One document matched: draft-cui-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-length-hint-issue-00.txt
DHC Working Group Y. Cui
Internet-Draft T. Li
Intended status: Standards Track C. Liu
Expires: January 7, 2016 Tsinghua University
July 6, 2015
DHCPv6 Prefix Length Hint Issues
draft-cui-dhc-dhcpv6-prefix-length-hint-issue-00
Abstract
DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation [RFC3633] allows a client to set a hint
value in the prefix-length field of the IA_PD option to indicate a
preference for the size of the prefix to be delegated, but is unclear
about how the client and server should act in different situations
involving the prefix length hint. This document provides a summary
of the existing problems with the prefix length hint and guidance on
what the client and server could do in the different situation
involving the the prefix length hint.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
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."
This Internet-Draft will expire on January 7, 2016.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
Cui, et al. Expires January 7, 2016 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft DHCPv6 Prefix Length Hint Issues July 2015
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Problem Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1. Creation of Solicit Message by the Client . . . . . . . . 3
3.2. Receipt of Solicit message by the Server . . . . . . . . 3
3.3. Receipt of Advertise Message by the Client . . . . . . . 4
3.4. Creation of Renew/Rebind Message by the Client . . . . . 4
3.5. Receipt of Renew Message by the Server . . . . . . . . . 5
3.6. Receipt of Rebind Message by the Server . . . . . . . . . 5
4. Proposed Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.1. Creation of Solicit Message by the Client . . . . . . . . 6
4.2. Receipt of Solicit message by the Server . . . . . . . . 6
4.3. Receipt of Advertise Message by the Client . . . . . . . 7
4.4. Creation of Renew Message by the Client . . . . . . . . . 7
4.5. Receipt of Renew Message by the Server . . . . . . . . . 7
4.6. Creation of Rebind Message by the Client . . . . . . . . 8
4.7. Receipt of Rebind Message by the Server . . . . . . . . . 8
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
7. Contributors List . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
8. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1. Introduction
The DHCPv6 specification [RFC3315] allows a client to include data
values in the requested options, as hints to the server about
parameter values the client would like to have returned. The servers
are free to ignore the hint values depending on server policy. This
would not cause problems for some hint values such as T1 and T2
lifetimes, but it would be an issue for the prefix length hint. Some
clients can't function normally when they're provided with a prefix
which length is different from what they requested. E.g. if the
client is asking for a /56 and the server returns a /64, the
functionality of the client might be limited because it might not be
able to split the prefix for all its interfaces. The clients usually
have higher preference on the prefix length hint than the other
option hints, and it should be treated differently.
The current specification is unclear about how the client and server
should act in different situations involving the prefix length hint.
Cui, et al. Expires January 7, 2016 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft DHCPv6 Prefix Length Hint Issues July 2015
From the client perspective, it should be able to use the prefix
length hint to signal to the server its real time need and it should
be able to handle the prefixes which lengths are different from the
prefix length hint. This document provides guidance on what a client
should do in different situations, to prevent it from failing. From
the server perspective, the server is free to ignore the prefix
length hints depending on server policy, but in cases where the
server has a policy for considering the hint, this document provides
guidance on how the prefix length hint should be handled by the
server in different situations.
2. Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
3. Problem Description
3.1. Creation of Solicit Message by the Client
The Solicit message allows a client to ask servers for addresses and
configuration parameters. When the client's configuration changes,
it might require a prefix length different from what it is currently
using. Sometimes the client might want to switch to a new prefix
right away. The current specification is unclear about what the
client should do if it wants to switch to a different prefix length.
There is also the problem of what the client should do if the server
is not able to provide the requested prefix length.
Additionally, if the server is able to provide the new prefix length
that the client wants, what the client should do with the prefix it
is currently using. The client could either deprecate the old prefix
right away by sending a Release message or the client could use the
two prefixes at the same time and deprecate the old prefix after some
time interval.
3.2. Receipt of Solicit message by the Server
Some servers will keep a record about prefixes it gave to the client
during previous interactions, and give the client with the same
prefix if the same client requested a prefix from the server. If the
server has prefix record from previous interactions with the client,
and the client is now requesting a different prefix length in the
Solicit message, the server has to decide whether to honor the newly
requested prefix length hint or give the client the recorded prefix.
The current specification is unclear about what a server should do in
this situation, and it is dependent on the server policy. Normally
Cui, et al. Expires January 7, 2016 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft DHCPv6 Prefix Length Hint Issues July 2015
the server just gives the client the prefix the client had gotten
before, during previous interactions with the server, but that might
not be what the client prefers. The client might want a different
prefix length due to configuration changes or it might just want the
same prefix again after reboot. The server should interpret these
cases differently, because giving the client a prefix different from
what it needs might cause functional problems for the client.
Many servers are configured to provide prefixes of specific lengths
to the client. E.g. Some servers will only provide /48 and /56.
The question is how should these servers decide which prefix to give
to the client based on the client's prefix length hint. If the
client requested for a /54, and the server could only provide
/30,/48, and /56, the server has to decide which prefix to give to
the client.
3.3. Receipt of Advertise Message by the Client
The server might not be able to honor the prefix length hint due to
server policy. If the prefix length provided by the server in the
Advertise message is different from what the client requested in the
Solicit message, the question would be whether the client should use
the provided prefix or continue to ask for its preferred prefix.
There are certain situations where the client would fail if it used a
prefix which length is different from what it requested in the prefix
length hint. However, if the client ignores the Advertise messages,
and continue to solicit for the desired prefix length, the client
might be stuck in the DHCP process.
3.4. Creation of Renew/Rebind Message by the Client
Servers might not be able to provide a prefix matching the prefix
length hint requested by the client. If the client decided to use
the prefix provided by the server which doesn't match the prefix
length hint, but would still prefer the prefix length hint it
originally requested in the Solicit message, there should be some way
for the client to express this preference during Renew/Rebind. E.g.
If the client requested for a /60 but got a /64, there should be some
way for the client to signal to the server during Renew/Rebind that
it would still prefer a /60. This is to see whether the server has
the prefix preferred by the client available in its prefix pool
during Renew/Rebind.
[RFC3315] does not allow a client to include in the Renew/Rebind
message hint values different from what it already has, so the client
cannot directly include a different prefix length hint value in the
Renew/Rebind message. The current specification is also unclear
about whether the client can include both the prefix it is currently
Cui, et al. Expires January 7, 2016 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft DHCPv6 Prefix Length Hint Issues July 2015
using as well as a different prefix length value as hint in the
Renew/Rebind message.
This would raise the same question as to what the client should do
with the prefix it is currently using, if the server is able to
provide the new prefix that the client wants.
3.5. Receipt of Renew Message by the Server
Upon the receipt of the Renew message, the question is whether the
server should remember the prefix length hint the client originally
included in the Solicit message and check to see if it now has the
prefix length the client originally desired. The prefix desired by
the client might become available in the prefix pool during Renew but
was unavailable during Solicit. This might be due to server
configuration change or because some other client stopped using the
prefix. This would require the server to keep extra information
about the client. There is also the possibility that the client's
preference for the prefix length might have changed during this time
interval, so the prefix length remembered by the server might not be
what the client wants during the Renew process.
Another question is what the server should do if the client also
included in the Renew message a prefix length value different from
what the client is currently using. The current specification does
not specify how this should be handled and whether the server could
also provide a different prefix to the client during the Renew
process.
3.6. Receipt of Rebind Message by the Server
[RFC3315] specifies that when the server receives a Rebind message
that contains an IA option from a client, it locates the client's
binding and verifies that information in the IA from the client
matches the information stored for that client. So the current
specification requires the client to include in the Rebind message
the prefix it is currently using. The question is what the server
should do if the client also included in the Rebind message a prefix
length value different from what the client is currently using. The
Rebind message is sent to any available servers the client can find,
so the servers might have the prefix length the client wanted, but
the current specification does not specify whether the server could
also provide a different prefix to the client during the Rebind
process.
Cui, et al. Expires January 7, 2016 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft DHCPv6 Prefix Length Hint Issues July 2015
4. Proposed Solution
4.1. Creation of Solicit Message by the Client
When the client's configuration changes and suddenly requires a
prefix length different from what it already has, the client should
send a Solicit message with a different IAID, including the desired
prefix length in the prefix-length field of the IA_PD option as the
hint.
If the client is able to get the new prefix right away, it could do
one of the following things depending on client's need:
1.Deprecate the old prefix right away by sending a Release message to
the server, and switch over to the new prefix.
2.Use the two prefixes at the same time and deprecate the old prefix
after some time interval. The client could wait for the old prefix
to expire or it could extend the lifetime of the old prefix with some
specific value.
If the client is unable to get the new prefix right away, it should
continue using the old prefix, while soliciting for the new prefix.If
the client is unable to use the old prefix anymore, it should
deprecate the old prefix by sending a Release message to the server
and keep sending Solicit messages asking for the new prefix. The
client should send the Solicit messages at defined time intervals to
avoid traffic congestion.
4.2. Receipt of Solicit message by the Server
When the prefix length hint in the Solicit message sent by the client
is different from the prefix record the server has from previous
interactions with the client, the server should try to honor the
prefix length hint the client included in the Solicit message.
Because it is what the client prefers to have at the time being. If
the client wanted the same prefix back it would just include the old
prefix as the hint in the Solicit message. If the server has a
policy for considering the client's hint it should regard the prefix
length hint in the Solicit message as the prefix length most
preferred by the client at the time being.
Many servers are configured to provide prefixes of specific lengths
to the client. In this situation, the server should provide a prefix
which length is shorter than the prefix length hint and which length
is closest to the prefix length hint. E.g. If the server could only
provide prefixes with lengths /30,/48, and /56, and the client is
requesting for a /50 in the prefix length hint, then the server
Cui, et al. Expires January 7, 2016 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft DHCPv6 Prefix Length Hint Issues July 2015
should provide the /48 to the client.
4.3. Receipt of Advertise Message by the Client
If none of the prefixes provided by the server in the Advertise
messages match the prefix length hint the client included in the
Solicit message, the client could choose to either accept or ignore
the prefixes provided by the servers depending on functional need.
If the client could use the prefixes provided by the servers despite
being different from the prefix length hint, the client should choose
a prefix length closest to the prefix length hint.
There are certain situations where the client will fail if it used a
prefix which length does not meet its requirement. If the client
cannot use the prefixes provided by the servers, it should ignore the
Advertise messages and continue to send Solicit messages until it
gets the desired prefix. To prevent the client from not functioning,
the client should not ignore other configuration parameters provided
by the server such as available IA_NA addresses.
4.4. Creation of Renew Message by the Client
During the Renew process, if the client prefers a prefix length
different from the prefix it is currently using, then the client
should two IA_PD options in the Renew message, one with the currently
delegated prefix as the hint and the other with the preferred prefix
length as the hint. This is to extend the lifetime of the prefix the
client is currently using and also get the prefix the client prefers,
and go through a graceful switch over.
If the server is unable to unable to provide the client with the
newly requested prefix, the client should continue using the prefix
it currently has.
4.5. Receipt of Renew Message by the Server
Upon the receipt of Renew message, if the client included an IA_PD
option with a prefix length hint different from the prefix that has
been delegated to the client, the server should check to9 see whether
it has a prefix matching the prefix length hint.
If the server is able to provide a prefix matching the prefix length
hint, then it should provide the new prefix to the client, while
giving the old prefix a shorter lifetime. This way, the client
wouldn't have to deprecate the old prefix right away.
If the server is unable to provide a prefix matching the newly
Cui, et al. Expires January 7, 2016 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft DHCPv6 Prefix Length Hint Issues July 2015
requested prefix length hint during Renew then it should just extend
the lifetime of the old prefix.
It's unnecessary for the server to remember what the client requested
before. The prefix length hint is reflecting what the client prefers
at the time being. There is also the possibility that the client's
preference for the prefix length might have changed during this time
interval, so the prefix length hint in the Renew message might not be
the same as the prefix length hint the client originally sent in the
Solicit message.
4.6. Creation of Rebind Message by the Client
During the Rebind process, if the client prefers a prefix length
different from the prefix it is currently using, then the client
should check to see if any of the available servers have the prefix
length preferred by the client. The client should include two IA_PD
options in the Rebind message, one with the currently delegated
prefix as the hint, and the other with the preferred prefix length as
the hint. This is to extend lifetime of the prefix the client is
currently using and also get the prefix the client prefers, and go
through a graceful switch over.
4.7. Receipt of Rebind Message by the Server
Upon the receipt of Rebind message, if the client included an IA_PD
option with a prefix length hint different from the prefix that has
been delegated to the client, the server should check to see whether
it has a prefix in its prefix pool that match the prefix length in
the hint.
If the server is able to provide a prefix matching the prefix length
hint, then it should provide the new prefix to the client, while
giving the old prefix a shorter lifetime. This way, the client
wouldn't have to deprecate the old prefix right away.
If the server is unable to provide the client with the newly
requested prefix during Rebind then it should just extend the
lifetime of the old prefix.
5. Security Considerations
TBD.
Cui, et al. Expires January 7, 2016 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft DHCPv6 Prefix Length Hint Issues July 2015
6. IANA Considerations
This document does not include an IANA request.
7. Contributors List
Many thanks to Qi Sun, Bernie Volz, Ole Troan.
8. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC3315] Droms, R., Bound, J., Volz, B., Lemon, T., Perkins, C.,
and M. Carney, "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for
IPv6 (DHCPv6)", RFC 3315, July 2003.
[RFC3633] Troan, O. and R. Droms, "IPv6 Prefix Options for Dynamic
Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) version 6", RFC 3633,
December 2003.
Authors' Addresses
Yong Cui
Tsinghua University
Beijing 100084
P.R.China
Phone: +86-10-6260-3059
Email: yong@csnet1.cs.tsinghua.edu.cn
Tianxiang Li
Tsinghua University
Beijing 100084
P.R.China
Phone: +86-18301185866
Email: peter416733@gmail.com
Cong Liu
Tsinghua University
Beijing 100084
P.R.China
Phone: +86-10-6278-5822
Email: gnocuil@gmail.com
Cui, et al. Expires January 7, 2016 [Page 9]
| PAFTECH AB 2003-2026 | 2026-04-24 08:31:56 |