One document matched: draft-ietf-malloc-static-allocation-00.txt

MBONED Working Group                               David Meyer
Internet Draft                                     Cisco Systems
                                                   Peter Lothberg
                                                   Sprint
Category                                           Experimental
draft-ietf-malloc-static-allocation-00.txt         March, 1999




                      Static Allocations in 233/8



1. Status of this Memo

   This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
   all provisions of Section 10 of RFC 2026.

   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.


2. Abstract

   This describes an experimental policy for use of the class D address
   space using 233/8 as the experimental statically assigned subset of
   the class D address space. This new experimental allocation is in
   addition to those described on [IANA] (e.g. [RFC2365]).

   This memo is a product of the Multicast-Address Allocation working
   group (MALLOC) in the Internat and Transport Areas of the Internet
   Engineering Task Force. Submit comments to <malloc@catarina.usc.edu>
   or the authors.




David Meyer                                                     [Page 1]





Internet Draft draft-ietf-malloc-static-allocation-00.txt    March, 1999


3. Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1999).  All Rights Reserved.


4. Problem Statement

   Multicast address have traditionally been allocated by a dynamic
   mechanism such as SDR [SAP]. However, many current multicast
   deployment models are not amenable to dynamic allocation. For
   example, many content aggregators require group addresses which are
   fixed on a time scale which is not amenable to allocation by a
   mechanism such as described in [SAP]. Perhaps more seriously, since
   there isn't general consensus by providers, content aggregators, or
   application writers as to the allocation mechanism, the Internet is
   left without a coherent multicast address allocation scheme. While
   the MALLOC working group is looking at a specific strategy [MADCAP,
   MASC], it is proposed that a different strategy be developed in
   parallel.


5. Address Space

   For purposes of the experiment described here, the IANA should
   allocate 233/8. The remaining 24 bits will be administered in a
   manner similar to that described in RFC1797:





        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
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       |      233      |           16 bits AS            |  local bits |
       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+







5.1. Example

   Consider, for example, AS 5662. Written in binary, left padded with
   0s, we get 0001011000011110 Mapping the high order octet to the
   second octet of the address, and the low order octect to the the
   third octet, we get 233.22.30/24.



David Meyer                                                     [Page 2]





Internet Draft draft-ietf-malloc-static-allocation-00.txt    March, 1999


6. Allocation

   As mentioned above, the allocation propsed here follows the RFC1797
   (case 1) allocation scheme, modified as follows: the high order octet
   has the value 233, and the next 16 bits are a previously assigned
   Autonomous System number (AS), as registered by a network registry
   and listed in the RWhois database system. This allows a single /24
   per AS.

   As was the case RFC1797, using the AS number in this way allows the
   experiment to get underway quickly in that it automatically allocates
   some addresses to each service provider and does not require a
   registration step.


6.1. Private AS Space

   The address space mapped to the private AS space (as defined in
   [RFC1930], is reserved for future allocation.


7. Security Considerations

   The approach described here may have the effect of reduced exposure
   to denial of space attacks as it greatly reduces the space that is
   dynamically assigned. Further, since dynamic assignment does not
   cross domain boundaries, well known intra-domain security techniques
   can be applied.


8. IANA Considerations

   IANA should allocate 233/8 for experimental assignments. This
   assigment should timeout one year after the assigment is made. The
   assignment may be renewed at that time. It should be noted that the
   experiment described here is in the same spirit the experiment
   described in [RFC1707].














David Meyer                                                     [Page 3]





Internet Draft draft-ietf-malloc-static-allocation-00.txt    March, 1999


9. Acknowledgments

   This idea originated with Peter Lothberg's idea that we use the same
   allocation (AS based) as described in RFC 1797 in the class D address
   space. Randy Bush and Mark Handley contributed many insightful
   comments.


10. References

    [MADCAP]  B. Patel, et. al., "Multicast Address Dynamic Client
              Allocation Protocol (MADCAP)",
              draft-ietf-malloc-madcap-04.txt, Feburay, 1999.

    [MASC]    D. Estrin, et. al., "The Multicast Address-Set Claim
             (MASC) Protocol", draft-ietf-malloc-masc-01.txt, August,
             1998.

    [IANA]    www.isi.edu/in-notes/iana/assignments/multicast-addresses

    [RFC1797] IANA, "Class A Subnet Experiment", RFC 1797, April,
              1995.

    [RFC1930] J. Hawkinson, et. al., "Guidelines for creation,
   selection,
              and registration of an Autonomous System (AS)", RFC1930,
              March, 1996.

    [RFC2365] David Meyer, "Administratively Scoped IP Multicast",
              July, 1998.

    [RFC2374] R. Hinden, et. al., "An IPv6 Aggregatable Global Unicast
              Address Format", July, 1998.

    [SAP]     Handley, Mark, "SAP: Session Announcement Protocol",
              draft-ietf-mmusic-sap-00.txt, November, 1996.















David Meyer                                                     [Page 4]





Internet Draft draft-ietf-malloc-static-allocation-00.txt    March, 1999


11. Author's Address


   David Meyer
   Cisco Systems, Inc.
   170 W. Tasman Drive
   San Jose, CA 95134-1706
   United States
   EMail: dmm@cisco.com

   Peter Lothberg
   Sprint
   VARESA0104
   12502 Sunrise Valley Drive
   Reston VA, 20196
   Email: roll@sprint.net



































David Meyer                                                     [Page 5]