Network Working Group Philip J. Nesser II
draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv4survey-subip-01.txtdraft-ietf-v6ops-ipv4survey-subip-02.txt Nesser & Nesser Consulting Internet Draft Andreas Bergstrom Ostfold University College JuneAugust 2003 Expires December 2003January 2004 Survey of IPv4 Addresses in Currently Deployed IETF Sub-IP Area Standards This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. Status of this Memo Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. Abstract This document seeks to document all usage of IPv4 addresses in currently deployed IETF Sub-IP 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. Table of Contents 1. Introduction 2. Document Organisation 3. Full Standards 4. Draft Standards 5. Proposed Standards 6. Experimental RFCs 7. Summary of Results 7.1 Standards 7.2 Draft Standards 7.3 Proposed Standards 7.4 Experimental RFCs 8. Security Consideration 9. Acknowledgements 10. References 11. Authors Addresses 12. Intellectual Property Statement 13. Full Copyright Statement 1.0 Introduction This document is part of a document set aiming to document all usage of IPv4 addresses in IETF stanadards. In an effort to have the information in a manageable form, it has been broken into 7 documents conforming to the current IETF areas (Application, Internet, Manangement & Operations, Routing, Security, Sub-IP and Transport). For a full introduction, please see the intro draft. 2.0 Document Organization The rest of the document sections are described below. Sections 3, 4, 5, and 6 each describe the raw analysis of Full, Draft, and Proposed Standards, and Experimental RFCs. Each RFC is discussed in its turn starting with RFC 1 and ending with RFC 3247. The comments for each RFC is "raw" in nature. That is, each RFC is discussed in a vacuum and problems or issues discussed do not "look ahead" to see if the problems have already been fixed. Section 7 is an analysis of the data presented in Sections 3, 4, 5, and 6. It is here that all of the results are considered as a whole and the problems that have been resolved in later RFCs are correlated. 3.0 Full Standards Full Internet Standards (most commonly simply referred to as "Standards") are fully mature protocol specification that are widely implemented and used throughout the Internet. There are no full standars within the scope of this document. 4.0 Draft Standards Draft Standards represent the penultimate standard level in the IETF. A protocol can only achieve draft standard when there are multiple, independent, interoperable implementations. Draft Standards are usually quite mature and widely used. There are no draft standards within the scope of this document. 5.0 Proposed Standards Proposed Standards are introductory level documents. There are no requirements for even a single implementation. In many cases Proposed are never implemented or advanced in the IETF standards process. They therefore are often just proposed ideas that are presented to the Internet community. Sometimes flaws are exposed or they are one of many competing solutions to problems. In these later cases, no discussion is presented as it would not serve the purpose of this discussion. 5.01 RFC 3031 Multiprotocol Label Switching Architecture (MPLS) There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. 5.01 RFC 3032 MPLS Label Stack Encoding This protocol is both IPv4 and IPv6 aware and needs no changes. 5.03 RFC 3034 Use of Label Switching on Frame Relay Networks Specification There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. 5.04 RFC 3035 MPLS using LDP and ATM VC Switching There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. 5.05 RFC 3036 LDP Specification This protocol is both IPv4 and IPv6 aware and needs no changes. 5.06 RFC 3038 VCID Notification over ATM link for LDP There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. 6.0 Experimental RFCs Experimental RFCs typically define protocols that do not have widescale implementation or usage on the Internet. They are often propriety in nature or used in limited arenas. They are documented to the Internet community in order to allow potential interoperability or some other potential useful scenario. In a few cases they are presented as alternatives to the mainstream solution to an acknowledged problem. 6.1 RFC 3063 MPLS Loop Prevention Mechanism There are no IPv4 dependencies in this protocol. 7.0 Summary of Results In the initial survey of RFCs 0 positives were identified out of a total of 7, broken down as follows: Standards 0 of 0 or 0.00% Draft Standards 0 of 0 or 0.00% Proposed Standards 0 of 6 or 0.00% Experimental RFCs 0 of 1 or 0.00% Of those identified many require no action because they document outdated and unused protocols, while others are document protocols that are actively being updated by the appropriate working groups. Additionally there are many instances of standards that should be updated but do not cause any operational impact if they are not updated. The remaining instances are documented below. 7.1 Standards There are no standards within the scope of this document. 7.2 Draft Standards There are no draft standards within the scope of this document. 7.3 Proposed Standards There are no proposed standards with recommendations in this document. 7.4 Experimental RFCs There are no experimental standards with recommendations in this document. 8.0 Security Consideration This memo examines the IPv6-readiness of specifications; this does not have security considerations in itself. 9.0 Acknowledgements The authors would like to acknowledge the support of the Internet Society in the research and production of this document. Additionally the author, Philip J. Nesser II, would like to thanks his partner in all ways, Wendy M. Nesser. The editor, Andreas Bergstrom, would like to thank Pekka Savola for guidance and collection of comments for the editing of this document. 10.0 References 10.1 Normative  Philip J. Nesser II, Andreas Bergstrom. "Introduction to the Survey of IPv4 Addresses in Currently Deployed IETF Standards", draft-ietf-v6ops-ipv4survey-intro-01.txtdraft-ietf-v6ops-ipv4survey-intro-02.txt IETF work in progress, JuneAugust 2003 11.0 Authors Addresses Please contact the author with any questions, comments or suggestions at: Philip J. Nesser II Principal Nesser & Nesser Consulting 13501 100th Ave NE, #5202 Kirkland, WA 98034 Email: firstname.lastname@example.org Phone: +1 425 481 4303 Fax: +1 425 48 Andreas Bergstrom Ostfold University College Email: email@example.com Address: Rute 503 Buer N-1766 Halden Norway 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. 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 docu- ment 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.