draft-ietf-v6ops-6204bis-12.txt   rfc7084.txt 
Network Working Group H. Singh Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) H. Singh
Internet-Draft W. Beebee Request for Comments: 7084 W. Beebee
Obsoletes: 6204 (if approved) Cisco Systems, Inc. Obsoletes: 6204 Cisco Systems, Inc.
Intended status: Informational C. Donley Category: Informational C. Donley
Expires: May 3, 2013 CableLabs ISSN: 2070-1721 CableLabs
B. Stark B. Stark
AT&T AT&T
October 30, 2012 November 2013
Basic Requirements for IPv6 Customer Edge Routers Basic Requirements for IPv6 Customer Edge Routers
draft-ietf-v6ops-6204bis-12
Abstract Abstract
This document specifies requirements for an IPv6 Customer Edge (CE) This document specifies requirements for an IPv6 Customer Edge (CE)
router. Specifically, the current version of this document focuses router. Specifically, the current version of this document focuses
on the basic provisioning of an IPv6 CE router and the provisioning on the basic provisioning of an IPv6 CE router and the provisioning
of IPv6 hosts attached to it. The document also covers IP transition of IPv6 hosts attached to it. The document also covers IP transition
technologies. Two transition technologies in RFC 5969's 6rd and RFC technologies. Two transition technologies in RFC 5969's IPv6 Rapid
6333's DS-Lite are covered in the document. The document obsoletes Deployment on IPv4 Infrastructures (6rd) and RFC 6333's Dual-Stack
RFC 6204, if approved. Lite (DS-Lite) are covered in the document. The document obsoletes
RFC 6204.
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the Status of This Memo
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute published for informational purposes.
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference received public review and has been approved for publication by the
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Not all documents
approved by the IESG are a candidate for any level of Internet
Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 5741.
This Internet-Draft will expire on May 3, 2013. Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7084.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2013 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
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1. Introduction ....................................................3
1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.1. Requirements Language ......................................3
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Terminology .....................................................4
3. Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. Architecture ....................................................5
3.1. Current IPv4 End-User Network Architecture . . . . . . . . 4 3.1. Current IPv4 End-User Network Architecture .................5
3.2. IPv6 End-User Network Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.2. IPv6 End-User Network Architecture .........................5
3.2.1. Local Communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.2.1. Local Communication .................................7
4. Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4. Requirements ....................................................7
4.1. General Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4.1. General Requirements .......................................7
4.2. WAN-Side Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 4.2. WAN-Side Configuration .....................................8
4.3. LAN-Side Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 4.3. LAN-Side Configuration ....................................12
4.4. Transition Technologies Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 4.4. Transition Technologies Support ...........................14
4.4.1. 6rd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 4.4.1. 6rd ................................................14
4.4.2. Dual-Stack Lite (DS-Lite) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 4.4.2. Dual-Stack Lite (DS-Lite) ..........................15
4.5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 4.5. Security Considerations ...................................16
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 5. Acknowledgements ...............................................17
6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 6. Contributors ...................................................17
7. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 7. References .....................................................18
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 7.1. Normative References ......................................18
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 7.2. Informative References ....................................20
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Appendix A. Changes from RFC 6204 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
This document defines basic IPv6 features for a residential or small- This document defines basic IPv6 features for a residential or small-
office router, referred to as an IPv6 CE router, in order to office router, referred to as an "IPv6 CE router", in order to
establish an industry baseline for features to be implemented on such establish an industry baseline for features to be implemented on such
a router. a router.
These routers typically also support IPv4. These routers typically also support IPv4.
Mixed environments of dual-stack hosts and IPv6-only hosts (behind Mixed environments of dual-stack hosts and IPv6-only hosts (behind
the CE router) can be more complex if the IPv6-only devices are using the CE router) can be more complex if the IPv6-only devices are using
a translator to access IPv4 servers [RFC6144]. Support for such a translator to access IPv4 servers [RFC6144]. Support for such
mixed environments is not in scope of this document. mixed environments is not in scope of this document.
skipping to change at page 3, line 39 skipping to change at page 3, line 39
The document also covers the IP transition technologies that were The document also covers the IP transition technologies that were
available at the time this document was written. Two transition available at the time this document was written. Two transition
technologies in 6rd [RFC5969] and DS-Lite [RFC6333] are covered in technologies in 6rd [RFC5969] and DS-Lite [RFC6333] are covered in
the document. the document.
1.1. Requirements Language 1.1. Requirements Language
Take careful note: Unlike other IETF documents, the key words "MUST", Take careful note: Unlike other IETF documents, the key words "MUST",
"MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT",
"RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are not used as "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are not used as
described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. This document uses these keyword described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. This document uses these keywords
not strictly for the purpose of interoperability, but rather for the not strictly for the purpose of interoperability, but rather for the
purpose of establishing industry-common baseline functionality. As purpose of establishing industry-common baseline functionality. As
such, the document points to several other specifications (preferable such, the document points to several other specifications (preferable
in RFC or stable form) to provide additional guidance to implementers in RFC or stable form) to provide additional guidance to implementers
regarding any protocol implementation required to produce a regarding any protocol implementation required to produce a
successful CPE router that interoperates successfully with a successful CE router that interoperates successfully with a
particular subset of currently deploying and planned common IPv6 particular subset of currently deploying and planned common IPv6
access networks. access networks.
2. Terminology 2. Terminology
End-User Network one or more links attached to the IPv6 CE End-User Network one or more links attached to the IPv6 CE
router that connect IPv6 hosts. router that connect IPv6 hosts.
IPv6 Customer Edge Router a node intended for home or small-office IPv6 Customer Edge Router a node intended for home or small-office
use that forwards IPv6 packets not use that forwards IPv6 packets not
explicitly addressed to itself. The IPv6 explicitly addressed to itself. The IPv6
CE router connects the end-user network to CE router connects the end-user network to
a service provider network. a service provider network.
IPv6 Host any device implementing an IPv6 stack IPv6 Host any device implementing an IPv6 stack
skipping to change at page 4, line 27 skipping to change at page 4, line 30
LAN Interface an IPv6 CE router's attachment to a link in LAN Interface an IPv6 CE router's attachment to a link in
the end-user network. Examples are the end-user network. Examples are
Ethernet (simple or bridged), 802.11 Ethernet (simple or bridged), 802.11
wireless, or other LAN technologies. An wireless, or other LAN technologies. An
IPv6 CE router may have one or more IPv6 CE router may have one or more
network-layer LAN interfaces. network-layer LAN interfaces.
Service Provider an entity that provides access to the Service Provider an entity that provides access to the
Internet. In this document, a service Internet. In this document, a service
provider specifically offers Internet provider specifically offers Internet
access using IPv6, and may also offer IPv4 access using IPv6, and it may also offer
Internet access. The service provider can IPv4 Internet access. The service provider
provide such access over a variety of can provide such access over a variety of
different transport methods such as DSL, different transport methods such as DSL,
cable, wireless, and others. cable, wireless, and others.
WAN Interface an IPv6 CE router's attachment to a link WAN Interface an IPv6 CE router's attachment to a link
used to provide connectivity to the service used to provide connectivity to the service
provider network; example link technologies provider network; example link technologies
include Ethernet (simple or bridged), PPP include Ethernet (simple or bridged), PPP
links, Frame Relay, or ATM networks, as links, Frame Relay, or ATM networks, as
well as Internet-layer (or higher-layer) well as Internet-layer (or higher-layer)
"tunnels", such as tunnels over IPv4 or "tunnels", such as tunnels over IPv4 or
IPv6 itself. IPv6 itself.
3. Architecture 3. Architecture
3.1. Current IPv4 End-User Network Architecture 3.1. Current IPv4 End-User Network Architecture
An end-user network will likely support both IPv4 and IPv6. It is An end-user network will likely support both IPv4 and IPv6. It is
not expected that an end-user will change their existing network not expected that an end user will change their existing network
topology with the introduction of IPv6. There are some differences topology with the introduction of IPv6. There are some differences
in how IPv6 works and is provisioned; these differences have in how IPv6 works and is provisioned; these differences have
implications for the network architecture. A typical IPv4 end-user implications for the network architecture. A typical IPv4 end-user
network consists of a "plug and play" router with NAT functionality network consists of a "plug and play" router with NAT functionality
and a single link behind it, connected to the service provider and a single link behind it, connected to the service provider
network. network.
A typical IPv4 NAT deployment by default blocks all incoming A typical IPv4 NAT deployment by default blocks all incoming
connections. Opening of ports is typically allowed using a Universal connections. Opening of ports is typically allowed using a Universal
Plug and Play Internet Gateway Device (UPnP IGD) [UPnP-IGD] or some Plug and Play Internet Gateway Device (UPnP IGD) [UPnP-IGD] or some
other firewall control protocol. other firewall control protocol.
Another consequence of using private address space in the end-user Another consequence of using private address space in the end-user
network is that it provides stable addressing; i.e., it never changes network is that it provides stable addressing; that is, it never
even when you change service providers, and the addresses are always changes even when you change service providers, and the addresses are
there even when the WAN interface is down or the customer edge router always there even when the WAN interface is down or the customer edge
has not yet been provisioned. router has not yet been provisioned.
Many existing routers support dynamic routing (which learns routes Many existing routers support dynamic routing (which learns routes
from other routers), and advanced end-users can build arbitrary, from other routers), and advanced end-users can build arbitrary,
complex networks using manual configuration of address prefixes complex networks using manual configuration of address prefixes
combined with a dynamic routing protocol. combined with a dynamic routing protocol.
3.2. IPv6 End-User Network Architecture 3.2. IPv6 End-User Network Architecture
The end-user network architecture for IPv6 should provide equivalent The end-user network architecture for IPv6 should provide equivalent
or better capabilities and functionality than the current IPv4 or better capabilities and functionality than the current IPv4
architecture. architecture.
The end-user network is a stub network. Figure 1 illustrates the The end-user network is a stub network. Figure 1 illustrates the
model topology for the end-user network. model topology for the end-user network.
+-------+-------+ \ +-------+-------+ \
| Service | \ | Service | \
| Provider | | Service | Provider | | Service
| Router | | Provider | Router | | Provider
+-------+-------+ | network +-------+-------+ | Network
| / | /
| Customer / | Customer /
| Internet connection / | Internet Connection /
| |
+------+--------+ \ +------+--------+ \
| IPv6 | \ | IPv6 | \
| Customer Edge | \ | Customer Edge | \
| Router | / | Router | /
+---+-------+-+-+ / +---+-------+-+-+ /
Network A | | Network B | End-User Network A | | Network B | End-User
---+-------------+----+- --+--+-------------+--- | network(s) ---+-------------+----+- --+--+-------------+--- | Network(s)
| | | | \ | | | | \
+----+-----+ +-----+----+ +----+-----+ +-----+----+ \ +----+-----+ +-----+----+ +----+-----+ +-----+----+ \
|IPv6 Host | |IPv6 Host | | IPv6 Host| |IPv6 Host | / |IPv6 Host | |IPv6 Host | | IPv6 Host| |IPv6 Host | /
| | | | | | | | / | | | | | | | | /
+----------+ +-----+----+ +----------+ +----------+ / +----------+ +-----+----+ +----------+ +----------+ /
Figure 1: An Example of a Typical End-User Network Figure 1: An Example of a Typical End-User Network
This architecture describes the: This architecture describes the:
o Basic capabilities of an IPv6 CE router o Basic capabilities of an IPv6 CE router
o Provisioning of the WAN interface connecting to the service o Provisioning of the WAN interface connecting to the service
provider provider
skipping to change at page 7, line 39 skipping to change at page 7, line 47
4. Requirements 4. Requirements
4.1. General Requirements 4.1. General Requirements
The IPv6 CE router is responsible for implementing IPv6 routing; that The IPv6 CE router is responsible for implementing IPv6 routing; that
is, the IPv6 CE router must look up the IPv6 destination address in is, the IPv6 CE router must look up the IPv6 destination address in
its routing table to decide to which interface it should send the its routing table to decide to which interface it should send the
packet. packet.
In this role, the IPv6 CE router is responsible for ensuring that In this role, the IPv6 CE router is responsible for ensuring that
traffic using its ULA addressing does not go out the WAN interface, traffic using its ULA addressing does not go out the WAN interface
and does not originate from the WAN interface. and does not originate from the WAN interface.
G-1: An IPv6 CE router is an IPv6 node according to the IPv6 Node G-1: An IPv6 CE router is an IPv6 node according to the IPv6 Node
Requirements [RFC6434] specification. Requirements specification [RFC6434].
G-2: The IPv6 CE router MUST implement ICMPv6 according to G-2: The IPv6 CE router MUST implement ICMPv6 according to
[RFC4443]. In particular, point-to-point links MUST be handled [RFC4443]. In particular, point-to-point links MUST be handled
as described in Section 3.1 of [RFC4443]. as described in Section 3.1 of [RFC4443].
G-3: The IPv6 CE router MUST NOT forward any IPv6 traffic between G-3: The IPv6 CE router MUST NOT forward any IPv6 traffic between
its LAN interface(s) and its WAN interface until the router has its LAN interface(s) and its WAN interface until the router has
successfully completed the IPv6 address and the delegated successfully completed the IPv6 address and the delegated
prefix acquisition process. prefix acquisition process.
skipping to change at page 9, line 7 skipping to change at page 9, line 19
stateful [RFC3315] interface address assignment. stateful [RFC3315] interface address assignment.
W-2: The IPv6 CE router MUST generate a link-local address and W-2: The IPv6 CE router MUST generate a link-local address and
finish Duplicate Address Detection according to [RFC4862] prior finish Duplicate Address Detection according to [RFC4862] prior
to sending any Router Solicitations on the interface. The to sending any Router Solicitations on the interface. The
source address used in the subsequent Router Solicitation MUST source address used in the subsequent Router Solicitation MUST
be the link-local address on the WAN interface. be the link-local address on the WAN interface.
W-3: Absent other routing information, the IPv6 CE router MUST use W-3: Absent other routing information, the IPv6 CE router MUST use
Router Discovery as specified in [RFC4861] to discover a Router Discovery as specified in [RFC4861] to discover a
default router(s) and install default route(s) in its routing default router(s) and install a default route(s) in its routing
table with the discovered router's address as the next hop. table with the discovered router's address as the next hop.
W-4: The router MUST act as a requesting router for the purposes of W-4: The router MUST act as a requesting router for the purposes of
DHCPv6 prefix delegation ([RFC3633]). DHCPv6 prefix delegation ([RFC3633]).
W-5: The IPv6 CE router MUST use a persistent DHCP Unique Identifier W-5: The IPv6 CE router MUST use a persistent DHCP Unique Identifier
(DUID) for DHCPv6 messages. The DUID MUST NOT change between (DUID) for DHCPv6 messages. The DUID MUST NOT change between
network interface resets or IPv6 CE router reboots. network-interface resets or IPv6 CE router reboots.
W-6: The WAN interface of the CE router SHOULD support a PCP client W-6: The WAN interface of the CE router SHOULD support a Port
as specified in [I-D.ietf-pcp-base] for use by applications on Control Protocol (PCP) client as specified in [RFC6887] for use
the CE Router. The PCP client SHOULD follow the procedure by applications on the CE router. The PCP client SHOULD follow
specified in Section 8.1 of [I-D.ietf-pcp-base] to discover its the procedure specified in Section 8.1 of [RFC6887] to discover
PCP server. This document takes no position on whether such its PCP server. This document takes no position on whether
functionality is enabled by default or mechanisms by which such functionality is enabled by default or mechanisms by which
users would configure the functionality. Handling PCP requests users would configure the functionality. Handling PCP requests
from PCP clients in the LAN side of the CE Router is out of from PCP clients in the LAN side of the CE router is out of
scope. scope.
Link-layer requirements: Link-layer requirements:
WLL-1: If the WAN interface supports Ethernet encapsulation, then WLL-1: If the WAN interface supports Ethernet encapsulation, then
the IPv6 CE router MUST support IPv6 over Ethernet [RFC2464]. the IPv6 CE router MUST support IPv6 over Ethernet [RFC2464].
WLL-2: If the WAN interface supports PPP encapsulation, the IPv6 CE WLL-2: If the WAN interface supports PPP encapsulation, the IPv6 CE
router MUST support IPv6 over PPP [RFC5072]. router MUST support IPv6 over PPP [RFC5072].
skipping to change at page 10, line 9 skipping to change at page 10, line 19
WAA-2: The IPv6 CE router MUST follow the recommendations in WAA-2: The IPv6 CE router MUST follow the recommendations in
Section 4 of [RFC5942], and in particular the handling of Section 4 of [RFC5942], and in particular the handling of
the L flag in the Router Advertisement Prefix Information the L flag in the Router Advertisement Prefix Information
option. option.
WAA-3: The IPv6 CE router MUST support DHCPv6 [RFC3315] client WAA-3: The IPv6 CE router MUST support DHCPv6 [RFC3315] client
behavior. behavior.
WAA-4: The IPv6 CE router MUST be able to support the following WAA-4: The IPv6 CE router MUST be able to support the following
DHCPv6 options: IA_NA, Reconfigure Accept [RFC3315], and DHCPv6 options: Identity Association for Non-temporary
Address (IA_NA), Reconfigure Accept [RFC3315], and
DNS_SERVERS [RFC3646]. The IPv6 CE router SHOULD be able to DNS_SERVERS [RFC3646]. The IPv6 CE router SHOULD be able to
support the DNS Search List DNSSL option as specified in support the DNS Search List (DNSSL) option as specified in
[RFC3646]. [RFC3646].
WAA-5: The IPv6 CE router SHOULD implement the Network Time WAA-5: The IPv6 CE router SHOULD implement the Network Time
Protocol (NTP) as specified in [RFC5905] to provide a time Protocol (NTP) as specified in [RFC5905] to provide a time
reference common to the service provider for other reference common to the service provider for other
protocols, such as DHCPv6, to use. If the CE router protocols, such as DHCPv6, to use. If the CE router
implements NTP, it requests the NTP Server DHCPv6 option implements NTP, it requests the NTP Server DHCPv6 option
[RFC5908] and uses the received list of servers as primary [RFC5908] and uses the received list of servers as primary
time reference, unless explicitly configured otherwise. LAN time reference, unless explicitly configured otherwise. LAN
side support of NTP is out of scope for this document. side support of NTP is out of scope for this document.
WAA-6: If the IPv6 CE router receives a Router Advertisement WAA-6: If the IPv6 CE router receives a Router Advertisement
message (described in [RFC4861]) with the M flag set to 1, message (described in [RFC4861]) with the M flag set to 1,
the IPv6 CE router MUST do DHCPv6 address assignment the IPv6 CE router MUST do DHCPv6 address assignment
(request an IA_NA option). (request an IA_NA option).
WAA-7: If the IPv6 CE router does not acquire global IPv6 WAA-7: If the IPv6 CE router does not acquire a global IPv6
address(es) from either SLAAC or DHCPv6, then it MUST create address(es) from either SLAAC or DHCPv6, then it MUST create
global IPv6 address(es) from its delegated prefix(es) and a global IPv6 address(es) from its delegated prefix(es) and
configure those on one of its internal virtual network configure those on one of its internal virtual network
interfaces, unless configured to require a global IPv6 interfaces, unless configured to require a global IPv6
address on the WAN interface. address on the WAN interface.
WAA-8: The CE router must support the SOL_MAX_RT option WAA-8: The CE router MUST support the SOL_MAX_RT option [RFC7083]
[I-D.droms-dhc-dhcpv6-solmaxrt-update] and request the and request the SOL_MAX_RT option in an Option Request
SOL_MAX_RT option in an ORO. Option (ORO).
WAA-9: As a router, the IPv6 CE router MUST follow the weak host WAA-9: As a router, the IPv6 CE router MUST follow the weak host
(Weak ES) model [RFC1122]. When originating packets from an (Weak End System) model [RFC1122]. When originating packets
interface, it will use a source address from another one of from an interface, it will use a source address from another
its interfaces if the outgoing interface does not have an one of its interfaces if the outgoing interface does not
address of suitable scope. have an address of suitable scope.
WAA-10: The IPv6 CE router SHOULD implement the Information Refresh WAA-10: The IPv6 CE router SHOULD implement the Information Refresh
Time option and associated client behavior as specified in Time option and associated client behavior as specified in
[RFC4242]. [RFC4242].
Prefix delegation requirements: Prefix delegation requirements:
WPD-1: The IPv6 CE router MUST support DHCPv6 prefix delegation WPD-1: The IPv6 CE router MUST support DHCPv6 prefix delegation
requesting router behavior as specified in [RFC3633] (IA_PD requesting router behavior as specified in [RFC3633]
option). (Identity Association for Prefix Delegation (IA_PD) option).
WPD-2: The IPv6 CE router MAY indicate as a hint to the delegating WPD-2: The IPv6 CE router MAY indicate as a hint to the delegating
router the size of the prefix it requires. If so, it MUST router the size of the prefix it requires. If so, it MUST
ask for a prefix large enough to assign one /64 for each of ask for a prefix large enough to assign one /64 for each of
its interfaces, rounded up to the nearest nibble, and SHOULD its interfaces, rounded up to the nearest nibble, and SHOULD
be configurable to ask for more. be configurable to ask for more.
WPD-3: The IPv6 CE router MUST be prepared to accept a delegated WPD-3: The IPv6 CE router MUST be prepared to accept a delegated
prefix size different from what is given in the hint. If the prefix size different from what is given in the hint. If the
delegated prefix is too small to address all of its delegated prefix is too small to address all of its
skipping to change at page 11, line 38 skipping to change at page 12, line 5
WPD-5: Any packet received by the CE router with a destination WPD-5: Any packet received by the CE router with a destination
address in the prefix(es) delegated to the CE router but not address in the prefix(es) delegated to the CE router but not
in the set of prefixes assigned by the CE router to the LAN in the set of prefixes assigned by the CE router to the LAN
must be dropped. In other words, the next hop for the must be dropped. In other words, the next hop for the
prefix(es) delegated to the CE router should be the null prefix(es) delegated to the CE router should be the null
destination. This is necessary to prevent forwarding loops destination. This is necessary to prevent forwarding loops
when some addresses covered by the aggregate are not when some addresses covered by the aggregate are not
reachable [RFC4632]. reachable [RFC4632].
(a) The IPv6 CE router SHOULD send an ICMPv6 Destination (a) The IPv6 CE router SHOULD send an ICMPv6 Destination
Unreachable message in accordance with Section 3.1 of Unreachable message in accordance with Section 3.1 of
[RFC4443] back to the source of the packet, if the [RFC4443] back to the source of the packet, if the packet is
packet is to be dropped due to this rule. to be dropped due to this rule.
WPD-6: If the IPv6 CE router requests both an IA_NA and an IA_PD WPD-6: If the IPv6 CE router requests both an IA_NA and an IA_PD
option in DHCPv6, it MUST accept an IA_PD option in DHCPv6 option in DHCPv6, it MUST accept an IA_PD option in DHCPv6
Advertise/Reply messages, even if the message does not Advertise/Reply messages, even if the message does not
contain any addresses, unless configured to only obtain its contain any addresses, unless configured to only obtain its
WAN IPv6 address via DHCPv6. See WAN IPv6 address via DHCPv6; see [DHCPv6-STATEFUL-ISSUES].
[I-D.ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-issues]
WPD-7: By default, an IPv6 CE router MUST NOT initiate any dynamic WPD-7: By default, an IPv6 CE router MUST NOT initiate any dynamic
routing protocol on its WAN interface. routing protocol on its WAN interface.
WPD-8: The IPv6 CE Router SHOULD support the WPD-8: The IPv6 CE router SHOULD support the [RFC6603] Prefix
[I-D.ietf-dhc-pd-exclude] PD-Exclude option. Exclude option.
4.3. LAN-Side Configuration 4.3. LAN-Side Configuration
The IPv6 CE router distributes configuration information obtained The IPv6 CE router distributes configuration information obtained
during WAN interface provisioning to IPv6 hosts and assists IPv6 during WAN interface provisioning to IPv6 hosts and assists IPv6
hosts in obtaining IPv6 addresses. It also supports connectivity of hosts in obtaining IPv6 addresses. It also supports connectivity of
these devices in the absence of any working WAN interface. these devices in the absence of any working WAN interface.
An IPv6 CE router is expected to support an IPv6 end-user network and An IPv6 CE router is expected to support an IPv6 end-user network and
IPv6 hosts that exhibit the following characteristics: IPv6 hosts that exhibit the following characteristics:
skipping to change at page 13, line 36 skipping to change at page 13, line 46
router with a Router Lifetime [RFC4861] greater than zero if router with a Router Lifetime [RFC4861] greater than zero if
it has no prefixes configured or delegated to it. it has no prefixes configured or delegated to it.
L-5: The IPv6 CE router MUST make each LAN interface an advertising L-5: The IPv6 CE router MUST make each LAN interface an advertising
interface according to [RFC4861]. interface according to [RFC4861].
L-6: In Router Advertisement messages ([RFC4861]), the Prefix L-6: In Router Advertisement messages ([RFC4861]), the Prefix
Information option's A and L flags MUST be set to 1 by Information option's A and L flags MUST be set to 1 by
default. default.
L-7: The A and L flags' ([RFC4861]) settings SHOULD be user- L-7: The A and L flags' ([RFC4861]) settings SHOULD be user
configurable. configurable.
L-8: The IPv6 CE router MUST support a DHCPv6 server capable of L-8: The IPv6 CE router MUST support a DHCPv6 server capable of
IPv6 address assignment according to [RFC3315] OR a stateless IPv6 address assignment according to [RFC3315] OR a stateless
DHCPv6 server according to [RFC3736] on its LAN interfaces. DHCPv6 server according to [RFC3736] on its LAN interfaces.
L-9: Unless the IPv6 CE router is configured to support the DHCPv6 L-9: Unless the IPv6 CE router is configured to support the DHCPv6
IA_NA option, it SHOULD set the M flag to 0 and the O flag to IA_NA option, it SHOULD set the M flag to zero and the O flag
1 in its Router Advertisement messages [RFC4861]. to 1 in its Router Advertisement messages [RFC4861].
L-10: The IPv6 CE router MUST support providing DNS information in L-10: The IPv6 CE router MUST support providing DNS information in
the DHCPv6 DNS_SERVERS and DOMAIN_LIST options [RFC3646]. the DHCPv6 DNS_SERVERS and DOMAIN_LIST options [RFC3646].
L-11: The IPv6 CE router MUST support providing DNS information in L-11: The IPv6 CE router MUST support providing DNS information in
the Router Advertisement Recursive DNS Server (RDNSS) and DNS the Router Advertisement Recursive DNS Server (RDNSS) and DNS
Search List options. Both options are specified in [RFC6106]. Search List options. Both options are specified in [RFC6106].
L-12: The IPv6 CE router SHOULD make available a subset of DHCPv6 L-12: The IPv6 CE router SHOULD make available a subset of DHCPv6
options (as listed in Section 5.3 of [RFC3736]) received from options (as listed in Section 5.3 of [RFC3736]) received from
the DHCPv6 client on its WAN interface to its LAN-side DHCPv6 the DHCPv6 client on its WAN interface to its LAN-side DHCPv6
server. server.
L-13: If the delegated prefix changes, i.e., the current prefix is L-13: If the delegated prefix changes, i.e., the current prefix is
replaced with a new prefix without any overlapping time replaced with a new prefix without any overlapping time
period, then the IPv6 CE router MUST immediately advertise the period, then the IPv6 CE router MUST immediately advertise the
old prefix with a Preferred Lifetime of zero and a Valid old prefix with a Preferred Lifetime of zero and a Valid
Lifetime of either a) zero, or b) the lower of the current Lifetime of either a) zero or b) the lower of the current
Valid Lifetime and two hours (which must be decremented in Valid Lifetime and two hours (which must be decremented in
real time) in a Router Advertisement message as described in real time) in a Router Advertisement message as described in
Section 5.5.3, (e) of [RFC4862]. Section 5.5.3, (e) of [RFC4862].
L-14: The IPv6 CE router MUST send an ICMPv6 Destination Unreachable L-14: The IPv6 CE router MUST send an ICMPv6 Destination Unreachable
message, code 5 (Source address failed ingress/egress policy) message, code 5 (Source address failed ingress/egress policy)
for packets forwarded to it that use an address from a prefix for packets forwarded to it that use an address from a prefix
that has been invalidated. that has been invalidated.
4.4. Transition Technologies Support 4.4. Transition Technologies Support
4.4.1. 6rd 4.4.1. 6rd
6rd [RFC5969] specifies an automatic tunneling mechanism tailored to 6rd [RFC5969] specifies an automatic tunneling mechanism tailored to
advance deployment of IPv6 to end users via a service provider's IPv4 advance deployment of IPv6 to end users via a service provider's IPv4
network infrastructure. Key aspects include automatic IPv6 prefix network infrastructure. Key aspects include automatic IPv6 prefix
delegation to sites, stateless operation, simple provisioning, and delegation to sites, stateless operation, simple provisioning, and
service that is equivalent to native IPv6 at the sites that are service that is equivalent to native IPv6 at the sites that are
served by the mechanism. It is expected that such traffic is served by the mechanism. It is expected that such traffic is
forwarded over the CE Router's native IPv4 WAN interface, and not forwarded over the CE router's native IPv4 WAN interface and not
encapsulated in another tunnel. encapsulated in another tunnel.
The CE Router SHOULD support 6rd functionality. If 6rd is supported, The CE router SHOULD support 6rd functionality. If 6rd is supported,
it MUST be implemented according to [RFC5969]. The following CE it MUST be implemented according to [RFC5969]. The following CE
Requirements also apply: Requirements also apply:
6rd requirements: 6rd requirements:
6RD-1: The IPv6 CE router MUST support 6rd configuration via the 6rd 6RD-1: The IPv6 CE router MUST support 6rd configuration via the 6rd
DHCPv4 Option (212). If the CE router has obtained an IPv4 DHCPv4 Option 212. If the CE router has obtained an IPv4
network address through some other means such as PPP, it network address through some other means such as PPP, it
SHOULD use the DHCPINFORM request message [RFC2131] to SHOULD use the DHCPINFORM request message [RFC2131] to
request the 6rd DHCPv4 Option. The IPv6 CE router MAY use request the 6rd DHCPv4 Option. The IPv6 CE router MAY use
other mechanisms to configure 6rd parameters. Such other mechanisms to configure 6rd parameters. Such
mechanisms are outside the scope of this document. mechanisms are outside the scope of this document.
6RD-2: If the IPv6 CE router is capable of automated configuration 6RD-2: If the IPv6 CE router is capable of automated configuration
of IPv4 through IPCP (i.e., over a PPP connection), it MUST of IPv4 through IPCP (i.e., over a PPP connection), it MUST
support user-entered configuration of 6rd. support user-entered configuration of 6rd.
6RD-3: If the CE router supports configuration mechanisms other than 6RD-3: If the CE router supports configuration mechanisms other than
the 6rd DHCPv4 Option 212 (user-entered, TR-69, etc.), the CE the 6rd DHCPv4 Option 212 (user-entered, TR-069 [TR-069],
router MUST support 6rd in "hub and spoke" mode. 6rd in "hub etc.), the CE router MUST support 6rd in "hub and spoke"
and spoke" requires all IPv6 traffic to go to the 6rd Border mode. 6rd in "hub and spoke" requires all IPv6 traffic to go
Relay. In effect, this requirement removes the "direct to the 6rd Border Relay. In effect, this requirement removes
connect to 6rd" route defined in Section 7.1.1 of [RFC5969]. the "direct connect to 6rd" route defined in Section 7.1.1 of
[RFC5969].
6RD-4: A CE router MUST allow 6rd and native IPv6 WAN interfaces to 6RD-4: A CE router MUST allow 6rd and native IPv6 WAN interfaces to
be active alone as well as simultaneously in order to support be active alone as well as simultaneously in order to support
coexistence of the two technologies during an incremental coexistence of the two technologies during an incremental
migration period such as a migration from 6rd to native IPv6. migration period such as a migration from 6rd to native IPv6.
6RD-5: Each packet sent on a 6rd or native WAN interface MUST be 6RD-5: Each packet sent on a 6rd or native WAN interface MUST be
directed such that its source IP address is derived from the directed such that its source IP address is derived from the
delegated prefix associated with the particular interface delegated prefix associated with the particular interface
from which the packet is being sent[Section 4.3 [RFC3704]]. from which the packet is being sent (Section 4.3 of
[RFC3704]).
6RD-6: The CE router MUST allow different as well as identical 6RD-6: The CE router MUST allow different as well as identical
delegated prefixes to be configured via each (6rd or native) delegated prefixes to be configured via each (6rd or native)
WAN interface. WAN interface.
6RD-7: In the event that forwarding rules produce a tie between 6rd 6RD-7: In the event that forwarding rules produce a tie between 6rd
and native IPv6, by default, the IPv6 CE Router MUST prefer and native IPv6, by default, the IPv6 CE router MUST prefer
native IPv6. native IPv6.
4.4.2. Dual-Stack Lite (DS-Lite) 4.4.2. Dual-Stack Lite (DS-Lite)
Dual-Stack Lite [RFC6333] enables both continued support for IPv4 Dual-Stack Lite [RFC6333] enables both continued support for IPv4
services and incentives for the deployment of IPv6. It also de- services and incentives for the deployment of IPv6. It also
couples IPv6 deployment in the Service Provider network from the rest de-couples IPv6 deployment in the service provider network from the
of the Internet, making incremental deployment easier. Dual-Stack rest of the Internet, making incremental deployment easier. Dual-
Lite enables a broadband service provider to share IPv4 addresses Stack Lite enables a broadband service provider to share IPv4
among customers by combining two well-known technologies: IP in IP addresses among customers by combining two well-known technologies:
(IPv4-in-IPv6) and Network Address Translation (NAT). It is expected IP in IP (IPv4-in-IPv6) and Network Address Translation (NAT). It is
that DS-Lite traffic is forwarded over the CE Router's native IPv6 expected that DS-Lite traffic is forwarded over the CE router's
WAN interface, and not encapsulated in another tunnel. native IPv6 WAN interface, and not encapsulated in another tunnel.
The IPv6 CE Router SHOULD implement DS-Lite functionality. If DS- The IPv6 CE router SHOULD implement DS-Lite functionality. If
Lite is supported, it MUST be implemented according to [RFC6333]. DS-Lite is supported, it MUST be implemented according to [RFC6333].
This document takes no position on simultaneous operation of Dual- This document takes no position on simultaneous operation of Dual-
Stack Lite and native IPv4. The following CE Router requirements Stack Lite and native IPv4. The following CE router requirements
also apply: also apply:
WAN requirements: WAN requirements:
DLW-1: The CE Router MUST support configuration of DS-Lite via the DLW-1: The CE router MUST support configuration of DS-Lite via the
DS-Lite DHCPv6 option [RFC6334]. The IPv6 CE Router MAY use DS-Lite DHCPv6 option [RFC6334]. The IPv6 CE router MAY use
other mechanisms to configure DS-Lite parameters. Such other mechanisms to configure DS-Lite parameters. Such
mechanisms are outside the scope of this document. mechanisms are outside the scope of this document.
DLW-2: IPv6 CE Router MUST NOT perform IPv4 Network Address DLW-2: The IPv6 CE router MUST NOT perform IPv4 Network Address
Translation (NAT) on IPv4 traffic encapsulated using DS-Lite. Translation (NAT) on IPv4 traffic encapsulated using DS-Lite.
DLW-3: If the IPv6 CE Router is configured with an IPv4 address on DLW-3: If the IPv6 CE router is configured with an IPv4 address on
its WAN interface then the IPv6 CE Router SHOULD disable the its WAN interface, then the IPv6 CE router SHOULD disable the
DS-Lite B4 element. DS-Lite Basic Bridging BroadBand (B4) element.
4.5. Security Considerations 4.5. Security Considerations
It is considered a best practice to filter obviously malicious It is considered a best practice to filter obviously malicious
traffic (e.g., spoofed packets, "Martian" addresses, etc.). Thus, traffic (e.g., spoofed packets, "Martian" addresses, etc.). Thus,
the IPv6 CE router ought to support basic stateless egress and the IPv6 CE router ought to support basic stateless egress and
ingress filters. The CE router is also expected to offer mechanisms ingress filters. The CE router is also expected to offer mechanisms
to filter traffic entering the customer network; however, the method to filter traffic entering the customer network; however, the method
by which vendors implement configurable packet filtering is beyond by which vendors implement configurable packet filtering is beyond
the scope of this document. the scope of this document.
skipping to change at page 16, line 48 skipping to change at page 17, line 15
S-2: The IPv6 CE router SHOULD support ingress filtering in S-2: The IPv6 CE router SHOULD support ingress filtering in
accordance with BCP 38 [RFC2827]. Note that this requirement accordance with BCP 38 [RFC2827]. Note that this requirement
was downgraded from a MUST from RFC 6204 due to the difficulty was downgraded from a MUST from RFC 6204 due to the difficulty
of implementation in the CE router and the feature's redundancy of implementation in the CE router and the feature's redundancy
with upstream router ingress filtering. with upstream router ingress filtering.
S-3: If the IPv6 CE router firewall is configured to filter incoming S-3: If the IPv6 CE router firewall is configured to filter incoming
tunneled data, the firewall SHOULD provide the capability to tunneled data, the firewall SHOULD provide the capability to
filter decapsulated packets from a tunnel. filter decapsulated packets from a tunnel.
5. IANA Considerations 5. Acknowledgements
This document has no actions for IANA.
6. Acknowledgements
Thanks to the following people (in alphabetical order) for their Thanks to the following people (in alphabetical order) for their
guidance and feedback: guidance and feedback:
Mikael Abrahamsson, Tore Anderson, Merete Asak, Rajiv Asati, Scott Mikael Abrahamsson, Tore Anderson, Merete Asak, Rajiv Asati, Scott
Beuker, Mohamed Boucadair, Rex Bullinger, Brian Carpenter, Tassos Beuker, Mohamed Boucadair, Rex Bullinger, Brian Carpenter, Tassos
Chatzithomaoglou, Lorenzo Colitti, Remi Denis-Courmont, Gert Doering, Chatzithomaoglou, Lorenzo Colitti, Remi Denis-Courmont, Gert Doering,
Alain Durand, Katsunori Fukuoka, Brian Haberman, Tony Hain, Thomas Alain Durand, Katsunori Fukuoka, Brian Haberman, Tony Hain, Thomas
Herbst, Ray Hunter, Kevin Johns, Joel Jaeggli, Erik Kline, Stephen Herbst, Ray Hunter, Joel Jaeggli, Kevin Johns, Erik Kline, Stephen
Kramer, Victor Kuarsingh, Francois-Xavier Le Bail, Arifumi Matsumoto, Kramer, Victor Kuarsingh, Francois-Xavier Le Bail, Arifumi Matsumoto,
David Miles, Shin Miyakawa, Jean-Francois Mule, Michael Newbery, David Miles, Shin Miyakawa, Jean-Francois Mule, Michael Newbery,
Carlos Pignataro, John Pomeroy, Antonio Querubin, Daniel Roesen, Carlos Pignataro, John Pomeroy, Antonio Querubin, Daniel Roesen,
Hiroki Sato, Teemu Savolainen, Matt Schmitt, David Thaler, Mark Hiroki Sato, Teemu Savolainen, Matt Schmitt, David Thaler, Mark
Townsley, Sean Turner, Bernie Volz, Dan Wing, Timothy Winters, James Townsley, Sean Turner, Bernie Volz, Dan Wing, Timothy Winters, James
Woodyatt, Carl Wuyts, and Cor Zwart. Woodyatt, Carl Wuyts, and Cor Zwart.
This document is based in part on CableLabs' eRouter specification. This document is based in part on CableLabs' eRouter specification.
The authors wish to acknowledge the additional contributors from the The authors wish to acknowledge the additional contributors from the
eRouter team: eRouter team:
Ben Bekele, Amol Bhagwat, Ralph Brown, Eduardo Cardona, Margo Dolas, Ben Bekele, Amol Bhagwat, Ralph Brown, Eduardo Cardona, Margo Dolas,
Toerless Eckert, Doc Evans, Roger Fish, Michelle Kuska, Diego Toerless Eckert, Doc Evans, Roger Fish, Michelle Kuska, Diego
Mazzola, John McQueen, Harsh Parandekar, Michael Patrick, Saifur Mazzola, John McQueen, Harsh Parandekar, Michael Patrick, Saifur
Rahman, Lakshmi Raman, Ryan Ross, Ron da Silva, Madhu Sudan, Dan Rahman, Lakshmi Raman, Ryan Ross, Ron da Silva, Madhu Sudan, Dan
Torbet, and Greg White. Torbet, and Greg White.
7. Contributors 6. Contributors
The following people have participated as co-authors or provided The following people have participated as co-authors or provided
substantial contributions to this document: Ralph Droms, Kirk substantial contributions to this document: Ralph Droms, Kirk
Erichsen, Fred Baker, Jason Weil, Lee Howard, Jean-Francois Tremblay, Erichsen, Fred Baker, Jason Weil, Lee Howard, Jean-Francois Tremblay,
Yiu Lee, John Jason Brzozowski, and Heather Kirksey. Thanks to Ole Yiu Lee, John Jason Brzozowski, and Heather Kirksey. Thanks to Ole
Troan for editorship in the original RFC 6204 document. Troan for editorship in the original RFC 6204 document.
8. References 7. References
8.1. Normative References
[I-D.droms-dhc-dhcpv6-solmaxrt-update]
Droms, R., "Modification to Default Value of SOL_MAX_RT",
draft-droms-dhc-dhcpv6-solmaxrt-update-03 (work in
progress), August 2012.
[I-D.ietf-dhc-pd-exclude]
Korhonen, J., Savolainen, T., Krishnan, S., and O. Troan,
"Prefix Exclude Option for DHCPv6-based Prefix
Delegation", draft-ietf-dhc-pd-exclude-04 (work in
progress), December 2011.
[I-D.ietf-pcp-base] 7.1. Normative References
Wing, D., Cheshire, S., Boucadair, M., Penno, R., and P.
Selkirk, "Port Control Protocol (PCP)",
draft-ietf-pcp-base-28 (work in progress), October 2012.
[RFC1122] Braden, R., "Requirements for Internet Hosts - [RFC1122] Braden, R., "Requirements for Internet Hosts -
Communication Layers", STD 3, RFC 1122, October 1989. Communication Layers", STD 3, RFC 1122, October 1989.
[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.
[RFC2131] Droms, R., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol", [RFC2131] Droms, R., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol", RFC
RFC 2131, March 1997. 2131, March 1997.
[RFC2464] Crawford, M., "Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Ethernet [RFC2464] Crawford, M., "Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Ethernet
Networks", RFC 2464, December 1998. Networks", RFC 2464, December 1998.
[RFC2827] Ferguson, P. and D. Senie, "Network Ingress Filtering: [RFC2827] Ferguson, P. and D. Senie, "Network Ingress Filtering:
Defeating Denial of Service Attacks which employ IP Source Defeating Denial of Service Attacks which employ IP Source
Address Spoofing", BCP 38, RFC 2827, May 2000. Address Spoofing", BCP 38, RFC 2827, May 2000.
[RFC3315] Droms, R., Bound, J., Volz, B., Lemon, T., Perkins, C., [RFC3315] Droms, R., Bound, J., Volz, B., Lemon, T., Perkins, C.,
and M. Carney, "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for and M. Carney, "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for
skipping to change at page 19, line 33 skipping to change at page 19, line 29
J. Palet, "ISP IPv6 Deployment Scenarios in Broadband J. Palet, "ISP IPv6 Deployment Scenarios in Broadband
Access Networks", RFC 4779, January 2007. Access Networks", RFC 4779, January 2007.
[RFC4861] Narten, T., Nordmark, E., Simpson, W., and H. Soliman, [RFC4861] Narten, T., Nordmark, E., Simpson, W., and H. Soliman,
"Neighbor Discovery for IP version 6 (IPv6)", RFC 4861, "Neighbor Discovery for IP version 6 (IPv6)", RFC 4861,
September 2007. September 2007.
[RFC4862] Thomson, S., Narten, T., and T. Jinmei, "IPv6 Stateless [RFC4862] Thomson, S., Narten, T., and T. Jinmei, "IPv6 Stateless
Address Autoconfiguration", RFC 4862, September 2007. Address Autoconfiguration", RFC 4862, September 2007.
[RFC4864] Van de Velde, G., Hain, T., Droms, R., Carpenter, B., and [RFC5072] Varada, S., Haskins, D., and E. Allen, "IP Version 6 over
E. Klein, "Local Network Protection for IPv6", RFC 4864,
May 2007.
[RFC5072] S.Varada, Haskins, D., and E. Allen, "IP Version 6 over
PPP", RFC 5072, September 2007. PPP", RFC 5072, September 2007.
[RFC5905] Mills, D., Martin, J., Burbank, J., and W. Kasch, "Network [RFC5905] Mills, D., Martin, J., Burbank, J., and W. Kasch, "Network
Time Protocol Version 4: Protocol and Algorithms Time Protocol Version 4: Protocol and Algorithms
Specification", RFC 5905, June 2010. Specification", RFC 5905, June 2010.
[RFC5908] Gayraud, R. and B. Lourdelet, "Network Time Protocol (NTP) [RFC5908] Gayraud, R. and B. Lourdelet, "Network Time Protocol (NTP)
Server Option for DHCPv6", RFC 5908, June 2010. Server Option for DHCPv6", RFC 5908, June 2010.
[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.
[RFC5969] Townsley, W. and O. Troan, "IPv6 Rapid Deployment on IPv4 [RFC5969] Townsley, W. and O. Troan, "IPv6 Rapid Deployment on IPv4
Infrastructures (6rd) -- Protocol Specification", Infrastructures (6rd) -- Protocol Specification", RFC
RFC 5969, August 2010. 5969, August 2010.
[RFC6092] Woodyatt, J., "Recommended Simple Security Capabilities in [RFC6092] Woodyatt, J., "Recommended Simple Security Capabilities in
Customer Premises Equipment (CPE) for Providing Customer Premises Equipment (CPE) for Providing
Residential IPv6 Internet Service", RFC 6092, Residential IPv6 Internet Service", RFC 6092, January
January 2011. 2011.
[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.
[RFC6177] Narten, T., Huston, G., and L. Roberts, "IPv6 Address [RFC6177] Narten, T., Huston, G., and L. Roberts, "IPv6 Address
Assignment to End Sites", BCP 157, RFC 6177, March 2011. Assignment to End Sites", BCP 157, RFC 6177, March 2011.
[RFC6333] Durand, A., Droms, R., Woodyatt, J., and Y. Lee, "Dual- [RFC6333] Durand, A., Droms, R., Woodyatt, J., and Y. Lee, "Dual-
Stack Lite Broadband Deployments Following IPv4 Stack Lite Broadband Deployments Following IPv4
Exhaustion", RFC 6333, August 2011. Exhaustion", RFC 6333, August 2011.
[RFC6334] Hankins, D. and T. Mrugalski, "Dynamic Host Configuration [RFC6334] Hankins, D. and T. Mrugalski, "Dynamic Host Configuration
Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6) Option for Dual-Stack Lite", Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6) Option for Dual-Stack Lite",
RFC 6334, August 2011. RFC 6334, August 2011.
[RFC6434] Jankiewicz, E., Loughney, J., and T. Narten, "IPv6 Node [RFC6434] Jankiewicz, E., Loughney, J., and T. Narten, "IPv6 Node
Requirements", RFC 6434, December 2011. Requirements", RFC 6434, December 2011.
8.2. Informative References [RFC6603] Korhonen, J., Savolainen, T., Krishnan, S., and O. Troan,
"Prefix Exclude Option for DHCPv6-based Prefix
Delegation", RFC 6603, May 2012.
[I-D.ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-issues] [RFC6887] Wing, D., Cheshire, S., Boucadair, M., Penno, R., and P.
Selkirk, "Port Control Protocol (PCP)", RFC 6887, April
2013.
[RFC7083] Droms, R., "Modification to Default Values of SOL_MAX_RT
and INF_MAX_RT", RFC 7083, November 2013.
7.2. Informative References
[DHCPv6-STATEFUL-ISSUES]
Troan, O. and B. Volz, "Issues with multiple stateful Troan, O. and B. Volz, "Issues with multiple stateful
DHCPv6 options", draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-stateful-issues-00 DHCPv6 options", Work in Progress, May 2013.
(work in progress), May 2012.
[MULTIHOMING-WITHOUT-NAT] [MULTIHOMING-WITHOUT-NAT]
Troan, O., Ed., Miles, D., Matsushima, S., Okimoto, T., Troan, O., Ed., Miles, D., Matsushima, S., Okimoto, T.,
and D. Wing, "IPv6 Multihoming without Network Address and D. Wing, "IPv6 Multihoming without Network Address
Translation", Work in Progress, December 2010. Translation", Work in Progress, December 2010.
[RFC6144] Baker, F., Li, X., Bao, C., and K. Yin, "Framework for [RFC6144] Baker, F., Li, X., Bao, C., and K. Yin, "Framework for
IPv4/IPv6 Translation", RFC 6144, March 2011. IPv4/IPv6 Translation", RFC 6144, April 2011.
[UPnP-IGD]
UPnP Forum, "Universal Plug and Play (UPnP) Internet
Gateway Device (IGD)", November 2001,
<http://www.upnp.org/>.
Appendix A. Changes from RFC 6204
1. Added IP transition technologies available in RFC form.
2. Changed requirement G-5 to augment the condition of losing IPv6
default router(s) with loss of connectivity.
3. Removed requirement WAA-7 due to not reaching consensus by
various service provider standards bodies. The removal of text
does not remove any critical functionality from the CE
specification.
4. Changed requirement WAA-8 to qualify WAN behavior only if not
configured to perform DHCPv6. This way a deployment specific
profile can mandate DHCPv6 numbered WAN without conflicting with
this document.
5. Changed the WPD-2 requirement from MUST be configurable to
SHOULD be configurable.
6. Changed requirement WPD-4 for a default behavior without
compromising any prior specification of the CE device. The
change was needed by a specific layer 2 deployment which wanted
to specify a MUST for DHCPv6 in their layer 2 profile and not
conflict with this document.
7. Changed requirement WPD-7 to qualify text for DHCPv6. Removed
W-5 and WPD-5 because the text does not have consensus from the
IETF DHC Working Group for what the final solution related to
the removed requirements will be.
8. Added a new WAN DHCPv6 requirement for SOL_MAX_RT of DHCPv6 so
that if an service provider does not have DHCPv6 service enabled
CE routers do not send too frequent DHCPv6 requests to the
service provider DHCPv6 server.
9. Changed requirement L-11 from SHOULD provide DNS options in the
RA to MUST provide DNS option in the RA.
10. New requirement added to the Security Considerations section due
to addition of transition technology. The CE router filters
decapsulated 6rd data.
11. Minor change involved changing ICMP to ICMPv6.
12. Added PCP client requirement for the WAN. [TR-069] Broadband Forum, "CPE WAN Management Protocol", TR-069
Amendment 4, July 2011,
<http://www.broadband-forum.org/technical/trlist.php>.
13. Added a requirement for the DHCPv6 pd-exclude option. [UPnP-IGD] UPnP Forum, , "InternetGatewayDevice:2 Device Template
Version 1.01", December 2010,
<http://upnp.org/specs/gw/igd2/>.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Hemant Singh Hemant Singh
Cisco Systems, Inc. Cisco Systems, Inc.
1414 Massachusetts Ave. 1414 Massachusetts Ave.
Boxborough, MA 01719 Boxborough, MA 01719
USA USA
Phone: +1 978 936 1622 Phone: +1 978 936 1622
skipping to change at page 22, line 39 skipping to change at page 21, line 41
Chris Donley Chris Donley
CableLabs CableLabs
858 Coal Creek Circle 858 Coal Creek Circle
Louisville, CO 80027 Louisville, CO 80027
USA USA
EMail: c.donley@cablelabs.com EMail: c.donley@cablelabs.com
Barbara Stark Barbara Stark
AT&T AT&T
725 W Peachtree St. 1057 Lenox Park Blvd. NE
Atlanta, GA 30308 Atlanta, GA 30319
USA USA
EMail: barbara.stark@att.com EMail: barbara.stark@att.com
 End of changes. 65 change blocks. 
237 lines changed or deleted 176 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/