissi, [RFC3596] Thomson, S., Huitema, C., Ksinant, V., and M. Souissi,
"DNS Extensions to Support IP Version 6", RFC 3596, "DNS Extensions to Support IP Version 6", RFC 3596,
October 2003. October 2003.
[RFC3678] Thaler, D., Fenner, B., and B. Quinn, "Socket Interface
Extensions for Multicast Source Filters", RFC 3678,
January 2004.
[RFC3775] Johnson, D., Perkins, C., and J. Arkko, "Mobility Support [RFC3775] Johnson, D., Perkins, C., and J. Arkko, "Mobility Support
in IPv6", RFC 3775, June 2004. in IPv6", RFC 3775, June 2004.
[RFC3776] Arkko, J., Devarapalli, V., and F. Dupont, "Using IPsec to [RFC3776] Arkko, J., Devarapalli, V., and F. Dupont, "Using IPsec to
Protect Mobile IPv6 Signaling Between Mobile Nodes and Protect Mobile IPv6 Signaling Between Mobile Nodes and
Home Agents", RFC 3776, June 2004. Home Agents", RFC 3776, June 2004.
[RFC3810] Vida, R. and L. Costa, "Multicast Listener Discovery [RFC3810] Vida, R. and L. Costa, "Multicast Listener Discovery
Version 2 (MLDv2) for IPv6", RFC 3810, June 2004. Version 2 (MLDv2) for IPv6", RFC 3810, June 2004.
skipping to change at page 22, line 24 skipping to change at page 25, line 12
[RFC4303] Kent, S., "IP Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP)", [RFC4303] Kent, S., "IP Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP)",
RFC 4303, December 2005. RFC 4303, December 2005.
[RFC4307] Schiller, J., "Cryptographic Algorithms for Use in the [RFC4307] Schiller, J., "Cryptographic Algorithms for Use in the
Internet Key Exchange Version 2 (IKEv2)", RFC 4307, Internet Key Exchange Version 2 (IKEv2)", RFC 4307,
December 2005. December 2005.
[RFC4311] Hinden, R. and D. Thaler, "IPv6 Host-to-Router Load [RFC4311] Hinden, R. and D. Thaler, "IPv6 Host-to-Router Load
Sharing", RFC 4311, November 2005. Sharing", RFC 4311, November 2005.
[RFC4429] Moore, N., "Optimistic Duplicate Address Detection (DAD)
for IPv6", RFC 4429, April 2006.
[RFC4443] Conta, A., Deering, S., and M. Gupta, "Internet Control [RFC4443] Conta, A., Deering, S., and M. Gupta, "Internet Control
Message Protocol (ICMPv6) for the Internet Protocol Message Protocol (ICMPv6) for the Internet Protocol
Version 6 (IPv6) Specification", RFC 4443, March 2006. Version 6 (IPv6) Specification", RFC 4443, March 2006.
[RFC4584] Chakrabarti, S. and E. Nordmark, "Extension to Sockets API
for Mobile IPv6", RFC 4584, July 2006.
[RFC4604] Holbrook, H., Cain, B., and B. Haberman, "Using Internet [RFC4604] Holbrook, H., Cain, B., and B. Haberman, "Using Internet
Group Management Protocol Version 3 (IGMPv3) and Multicast Group Management Protocol Version 3 (IGMPv3) and Multicast
Listener Discovery Protocol Version 2 (MLDv2) for Source- Listener Discovery Protocol Version 2 (MLDv2) for Source-
Specific Multicast", RFC 4604, August 2006. Specific Multicast", RFC 4604, August 2006.
[RFC4607] Holbrook, H. and B. Cain, "Source-Specific Multicast for [RFC4607] Holbrook, H. and B. Cain, "Source-Specific Multicast for
IP", RFC 4607, August 2006. IP", RFC 4607, August 2006.
[RFC4835] Manral, V., "Cryptographic Algorithm Implementation [RFC4835] Manral, V., "Cryptographic Algorithm Implementation
Requirements for Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP) and Requirements for Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP) and
skipping to change at page 23, line 6 skipping to change at page 25, line 49
Address Autoconfiguration", RFC 4862, September 2007. Address Autoconfiguration", RFC 4862, September 2007.
[RFC4941] Narten, T., Draves, R., and S. Krishnan, "Privacy [RFC4941] Narten, T., Draves, R., and S. Krishnan, "Privacy
Extensions for Stateless Address Autoconfiguration in Extensions for Stateless Address Autoconfiguration in
IPv6", RFC 4941, September 2007. IPv6", RFC 4941, September 2007.
[RFC5006] Jeong, J., Park, S., Beloeil, L., and S. Madanapalli, [RFC5006] Jeong, J., Park, S., Beloeil, L., and S. Madanapalli,
"IPv6 Router Advertisement Option for DNS Configuration", "IPv6 Router Advertisement Option for DNS Configuration",
RFC 5006, September 2007. RFC 5006, September 2007.
[RFC5014] Nordmark, E., Chakrabarti, S., and J. Laganier, "IPv6
Socket API for Source Address Selection", RFC 5014,
September 2007.
[RFC5072] S.Varada, Haskins, D., and E. Allen, "IP Version 6 over [RFC5072] S.Varada, Haskins, D., and E. Allen, "IP Version 6 over
PPP", RFC 5072, September 2007. PPP", RFC 5072, September 2007.
[RFC5095] Abley, J., Savola, P., and G. Neville-Neil, "Deprecation [RFC5095] Abley, J., Savola, P., and G. Neville-Neil, "Deprecation
of Type 0 Routing Headers in IPv6", RFC 5095, of Type 0 Routing Headers in IPv6", RFC 5095,
December 2007. December 2007.
[RFC5453] Krishnan, S., "Reserved IPv6 Interface Identifiers",
RFC 5453, February 2009.
[RFC5722] Krishnan, S., "Handling of Overlapping IPv6 Fragments", [RFC5722] Krishnan, S., "Handling of Overlapping IPv6 Fragments",
RFC 5722, December 2009. RFC 5722, December 2009.
[RFC5942] Singh, H., Beebee, W., and E. Nordmark, "IPv6 Subnet [RFC5942] Singh, H., Beebee, W., and E. Nordmark, "IPv6 Subnet
Model: The Relationship between Links and Subnet Model: The Relationship between Links and Subnet
Prefixes", RFC 5942, July 2010. Prefixes", RFC 5942, July 2010.
[RFC5952] Kawamura, S. and M. Kawashima, "A Recommendation for IPv6 [RFC5952] Kawamura, S. and M. Kawashima, "A Recommendation for IPv6
Address Text Representation", RFC 5952, August 2010. Address Text Representation", RFC 5952, August 2010.
skipping to change at page 23, line 35 skipping to change at page 26, line 37
RFC 5996, September 2010. RFC 5996, September 2010.
[RFC6106] Jeong, J., Park, S., Beloeil, L., and S. Madanapalli, [RFC6106] Jeong, J., Park, S., Beloeil, L., and S. Madanapalli,
"IPv6 Router Advertisement Options for DNS Configuration", "IPv6 Router Advertisement Options for DNS Configuration",
RFC 6106, November 2010. RFC 6106, November 2010.
[USGv6] National Institute of Standards and Technology, "A Profile [USGv6] National Institute of Standards and Technology, "A Profile
for IPv6 in the U.S. Government - Version 1.0", July 2008, for IPv6 in the U.S. Government - Version 1.0", July 2008,
<http://www.antd.nist.gov/usgv6/usgv6-v1.pdf>. <http://www.antd.nist.gov/usgv6/usgv6-v1.pdf>.
22.2. Informative References 23.2. Informative References
[RFC0793] Postel, J., "Transmission Control Protocol", STD 7, [RFC0793] Postel, J., "Transmission Control Protocol", STD 7,
RFC 793, September 1981. RFC 793, September 1981.
[RFC1034] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - concepts and facilities", [RFC1034] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - concepts and facilities",
STD 13, RFC 1034, November 1987. STD 13, RFC 1034, November 1987.
[RFC2205] Braden, B., Zhang, L., Berson, S., Herzog, S., and S. [RFC2205] Braden, B., Zhang, L., Berson, S., Herzog, S., and S.
Jamin, "Resource ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP) -- Version 1 Jamin, "Resource ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP) -- Version 1
Functional Specification", RFC 2205, September 1997. Functional Specification", RFC 2205, September 1997.
skipping to change at page 25, line 35 skipping to change at page 28, line 37
Routers", RFC 5555, June 2009. Routers", RFC 5555, June 2009.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Ed Jankiewicz Ed Jankiewicz
SRI International, Inc. SRI International, Inc.
1161 Broad Street - Suite 212 1161 Broad Street - Suite 212
Shrewsbury, NJ 07702 Shrewsbury, NJ 07702
USA USA
Phone: 732-389-1003 Phone: 443-502-5815
Email: edward.jankiewicz@sri.com Email: edward.jankiewicz@sri.com
John Loughney John Loughney
Nokia Nokia
955 Page Mill Road 955 Page Mill Road
Palo Alto 94303 Palo Alto 94303
USA USA
Phone: +1 650 283 8068 Phone: +1 650 283 8068
Email: john.loughney@nokia.com Email: john.loughney@nokia.com
 End of changes. 59 change blocks. 
89 lines changed or deleted 239 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.41. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/