1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
|
Network Working Group S. Krishnan
Request for Comments: 5453 Ericsson
Category: Standards Track February 2009
Reserved IPv6 Interface Identifiers
Status of This Memo
This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the
Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet
Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state
and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2009 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 to this document.
Abstract
Interface identifiers in IPv6 unicast addresses are used to identify
interfaces on a link. They are required to be unique within a
subnet. Several RFCs have specified interface identifiers or
identifier ranges that have a special meaning attached to them. An
IPv6 node autoconfiguring an interface identifier in these ranges
will encounter unexpected consequences. Since there is no
centralized repository for such reserved identifiers, this document
aims to create one.
Krishnan Standards Track [Page 1]
^L
RFC 5453 Reserved IPv6 Interface Identifiers February 2009
Table of Contents
1. Introduction ....................................................2
1.1. Applicability ..............................................2
1.2. Requirements Notation ......................................3
2. Issues with Reusing Reserved Interface Identifiers ..............3
2.1. Possible Solutions .........................................3
3. IANA Considerations .............................................3
4. Acknowledgements ................................................4
5. Security Considerations .........................................4
6. References ......................................................5
6.1. Normative References .......................................5
6.2. Informative References .....................................5
Appendix A. List of Potentially Affected RFCs ......................6
1. Introduction
An IPv6 unicast address is composed of two parts: a subnet prefix and
an interface identifier (IID) that identifies a unique interface
within the subnet prefix. The structure of an IPv6 unicast address
is depicted in "IPv6 Addressing Architecture" [RFC4291] and is
replicated here for clarity.
| n bits | 128-n bits |
+-------------------------------+---------------------------------+
| subnet prefix | interface ID |
+-------------------------------+---------------------------------+
Figure 1: IPv6 Unicast Address Format
For all unicast addresses, except those that start with the binary
value 000, Interface IDs are required to be 64 bits long and to be
constructed in Modified EUI-64 format [RFC4291]. Examples of
mechanisms that generate interface identifiers without a unique token
include Cryptographically Generated Addresses [RFC3972], Privacy
Addresses [RFC4941], Hash-Based Addresses [HBA], etc. Non-unique
interface identifiers can also be allocated using managed address
assignment mechanisms like DHCPv6 (Dynamic Host Configuration
Protocol for IPv6) [RFC3315].
1.1. Applicability
This document applies only to interface identifiers that are formed
in the modified EUI-64 format as defined in Appendix A of [RFC4291].
All other types of interface identifiers are out of its scope.
Krishnan Standards Track [Page 2]
^L
RFC 5453 Reserved IPv6 Interface Identifiers February 2009
1.2. Requirements Notation
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].
2. Issues with Reusing Reserved Interface Identifiers
Let us assume a node comes up with an interface identifier that has
been reserved for use in some other capacity, e.g., an IPv6 node that
uses temporary IPv6 addresses [RFC4941] comes up with an IID of
fdff:ffff:ffff:ffff. This node will receive requests from all nodes
that are requesting a service from a Mobile IPv6 home agent since the
above-mentioned interface identifier has been reserved in [RFC2526]
to serve as a MIPv6 home agent's anycast address. At best, this is
an annoyance to the node that came up with this address. At worst,
another node on the link would be denied service and may not look for
other methods of acquiring a home agent. Thus, such reserved
interface identifiers MUST NOT be used for autonomous
autoconfiguration or for managed address configuration.
2.1. Possible Solutions
There are two possible ways to go about avoiding usage of these
reserved interface identifiers. One of them would be to add a
normative reference to each specification that reserves an interface
identifier. The other would be to create an IANA registry for such
interface identifiers. There are two disadvantages to the normative
reference approach. Firstly, this approach does not scale well
because the number of such specifications that would need to be
updated is large. Secondly, the maturity level of the document
reserving the IID might be lower than the one prohibited from using
it; this will cause a downward reference problem. Therefore, the
better solution is to create an IANA registry for this purpose.
3. IANA Considerations
This document creates an IANA registry for reserved IPv6 interface
identifiers. Initial values for the reserved IPv6 interface
identifiers are given below.
Krishnan Standards Track [Page 3]
^L
RFC 5453 Reserved IPv6 Interface Identifiers February 2009
+-----------------------------------------+-------------------------+
| Interface Identifier Range | Description |
+-----------------------------------------+-------------------------+
| 0000:0000:0000:0000 | Subnet-Router Anycast |
| | [RFC4291] |
| | |
| FDFF:FFFF:FFFF:FF80-FDFF:FFFF:FFFF:FFFF | Reserved Subnet Anycast |
| | Addresses[RFC2526] |
+-----------------------------------------+-------------------------+
Table 1: Current Assignments
It is possible that implementations might predate a specific
assignment from this registry and hence not be cognizant of the
reserved nature of the interface identifier. Hence, future
assignments from this registry are discouraged. Future assignments,
if any, are to be made through Standards Action [RFC5226].
Assignments consist of a single interface identifier or a range of
interface identifiers.
NOTE: The address :: (all zeros in the interface identifier field) is
used as the unspecified address and ::/0 is used as a default route
indicator, as specified in [RFC5156]. These uses do not conflict
with the reserved interface identifiers defined here, since the
reserved identifiers defined in this document are used for avoiding
conflicts with stateless address autoconfiguration that utilizes a
64-bit prefix length.
4. Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank Alain Durand, Alex Petrescu, Bernie
Volz, Bob Hinden, Christian Huitema, Fred Templin, Jordi Palet
Martinez, Pekka Savola, Remi Denis-Courmount, Tim Enos, Ed
Jankiewicz, Brian Carpenter, Alfred Hoenes, Jari Arkko, Pasi Eronen,
Tim Polk, Lars Eggert, Derek Atkins, and Robert Sparks for reviewing
this document and suggesting changes.
5. Security Considerations
By utilizing one of the reserved interface identifiers, an IPv6 node
might receive requests that it is not authorized to receive.
Information that creates or updates a registration in this registry
needs to be authenticated and authorized by the IANA based on the
instructions set forth by [RFC5226].
Krishnan Standards Track [Page 4]
^L
RFC 5453 Reserved IPv6 Interface Identifiers February 2009
6. References
6.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2526] Johnson, D. and S. Deering, "Reserved IPv6 Subnet Anycast
Addresses", RFC 2526, March 1999.
[RFC4291] Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "IP Version 6 Addressing
Architecture", RFC 4291, February 2006.
[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
May 2008.
6.2. Informative References
[HBA] Bagnulo, M., "Hash Based Addresses (HBA)", Work in
Progress, October 2006.
[RFC3315] Droms, R., Ed., Bound, J., Volz, B., Lemon, T., Perkins,
C., and M. Carney, "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol
for IPv6 (DHCPv6)", RFC 3315, July 2003.
[RFC3972] Aura, T., "Cryptographically Generated Addresses (CGA)",
RFC 3972, March 2005.
[RFC4941] Narten, T., Draves, R., and S. Krishnan, "Privacy
Extensions for Stateless Address Autoconfiguration in
IPv6", RFC 4941, September 2007.
[RFC5156] Blanchet, M., "Special-Use IPv6 Addresses", RFC 5156,
April 2008.
Krishnan Standards Track [Page 5]
^L
RFC 5453 Reserved IPv6 Interface Identifiers February 2009
Appendix A. List of Potentially Affected RFCs
Implementations of the following RFCs need to be aware of the
reserved interface identifier ranges when they allocate new
addresses. Future revisions of these RFCs should ensure that this is
either already sufficiently clear or that the text is amended to take
this into account.
o RFC 2590 - Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Frame Relay Networks
Specification
o RFC 3315 - Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6)
o RFC 3972 - Cryptographically Generated Addresses (CGA)
o RFC 4489 - A Method for Generating Link-Scoped IPv6 Multicast
Addresses
o RFC 4862 - IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration
o RFC 4941 - Privacy Extensions for Stateless Address
Autoconfiguration in IPv6
o RFC 4982 - Support for Multiple Hash Algorithms in
Cryptographically Generated Addresses (CGAs)
o RFC 5072 - IP Version 6 over PPP
Author's Address
Suresh Krishnan
Ericsson
8400 Decarie Blvd.
Town of Mount Royal, QC
Canada
Phone: +1 514 345 7900 x42871
EMail: suresh.krishnan@ericsson.com
Krishnan Standards Track [Page 6]
^L
|
