draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv4survey-int-00.txt   draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv4survey-int-01.txt 
Network Working Group Philip J. Nesser II Network Working Group Philip J. Nesser II
draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv4survey-int-00.txt Nesser & Nesser Consulting draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv4survey-int-01.txt Nesser & Nesser Consulting
Expires August 2003 Internet Draft Cleveland Mickles
AOL Time Warner
June 2003
Expires December 2003
Survey of IPv4 Addresses in Currently Deployed Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed
IETF Internet Area Standards
This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other
groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts.
skipping to change at line 28 skipping to change at page 10, line ?
months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at
any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference any 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."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
Abstract Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
This document seeks to document all usage of IPv4 addresses in currently
deployed IETF Internet Area documented standards. In order to
successfully transition from an all IPv4 Internet to an all IPv6 Internet,
many interim steps will be taken. One of these steps is the evolution of
current protocols that have IPv4 dependencies. It is hoped that these
protocols (and their implementations) will be redesigned to be network
address independent, but failing that will at least dually support IPv4
and IPv6. To this end, all Standards (Full, Draft, and Proposed) as well
as Experimental RFCs will be surveyed and any dependencies will be documented.
1.0 Introduction
This work began as a megolithic document draft-ietf-ngtrans-
ipv4survey-XX.txt. In an effort to rework the information into a more
manageable form, it has been broken into 8 documents conforming to the
current IETF areas (Application, General, Internet, Manangement & Operations,
Routing, Security, Sub-IP and Transport).
1.1 Short Historical Perspective
There are many challenges that face the Internet Engineering community.
The foremost of these challenges has been the scaling issue. How to grow
a network that was envisioned to handle thousands of hosts to one that
will handle tens of millions of networks with billions of hosts. Over the
years this scaling problem has been overcome with changes to the network
layer and to routing protocols. (Ignoring the tremendous advances in
computational hardware)
The first "modern" transition to the network layer occurred in during the
early 1980's from the Network Control Protocol (NCP) to IPv4. This
culminated in the famous "flag day" of January 1, 1983. This version of
IP was documented in RFC 760. This was a version of IP with 8 bit network
and 24 bit host addresses. A year later IP was updated in RFC 791 to
include the famous A, B, C, D, & E class system.
Networks were growing in such a way that it was clear that a need for
breaking networks into smaller pieces was needed. In October of 1984 RFC
917 was published formalizing the practice of subnetting.
By the late 1980's it was clear that the current exterior routing protocol
used by the Internet (EGP) was not sufficient to scale with the growth of
the Internet. The first version of BGP was documented in 1989 in RFC
1105.
The next scaling issues to became apparent in the early 1990's was the
exhaustion of the Class B address space. The growth and commercialization
of the Internet had organizations requesting IP addresses in alarming
numbers. In May of 1992 over 45% of the Class B space was allocated. In
early 1993 RFC 1466 was published directing assignment of blocks of Class
C's be given out instead of Class B's. This solved the problem of address
space exhaustion but had significant impact of the routing infrastructure.
The number of entries in the "core" routing tables began to grow
exponentially as a result of RFC 1466. This led to the implementation of
BGP4 and CIDR prefix addressing. This may have solved the problem for the
present but there are still potential scaling issues.
Current Internet growth would have long overwhelmed the current address
space if industry didn't supply a solution in Network Address Translators
(NATs). To do this the Internet has sacrificed the underlying
"End-to-End" principle.
In the early 1990's the IETF was aware of these potential problems and
began a long design process to create a successor to IPv4 that would
address these issues. The outcome of that process was IPv6.
The purpose of this document is not to discuss the merits or problems of
IPv6. That is a debate that is still ongoing and will eventually be
decided on how well the IETF defines transition mechanisms and how
industry accepts the solution. The question is not "should," but "when."
1.2 A Brief Aside
Throughout this document there are discussions on how protocols might be
updated to support IPv6 addresses. Although current thinking is that IPv6
should suffice as the dominant network layer protocol for the lifetime of
the author, it is not unreasonable to contemplate further upgrade to IP.
Work done by the IRTF Interplanetary Internet Working Group shows one idea
of far reaching thinking. It may be a reasonable idea (or may not) to
consider designing protocols in such a way that they can be either IP
version aware or independent. This idea must be balanced against issues
of simplicity and performance. Therefore it is recommended that protocol
designer keep this issue in mind in future designs.
Just as a reminder, remember the words of Jon Postel: Abstract
"Be conservative in what you send; be liberal in what This document seeks to document all usage of IPv4 addresses in
you accept from others." currently deployed IETF Internet Area documented standards. In order
to successfully transition from an all IPv4 Internet to an all IPv6
Internet, many interim steps will be taken. One of these steps is the
evolution of current protocols that have IPv4 dependencies. It is
hoped that these protocols (and their implementations) will be
redesigned to be network address independent, but failing that will at
least dually support IPv4 and IPv6. To this end, all Standards (Full,
Draft, and Proposed) as well as Experimental RFCs will be surveyed
and any dependencies will be documented.
2.0 Methodology 1.0 Introduction.............................................02
2.0 Document Organization....................................03
3.0 Full Standards...........................................03
4.0 Draft Standards..........................................09
5.0 Proposed Standards.......................................13
6.0 Experimental RFCs........................................34
7.0 Summary of Results......................................43
8.0 Security Considerations..................................51
9.0 References...............................................51
10.0 Acknowledgements........................................51
11.0 Author's Addresses......................................52
12.0 Intellectual Property Statement.........................52
13.0 Full Copyright Statement...............................53
To perform this study each class of IETF standards are investigated in 1.0 Introduction
order of maturity: Full, Draft, and Proposed, as well as Experimental.
Informational RFC are not addressed. RFCs that have been obsoleted by
either newer versions or as they have transitioned through the standards
process are not covered.
Please note that a side effect of this choice of methodology is that This document is part of a document set aiming to document all usage of
some protocols that are defined by a series of RFC's that are of different IPv4 addresses in IETF standards. In an effort to have the information
levels of standards maturity are covered in different spots in the in a manageable form, it has been broken into 7 documents conforming
document. Likewise other natural groupings (i.e. MIBs, SMTP extensions, to the current IETF areas (Application, Internet, Management &
IP over FOO, PPP, DNS, etc.) could easily be imagined. Operations, Routing, Security, Sub-IP and Transport).
2.1 Scope This specific document focuses on usage of IPv4 addresses within the
Internet area.
The procedure used in this investigation is an exhaustive reading of the For a full introduction, please see the intro[1] draft.
applicable RFC's. This task involves reading approximately 25000 pages
of protocol specifications. To compound this, it was more than a process
of simple reading. It was necessary to attempt to understand the purpose
and functionality of each protocol in order to make a proper determination
of IPv4 reliability. The author has made ever effort to make this effort
and the resulting document as complete as possible, but it is likely that
some subtle (or perhaps not so subtle) dependence was missed. The author
encourage those familiar (designers, implementers or anyone who has an
intimate knowledge) with any protocol to review the appropriate sections
and make comments.
2.2 Document Organization Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
The rest of the document sections are described below. 2.0 Document Organization
Sections 3, 4, 5, and 6 each describe the raw analysis of Full, Draft, The following sections 3, 4, 5, and 6 each describe the raw analysis
and Proposed Standards, and Experimental RFCs. Each RFC is discussed in of Full, Draft, and Proposed Standards, and Experimental RFCs. Each
its turn starting with RFC 1 and ending with RFC 3247. The comments for RFC is discussed in turn starting with RFC 1 and ending with RFC 3247.
each RFC is "raw" in nature. That is, each RFC is discussed in a vacuum The comments for each RFC are "raw" in nature. That is, each RFC is
and problems or issues discussed do not "look ahead" to see if the discussed in a vacuum and problems or issues discussed do not "look
problems have already been fixed. ahead" to see if any of the issues raised have already been fixed.
Section 7 is an analysis of the data presented in Sections 3, 4, 5, and Section 7 is an analysis of the data presented in Sections 3, 4, 5,
6. It is here that all of the results are considered as a whole and the and 6. It is here that all of the results are considered as a whole
problems that have been resolved in later RFCs are correlated. and the problems that have been resolved in later RFCs are correlated.
3.0 Full Standards 3.0 Full Standards
Full Internet Standards (most commonly simply referred to as "Standards") Full Internet Standards (most commonly simply referred to as
are fully mature protocol specification that are widely implemented and "Standards") are fully mature protocol specification that are widely
used throughout the Internet. implemented and used throughout the Internet.
3.01 Internet Protocol. RFC0791, RFC0950, RFC0919, RFC0922, RFC792, RFC1112
3.01.1 RFC 791 defines IPv4 and will be replaced by the IPv6 specifications. 3.01 Internet Protocol. RFC0791, RFC0950, RFC0919, RFC0922, RFC792,
3.01.2 RFC 950 specifies IPv4 subnetting and will be replaced by the IPv6 3.01.1 RFC 791 defines IPv4 and will be replaced by the IPv6
specifications. specifications.
3.01.2 RFC 950 specifies IPv4 subnetting and will be replaced by the
IPv6 specifications.
3.01.3 RFC 919 is not online and is unavailable for review. 3.01.3 RFC 919 is not online and is unavailable for review.
3.01.4 RFC 922 specifies how broadcasts should be treated in the presence of 3.01.4 RFC 922 specifies how broadcasts should be treated in the
subnets. The techniques of this document will be replaced by the IPv6 presence of subnets. The techniques of this document will be replaced
specifications. by the IPv6 specifications.
3.01.5 RFC 792 defines ICMP. The specification of ICMPv6 will serve as an 3.01.5 RFC 792 defines ICMP. The specification of ICMPv6 will serve
update. as an update.
3.01.6 RFC 1112 defines IP multicast. A similar updated version for IPv6 3.01.6 RFC 1112 defines IP multicast. A similar updated version for
multicasting must be written. IPv6 multicasting must be written.
3.02 Domain Name System. RFC1034, RFC1035 3.02 Domain Name System. RFC1034, RFC1035
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
3.02.1 RFC 1034 Domain Concepts and Facilities 3.02.1 RFC 1034 Domain Concepts and Facilities
In Section 3.6. Resource Records the definition of A records is: In Section 3.6. Resource Records the definition of A records is:
RDATA which is the type and sometimes class dependent data RDATA which is the type and sometimes class dependent data
which describes the resource: which describes the resource:
A For the IN class, a 32 bit IP address A For the IN class, a 32 bit IP address
skipping to change at line 230 skipping to change at page 10, line ?
the host. For example, a request for the host name the host. For example, a request for the host name
corresponding to IP address 1.2.3.4 looks for PTR RRs for corresponding to IP address 1.2.3.4 looks for PTR RRs for
domain name "4.3.2.1.IN-ADDR.ARPA". domain name "4.3.2.1.IN-ADDR.ARPA".
There are, of course, numerous examples of IPv4 addresses scattered There are, of course, numerous examples of IPv4 addresses scattered
throughout the document. There is currently a large debate ongoing throughout the document. There is currently a large debate ongoing
in the DNS community over the use of A6 or AAAA record types for the in the DNS community over the use of A6 or AAAA record types for the
resolution of IPv6 addresses. The fact that current A records are resolution of IPv6 addresses. The fact that current A records are
insufficient to support IPv6 is not unknown to the Internet community. insufficient to support IPv6 is not unknown to the Internet community.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
3.02.2 RFC 1035 DOMAIN NAMES - IMPLEMENTATION AND SPECIFICATION 3.02.2 RFC 1035 DOMAIN NAMES - IMPLEMENTATION AND SPECIFICATION
Section 3.4.1. A RDATA format defines the format for A records: Section 3.4.1. A RDATA format defines the format for A records:
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
| ADDRESS | | ADDRESS |
+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+ +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
where: where:
skipping to change at line 280 skipping to change at page 10, line ?
The WKS record is used to describe the well known services The WKS record is used to describe the well known services
supported by a particular protocol on a particular internet supported by a particular protocol on a particular internet
address. The PROTOCOL field specifies an IP protocol number, address. The PROTOCOL field specifies an IP protocol number,
and the bit map has one bit per port of the specified protocol. and the bit map has one bit per port of the specified protocol.
The first bit corresponds to port 0, the second to port 1, etc. The first bit corresponds to port 0, the second to port 1, etc.
If the bit map does not include a bit for a protocol of If the bit map does not include a bit for a protocol of
interest, that bit is assumed zero. The appropriate values and interest, that bit is assumed zero. The appropriate values and
mnemonics for ports and protocols are specified in [RFC-1010]. mnemonics for ports and protocols are specified in [RFC-1010].
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
For example, if PROTOCOL=TCP (6), the 26th bit corresponds to For example, if PROTOCOL=TCP (6), the 26th bit corresponds to
TCP port 25 (SMTP). If this bit is set, a SMTP server should be TCP port 25 (SMTP). If this bit is set, a SMTP server should be
listening on TCP port 25; if zero, SMTP service is not supported listening on TCP port 25; if zero, SMTP service is not supported
on the specified address. on the specified address.
The purpose of WKS RRs is to provide availability information for The purpose of WKS RRs is to provide availability information for
servers for TCP and UDP. If a server supports both TCP and UDP, servers for TCP and UDP. If a server supports both TCP and UDP,
or has multiple Internet addresses, then multiple WKS RRs are used. or has multiple Internet addresses, then multiple WKS RRs are
used.
WKS RRs cause no additional section processing. WKS RRs cause no additional section processing.
Section 3.5. IN-ADDR.ARPA domain describe reverse DNS lookups and Section 3.5. IN-ADDR.ARPA domain describe reverse DNS lookups and
is clearly IPv4 dependent. is clearly IPv4 dependent.
There are, of course, numerous examples of IPv4 addresses scattered There are, of course, numerous examples of IPv4 addresses scattered
throughout the document. throughout the document.
3.03 RFC 894 Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams over Ethernet 3.03 RFC 894 Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams over
networks Ethernet networks
This protocol specifically deals with the transmissions of IPv4 packets This protocol specifically deals with the transmissions of IPv4 packets
over Ethernet. A similar RFC must exist for transmission of IPv6 packets. over Ethernet. A similar RFC must exist for transmission of IPv6
packets.
3.04 RFC 895 Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams over experimental 3.04 RFC 895 Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams over
Ethernetnetworks experimental Ethernet networks
This protocol specifically deals with the transmissions of IPv4 packets This protocol specifically deals with the transmissions of IPv4 packets
over Ethernet. It is probably unnecessary to provide an updated RFC over Ethernet. It is probably unnecessary to provide an updated RFC
because of the unlikelihood of the existence of this layer 2 medium. because of the unlikelihood of the existence of this layer 2 medium.
3.05 RFC 1042 Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams over IEEE 802 3.05 RFC 1042 Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams over IEEE
networks 802 networks
This protocol specifically deals with the transmissions of IPv4 packets This protocol specifically deals with the transmissions of IPv4 packets
over Ethernet. A similar RFC must exist for transmission of IPv6 packets, over Ethernet. A similar RFC must exist for transmission of IPv6
particularly for 802.5 networks. packets, particularly for 802.5 networks.
3.06 RFC 891 DCN Local-Network Protocols 3.06 RFC 891 DCN Local-Network Protocols
There are many implicit assumptions about the use of IPv4 addresses in this There are many implicit assumptions about the use of IPv4 addresses in
document. It is unlikely to require any updates since no DCN networks are this document. It is unlikely to require any updates since no DCN
in existence. networks are in existence.
3.07 RFC 1044 Internet Protocol on Network System's HYPERchannel: Protocol Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
Specification
There are a variety of methods used in this standard to map IPv4 addresses 3.07 RFC 1044 Internet Protocol on Network System's HYPERchannel:
to 32 bits fields in the HYPERchannel headers. A new version of the Protocol Specification
standard
will need to be written do support IPv6 on HYPERchannel networks. There are a variety of methods used in this standard to map IPv4
addresses to 32 bits fields in the HYPERchannel headers. A new
version of the standard will need to be written do support IPv6 on
HYPERchannel networks.
3.08 RFC 1201 Transmitting IP traffic over ARCNET networks 3.08 RFC 1201 Transmitting IP traffic over ARCNET networks
The major concerns of this RFC with respect to IPv4 addresses occur in the The major concerns of this RFC with respect to IPv4 addresses occur
resolution of ARCnet 8bit addresses to IPv4 addresses in an "ARPlike" in the resolution of ARCnet 8bit addresses to IPv4 addresses in an
method. "ARPlike" method.
A similar method, very similar to this RFC, would need to be written to A similar method, very similar to this RFC, would need to be written
support to support IPv6 addresses over ARCNET.
IPv6 addresses over ARCNET.
3.09 RFC 1055 Nonstandard for transmission of IP datagrams over serial 3.09 RFC 1055 Nonstandard for transmission of IP datagrams over serial
lines: lines:
SLIP SLIP
This RFC is more of a analysis of the shortcomings of SLIP which is This RFC is more of a analysis of the shortcomings of SLIP which is
unsurprising. The introduction of PPP as a general replacement of SLIP unsurprising. The introduction of PPP as a general replacement of SLIP
has made this protocol essentially unused. No update need be considered. has made this protocol essentially unused. No update need be
considered.
3.10 RFC 1088 Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams over NetBIOS 3.10 RFC 1088 Standard for the transmission of IP datagrams over
networks NetBIOS networks
This RFC documents a technique to encapsulate IP packets inside NetBIOS This RFC documents a technique to encapsulate IP packets inside NetBIOS
packets. packets.
The technique presented of using NetBIOS names of the form IP.XX.XX.XX.XX The technique presented of using NetBIOS names of the form
will IP.XX.XX.XX.XX will not work for IPv6 addresses since the length of
not work for IPv6 addresses since the length of IPv6 addresses will not fit IPv6 addresses will not fit within the NetBIOS 15 octet name
within the NetBIOS 15 octet name limitation. A new scheme must be invented limitation. A new scheme must be invented to similarly encapsulate
to similarly encapsulate IPv6 packets. IPv6 packets.
3.11 The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP). RFC1661, RFC1662 3.11 The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP). RFC1661, RFC1662
3.11.1 RFC 1661 The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) 3.11.1 RFC 1661 The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP)
The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP)
3.11.2 RFC 1662 PPP in HDLC-like Framing 3.11.2 RFC 1662 PPP in HDLC-like Framing
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
3.12 RFC 1209 The Transmission of IP Datagrams over the SMDS Service 3.12 RFC 1209 The Transmission of IP Datagrams over the SMDS Service
This RFC defines running IPv4 and ARP over SMDS. The methods described This RFC defines running IPv4 and ARP over SMDS. The methods described
could easily be extended to support IPv6 packets, but a new RFC would be could easily be extended to support IPv6 packets, but a new RFC would
required. be required.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
4.0 Draft Standards 4.0 Draft Standards
Draft Standards represent the penultimate standard level in the IETF. Draft Standards represent the penultimate standard level in the IETF.
A protocol can only achieve draft standard when there are multiple, A protocol can only achieve draft standard when there are multiple,
independent, interoperable implementations. Draft Standards are usually independent, interoperable implementations. Draft Standards are
quite mature and widely used. usually quite mature and widely used.
4.01 RFC 951 Bootstrap Protocol (BOOTP) 4.01 RFC 951 Bootstrap Protocol (BOOTP)
This protocol is designed specifically for use with IPv4. A new version This protocol is designed specifically for use with IPv4. A new
will be required to support IPv6. For example: version will be required to support IPv6. For example:
Section 3. Packet Format Section 3. Packet Format
All numbers shown are decimal, unless indicated otherwise. The BOOTP All numbers shown are decimal, unless indicated otherwise. The
packet is enclosed in a standard IP [8] UDP [7] datagram. For BOOTP packet is enclosed in a standard IP [8] UDP [7] datagram. For
simplicity it is assumed that the BOOTP packet is never fragmented. simplicity it is assumed that the BOOTP packet is never fragmented.
Any numeric fields shown are packed in 'standard network byte order', Any numeric fields shown are packed in 'standard network byte
i.e. high order bits are sent first. order', i.e. high order bits are sent first.
In the IP header of a bootrequest, the client fills in its own IP In the IP header of a bootrequest, the client fills in its own IP
source address if known, otherwise zero. When the server address is source address if known, otherwise zero. When the server address is
unknown, the IP destination address will be the 'broadcast address' unknown, the IP destination address will be the 'broadcast address'
255.255.255.255. This address means 'broadcast on the local cable, 255.255.255.255. This address means 'broadcast on the local cable,
(I don't know my net number)' [4]. (I don't know my net number)' [4].
... ...
FIELD BYTES DESCRIPTION FIELD BYTES DESCRIPTION
skipping to change at line 424 skipping to change at page 10, line ?
returned in bootreply by server. returned in bootreply by server.
giaddr 4 gateway IP address, giaddr 4 gateway IP address,
used in optional cross-gateway booting. used in optional cross-gateway booting.
Since the packet format is a fixed 300 bytes in length, an updated Since the packet format is a fixed 300 bytes in length, an updated
version of the protocol could easily accommodate an additional 48 bytes version of the protocol could easily accommodate an additional 48 bytes
(4 IPV6 fields of 16 bytes to replace the existing 4 IPv4 fields of (4 IPV6 fields of 16 bytes to replace the existing 4 IPv4 fields of
4 bytes). 4 bytes).
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
4.02 RFC 1191 Path MTU discovery (IP-MTU) 4.02 RFC 1191 Path MTU discovery (IP-MTU)
The entire process of PMTU discovery is predicated on the use of the DF The entire process of PMTU discovery is predicated on the use of the DF
bit in the IPv4 header, an ICMP message (also IPv4 dependent) and TCP bit in the IPv4 header, an ICMP message (also IPv4 dependent) and TCP
MSS option. There clearly needs to an PMTUv6 functionality. MSS option. There clearly needs to an PMTUv6 functionality.
4.03 RFC 1534 Interoperation Between DHCP and BOOTP (DHCP-BOOTP) 4.03-zzzz RFC 1356 Multiprotocol Interconnect on X.25 and ISDN
There are IPv4 dependencies within this RFC.
4.04 RFC 1534 Interoperation Between DHCP and BOOTP (DHCP-BOOTP)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
4.04 RFC 1542 Clarifications and Extensions for the Bootstrap Protocol 4.05 RFC 1542 Clarifications and Extensions for the Bootstrap Protocol
There are no new issues other than those presented in Section 4.01 above. There are no new issues other than those presented in Section 4.01
above.
4.05 RFC 1629 Guidelines for OSI NSAP Allocation in the Internet 4.06 RFC 1629 Guidelines for OSI NSAP Allocation in the Internet
(OSI-NSAP) (OSI-NSAP)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
4.06 RFC 1762 The PPP DECnet Phase IV Control Protocol (DNCP) (PPP-DNCP) 4.07 RFC 1762 The PPP DECnet Phase IV Control Protocol (DNCP)
(PPP-DNCP)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
4.07 RFC 1989 PPP Link Quality Monitoring (PPP-LINK) 4.08 RFC 1989 PPP Link Quality Monitoring (PPP-LINK)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
4.08 RFC 1990 The PPP Multilink Protocol (MP) (PPP-MP) 4.09 RFC 1990 The PPP Multilink Protocol (MP) (PPP-MP)
Section 5.1.3. Endpoint Discriminator Option defines a Class header Section 5.1.3. Endpoint Discriminator Option defines a Class header
field. field.
Class Class
The Class field is one octet and indicates the identifier The Class field is one octet and indicates the identifier
address space. The most up-to-date values of the LCP Endpoint address space. The most up-to-date values of the LCP Endpoint
Discriminator Class field are specified in the most recent Discriminator Class field are specified in the most recent
"Assigned Numbers" RFC [7]. Current values are assigned as "Assigned Numbers" RFC [7]. Current values are assigned as
follows: follows:
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
0 Null Class 0 Null Class
1 Locally Assigned Address 1 Locally Assigned Address
2 Internet Protocol (IP) Address 2 Internet Protocol (IP) Address
3 IEEE 802.1 Globally Assigned MAC Address 3 IEEE 802.1 Globally Assigned MAC Address
4 PPP Magic-Number Block 4 PPP Magic-Number Block
5 Public Switched Network Directory Number 5 Public Switched Network Directory Number
A new class field needs to be defined by the IANA for IPv6 addresses. A new class field needs to be defined by the IANA for IPv6 addresses.
4.09 RFC 1994 PPP Challenge Handshake Authentication Protocol 4.10 RFC 1994 PPP Challenge Handshake Authentication Protocol
(CHAP) (PPP-CHAP) (CHAP) (PPP-CHAP)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
4.10 RFC 2067 IP over HIPPI (IP-HIPPI) 4.11 RFC 2067 IP over HIPPI (IP-HIPPI)
Section 5.1 Packet Formats contains the following excerpt: Section 5.1 Packet Formats contains the following excerpt:
EtherType (16 bits) SHALL be set as defined in Assigned Numbers [8]: EtherType (16 bits) SHALL be set as defined in Assigned Numbers [8]:
IP = 2048 ('0800'h), ARP = 2054 ('0806'h), RARP = 32,821 ('8035'h). IP = 2048 ('0800'h), ARP = 2054 ('0806'h), RARP = 32,821 ('8035'h).
Section 5.5 MTU has the following definition: Section 5.5 MTU has the following definition:
The MTU for HIPPI-SC LANs is 65280 bytes. The MTU for HIPPI-SC LANs is 65280 bytes.
This value was selected because it allows the IP packet to fit in one This value was selected because it allows the IP packet to fit in
64K byte buffer with up to 256 bytes of overhead. The overhead is 40 one 64K byte buffer with up to 256 bytes of overhead. The overhead
bytes at the present time; there are 216 bytes of room for expansion. is 40 bytes at the present time; there are 216 bytes of room for
expansion.
HIPPI-FP Header 8 bytes HIPPI-FP Header 8 bytes
HIPPI-LE Header 24 bytes HIPPI-LE Header 24 bytes
IEEE 802.2 LLC/SNAP Headers 8 bytes IEEE 802.2 LLC/SNAP Headers 8 bytes
Maximum IP packet size (MTU) 65280 bytes Maximum IP packet size (MTU) 65280 bytes
------------ ------------
Total 65320 bytes (64K - 216) Total 65320 bytes (64K - 216)
This definition is not applicable for IPv6 packets since packets can This definition is not applicable for IPv6 packets since packets can
be larger than the IPv4 limitation of 65280 bytes. be larger than the IPv4 limitation of 65280 bytes.
4.11 RFC 2131 Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) 4.12 RFC 2131 Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP)
This version of DHCP is highly assumptive of IPv4. Significant work This version of DHCP is highly assumptive of IPv4. Significant work
on DHCPv6 has been done and is ongoing. on DHCPv6 has been done and is ongoing.
4.12 RFC 2132 DHCP Options and BOOTP Vendor Extensions (DHCP-BOOTP) Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
4.13 RFC 2132 DHCP Options and BOOTP Vendor Extensions (DHCP-BOOTP)
This version of DHCP is highly assumptive of IPv4. Significant work This version of DHCP is highly assumptive of IPv4. Significant work
on DHCPv6 has been done and is ongoing. on DHCPv6 has been done and is ongoing.
4.13 RFC 2460 Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6) Specification (IPV6) 4.14-zzzz RFC 2332 NBMA Next Hop Resolution Protocol (NHRP)
There are IPv4 dependencies within this RFC.
4.15-zzzz RFC 2390 Inverse Address Resolution Protocol (IARP)
There are IPv4 dependencies within this RFC.
4.16-zzzz RFC 2427 Multiprotocol Interconnect over Frame Relay
There are IPv4 dependencies within this RFC.
4.17 RFC 2460 Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6) Specification (IPV6)
This document defines IPv6 and has no IPv4 issues. This document defines IPv6 and has no IPv4 issues.
4.14 RFC 2461 Neighbor Discovery for IP Version 6 (IPv6) (IPV6-ND) 4.18 RFC 2461 Neighbor Discovery for IP Version 6 (IPv6) (IPV6-ND)
This document defines an IPv6 related protocol and has no IPv4 issues. This document defines an IPv6 related protocol and has no IPv4 issues.
4.15 RFC 2462 IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration (IPV6-AUTO) 4.19 RFC 2462 IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration (IPV6-AUTO)
This document defines an IPv6 related protocol and has no IPv4 issues. This document defines an IPv6 related protocol and has no IPv4 issues.
4.16 RFC 2463 Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMPv6) for the Internet 4.20 RFC 2463 Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMPv6) for the Internet
Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Specification (ICMPv6) Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Specification (ICMPv6)
This document defines an IPv6 related protocol and has no IPv4 issues. This document defines an IPv6 related protocol and has no IPv4 issues.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
5.0 Proposed Standards 5.0 Proposed Standards
Proposed Standards are introductory level documents. There are no Proposed Standards are introductory level documents. There are no
requirements for even a single implementation. In many cases Proposed requirements for even a single implementation. In many cases Proposed
are never implemented or advanced in the IETF standards process. They are never implemented or advanced in the IETF standards process. They
therefore are often just proposed ideas that are presented to the Internet therefore are often just proposed ideas that are presented to the
community. Sometimes flaws are exposed or they are one of many competing Internet community. Sometimes flaws are exposed or they are one of
solutions to problems. In these later cases, no discussion is presented many competing solutions to problems. In these later cases, no
as it would not serve the purpose of this discussion. discussion is presented as it would not serve the purpose of this
discussion.
5.01 RFC 1234 Tunneling IPX traffic through IP networks (IPX-IP) 5.01 RFC 1234 Tunneling IPX traffic through IP networks (IPX-IP)
The section "Unicast Address Mappings" has the following text: The section "Unicast Address Mappings" has the following text:
For implementations of this memo, the first two octets of the host For implementations of this memo, the first two octets of the host
number will always be zero and the last four octets will be the number will always be zero and the last four octets will be the
node's four octet IP address. This makes address mapping trivial for node's four octet IP address. This makes address mapping trivial
unicast transmissions: the first two octets of the host number are for unicast transmissions: the first two octets of the host number
discarded, leaving the normal four octet IP address. The are discarded, leaving the normal four octet IP address. The
encapsulation code should use this IP address as the destination encapsulation code should use this IP address as the destination
address of the UDP/IP tunnel packet. address of the UDP/IP tunnel packet.
This mapping will not be able to work with IPv6 addresses. This mapping will not be able to work with IPv6 addresses.
There are also numerous discussions on systems keeping a "peer list" There are also numerous discussions on systems keeping a "peer list"
to map between IP and IPX addresses. The specifics are not discussed to map between IP and IPX addresses. The specifics are not discussed
in the document and are left to the individual implementation. in the document and are left to the individual implementation.
The section "Maximum Transmission Unit" The section "Maximum Transmission Unit"
Although larger IPX packets are possible, the standard maximum Although larger IPX packets are possible, the standard maximum
transmission unit for IPX is 576 octets. Consequently, 576 octets is transmission unit for IPX is 576 octets. Consequently, 576 octets
the recommended default maximum transmission unit for IPX packets is the recommended default maximum transmission unit for IPX packets
being sent with this encapsulation technique. With the eight octet being sent with this encapsulation technique. With the eight octet
UDP header and the 20 octet IP header, the resulting IP packets will UDP header and the 20 octet IP header, the resulting IP packets will
be 604 octets long. Note that this is larger than the 576 octet be 604 octets long. Note that this is larger than the 576 octet
maximum size IP implementations are required to accept [3]. Any IP maximum size IP implementations are required to accept [3]. Any IP
implementation supporting this encapsulation technique must be implementation supporting this encapsulation technique must be
capable of receiving 604 octet IP packets. capable of receiving 604 octet IP packets.
As improvements in protocols and hardware allow for larger, As improvements in protocols and hardware allow for larger,
unfragmented IP transmission units, the 576 octet maximum IPX packet unfragmented IP transmission units, the 576 octet maximum IPX packet
size may become a liability. For this reason, it is recommended that size may become a liability. For this reason, it is recommended
the IPX maximum transmission unit size be configurable in that the IPX maximum transmission unit size be configurable in
implementations of this memo. implementations of this memo.
also has some implications on IP addressing. also has some implications on IP addressing.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
5.02 RFC 1256 ICMP Router Discovery Messages (ICMP-ROUT) 5.02 RFC 1256 ICMP Router Discovery Messages (ICMP-ROUT)
This RFC documents a protocol that is very specific to IPv4 and a This RFC documents a protocol that is very specific to IPv4 and a
successor will be needed to provide the functionality. successor will be needed to provide the functionality.
5.03 RFC 1277 Encoding Network Addresses to Support Operation 5.03 RFC 1277 Encoding Network Addresses to Support Operation
over Non-OSI Lower Layers over Non-OSI Lower Layers
Section 4.5 TCP/IP (RFC 1006) Network Specific Format states: Section 4.5 TCP/IP (RFC 1006) Network Specific Format states:
skipping to change at line 614 skipping to change at page 14, line 39
which is defined here as ``transport set'' that indicates what kind of which is defined here as ``transport set'' that indicates what kind of
IP-based transport protocols is used. This is a decimal number from IP-based transport protocols is used. This is a decimal number from
0-65535 which is really a 16-bit flag word. 1 is TCP, 2 is UDP. 0-65535 which is really a 16-bit flag word. 1 is TCP, 2 is UDP.
Further values of this code are assigned by the IANA. If the transport Further values of this code are assigned by the IANA. If the transport
set is not there or no bits are set, it means ``default'' which is set is not there or no bits are set, it means ``default'' which is
TCP. This is encoded in 5 digits. TCP. This is encoded in 5 digits.
For example, the IP Address 10.0.0.6 with port 9 over UDP is encoded For example, the IP Address 10.0.0.6 with port 9 over UDP is encoded
as: as:
____________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________
|Part______|_|_____IDP_________|____________________DSP____________________| |Part_____|_|_____IDP_________|___________________DSP__________________|
_ _
|Component_|_|AFI__|___IDI_____|Prefix_|___IP_Address_____|_Port__|_T_Set__| |Component|_|AFI__|___IDI_____|Prefix|___IP_Address____|_Port__|_T_Set_|
_ _
|Octet_____|_|____|____________|_1-2___|______3-14________|_15-19_|_20-24__| |Octet____|_|____|____________|_1-2__|______3-14_______|_15-19_|_20-24_|
_ _
|Value_____|T|elex_|007_28722__|__03___|_010_000_000_006__|_00009_|_00002__| |Value____|T|elex_|007_28722__|__03__|_010_000_000_006_|_00009_|_00002_|
__ __
|Cncrt_Dec_|_|54___|007_28722__|__03___|_010_000_000_006__|_00009_|_00002__| |Cncrt_Dec|_|54___|007_28722__|__03__|_010_000_000_006_|_00009_|_00002_|
_ _
|Cncrt_Bin_|_|54___|00_72_87_22_|_03___|01_00_00_00_00_06_|00_00_9|0_00_02_| |Cncrt_Bin|_|54___|00_72_87_22_|_03__|01_00_00_00_00_06|00_00_9|0_00_02|
_ _
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
This 12 octet field for decimal versions of IP addresses is insufficient This 12 octet field for decimal versions of IP addresses is
for a decimal version of IPv6 addresses. It is possible to define a new insufficient for a decimal version of IPv6 addresses. It is possible
encoding using the 20 digit long IP Address + Port + Transport Set fields to define a new encoding using the 20 digit long IP Address + Port +
in order to accommodate a binary version of an IPv6 address, port number Transport Set fields in order to accommodate a binary version of an
and Transport Set. There are several schemes that could be envisioned. IPv6 address, port number and Transport Set. There are several
schemes that could be envisioned.
5.04 RFC 1332 The PPP Internet Protocol Control Protocol (IPCP) 5.04 RFC 1332 The PPP Internet Protocol Control Protocol (IPCP)
(PPP-IPCP) (PPP-IPCP)
This document defines a protocol for devices to assign IPv4 addresses This document defines a protocol for devices to assign IPv4 addresses
to PPP clients once PPP negotiation is completed. Section 3. IPCP to PPP clients once PPP negotiation is completed. Section 3. IPCP
Configuration Options defines the following: Configuration Options defines the following:
The most up-to-date values of the IPCP Option Type field are specified The most up-to-date values of the IPCP Option Type field are specified
in the most recent "Assigned Numbers" RFC [6]. Current values are in the most recent "Assigned Numbers" RFC [6]. Current values are
skipping to change at line 656 skipping to change at page 15, line 35
2 IP-Compression-Protocol 2 IP-Compression-Protocol
3 IP-Address 3 IP-Address
3.1. IP-Addresses 3.1. IP-Addresses
Description Description
The use of the Configuration Option IP-Addresses has been The use of the Configuration Option IP-Addresses has been
deprecated. It has been determined through implementation deprecated. It has been determined through implementation
experience that it is difficult to ensure negotiation convergence experience that it is difficult to ensure negotiation convergence
in all cases using this option. RFC 1172 [7] provides information in all cases using this option. RFC 1172 [7] provides
for implementations requiring backwards compatibility. The IP- information for implementations requiring backwards
Address Configuration Option replaces this option, and its use is compatibility. The IP-Address Configuration Option replaces
preferred. this option, and its use is preferred.
This option SHOULD NOT be sent in a Configure-Request if a This option should not be sent in a Configure-Request if a
Configure-Request has been received which includes either an IP- Configure-Request has been received which includes either an IP-
Addresses or IP-Address option. This option MAY be sent if a Addresses or IP-Address option. This option MAY be sent if a
Configure-Reject is received for the IP-Address option, or a Configure-Reject is received for the IP-Address option, or a
Configure-Nak is received with an IP-Addresses option as an Configure-Nak is received with an IP-Addresses option as an
appended option. appended option.
Support for this option MAY be removed after the IPCP protocol Support for this option MAY be removed after the IPCP protocol
status advances to Internet Draft Standard. status advances to Internet Draft Standard.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
3.3. IP-Address 3.3. IP-Address
Description Description
This Configuration Option provides a way to negotiate the IP This Configuration Option provides a way to negotiate the IP
address to be used on the local end of the link. It allows the address to be used on the local end of the link. It allows the
sender of the Configure-Request to state which IP-address is sender of the Configure-Request to state which IP-address is
desired, or to request that the peer provide the information. The desired, or to request that the peer provide the information.
peer can provide this information by NAKing the option, and The peer can provide this information by NAKing the option, and
returning a valid IP-address. returning a valid IP-address.
If negotiation about the remote IP-address is required, and the If negotiation about the remote IP-address is required, and the
peer did not provide the option in its Configure-Request, the peer did not provide the option in its Configure-Request, the
option SHOULD be appended to a Configure-Nak. The value of the option should be appended to a Configure-Nak. The value of the
IP-address given must be acceptable as the remote IP-address, or IP-address given must be acceptable as the remote IP-address, or
indicate a request that the peer provide the information. indicate a request that the peer provide the information.
By default, no IP address is assigned. By default, no IP address is assigned.
A summary of the IP-Address Configuration Option format is shown A summary of the IP-Address Configuration Option format is shown
below. The fields are transmitted from left to right. below. The fields are transmitted from left to right.
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
skipping to change at line 720 skipping to change at page 17, line 5
The four octet IP-Address is the desired local address of the The four octet IP-Address is the desired local address of the
sender of a Configure-Request. If all four octets are set to sender of a Configure-Request. If all four octets are set to
zero, it indicates a request that the peer provide the IP-Address zero, it indicates a request that the peer provide the IP-Address
information. information.
Default Default
No IP address is assigned. No IP address is assigned.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
It is clearly designed to allow new Option Types to be added and should It is clearly designed to allow new Option Types to be added and should
offer no problems for use with IPv6 once appropriate options have been offer no problems for use with IPv6 once appropriate options have been
defined. defined.
5.05 RFC 1377 The PPP OSI Network Layer Control Protocol (OSINLCP) 5.05 RFC 1377 The PPP OSI Network Layer Control Protocol (OSINLCP)
(PPP-OSINLC) (PPP-OSINLC)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
5.06 RFC 1378 The PPP AppleTalk Control Protocol (ATCP) (PPP-ATCP) 5.06 RFC 1378 The PPP AppleTalk Control Protocol (ATCP) (PPP-ATCP)
skipping to change at line 761 skipping to change at page 18, line 5
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
5.11 RFC 1618 PPP over ISDN (PPP-ISDN) 5.11 RFC 1618 PPP over ISDN (PPP-ISDN)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
5.12 RFC 1663 PPP Reliable Transmission (PPP-TRANS) 5.12 RFC 1663 PPP Reliable Transmission (PPP-TRANS)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
5.13 RFC 1752 The Recommendation for the IP Next Generation Protocol 5.13 RFC 1752 The Recommendation for the IP Next Generation Protocol
(IPNG) (IPNG)
This document defines a roadmap for IPv6 development and is not relevant This document defines a roadmap for IPv6 development and is not
to this discussion. relevant to this discussion.
5.14 RFC 1755 ATM Signaling Support for IP over ATM (ATM) 5.14 RFC 1755 ATM Signaling Support for IP over ATM (ATM)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
5.15 RFC 1763 The PPP Banyan Vines Control Protocol (BVCP) (BVCP) 5.15 RFC 1763 The PPP Banyan Vines Control Protocol (BVCP) (BVCP)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
5.16 RFC 1764 The PPP XNS IDP Control Protocol (XNSCP) (XNSCP) 5.16 RFC 1764 The PPP XNS IDP Control Protocol (XNSCP) (XNSCP)
skipping to change at line 799 skipping to change at page 19, line 5
5.19 RFC 1981 Path MTU Discovery for IP version 6 MTU-IPV6 5.19 RFC 1981 Path MTU Discovery for IP version 6 MTU-IPV6
This protocol describes an IPv6 related protocol and is not discussed This protocol describes an IPv6 related protocol and is not discussed
in this document. in this document.
5.20 RFC 1982 Serial Number Arithmetic (SNA) 5.20 RFC 1982 Serial Number Arithmetic (SNA)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
5.21 RFC 1995 Incremental Zone Transfer in DNS (DNS-IZT) 5.21 RFC 1995 Incremental Zone Transfer in DNS (DNS-IZT)
Although the examples used in this document use IPv4 adddresses, Although the examples used in this document use IPv4 addresses,
(i.e. A records) there is nothing in the protocol to preclude (i.e. A records) there is nothing in the protocol to preclude
full and proper functionality using IPv6. full and proper functionality using IPv6.
5.22 RFC 1996 A Mechanism for Prompt Notification of Zone Changes (DNS 5.22 RFC 1996 A Mechanism for Prompt Notification of Zone Changes (DNS
NOTIFY) (DNS-NOTIFY) NOTIFY) (DNS-NOTIFY)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
5.23 RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support (MOBILEIPSU) 5.23 RFC 2002 IP Mobility Support (MOBILEIPSU)
skipping to change at line 844 skipping to change at page 20, line 5
5.27 RFC 2022 Support for Multicast over UNI 3.0/3.1 based ATM 5.27 RFC 2022 Support for Multicast over UNI 3.0/3.1 based ATM
Networks (MULTI-UNI) Networks (MULTI-UNI)
This protocol specifically maps IPv4 multicast and a new version is This protocol specifically maps IPv4 multicast and a new version is
required to support IPv6 multicast. required to support IPv6 multicast.
5.28 RFC 2043 The PPP SNA Control Protocol (SNACP) (PPP-SNACP) 5.28 RFC 2043 The PPP SNA Control Protocol (SNACP) (PPP-SNACP)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
5.29 RFC 2097 The PPP NetBIOS Frames Control Protocol (NBFCP) 5.29 RFC 2097 The PPP NetBIOS Frames Control Protocol (NBFCP)
(PPP-NBFCP) (PPP-NBFCP)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
5.30 RFC 2113 IP Router Alert Option (ROUT-ALERT) 5.30 RFC 2113 IP Router Alert Option (ROUT-ALERT)
This document provides a new mechanism for IPv4. It is expected that This document provides a new mechanism for IPv4. It is expected that
a similar functionality will be included in IPv6. a similar functionality will be included in IPv6.
skipping to change at line 883 skipping to change at page 20, line 46
document is designed for IPv4 only. It is only later in the document is designed for IPv4 only. It is only later in the
document that it is implicitly stated, as in: document that it is implicitly stated, as in:
ar$spln - length in octets of the source protocol address. Value ar$spln - length in octets of the source protocol address. Value
range is 0 or 4 (decimal). For IPv4 ar$spln is 4. range is 0 or 4 (decimal). For IPv4 ar$spln is 4.
ar$tpln - length in octets of the target protocol address. Value ar$tpln - length in octets of the target protocol address. Value
range is 0 or 4 (decimal). For IPv4 ar$tpln is 4. range is 0 or 4 (decimal). For IPv4 ar$tpln is 4.
and and
For backward compatibility with previous implementations, a null IPv4 For backward compatibility with previous implementations, a null
protocol address may be received with length = 4 and an allocated IPv4 protocol address may be received with length = 4 and an
address in storage set to the value 0.0.0.0. Receiving stations MUST allocated address in storage set to the value 0.0.0.0. Receiving
be liberal in accepting this format of a null IPv4 address. However, stations must be liberal in accepting this format of a null IPv4
on transmitting an ATMARP or InATMARP packet, a null IPv4 address address. However, on transmitting an ATMARP or InATMARP packet, a
MUST only be indicated by the length set to zero and MUST have no null IPv4 address must only be indicated by the length set to zero
storage allocated. and must have no storage allocated.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
A new specification for IPv6 must be defined. A new specification for IPv6 must be defined.
5.35 RFC 2226 IP Broadcast over ATM Networks 5.35 RFC 2226 IP Broadcast over ATM Networks
This document is limited to IPv4 multicasting. A new specification This document is limited to IPv4 multicasting. A new specification
for IPv6 must be defined. for IPv6 must be defined.
5.36 RFC 2236 Internet Group Management Protocol, Version 2 (IGMP) 5.36 RFC 2236 Internet Group Management Protocol, Version 2 (IGMP)
skipping to change at line 934 skipping to change at page 21, line 50
Length is (n * 4) and the value is an array of n IP addresses, Length is (n * 4) and the value is an array of n IP addresses,
each four bytes in length. The maximum number of addresses is 5 each four bytes in length. The maximum number of addresses is 5
and therefore the maximum length value is 20. The list contains and therefore the maximum length value is 20. The list contains
the addresses of n Nearest NetWare/IP servers. the addresses of n Nearest NetWare/IP servers.
PRIMARY_DSS (code 11) PRIMARY_DSS (code 11)
Length of 4, and the value is a single IP address. This field Length of 4, and the value is a single IP address. This field
identifies the Primary Domain SAP/RIP Service server (DSS) for identifies the Primary Domain SAP/RIP Service server (DSS) for
this NetWare/IP domain. NetWare/IP administration utility uses this NetWare/IP domain. NetWare/IP administration utility uses
this value as Primary DSS server when configuring a secondary DSS this value as Primary DSS server when configuring a secondary
server. DSS server.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
5.39 RFC 2290 Mobile-IPv4 Configuration Option for PPP IPCP 5.39 RFC 2290 Mobile-IPv4 Configuration Option for PPP IPCP
This protocol is IPv4 specific. It is expected that similar This protocol is IPv4 specific. It is expected that similar
methods will be developed for Mobile IPv6. methods will be developed for Mobile IPv6.
5.40 RFC 2308 Negative Caching of DNS Queries (DNS NCACHE) 5.40 RFC 2308 Negative Caching of DNS Queries (DNS NCACHE)
(DNS-NCACHE) (DNS-NCACHE)
Although there are numerous examples in this document that use Although there are numerous examples in this document that use
IPv4 "A" records, there is nothing in the protocol that limits IPv4 "A" records, there is nothing in the protocol that limits
its effectiveness to IPv4. its effectiveness to IPv4.
5.41 RFC 2331 ATM Signaling Support for IP over ATM - UNI Signaling 5.41 RFC 2331 ATM Signaling Support for IP over ATM - UNI Signaling
4.0 Update (UNI-SIG) 4.0 Update (UNI-SIG)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
5.42 RFC 2363 PPP Over FUNI (PPP-FUNI) 5.42-zzzz RFC 2333 NHRP Protocol Applicability
There are IPv4 dependencies within this RFC.
5.43-zzzz RFC 2335 A Distributed NHRP Service Using SCSP
There are IPv4 dependencies within this RFC.
5.44 RFC 2363 PPP Over FUNI (PPP-FUNI)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
5.43 RFC 2364 PPP Over AAL5 (PPP-AAL) 5.45 RFC 2364 PPP Over AAL5 (PPP-AAL)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
5.44 RFC 2371 Transaction Internet Protocol Version 3.0 TIPV3 5.46 RFC 2371 Transaction Internet Protocol Version 3.0 TIPV3
This document states: This document states:
TIP transaction manager addresses take the form: TIP transaction manager addresses take the form:
<hostport><path> <hostport><path>
The <hostport> component comprises: The <hostport> component comprises:
<host>[:<port>] <host>[:<port>]
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
where <host> is either a <dns name> or an <ip address>; and <port> is where <host> is either a <dns name> or an <ip address>; and <port>
a decimal number specifying the port at which the transaction manager is a decimal number specifying the port at which the transaction
(or proxy) is listening for requests to establish TIP connections. If manager (or proxy) is listening for requests to establish TIP
the port number is omitted, the standard TIP port number (3372) is connections. If the port number is omitted, the standard TIP port
used. number (3372) is used.
A <dns name> is a standard name, acceptable to the domain name A <dns name> is a standard name, acceptable to the domain name
service. It must be sufficiently qualified to be useful to the service. It must be sufficiently qualified to be useful to the
receiver of the command. receiver of the command.
An <ip address> is an IP address, in the usual form: four decimal An <ip address> is an IP address, in the usual form: four decimal
numbers separated by period characters. numbers separated by period characters.
and further along it states: and further along it states:
skipping to change at line 1019 skipping to change at page 24, line 5
This format of <transaction string> may be used to express global This format of <transaction string> may be used to express global
transaction identifiers in terms of standard representations. transaction identifiers in terms of standard representations.
Examples for <NID> might be <iso> or <xopen>. e.g. Examples for <NID> might be <iso> or <xopen>. e.g.
tip://123.123.123.123/?urn:xopen:xid tip://123.123.123.123/?urn:xopen:xid
Note that Namespace Ids require registration. See [7] for details Note that Namespace Ids require registration. See [7] for details
on how to do this. on how to do this.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
ii. <transaction identifier> ii. <transaction identifier>
A sequence of printable ASCII characters (octets with values in the A sequence of printable ASCII characters (octets with values in
range 32 through 126 inclusive (excluding ":") representing a the range 32 through 126 inclusive (excluding ":") representing a
transaction identifier. In this non-standard case, it is the transaction identifier. In this non-standard case, it is the
combination of <transaction manager address> and <transaction combination of <transaction manager address> and <transaction
identifier> which ensures global uniqueness. e.g. identifier> which ensures global uniqueness. e.g.
tip://123.123.123.123/?transid1 tip://123.123.123.123/?transid1
It is not hard to assume that the production of an updated protocol It is not hard to assume that the production of an updated protocol
specification that supports IPv6 could be accomplished. specification that supports IPv6 could be accomplished.
5.45 RFC 2373 IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture, 5.47 RFC 2373 IP Version 6 Addressing Architecture,
This RFC documents IPv6 addressing and is not discussed in this This RFC documents IPv6 addressing and is not discussed in this
document. document.
5.46 RFC 2374 An IPv6 Aggregatable Global Unicast Address Format, 5.48 RFC 2374 An IPv6 Aggregatable Global Unicast Address Format,
This RFC documents IPv6 addressing and is not discussed in this This RFC documents IPv6 addressing and is not discussed in this
document. document.
5.47 RFC 2464 Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Ethernet Networks 5.49 RFC 2464 Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Ethernet Networks
This RFC documents a method for transmitting IPv6 packets over This RFC documents a method for transmitting IPv6 packets over
ethernet and is not considered in this discussion. ethernet and is not considered in this discussion.
5.48 RFC 2470 Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Token Ring 5.50 RFC 2470 Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Token Ring
Networks Networks
This RFC documents a method for transmitting IPv6 packets over This RFC documents a method for transmitting IPv6 packets over
token ring and is not considered in this discussion. token ring and is not considered in this discussion.
5.49 RFC 2472 IP Version 6 over PPP (IPv6-PPP) 5.51 RFC 2472 IP Version 6 over PPP (IPv6-PPP)
This RFC documents a method for transmitting IPv6 packets over This RFC documents a method for transmitting IPv6 packets over
PPP and is not considered in this discussion. PPP and is not considered in this discussion.
5.50 RFC 2473 Generic Packet Tunneling in IPv6 Specification 5.52 RFC 2473 Generic Packet Tunneling in IPv6 Specification
This RFC documents an IPv6 aware protocol and is not considered This RFC documents an IPv6 aware protocol and is not considered
in this discussion. in this discussion.
5.51 RFC 2484 PPP LCP Internationalization Configuration Option Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
5.53 RFC 2484 PPP LCP Internationalization Configuration Option
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
5.52 RFC 2485 DHCP Option for The Open Group's User 5.54 RFC 2485 DHCP Option for The Open Group's User
Authentication Protocol Authentication Protocol
This document defines extensions for the IPv4 only version of This document defines extensions for the IPv4 only version of
DHCP and it is expected that similar options will be present in DHCP and it is expected that similar options will be present in
DHCPv6. DHCPv6.
5.53 RFC 2486 The Network Access Identifier (NAI) 5.55 RFC 2486 The Network Access Identifier (NAI)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
5.54 RFC 2491 IPv6 over Non-Broadcast Multiple Access 5.56 RFC 2491 IPv6 over Non-Broadcast Multiple Access
(NBMA) networks (IPv6-NBMA) (NBMA) networks (IPv6-NBMA)
This RFC documents a method for transmitting IPv6 packets over This RFC documents a method for transmitting IPv6 packets over
NBMA networks and is not considered in this discussion. NBMA networks and is not considered in this discussion.
5.55 RFC 2492 IPv6 over ATM Networks (IPv6ATMNET) 5.57 RFC 2492 IPv6 over ATM Networks (IPv6ATMNET)
This RFC documents a method for transmitting IPv6 packets over This RFC documents a method for transmitting IPv6 packets over
ATM networks and is not considered in this discussion. ATM networks and is not considered in this discussion.
5.56 RFC 2497 Transmission of IPv6 Packets over ARCnet 5.58 RFC 2497 Transmission of IPv6 Packets over ARCnet
Networks Networks
This RFC documents a method for transmitting IPv6 packets over This RFC documents a method for transmitting IPv6 packets over
ARCnet networks and is not considered in this discussion. ARCnet networks and is not considered in this discussion.
5.57 RFC 2507 IP Header Compression 5.59 RFC 2507 IP Header Compression
This protocol is both IPv4 and IPv6 aware. This protocol is both IPv4 and IPv6 aware.
5.58 RFC 2526 Reserved IPv6 Subnet Anycast Addresses 5.60 RFC 2526 Reserved IPv6 Subnet Anycast Addresses
This RFC documents IPv6 addressing and is not discussed in this This RFC documents IPv6 addressing and is not discussed in this
document. document.
5.59 RFC 2529 Transmission of IPv6 over IPv4 Domains without Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
5.61 RFC 2529 Transmission of IPv6 over IPv4 Domains without
Explicit Tunnels Explicit Tunnels
This RFC documents IPv6 transmission methods and is not discussed This RFC documents IPv6 transmission methods and is not discussed
in this document. in this document.
5.60 RFC 2563 DHCP Option to Disable Stateless Auto-Configuration 5.62 RFC 2563 DHCP Option to Disable Stateless Auto-Configuration
in IPv4 Clients in IPv4 Clients
This document is only designated for IPv4. It is expected that This document is only designated for IPv4. It is expected that
similar functionality is available in DHCPv6. similar functionality is available in DHCPv6.
5.61 RFC 2590 Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Frame Relay 5.63 RFC 2590 Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Frame Relay
Networks Specification Networks Specification
This RFC documents IPv6 transmission method over Frame Relay and is This RFC documents IPv6 transmission method over Frame Relay and is
not discussed in this document. not discussed in this document.
5.62 RFC 2610 DHCP Options for Service Location Protocol 5.64-zzzz RFC 2601 ILMI-Based Server Discovery for ATMARP
There are IPv4 dependencies within this RFC.
5.65-zzzz RFC 2602 ILMI-Based Server Discovery for MARS
There are IPv4 dependencies within this RFC.
5.66-zzzz RFC 2603 ILMI-Based Server Discovery for NHRP
There are IPv4 dependencies within this RFC.
5.67 RFC 2610 DHCP Options for Service Location Protocol
This document is only designated for IPv4. It is expected that This document is only designated for IPv4. It is expected that
similar functionality is available in DHCPv6. similar functionality is available in DHCPv6.
5.63 RFC 2615 PPP over SONET/SDH 5.68 RFC 2615 PPP over SONET/SDH
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
5.64 RFC 2671 Extension Mechanisms for DNS (EDNS0) (EDNS0) 5.69 RFC 2671 Extension Mechanisms for DNS (EDNS0) (EDNS0)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
5.65 RFC 2672 Non-Terminal DNS Name Redirection Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
5.70 RFC 2672 Non-Terminal DNS Name Redirection
This document is only defined for IPv4 addresses. A similar This document is only defined for IPv4 addresses. A similar
specification for IPv6 addresses should be defined. specification for IPv6 addresses should be defined.
5.66 RFC 2673 Binary Labels in the Domain Name System (DNS) 5.71 RFC 2673 Binary Labels in the Domain Name System (DNS)
This document is only defined for IPv4 addresses. A similar This document is only defined for IPv4 addresses. A similar
specification for IPv6 addresses should be defined. specification for IPv6 addresses should be defined.
5.67 RFC 2675 IPv6 Jumbograms 5.72 RFC 2675 IPv6 Jumbograms
This document defines a IPv6 packet format and is therefore not This document defines a IPv6 packet format and is therefore not
discussed in this document. discussed in this document.
5.68 RFC 2686 The Multi-Class Extension to Multi-Link PPP 5.73-zzzz RFC 2684 Multiprotocol Encapsulation over ATM Adaptation
There are IPv4 dependencies within this RFC.
5.74 RFC 2686 The Multi-Class Extension to Multi-Link PPP
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
5.69 RFC 2687 PPP in a Real-time Oriented HDLC-like Framing 5.75 RFC 2687 PPP in a Real-time Oriented HDLC-like Framing
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
5.70 RFC 2688 Integrated Services Mappings for Low Speed Networks 5.76 RFC 2688 Integrated Services Mappings for Low Speed Networks
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
5.71 RFC 2710 Multicast Listener Discovery (MLD) for IPv6 5.77 RFC 2710 Multicast Listener Discovery (MLD) for IPv6
(MLD-IPv6) (MLD-IPv6)
This document defines an IPv6 specific protocol and is not discussed This document defines an IPv6 specific protocol and is not discussed
in this document. in this document.
5.72 RFC 2711 IPv6 Router Alert Option 5.78 RFC 2711 IPv6 Router Alert Option
This document defines an IPv6 specific protocol and is not discussed This document defines an IPv6 specific protocol and is not discussed
in this document. in this document.
5.73 RFC 2728 The Transmission of IP Over the Vertical Blanking Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
5.79 RFC 2728 The Transmission of IP Over the Vertical Blanking
Interval of a Television Signal Interval of a Television Signal
The following data format is defined: The following data format is defined:
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0| group | uncompressed IP header (20 bytes) | |0| group | uncompressed IP header (20 bytes) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +
| | | |
skipping to change at line 1201 skipping to change at page 28, line 35
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +
| | | |
: .... : : .... :
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| CRC | | CRC |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
This protocol is IPv4 dependent. Updates must be made to support This protocol is IPv4 dependent. Updates must be made to support
IPv6. IPv6.
5.74 RFC 2734 IPv4 over IEEE 1394 5.80 RFC 2734 IPv4 over IEEE 1394
This protocol is IPv4 only. A similar document must be defined for This protocol is IPv4 only. A similar document must be defined for
IPv6. IPv6.
5.75 RFC 2765 Stateless IP/ICMP Translation Algorithm (SIIT) 5.81-zzzz RFC 2735 NHRP Support for Virtual Private Networks
There are IPv4 dependencies within this RFC.
5.82 RFC 2765 Stateless IP/ICMP Translation Algorithm (SIIT)
(SIIT) (SIIT)
This protocol defines a method for IPv6 transition and is not This protocol defines a method for IPv6 transition and is not
discussed in this document. discussed in this document.
5.76 RFC 2766 Network Address Translation - Protocol 5.83 RFC 2766 Network Address Translation - Protocol
Translation (NAT-PT) (NAT-PT) Translation (NAT-PT) (NAT-PT)
This protocol defines a method for IPv6 transition and is not This protocol defines a method for IPv6 transition and is not
discussed in this document. discussed in this document.
5.77 RFC 2776 Multicast-Scope Zone Announcement Protocol (MZAP) Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
5.84 RFC 2776 Multicast-Scope Zone Announcement Protocol (MZAP)
(MZAP) (MZAP)
This protocol is both IPv4 and IPv6 aware and needs no changes. This protocol is both IPv4 and IPv6 aware and needs no changes.
5.78 RFC 2782 A DNS RR for specifying the location of services (DNS SRV) 5.85 RFC 2782 A DNS RR for specifying the location of services
(DNS-SRV) (DNS-SRV)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
5.79 RFC 2794 Mobile IP Network Access Identifier Extension for 5.86 RFC 2794 Mobile IP Network Access Identifier Extension for
IPv4 IPv4
This document defines an IPv4 specific protocol and a similar This document defines an IPv4 specific protocol and a similar
functionality must be defined for Mobile IPv6. functionality must be defined for Mobile IPv6.
5.80 RFC 2834 ARP and IP Broadcast over HIPPI-800 5.87 RFC 2834 ARP and IP Broadcast over HIPPI-800
This document uses the generic term "IP Address" in the text but This document uses the generic term "IP Address" in the text but
it also contains the text: it also contains the text:
The HARP message has several fields that have the following format The HARP message has several fields that have the following format
and values: and values:
Data sizes and field meaning: Data sizes and field meaning:
ar$hrd 16 bits Hardware type ar$hrd 16 bits Hardware type
ar$pro 16 bits Protocol type of the protocol fields below ar$pro 16 bits Protocol type of the protocol fields below
skipping to change at line 1265 skipping to change at page 30, line 4
ar$hrd - SHALL contain 28. (HIPARP) ar$hrd - SHALL contain 28. (HIPARP)
ar$pro - SHALL contain the IP protocol code 2048 (decimal). ar$pro - SHALL contain the IP protocol code 2048 (decimal).
ar$op - SHALL contain the operational value (decimal): ar$op - SHALL contain the operational value (decimal):
1 for HARP_REQUESTs 1 for HARP_REQUESTs
2 for HARP_REPLYs 2 for HARP_REPLYs
8 for InHARP_REQUESTs 8 for InHARP_REQUESTs
9 for InHARP_REPLYs 9 for InHARP_REPLYs
10 for HARP_NAK 10 for HARP_NAK
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
ar$pln - SHALL contain 4. ar$pln - SHALL contain 4.
and later: and later:
31 28 23 21 15 10 7 2 0 31 28 23 21 15 10 7 2 0
+-----+---------+-+-+-----------+---------+-----+---------+-----+ +-----+---------+-+-+-----------+---------+-----+---------+-----+
0 | 04 |1|0| 000 | 03 | 0 | 0 | 04 |1|0| 000 | 03 | 0 |
+---------------+-+-+---------------------+---------------+-----+ +---------------+-+-+---------------------+---------------+-----+
1 | 45 | 1 | 45 |
skipping to change at line 1316 skipping to change at page 31, line 5
17 | Target HIPPI Hardware Address bytes 1 - 4 | 17 | Target HIPPI Hardware Address bytes 1 - 4 |
+---------------------------------------------------------------+ +---------------------------------------------------------------+
18 | Target HIPPI Hardware Address bytes 5 - 8 | 18 | Target HIPPI Hardware Address bytes 5 - 8 |
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+ +---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
19 |Tgt HW byte 9-x| FILL | FILL | FILL | 19 |Tgt HW byte 9-x| FILL | FILL | FILL |
+---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+ +---------------+---------------+---------------+---------------+
HARP - InHARP Message HARP - InHARP Message
Which make this protocol only IPv4 aware. An update is required to Which make this protocol only IPv4 aware. An update is required to
support IPv6. support IPv6.
5.81 RFC 2835 IP and ARP over HIPPI-6400 (GSN) (GSN) Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
5.88 RFC 2835 IP and ARP over HIPPI-6400 (GSN) (GSN)
This document states: This document states:
The Ethertype value SHALL be set as defined in Assigned Numbers [18]: The Ethertype value SHALL be set as defined in Assigned Numbers [18]:
IP 0x0800 2048 (16 bits) IP 0x0800 2048 (16 bits)
This is IPv4 limited and as expected (after reviewing the previous This is IPv4 limited and as expected (after reviewing the previous
section) requires an update to support IPv6. There are numerous other section) requires an update to support IPv6. There are numerous other
points in the documents that confirms this assumption. points in the documents that confirms this assumption.
5.82 RFC 2855 DHCP for IEEE 1394 5.89 RFC 2855 DHCP for IEEE 1394
This document is only designated for IPv4. It is expected that This document is only designated for IPv4. It is expected that
similar functionality is available in DHCPv6. similar functionality is available in DHCPv6.
5.83 RFC 2874 DNS Extensions to Support IPv6 Address Aggregation 5.90 RFC 2874 DNS Extensions to Support IPv6 Address Aggregation
and Renumbering and Renumbering
This document defines a protocol to interact with IPv6 and is not This document defines a protocol to interact with IPv6 and is not
considered in this document. considered in this document.
5.84 RFC 2893 Transition Mechanisms for IPv6 Hosts and Routers 5.91 RFC 2893 Transition Mechanisms for IPv6 Hosts and Routers
(TRANS-IPV6) (TRANS-IPV6)
This document defines a transition mechanism for IPv6 and is not This document defines a transition mechanism for IPv6 and is not
considered in this document. considered in this document.
5.85 RFC 2915 The Naming Authority Pointer (NAPTR) DNS Resource 5.92 RFC 2915 The Naming Authority Pointer (NAPTR) DNS Resource
Record (NAPTR) Record (NAPTR)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
5.86 RFC 2916 E.164 number and DNS 5.93 RFC 2916 E.164 number and DNS
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
5.87 RFC 2937 The Name Service Search Option for DHCP 5.94 RFC 2937 The Name Service Search Option for DHCP
This document is only designated for IPv4. It is expected that This document is only designated for IPv4. It is expected that
similar functionality is available in DHCPv6. similar functionality is available in DHCPv6.
5.88 RFC 3004 The User Class Option for DHCP Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
5.95 RFC 3004 The User Class Option for DHCP
This document is only designated for IPv4. It is expected that This document is only designated for IPv4. It is expected that
similar functionality is available in DHCPv6. similar functionality is available in DHCPv6.
5.89 RFC 3011 The IPv4 Subnet Selection Option for DHCP 5.96 RFC 3011 The IPv4 Subnet Selection Option for DHCP
This document is specifically designed for IPv4. This document is specifically designed for IPv4.
5.90 RFC 3021 Using 31-Bit Prefixes on IPv4 Point-to-Point Links 5.97 RFC 3021 Using 31-Bit Prefixes on IPv4 Point-to-Point Links
This document is IPv4 specific and a similar technique could also This document is IPv4 specific and a similar technique could also
be defined for IPv6. be defined for IPv6.
5.91 RFC 3024 Reverse Tunneling for Mobile IP, revised 5.98 RFC 3024 Reverse Tunneling for Mobile IP, revised
This protocol assumes IPv4 addressing. An updated Mobile IPv6 This protocol assumes IPv4 addressing. An updated Mobile IPv6
specification should include this functionality. specification should include this functionality.
5.92 RFC 3046 DHCP Relay Agent Information Option 5.99 RFC 3046 DHCP Relay Agent Information Option
This document is only designated for IPv4. It is expected that This document is only designated for IPv4. It is expected that
similar functionality is available in DHCPv6. similar functionality is available in DHCPv6.
5.93 RFC 3056 Connection of IPv6 Domains via IPv4 Clouds 5.100 RFC 3056 Connection of IPv6 Domains via IPv4 Clouds
This is an IPv6 related document and is not discussed in this This is an IPv6 related document and is not discussed in this
document. document.
5.94 RFC 3068 An Anycast Prefix for 6to4 Relay Routers 5.101 RFC 3068 An Anycast Prefix for 6to4 Relay Routers
This is an IPv6 related document and is not discussed in this This is an IPv6 related document and is not discussed in this
document. document.
5.95 RFC 3074 DHC Load Balancing Algorithm 5.102 RFC 3074 DHC Load Balancing Algorithm
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
5.96 RFC 3077 A Link-Layer Tunneling Mechanism for Unidirectional 5.103 RFC 3077 A Link-Layer Tunneling Mechanism for Unidirectional
Links Links
This protocol is both IPv4 and IPv6 aware and needs no changes. This protocol is both IPv4 and IPv6 aware and needs no changes.
5.97 RFC 3115 Mobile IP Vendor/Organization-Specific Extensions Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
5.104 RFC 3115 Mobile IP Vendor/Organization-Specific Extensions
This is an enhancement for Mobile IPv4. It is expected that a This is an enhancement for Mobile IPv4. It is expected that a
similar capability will be in Mobile IPv6. similar capability will be in Mobile IPv6.
5.98 RFC 3145 L2TP Disconnect Cause Information 5.105 RFC 3145 L2TP Disconnect Cause Information
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
6.0 Experimental RFCs 6.0 Experimental RFCs
Experimental RFCs typically define protocols that do not have widescale Experimental RFCs typically define protocols that do not have widescale
implementation or usage on the Internet. They are often propriety in implementation or usage on the Internet. They are often propriety in
nature or used in limited arenas. They are documented to the Internet nature or used in limited arenas. They are documented to the Internet
community in order to allow potential interoperability or some other community in order to allow potential interoperability or some other
potential useful scenario. In a few cases they are presented as potential useful scenario. In a few cases they are presented as
alternatives to the mainstream solution to an acknowledged problem. alternatives to the mainstream solution to an acknowledged problem.
6.01 RFC 1183 New DNS RR Definitions (DNS-RR) 6.01 RFC 1183 New DNS RR Definitions (DNS-RR)
skipping to change at line 1450 skipping to change at page 35, line 5
6.05 RFC 1433 Directed ARP (DIR-ARP) 6.05 RFC 1433 Directed ARP (DIR-ARP)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
6.06 RFC 1464 Using the Domain Name System To Store Arbitrary String 6.06 RFC 1464 Using the Domain Name System To Store Arbitrary String
Attributes Attributes
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
6.07 RFC 1475 TP/IX: The Next Internet (TP-IX) 6.07 RFC 1475 TP/IX: The Next Internet (TP-IX)
This document defines IPv7 and has been abandoned by the IETF as a This document defines IPv7 and has been abandoned by the IETF as a
feasible design. It is not considered in this document. feasible design. It is not considered in this document.
6.08 RFC 1561 Use of ISO CLNP in TUBA Environments (CLNP-TUBA) 6.08 RFC 1561 Use of ISO CLNP in TUBA Environments (CLNP-TUBA)
This document defines the use of NSAPA addressing and does not This document defines the use of NSAPA addressing and does not
use any version of IP, so there are no IPv4 dependencies in this use any version of IP, so there are no IPv4 dependencies in this
protocol. protocol.
skipping to change at line 1498 skipping to change at page 36, line 5
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| NBMA length | NBMA address | | NBMA length | NBMA address |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |
| (variable length) | | (variable length) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Source and Destination IP Addresses Source and Destination IP Addresses
Respectively, these are the IP addresses of the NARP requestor and Respectively, these are the IP addresses of the NARP requestor and
the target terminal for which the NBMA address is desired. the target terminal for which the NBMA address is desired.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
and and
NARP Reply NARP Reply
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Version | Hop Count | Checksum | | Version | Hop Count | Checksum |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Code | Unused | | Type | Code | Unused |
skipping to change at line 1543 skipping to change at page 37, line 5
6.13 RFC 1797 Class A Subnet Experiment 6.13 RFC 1797 Class A Subnet Experiment
This document is specific to IPv4. This document is specific to IPv4.
6.14 RFC 1819 Internet Stream Protocol Version 2 (ST2) Protocol 6.14 RFC 1819 Internet Stream Protocol Version 2 (ST2) Protocol
Specification - Version ST2+ (ST2) Specification - Version ST2+ (ST2)
This protocol is IPv4 limited. In fact it is the definition of This protocol is IPv4 limited. In fact it is the definition of
IPv5. See below. IPv5. See below.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
Both ST2 and IP apply the same addressing schemes to identify Both ST2 and IP apply the same addressing schemes to identify
different hosts. ST2 and IP packets differ in the first four bits, different hosts. ST2 and IP packets differ in the first four bits,
which contain the internetwork protocol version number: number 5 is which contain the internetwork protocol version number: number 5 is
reserved for ST2 (IP itself has version number 4). As a network layer reserved for ST2 (IP itself has version number 4). As a network
protocol, like IP, ST2 operates independently of its underlying layer protocol, like IP, ST2 operates independently of its
subnets. Existing implementations use ARP for address resolution, and underlying subnets. Existing implementations use ARP for address
use the same Layer 2 SAPs as IP. resolution, and use the same Layer 2 SAPs as IP.
8.2 Group Name Generator 8.2 Group Name Generator
GroupName generation is similar to Stream ID generation. The GroupName generation is similar to Stream ID generation. The
GroupName includes a 16-bit unique identifier, a 32-bit creation GroupName includes a 16-bit unique identifier, a 32-bit creation
timestamp, and a 32-bit IP address. Group names are globally unique. timestamp, and a 32-bit IP address. Group names are globally unique.
A GroupName includes the creator's IP address, so this reduces a A GroupName includes the creator's IP address, so this reduces a
global uniqueness problem to a simple local problem. global uniqueness problem to a simple local problem.
IP-encapsulated ST packets begin with a normal IP header. Most fields IP-encapsulated ST packets begin with a normal IP header. Most
of the IP header should be filled in according to the same rules that fields of the IP header should be filled in according to the same
apply to any other IP packet. Three fields of special interest are: rules that apply to any other IP packet. Three fields of special
interest are:
o Protocol is 5, see [RFC1700], to indicate an ST packet is enclosed, o Protocol is 5, see [RFC1700], to indicate an ST packet is enclosed,
as opposed to TCP or UDP, for example. as opposed to TCP or UDP, for example.
and and
The following permanent IP multicast addresses have been assigned to The following permanent IP multicast addresses have been assigned to
ST: ST:
224.0.0.7 All ST routers (intermediate agents) 224.0.0.7 All ST routers (intermediate agents)
224.0.0.8 All ST hosts (agents) 224.0.0.8 All ST hosts (agents)
In addition, a block of transient IP multicast addresses, 224.1.0.0 - In addition, a block of transient IP multicast addresses,
224.1.255.255, has been allocated for ST multicast groups. For 224.1.0.0 -224.1.255.255, has been allocated for ST multicast
instance, the following two functions could be made available: groups. For instance, the following two functions could be made
available:
The ST Header also includes an ST Version Number, a total length The ST Header also includes an ST Version Number, a total length
field, a header checksum, a unique id, and the stream origin 32-bit field, a header checksum, a unique id, and the stream origin 32-bit
IP address. The unique id and the stream origin 32-bit IP address IP address. The unique id and the stream origin 32-bit IP address
form the stream id (SID). This is shown in Figure 10. Please refer to form the stream id (SID). This is shown in Figure 10. Please refer
Section 10.6 for an explanation of the notation. to Section 10.6 for an explanation of the notation.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ST=5 | Ver=3 |D| Pri | 0 | TotalBytes | | ST=5 | Ver=3 |D| Pri | 0 | TotalBytes |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| HeaderChecksum | UniqueID | | HeaderChecksum | UniqueID |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| OriginIPAddress | | OriginIPAddress |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
skipping to change at line 1631 skipping to change at page 38, line 54
o GroupUniqueID, GroupInitiatorIPAddress, and GroupCreationTime o GroupUniqueID, GroupInitiatorIPAddress, and GroupCreationTime
together form the GroupName field. They are allocated by the group together form the GroupName field. They are allocated by the group
name generator function, see Section 8.2. GroupUniqueID and name generator function, see Section 8.2. GroupUniqueID and
GroupCreationTime are implementation specific and have only local GroupCreationTime are implementation specific and have only local
definitions. definitions.
10.3.3 MulticastAddress 10.3.3 MulticastAddress
The MulticastAddress parameter (PCode = 3) is an optional parameter The MulticastAddress parameter (PCode = 3) is an optional parameter
that is used when using IP encapsulation and setting up an IP that is used when using IP encapsulation and setting up an IP
multicast group. This parameter is used to communicate the desired IP multicast group. This parameter is used to communicate the desired
multicast address to next-hop ST agents that should become members of IP multicast address to next-hop ST agents that should become
the group, see Section 8.8. members of the group, see Section 8.8.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| PCode = 3 | PBytes = 8 | 0 | | PCode = 3 | PBytes = 8 | 0 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| IPMulticastAddress | | IPMulticastAddress |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 15: MulticastAddress Figure 15: MulticastAddress
o IPMulticastAddress is the 32-bit IP multicast address to be used to o IPMulticastAddress is the 32-bit IP multicast address to be used
receive data packets for the stream. to receive data packets for the stream.
10.3.5 RecordRoute 10.3.5 RecordRoute
The RecordRoute parameter (PCode = 5) is used to request that the The RecordRoute parameter (PCode = 5) is used to request that the
route between the origin and a target be recorded and delivered to route between the origin and a target be recorded and delivered to
the user application. The ST agent at the origin (or target) the user application. The ST agent at the origin (or target)
including this parameter, has to determine the parameter's length, including this parameter, has to determine the parameter's length,
indicated by the PBytes field. ST agents processing messages indicated by the PBytes field. ST agents processing messages
containing this parameter add their receiving IP address in the containing this parameter add their receiving IP address in the
position indicated by the FreeOffset field, space permitting. If no position indicated by the FreeOffset field, space permitting. If no
space is available, the parameter is passed unchanged. When included space is available, the parameter is passed unchanged. When included
by the origin, all agents between the origin and the target add their by the origin, all agents between the origin and the target add
IP addresses and this information is made available to the their IP addresses and this information is made available to the
application at the target. When included by the target, all agents application at the target. When included by the target, all agents
between the target and the origin, inclusive, add their IP addresses between the target and the origin, inclusive, add their IP addresses
and this information is made available to the application at the and this information is made available to the application at the
origin. origin.
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| PCode = 5 | PBytes | 0 | FreeOffset | | PCode = 5 | PBytes | 0 | FreeOffset |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| IP Address 1 | | IP Address 1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
: ... : : ... :
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| IP Address N | | IP Address N |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 17: RecordRoute Figure 17: RecordRoute
o PBytes is the length of the parameter in bytes. Length is determined o PBytes is the length of the parameter in bytes. Length is
by the agent (target or origin) that first introduces the parameter. determined by the agent (target or origin) that first introduces
Once set, the length of the parameter remains unchanged. the parameter. Once set, the length of the parameter remains
unchanged.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
o FreeOffset indicates the offset, relative to the start of the o FreeOffset indicates the offset, relative to the start of the
parameter, for the next IP address to be recorded. When the parameter, for the next IP address to be recorded. When the
FreeOffset is greater than, or equal to, PBytes the RecordRoute FreeOffset is greater than, or equal to, PBytes the RecordRoute
parameter is full. parameter is full.
o IP Address is filled in, space permitting, by each ST agent o IP Address is filled in, space permitting, by each ST agent
processing this parameter. processing this parameter.
10.3.6 Target and TargetList 10.3.6 Target and TargetList
Several control messages use a parameter called TargetList (PCode = Several control messages use a parameter called TargetList (PCode =
6), which contains information about the targets to which the message 6), which contains information about the targets to which the
pertains. For each Target in the TargetList, the information includes message pertains. For each Target in the TargetList, the information
the 32-bit IP address of the target, the SAP applicable to the next includes the 32-bit IP address of the target, the SAP applicable to
higher layer protocol, and the length of the SAP (SAPBytes). the next higher layer protocol, and the length of the SAP
Consequently, a Target structure can be of variable length. Each (SAPBytes). Consequently, a Target structure can be of variable
entry has the format shown in Figure 18. length. Each entry has the format shown in Figure 18.
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Target IP Address | | Target IP Address |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| TargetBytes | SAPBytes | SAP : Padding | | TargetBytes | SAPBytes | SAP : Padding |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 18: Target Figure 18: Target
skipping to change at line 1731 skipping to change at page 41, line 5
This document defines a methodology for applying this technology This document defines a methodology for applying this technology
which is IPv4 dependent. The protocol itself has no IPv4 which is IPv4 dependent. The protocol itself has no IPv4
dependencies. dependencies.
6.17 RFC 1888 OSI NSAPs and IPv6 6.17 RFC 1888 OSI NSAPs and IPv6
This is an IPv6 related document and is not discussed in this This is an IPv6 related document and is not discussed in this
document. document.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
6.18 RFC 2009 GPS-Based Addressing and Routing (GPS-AR) 6.18 RFC 2009 GPS-Based Addressing and Routing (GPS-AR)
The document states: The document states:
The future version of IP (IP v6) will certainly have a sufficient The future version of IP (IP v6) will certainly have a sufficient
number of bits in its addressing space to provide an address for even number of bits in its addressing space to provide an address for
smaller GPS addressable units. In this proposal, however, we assume even smaller GPS addressable units. In this proposal, however, we
the current version of IP (IP v4) and we make sure that we manage the assume the current version of IP (IP v4) and we make sure that we
addressing space more economically than that. We will call the manage the addressing space more economically than that. We will
smallest GPS addressable unit a GPS-square. call the smallest GPS addressable unit a GPS-square.
6.19 RFC 2143 Encapsulating IP with the Small Computer System 6.19 RFC 2143 Encapsulating IP with the Small Computer System
Interface (IP-SCSI) Interface (IP-SCSI)
This protocol will only operate using IPv4. As stated in the This protocol will only operate using IPv4. As stated in the
document: document:
It was decided that the ten byte header offers the greatest It was decided that the ten byte header offers the greatest
flexibility for encapsulating version 4 IP datagrams for the flexibility for encapsulating version 4 IP datagrams for the
following reasons: following reasons:
6.20 RFC 2345 Domain Names and Company Name Retrieval 6.20 RFC 2345 Domain Names and Company Name Retrieval
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
6.21 RFC 2471 IPv6 Testing Address Allocation 6.21-zzzz RFC 2443 A Distributed MARS Service Using SCSP (MARS-SCSP)
There are IPv4 dependencies within this RFC.
6.22 RFC 2471 IPv6 Testing Address Allocation
This is an IPv6 related document and is not discussed in this This is an IPv6 related document and is not discussed in this
document. document.
6.22 RFC 2481 A Proposal to add Explicit Congestion Notification 6.23 RFC 2481 A Proposal to add Explicit Congestion Notification
(ECN) to IP (ECN-IP) (ECN) to IP (ECN-IP)
This protocol is both IPv4 and IPv6 aware and needs no changes. This protocol is both IPv4 and IPv6 aware and needs no changes.
6.23 RFC 2521 ICMP Security Failures Messages (ICMP-SEC) 6.24-zzzz RFC 2520 NHRP with Mobile NHCs
There are IPv4 dependencies within this RFC.
6.25 RFC 2521 ICMP Security Failures Messages (ICMP-SEC)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
6.24 RFC 2540 Detached Domain Name System (DNS) Information Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
6.26 RFC 2540 Detached Domain Name System (DNS) Information
(DNS-INFO) (DNS-INFO)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
6.25 RFC 2770 GLOP Addressing in 233/8 6.27 RFC 2770 GLOP Addressing in 233/8
This document is specific to IPv4. This document is specific to IPv4.
6.26 RFC 2823 PPP over Simple Data Link (SDL) using SONET/SDH with 6.28 RFC 2823 PPP over Simple Data Link (SDL) using SONET/SDH with
ATM-like framing (PPP-SDL) ATM-like framing (PPP-SDL)
There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol.
6.27 RFC 3123 A DNS RR Type for Lists of Address Prefixes (APL RR) 6.29 RFC 3123 A DNS RR Type for Lists of Address Prefixes (APL RR)
This protocol is both IPv4 and IPv6 aware and needs no changes. This protocol is both IPv4 and IPv6 aware and needs no changes.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
7.0 Summary of Results 7.0 Summary of Results
In the initial survey of RFCs 62 positives were identified out of a In the initial survey of RFCs 62 positives were identified out of a
total of 159, broken down as follows: total of 159, broken down as follows:
Standards 16 of 18 or 88.89% Standards 16 of 18 or 88.89%
Draft Standards 6 of 16 or 37.50% Draft Standards 6 of 16 or 37.50%
Proposed Standards 35 of 98 or 35.71% Proposed Standards 35 of 98 or 35.71%
Experimental RFCs 5 of 27 or 18.52% Experimental RFCs 5 of 27 or 18.52%
Of those identified many require no action because they document Of those identified many require no action because they document
outdated and unused protocols, while others are document protocols outdated and unused protocols, while others are document protocols
that are actively being updated by the appropriate working groups. that are actively being updated by the appropriate working groups.
Additionally there are many instances of standards that SHOULD be Additionally there are many instances of standards that should be
updated but do not cause any operational impact if they are not updated but do not cause any operational impact if they are not
updated. The remaining instances are documented below. updated. The remaining instances are documented below.
The author has attempted to organize the results in a format that allows
easy reference to other protocol designers. The following recommendations
uses the documented terms "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL",
"SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL"
described in RFC 2119. They should only be interpreted in the context
of RFC 2119 when they appear in all caps. That is, the word "should" in
the previous SHOULD NOT be interpreted as in RFC 2119.
The assignment of these terms has been based entirely on the authors
perceived needs for updates and should not be taken as an official
statement.
7.1 Standards 7.1 Standards
7.1.01 STD3 Requirements for Internet Hosts (RFC 1122 & 1123) 7.1.01 STD3 Requirements for Internet Hosts (RFC 1122 )
RFC 1122 is essentially a requirements document for IPv4 hosts and a RFC 1122 is essentially a requirements document for IPv4 hosts and a
similar document for IPv6 hosts SHOULD be written. similar document for IPv6 hosts should be written.
RFC 1123 SHOULD be updated to include advances in application
protocols, as well as tightening language regarding IP addressing.
7.1.02 STD 5 Internet Protocol (RFC 791, 922, 792, & 1122) 7.1.02 STD 5 Internet Protocol (RFC 791, 922, 792, & 1122)
RFC 791 has been updated in the definition of IPv6 in RFC 2460. RFC 791 has been updated in the definition of IPv6 in RFC 2460.
RFC 922 has been included in the IPv6 Addressing Architecture, RFC RFC 922 has been included in the IPv6 Addressing Architecture, RFC
2373. 2373.
RFC 792 has been updated in the definition of ICMPv6 in RFC 2463. RFC 792 has been updated in the definition of ICMPv6 in RFC 2463.
RFC 1122 has been updated in the definition of Multicast Listener RFC 1122 has been updated in the definition of Multicast Listener
Discovery in RFC 2710. Discovery in RFC 2710.
7.1.03 STD 13 Domain Name System (RFCs 1034 & 1035) 7.1.03 STD 13 Domain Name System (RFCs 1034 & 1035)
New resource records for IPv6 addresses have been defined (AAAA & A6). New resource records for IPv6 addresses have been defined (AAAA & A6).
7.1.04 STD 41 IP over Ethernet (RFC 894) 7.1.04 STD 41 IP over Ethernet (RFC 894)
This problem has been fixed by RFC2464, A Method for the Transmission of This problem has been fixed by RFC2464, A Method for the Transmission
IPv6 Packets over Ethernet Networks. of IPv6 Packets over Ethernet Networks.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
7.1.05 STD 42 IP over Experimental Ethernets (RFC 895) 7.1.05 STD 42 IP over Experimental Ethernets (RFC 895)
See above section. See above section.
7.1.06 STD 43 IP over IEEE 8.02 (RFC 1042) 7.1.06 STD 43 IP over IEEE 8.02 (RFC 1042)
The functionality of this RFC is included in subsequent standards defining The functionality of this RFC is included in subsequent standards
IPv6 over XXX. defining IPv6 over XXX.
7.1.07 STD 44 DCN Networks (RFC 891) 7.1.07 STD 44 DCN Networks (RFC 891)
This protocol is no longer used and an updated protocol SHOULD NOT be This protocol is no longer used and an updated protocol should not be
created. created.
7.1.08 STD 45 IP over HyperChannel (RFC 1044) 7.1.08 STD 45 IP over HyperChannel (RFC 1044)
No updated document exists for this protocol. It is unclear whether one No updated document exists for this protocol. It is unclear whether
is needed. An updated protocol MAY be created. one is needed. An updated protocol MAY be created.
7.1.09 STD 46 IP over Arcnet (RFC 1201) 7.1.09 STD 46 IP over Arcnet (RFC 1201)
This problem has been fixed by RFC 2497, A Method for the Transmission This problem has been fixed by RFC 2497, A Method for the
of IPv6 Packets over ARCnet Networks. Transmission of IPv6 Packets over ARCnet Networks.
7.1.10 STD 48 IP over Netbios (RFC 1088) 7.1.10 STD 48 IP over Netbios (RFC 1088)
A new protocol specification for tunneling IPv6 packets through Netbios A new protocol specification for tunneling IPv6 packets through
networks SHOULD be defined. Netbios networks should be defined.
7.1.11 STD 52 IP over SMDS (RFC 1209) 7.1.11 STD 52 IP over SMDS (RFC 1209)
An updated protocol for the transmission of IPv6 packets over SMDS MUST An updated protocol for the transmission of IPv6 packets over SMDS
be written. must be written.
7.2 Draft Standards 7.2 Draft Standards
7.2.1 Boot Protocol (RFC 951) 7.2.1 Boot Protocol (RFC 951)
This problem has been fixed in the DHCPv6 and Auto Configuration This problem has been fixed in the DHCPv6 and Auto Configuration
protocols of IPv6: RFC 2462: IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration, protocols of IPv6: RFC 2462: IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration,
and Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6) currently an and Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6) currently an
Internet Draft. Internet Draft.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
7.2.2 Path MTU Discovery (RFC 1191) 7.2.2 Path MTU Discovery (RFC 1191)
This problem has been fixed in RFC 1981, Path MTU Discovery for IP This problem has been fixed in RFC 1981, Path MTU Discovery for IP
version 6. version 6.
7.2.3 The PPP Multilink Protocol (RFC 1990) 7.2.3 The PPP Multilink Protocol (RFC 1990)
A new class identifier for IPv6 packets MUST be registered with A new class identifier for IPv6 packets must be registered with
the IANA. It is RECOMMENDED that the (currently unassigned) value of the IANA. It is RECOMMENDED that the (currently unassigned) value of
6 be assigned by the IANA with a description of "Internet Protocol 6 be assigned by the IANA with a description of "Internet Protocol
(IPv6) Address." An application for this assignment has been sent to (IPv6) Address." An application for this assignment has been sent to
the IANA. the IANA.
7.2.4 IP over HIPPI (RFC 2067) 7.2.4 IP over HIPPI (RFC 2067)
An updated protocol for the transmission of IPv6 packets over HIPPI MAY An updated protocol for the transmission of IPv6 packets over HIPPI MAY
be written. be written.
skipping to change at line 1924 skipping to change at page 45, line 40
7.2.6 DHCP Options (RFC 2132) 7.2.6 DHCP Options (RFC 2132)
The problems are being fixed by the work of the DHC WG. Several very The problems are being fixed by the work of the DHC WG. Several very
advanced IDs address all the issues. advanced IDs address all the issues.
7.3 Proposed Standards 7.3 Proposed Standards
7.3.01 Tunneling IPX over IP (RFC 1234) 7.3.01 Tunneling IPX over IP (RFC 1234)
This problem remains unresolved and a new protocol specification This problem remains unresolved and a new protocol specification
MUST be created. must be created.
7.3.02 ICMP Router Discovery (RFC 1256) 7.3.02 ICMP Router Discovery (RFC 1256)
This problem has been resolved in RFC 2461, Neighbor Discovery for This problem has been resolved in RFC 2461, Neighbor Discovery for
IP Version 6 (IPv6) IP Version 6 (IPv6)
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
7.3.03 Encoding Net Addresses to Support Operation Over Non OSI Lower 7.3.03 Encoding Net Addresses to Support Operation Over Non OSI Lower
Layers (RFC 1277) Layers (RFC 1277)
This problem is unresolved, but it MAY be resolved with the creation This problem is unresolved, but it MAY be resolved with the creation
of a new encoding scheme definition. of a new encoding scheme definition.
7.3.04 PPP Internet Protocol Control Protocol (RFC 1332) 7.3.04 PPP Internet Protocol Control Protocol (RFC 1332)
This problem has been resolved in RFC 2472, IP Version 6 over PPP. This problem has been resolved in RFC 2472, IP Version 6 over PPP.
skipping to change at line 1975 skipping to change at page 47, line 5
7.3.10 IP Router Alert Option (RFC 2113) 7.3.10 IP Router Alert Option (RFC 2113)
The problems identified are resolved in RFC 2711, IPv6 Router The problems identified are resolved in RFC 2711, IPv6 Router
Alert Option. Alert Option.
7.3.11 SLP (RFC 2165) 7.3.11 SLP (RFC 2165)
The problems have been addressed in RFC 3111, Service Location The problems have been addressed in RFC 3111, Service Location
Protocol Modifications for IPv6. Protocol Modifications for IPv6.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
7.3.12 Classical IP & ARP over ATM (RFC 2225) 7.3.12 Classical IP & ARP over ATM (RFC 2225)
The problems have been resolved in RFC 2492, IPv6 over ATM The problems have been resolved in RFC 2492, IPv6 over ATM
Networks. Networks.
7.3.13 IP Broadcast over ATM (RFC 2226) 7.3.13 IP Broadcast over ATM (RFC 2226)
The problems have been resolved in RFC 2492, IPv6 over ATM The problems have been resolved in RFC 2492, IPv6 over ATM
Networks. Networks.
skipping to change at line 2002 skipping to change at page 47, line 34
The problems are being fixed by the work of the DHC WG. Several very The problems are being fixed by the work of the DHC WG. Several very
advanced IDs address all the issues. advanced IDs address all the issues.
7.3.16 Netware/IP Domain Name and Information (RFC 2242) 7.3.16 Netware/IP Domain Name and Information (RFC 2242)
The problems are being fixed by the work of the DHC WG. Several very The problems are being fixed by the work of the DHC WG. Several very
advanced IDs address all the issues. advanced IDs address all the issues.
7.3.17 Mobile IPv4 Comfit Options for PPP IPCP (RFC 2290) 7.3.17 Mobile IPv4 Comfit Options for PPP IPCP (RFC 2290)
The problems are not being addressed and MUST be addressed in a new The problems are not being addressed and must be addressed in a new
protocol. protocol.
7.3.18 Transaction IP v3 (RFC 2371) 7.3.18 Transaction IP v3 (RFC 2371)
The problems identified are not addressed and a new standard MAY The problems identified are not addressed and a new standard MAY
be defined. be defined.
7.3.19 DHCP Option for Open Group User Authentication Protocol 7.3.19 DHCP Option for Open Group User Authentication Protocol
(RFC 2485) (RFC 2485)
The problems are being fixed by the work of the DHC WG. Several very The problems are being fixed by the work of the DHC WG. Several very
advanced IDs address all the issues. advanced IDs address all the issues.
7.3.20 DHCP Option to Disable Stateless Autoconfiguration 7.3.20 DHCP Option to Disable Stateless Autoconfiguration
(RFC 2563) (RFC 2563)
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
The problems are being fixed by the work of the DHC WG. Several very The problems are being fixed by the work of the DHC WG. Several very
advanced IDs address all the issues. advanced IDs address all the issues.
7.3.21 Non-Terminal DNS Redirection (RFC 2672) 7.3.21 Non-Terminal DNS Redirection (RFC 2672)
The problems have not been addressed and a new specification MAY The problems have not been addressed and a new specification MAY
be defined. be defined.
7.3.22 Binary Labels in DNS (RFC 2673) 7.3.22 Binary Labels in DNS (RFC 2673)
skipping to change at line 2045 skipping to change at page 48, line 32
be defined. be defined.
7.3.24 IPv4 over IEEE 1394 (RFC 2734) 7.3.24 IPv4 over IEEE 1394 (RFC 2734)
This problem is being addressed by the IPv6 WG and an ID exists This problem is being addressed by the IPv6 WG and an ID exists
(draft-ietf-ipngwg-ipngwg-1394-02.txt). (draft-ietf-ipngwg-ipngwg-1394-02.txt).
7.3.25 Mobile IP Network Access Identity Extensions for IPv4 7.3.25 Mobile IP Network Access Identity Extensions for IPv4
(RFC 2794) (RFC 2794)
The problems are not being addressed and MUST be addressed in a new The problems are not being addressed and must be addressed in a new
protocol. protocol.
7.3.26 ARP & IP Broadcasts Over HIPPI 800 (RFC 2834) 7.3.26 ARP & IP Broadcasts Over HIPPI 800 (RFC 2834)
The problems are not being addressed and MAY be addressed in a new The problems are not being addressed and MAY be addressed in a new
protocol. protocol.
7.3.27 ARP & IP Broadcasts Over HIPPI 6400 (RFC 2835) 7.3.27 ARP & IP Broadcasts Over HIPPI 6400 (RFC 2835)
The problems are not being addressed and MAY be addressed in a new The problems are not being addressed and MAY be addressed in a new
protocol. protocol.
7.3.28 DHCP for IEEE 1394 (RFC 2855) 7.3.28 DHCP for IEEE 1394 (RFC 2855)
This problem is being dually addressed by the IPv6 and DHC WGs and IDs This problem is being dually addressed by the IPv6 and DHC WGs and IDs
exists that address this issue. exists that address this issue.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
7.3.29 DHCP Name Server Search Option (RFC 2937) 7.3.29 DHCP Name Server Search Option (RFC 2937)
The problem is being fixed by the work of the DHC WG. Several very The problem is being fixed by the work of the DHC WG. Several very
advanced IDs address all the issues. advanced IDs address all the issues.
7.3.30 DHCP User Class Option (RFC 3004) 7.3.30 DHCP User Class Option (RFC 3004)
The problem is being fixed by the work of the DHC WG. Several very The problem is being fixed by the work of the DHC WG. Several very
advanced IDs address all the issues. advanced IDs address all the issues.
skipping to change at line 2084 skipping to change at page 49, line 28
The problem is being fixed by the work of the DHC WG. Several very The problem is being fixed by the work of the DHC WG. Several very
advanced IDs address all the issues. advanced IDs address all the issues.
7.3.32 Using 31-Bit Prefixes for IPv4 P2P Links (RFC 3021) 7.3.32 Using 31-Bit Prefixes for IPv4 P2P Links (RFC 3021)
No action is needed. No action is needed.
7.3.33 Reverse Tunneling for Mobile IP (RFC 3024) 7.3.33 Reverse Tunneling for Mobile IP (RFC 3024)
The problems are not being addressed and MUST be addressed in a new The problems are not being addressed and must be addressed in a new
protocol. protocol.
7.3.34 DHCP Relay Agent Information Option (RFC 3046) 7.3.34 DHCP Relay Agent Information Option (RFC 3046)
The problem is being fixed by the work of the DHC WG. Several very The problem is being fixed by the work of the DHC WG. Several very
advanced IDs address all the issues. advanced IDs address all the issues.
7.3.35 Mobile IP Vender/Organization Specific Extensions (RFC 3115) 7.3.35 Mobile IP Vender/Organization Specific Extensions (RFC 3115)
The problems are not being addressed and MUST be addressed in a new The problems are not being addressed and must be addressed in a new
protocol. protocol.
7.4 Experimental RFCs 7.4 Experimental RFCs
7.4.1 Traceroute using an IP Option (RFC 1393) 7.4.1 Traceroute using an IP Option (RFC 1393)
This protocol relies on IPv4 and a new protocol standard MAY be This protocol relies on IPv4 and a new protocol standard MAY be
produced. produced.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
7.4.2 NBMA ARP (RFC 1735) 7.4.2 NBMA ARP (RFC 1735)
This functionality has been defined in RFC 2491, IPv6 over This functionality has been defined in RFC 2491, IPv6 over
Non-Broadcast Multiple Access (NBMA) networks and RFC 2332, NBMA Non-Broadcast Multiple Access (NBMA) networks and RFC 2332, NBMA
Next Hop Resolution Protocol. Next Hop Resolution Protocol.
7.4.3 ST2+ Protocol (RFC 1819) 7.4.3 ST2+ Protocol (RFC 1819)
This protocol relies on IPv4 and a new protocol standard MAY be This protocol relies on IPv4 and a new protocol standard MAY be
produced. produced.
skipping to change at line 2125 skipping to change at page 51, line 5
7.4.4 ARP Extensions (RFC 1868) 7.4.4 ARP Extensions (RFC 1868)
This protocol relies on IPv4 and a new protocol standard MAY be This protocol relies on IPv4 and a new protocol standard MAY be
produced. produced.
7.4.5 IP Over SCSI (RFC 2143) 7.4.5 IP Over SCSI (RFC 2143)
This protocol relies on IPv4 and a new protocol standard MAY be This protocol relies on IPv4 and a new protocol standard MAY be
produced. produced.
8.0 Acknowledgements Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
The author would like to acknowledge the support of the Internet Society 8.0 Security Considerations
in the research and production of this document. Additionally the
author would like to thanks his partner in all ways, Wendy M. Nesser.
9.0 Authors Address This memo examines the IPv6-readiness of specifications; this does
not have security considerations in itself.
Please contact the author with any questions, comments or suggestions 9.0 References
9.1 Normative
[1] [Survey of IPv4 Addresses in Currently Deployed IETF Standards]
Philip J. Nesser II, Andreas Bergstrom. "Introduction to the
Survey ", draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv4survey-intro-01.txt
IETF work in progress, June 2003
[2] [Survey of IPv4 Addresses in Currently Deployed IETF Standards]
Philip J. Nesser II, Andreas Bergstrom: " IETF Sub-IP Area
Standards ", draft-ietf-v6ops- ipv4survey-subip-01.txt,
IETF work in progress. June 2003,
10.0 Acknowledgements
The author would like to acknowledge the support of the Internet
Society in the research and production of this document.
Additionally the author would like to thanks his partner in all
ways, Wendy M. Nesser.
The editor, Cleveland Mickles, would like to thank Steve Bellovin
and Russ Housley for their comments and Pekka Savola for his comments
and guidance during the editing of this document. Additionally the
editor would like to thank, his wife, Lesia R. Mickles for her patient
support.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
11.0 Author's Addresses
Please contact the authors with any questions, comments or suggestions
at: at:
Philip J. Nesser II Cleveland Mickles (Primary Editor)
America Online, Inc (owned by AOL Time Warner)
12100 Sunrise Valley Drive. Phone: +1 703-265-5618
Reston, VA 20191, USA Email: micklesc@aol.net
Philip J. Nesser II (Author)
Principal Principal
Nesser & Nesser Consulting Nesser & Nesser Consulting
13501 100th Ave NE, #5202 13501 100th Ave NE, #5202 Phone: +1 425 481 4303
Kirkland, WA 98034 Kirkland, WA 98034 Email: phil@nesser.com
Email: phil@nesser.com
Phone: +1 425 481 4303
Fax: +1 425 48 Fax: +1 425 48
12.0 Intellectual Property Statement
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
intellectual property or other rights that might be claimed to
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
might or might not be available; neither does it represent that it
has made any effort to identify any such rights. Information on the
IETF's procedures with respect to rights in standards-track and
standards-related documentation can be found in BCP-11. Copies of
claims of rights made available for publication and any assurances
of licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made
to obtain a general license or permission for the use of such
proprietary rights by implementors or users of this specification
can be obtained from the IETF Secretariat.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights which may cover technology that may be required to practice
this standard. Please address the information to the IETF Executive
Director.
Internet Area: Survey of IPv4 Addresses Currently Deployed Mar. 2003
13.0 Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2000). All Rights Reserved.
This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph
are included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of develop-
ing Internet standards in which case the procedures for copyrights
defined in the Internet Standards process must be followed, or as
required to translate it into languages other than English. The lim-
ited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be revoked
by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns. This document
and the information contained herein is provided on an "AS IS" basis
and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DIS-
CLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED
TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT
INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR
FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
 End of changes. 

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.23, available from http://www.levkowetz.com/ietf/tools/rfcdiff/