1 files changed, 451 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc1916.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc1916.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b49e118
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/rfc/rfc1916.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,451 @@
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Network Working Group                                       H. Berkowitz
+Request for Comments: 1916                             PSC International
+Category: Informational                                      P. Ferguson
+                                                     cisco Systems, Inc.
+                                                               W. Leland
+                                                                Bellcore
+                                                               P. Nesser
+                                              Nesser & Nesser Consulting
+                                                           February 1996
+
+
+    Enterprise Renumbering: Experience and Information Solicitation
+
+Status of this Memo
+
+   This memo provides information for the Internet community.  This memo
+   does not specify an Internet standard of any kind.  Distribution of
+   this memo is unlimited.
+
+Abstract
+
+   Because of the urgent need for, and substantial difficulty in,
+   renumbering IP networks, the PIER working group is compiling a series
+   of documents to assist sites in their renumbering efforts.  The
+   intent of these documents is to provide both educational and
+   practical information to the Internet community. To this end the
+   working group is soliciting information from organizations that
+   already have gone through, or are in the process of going through,
+   renumbering efforts. Case studies, tools, and lists of applications
+   that require special attention are sought.
+
+Table of Contents
+
+   1.   Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
+   2.   Renumbering Experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
+   3.   Information on Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
+   4.   Application Information  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
+   5.   Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
+   6.   Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
+   A.   Formatting Rules (from RFC 1543) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Berkowitz, et al             Informational                      [Page 1]
+
+RFC 1916          Enterprise Renumbering Solicitation      February 1996
+
+
+1. Introduction
+
+   There are immediate and increasingly severe requirements to renumber
+   both small and large-scale networks. The Procedures for
+   Internet/Enterprise Renumbering (PIER) working group in the IETF
+   urgently requests specific input for producing concrete guidance for
+   the renumbering task as quickly as possible.  As part of collecting
+   such information, the PIER working group therefore is soliciting
+   input from people and organizations with experience in changing the
+   IP addresses of enterprise networks or in making major changes in the
+   subnetting of existing networks. We are especially interested in
+   actual case studies -- that is, accounts describing what was actually
+   done to renumber one or more networks.  Information is also solicited
+   on specific tools used in the process, and on areas in which tools
+   were needed but not available.  Because applications that use IP
+   addresses directly in their configuration or security mechanisms pose
+   specific difficulties and coordination issues for renumbering, a
+   catalogue of such applications is being compiled.
+
+   All interested parties are invited to submit material in any of these
+   areas:
+
+   A) Accounts of the experience of renumbering networks:
+   -- Retrospective reports on renumbering efforts.
+   -- Journals or running accounts of a renumbering effort, written
+      while the task is underway.
+
+   B) Information on tools to help renumbering:
+   -- Descriptions of tools used, whether commercial, freeware, or ad
+      hoc (such as perl scripts).
+   -- Descriptions of specific needs where a tool could clearly have
+      helped, but none was found.
+
+   C) Information on applications using embedded IP addresses:
+   -- Software applications that use embedded IP addresses for security
+      keys, authentication, or any other "inappropriate" purposes.
+   -- Hardware devices whose IP addresses are hardcoded into the
+      hardware design (and so may require extensive time lags to
+      retool).
+   -- Both software and hardware whose vendors are no longer in business
+      and that may require replacement or specialized solutions.
+
+   The focus of this solicitation is on experience with renumbering that
+   has been done or is now underway in IPv4 networks, and not on future
+   changes to protocols or environments that may eventually be useful.
+   We are especially concerned with the most common situation faced
+   today: single-homed networks that are not transit providers. However,
+   experience with renumbering more complex environments is also
+
+
+
+Berkowitz, et al             Informational                      [Page 2]
+
+RFC 1916          Enterprise Renumbering Solicitation      February 1996
+
+
+   welcome.
+
+   The information provided will be used as an information base from
+   which at least three documents will be composed: a document
+   summarizing the processes to follow when renumbering, a document
+   describing the available tools, and a document containing a list of
+   known applications requiring special attention when renumbering. The
+   information will also be available on the PIER home page,
+   http://www.isi.edu/div7/pier. More specific reports on renumbering
+   particular environments may also be produced in those cases where
+   enough information is received from the community.
+
+   Although our emphasis is on technical issues and responses, solidly
+   based advice on smoothing the human problems is also appreciated.
+   Political and cultural sensitivities, and handling them, are major
+   issues in the real world.
+
+   There is no requirement that a formal document be submitted, although
+   with the permission of the submitter, selected accounts of experience
+   in renumbering will be published by PIER as part of their planned
+   series of case studies. If you wish to have your account released as
+   a PIER case study, please follow the standard RFC format described in
+   RFC 1543, "Instructions to RFC Authors". (For convenience, these
+   formatting rules are given in Appendix A below.)
+
+   The people and organization(s) involved and the network(s) renumbered
+   need not be identified in any document made public by PIER: please
+   explicitly indicate if a submission should have its anonymity
+   protected.
+
+   The deadline for the submission of your information is May 15, 1996,
+   though early submission is encouraged. Any information, however
+   informally written, that can be submitted earlier, would be greatly
+   appreciated and will help shape the further work of the PIER group.
+   In particular, if you expect to submit a detailed write-up by May 15,
+   1996, please let us know as soon as possible.
+
+   Please send submissions, questions, or suggestions to the PIER
+   discussion list, pier@isi.edu.
+
+   To subscribe to the PIER discussion list, please send your request to
+   pier-request@isi.edu. Further information on PIER is available on the
+   PIER home page, http://www.isi.edu/div7/pier.
+
+   Mail may also be sent directly to the editors, without its appearing
+   on the PIER list, by sending to pier-solicit@bellcore.com.
+
+
+
+
+
+Berkowitz, et al             Informational                      [Page 3]
+
+RFC 1916          Enterprise Renumbering Solicitation      February 1996
+
+
+2.  Renumbering Experience
+
+   An account of a renumbering effort should provide enough concrete
+   information, based on actual experience, so that the reader can
+   understand exactly what was done. Broadly speaking, we anticipate two
+   styles of account:
+
+   i) Retrospective reports
+
+      Based on one or more renumbering efforts, recapitulate what was
+      done and what was learned in the effort. Such a report should
+      describe:
+      -- The environment being renumbered.
+      -- The planning undertaken.
+      -- What was done.
+      -- What worked.
+      -- What didn't (unanticipated issues, problems with planned
+         approaches).
+
+      In addition, the report would be even more useful if it also
+      addressed:
+      -- The reasons for taking the approach chosen.
+      -- Any alternative approaches that were rejected, and why.
+      -- What could have been done in advance to make the task easier.
+      -- Lessons learned: how would you do it next time?
+
+      It is hoped that individuals and organizations that have already
+      been through a renumbering effort could quickly look back over
+      their experiences, and capture their knowledge.
+
+   ii) Running accounts
+
+      Many people are in the midst of a renumbering effort, or are about
+      to embark on one in the next few months. If, in the midst of that
+      hectic task, one could write down a brief account or "diary" of
+      what actually happens, as it happens, such a report is likely to
+      capture the glitches and fixes of even the best-planned effort
+      more accurately than any retrospective.
+
+   Of course, these are only rough categories: any record of the
+   experience of renumbering or of information gained by such experience
+   can be a valuable contribution to PIER. When submitting accounts of
+   renumbering efforts, please attempt to be as articulate and concise
+   as possible.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Berkowitz, et al             Informational                      [Page 4]
+
+RFC 1916          Enterprise Renumbering Solicitation      February 1996
+
+
+3.  Information on Tools
+
+   Information on the tools that were used in renumbering is valuable,
+   whether provided as a separate note or as part of an account of a
+   renumbering effort. We welcome comments, however detailed or brief,
+   on any tools that helped with renumbering, whether or not you intend
+   to produce an account of the entire renumbering effort.
+
+   Some areas in which tools may be used in renumbering include:
+   -- Identifying what needs to be changed in your network, such as
+      configuration files, hosts and servers with embedded or cached IP
+      addresses, DNS, access control lists (ACLs), firewalls, routers,
+      license servers, and other applications.
+   -- Identifying external factors (such as remote servers, routers, and
+      Internet registries) that need to be updated to accommodate your
+      new numbers.
+   -- Identifying dependencies between the different places where the
+      numbers must be updated.
+   -- Notifying external agents.
+   -- Generating the new information (such as routing, configuration,
+      and ACLs) required in order to carry out the updates.
+   -- Coordinating updates.
+   -- Making the updates.
+   -- Verifying the updates.
+   -- Trouble-shooting and debugging.
+   -- Maintaining network functionality.
+   -- Informing your users and other affected human beings (such as NOC
+      staff) of the changes.
+
+   The most useful tools are those that are, or can be, available to
+   other renumbering efforts. For a given tool, it would be helpful to
+   describe:
+   -- How to obtain it (if not a well-known tool).
+   -- What you used it for.
+   -- How you used it.
+   -- What its strengths and limitations are for these specific uses.
+
+   If a tool was created as part of the renumbering effort, a
+   description of exactly what it does should be included. (For example,
+   a script to check for IP addresses in configuration files on user
+   machines should be described in terms of just what it did to obtain
+   the list of machines, what files it looked for, and how it checked
+   them.)
+
+   Although the primary goal of this solicitation is to learn what tools
+   exist and are useful, we also value specific, experience-based
+   descriptions of ways in which tools could have helped even though
+   nothing was available during the renumbering to perform these
+
+
+
+Berkowitz, et al             Informational                      [Page 5]
+
+RFC 1916          Enterprise Renumbering Solicitation      February 1996
+
+
+   functions. Advisories on tools that appear to be useful but in
+   practice created further problems may also be considered, as
+   appropriate.
+
+4.  Application Information
+
+   Information on applications that require special attention when
+   renumbering are of particular interest, since specialized
+   applications are among the most difficult aspects of renumbering.  It
+   typically requires special intervention with the vendor to provide
+   new security keys, new license addresses, new versions of
+   applications, or perhaps even new hardware or proms to change the
+   hardcoded IP addresses.
+
+   A list of any such applications that required "extra" efforts during
+   the renumbering process is valuable. Please include as much specific
+   information as possible, including but not limited to: application
+   name, version, platform, vendor, operating system, operating system
+   version, the steps taken to overcome the problem, and lead times
+   needed.
+
+   In particular, any applications that are no longer supported, or
+   whose vendor has ceased to do business, are extremely important since
+   these applications will likely be some of the more difficult issues a
+   renumbering effort will encounter.  Any solutions to these types of
+   problems, including replacement applications and proprietary
+   solutions, are also sought.
+
+5.  Security Considerations
+
+   This RFC raises no security issues, although accounts of renumbering
+   are encouraged to describe any security issues encountered, any tools
+   that helped identify or resolve the issues, and the actions taken to
+   address them. Submissions should give serious consideration to the
+   content and context of issues regarding security.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Berkowitz, et al             Informational                      [Page 6]
+
+RFC 1916          Enterprise Renumbering Solicitation      February 1996
+
+
+6.  Authors' Addresses
+
+   Howard C. Berkowitz
+   PSC International
+   8260 Greensboro Drive, Suite 330
+   McLean, VA 22102
+
+   Phone: (703) 998-5819
+   Fax: (703) 998-5058
+   EMail: hcb@clark.net
+
+
+   Paul Ferguson
+   cisco Systems, Inc.
+   1835 Alexander Bell Drive
+   Suite 100
+   Reston, VA 22091
+
+   Phone: (703) 716-9538
+   Fax: (703) 716-9538
+   EMail: pferguso@cisco.com
+
+
+   Will E. Leland
+   Room 1A-228B
+   Bellcore
+   445 South Street
+   Morristown, NJ 07960-6438
+
+   Phone: (201) 829-4376
+   Fax: (201) 829-2504
+   EMail: wel@bellcore.com
+
+
+   Philip J. Nesser II
+   Nesser & Nesser Consulting
+   16015 84th Ave. NE
+   Bothell, WA 98011
+
+   Phone: (206) 488-6268
+   EMail: pjnesser@rocket.com
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Berkowitz, et al             Informational                      [Page 7]
+
+RFC 1916          Enterprise Renumbering Solicitation      February 1996
+
+
+Appendix  A - Formatting Rules (from RFC 1543)
+
+   Note: there are a set of NROFF formatting macros for the following
+   format.  Please contact pier-solicit@bellcore.com if you would like
+   to get a copy.
+
+3a.  ASCII Format Rules
+
+   The character codes are ASCII.
+
+   Each page must be limited to 58 lines followed by a form feed on a
+   line by itself.
+
+   Each line must be limited to 72 characters followed by carriage
+   return and line feed.
+
+   No overstriking (or underlining) is allowed.
+
+   These "height" and "width" constraints include any headers, footers,
+   page numbers, or left side indenting.
+
+   Do not fill the text with extra spaces to provide a straight right
+   margin.
+
+   Do not do hyphenation of words at the right margin.
+
+   Do not use footnotes.  If such notes are necessary, put them at the
+   end of a section, or at the end of the document.
+
+   Use single spaced text within a paragraph, and one blank line between
+   paragraphs.
+
+   Note that the number of pages in a document and the page numbers on
+   which various sections fall will likely change with reformatting.
+   Thus cross references in the text by section number usually are
+   easier to keep consistent than cross references by page number.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Berkowitz, et al             Informational                      [Page 8]
+