summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/doc/rfc/rfc7598.txt
blob: 58311a882b26f2dc5667339a6efc212ff7738dec (plain) (blame)
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
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
736
737
738
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
746
747
748
749
750
751
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
760
761
762
763
764
765
766
767
768
769
770
771
772
773
774
775
776
777
778
779
780
781
782
783
784
785
786
787
788
789
790
791
792
793
794
795
796
797
798
799
800
801
802
803
804
805
806
807
808
809
810
811
812
813
814
815
816
817
818
819
820
821
822
823
824
825
826
827
828
829
830
831
832
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
845
846
847
848
849
850
851
852
853
854
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
862
863
864
865
866
867
868
869
870
871
872
873
874
875
876
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
889
890
891
892
893
894
895
896
897
898
899
900
901
902
903
904
905
906
907
908
909
910
911
912
913
914
915
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
926
927
928
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
940
941
942
943
944
945
946
947
948
949
950
951
952
953
954
955
956
957
958
959
960
961
962
963
964
965
966
967
968
969
970
971
972
973
974
975
976
977
978
979
980
981
982
983
984
985
986
987
988
989
990
991
992
993
994
995
996
997
998
999
1000
1001
1002
1003
1004
1005
1006
1007
1008
1009
1010
1011
1012
1013
1014
1015
1016
1017
1018
1019
1020
1021
1022
1023
1024
1025
1026
1027
1028
1029
1030
1031
1032
1033
1034
1035
1036
1037
1038
1039
1040
1041
1042
1043
1044
1045
1046
1047
1048
1049
1050
1051
1052
1053
1054
1055
1056
1057
1058
1059
1060
1061
1062
1063
1064
1065
1066
1067
1068
1069
1070
1071
1072
1073
1074
1075
1076
1077
1078
1079
1080
1081
1082
1083
1084
1085
1086
1087
1088
1089
1090
1091
1092
1093
1094
1095
1096
1097
1098
1099
1100
1101
1102
1103
1104
1105
1106
1107
1108
1109
1110
1111
1112
1113
1114
1115
1116
1117
1118
1119
1120
1121
1122
1123
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                      T. Mrugalski
Request for Comments: 7598                                           ISC
Category: Standards Track                                       O. Troan
ISSN: 2070-1721                                            Cisco Systems
                                                               I. Farrer
                                                     Deutsche Telekom AG
                                                            S. Perreault
                                                     Jive Communications
                                                                  W. Dec
                                                           Cisco Systems
                                                                  C. Bao
                                                     Tsinghua University
                                                                  L. Yeh
                                                 Freelancer Technologies
                                                                 X. Deng
                                       The University of New South Wales
                                                               July 2015


          DHCPv6 Options for Configuration of Softwire Address
                        and Port-Mapped Clients

Abstract

   This document specifies DHCPv6 options, termed Softwire46 options,
   for the provisioning of Softwire46 Customer Edge (CE) devices.
   Softwire46 is a collective term used to refer to architectures based
   on the notion of IPv4 Address plus Port (A+P) for providing IPv4
   connectivity across an IPv6 network.

Status of This Memo

   This is an Internet Standards Track document.

   This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
   (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has
   received public review and has been approved for publication by the
   Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Further information on
   Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 5741.

   Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
   and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
   http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7598.








Mrugalski, et al.            Standards Track                    [Page 1]
^L
RFC 7598               DHCPv6 for Softwire 46 CEs              July 2015


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
   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 ....................................................3
   2. Conventions .....................................................3
   3. Softwire46 Overview .............................................4
   4. Common Softwire46 DHCPv6 Options ................................5
      4.1. S46 Rule Option ............................................5
      4.2. S46 BR Option ..............................................7
      4.3. S46 DMR Option .............................................8
      4.4. S46 IPv4/IPv6 Address Binding Option .......................9
      4.5. S46 Port Parameters Option ................................10
   5. Softwire46 Containers ..........................................11
      5.1. S46 MAP-E Container Option ................................11
      5.2. S46 MAP-T Container Option ................................12
      5.3. S46 Lightweight 4over6 Container Option ...................13
   6. Softwire46 Options Encapsulation ...............................14
   7. DHCPv6 Server Behavior .........................................14
   8. DHCPv6 Client Behavior .........................................14
   9. Security Considerations ........................................15
   10. IANA Considerations ...........................................16
   11. References ....................................................16
      11.1. Normative References .....................................16
      11.2. Informative References ...................................17
   Acknowledgements ..................................................18
   Authors' Addresses ................................................19











Mrugalski, et al.            Standards Track                    [Page 2]
^L
RFC 7598               DHCPv6 for Softwire 46 CEs              July 2015


1.  Introduction

   A number of architectural solution proposals discussed in the IETF
   Softwire Working Group use Address plus Port (A+P) [RFC6346] as their
   technology base for providing IPv4 connectivity to end users using
   Customer Edge (CE) devices across a service provider's IPv6 network,
   while allowing for shared or dedicated IPv4 addressing of CEs.

   An example is Mapping of Address and Port with Encapsulation (MAP-E)
   as defined in [RFC7597].  The MAP solution consists of one or more
   MAP Border Relay (BR) routers responsible for stateless forwarding
   between a MAP IPv6 domain and an IPv4 network, and one or more MAP
   Customer Edge (CE) routers responsible for forwarding between a
   user's IPv4 network and the MAP IPv6 network domain.  Collectively,
   the MAP CE and BR form a domain when configured with common service
   parameters.  This characteristic is common to all of the Softwire46
   mechanisms.

   To function in such a domain, a CE needs to be provisioned with the
   appropriate A+P service parameters for that domain.  These consist
   primarily of the CE's IPv4 address and transport-layer port range(s).
   Furthermore, the IPv6 transport mode (i.e., encapsulation or
   translation) needs to be specified.  Provisioning of other IPv4
   configuration information not derived directly from the A+P service
   parameters is not covered in this document.  It is expected that
   provisioning of other IPv4 configuration information will continue to
   use DHCPv4 [RFC2131].

   This memo specifies a set of DHCPv6 [RFC3315] options to provision
   Softwire46 configuration information to CE routers.  Although the
   focus is to deliver IPv4 service to an end-user network (such as a
   residential home network), it can equally be applied to an individual
   host acting as a CE.  Configuration of the BR is out of scope for
   this document.

2.  Conventions

   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 RFC 2119 [RFC2119].











Mrugalski, et al.            Standards Track                    [Page 3]
^L
RFC 7598               DHCPv6 for Softwire 46 CEs              July 2015


3.  Softwire46 Overview

   This document describes a set of common DHCPv6 options for
   configuring the Mapping of Address and Port with Encapsulation
   (MAP-E) [RFC7597], Mapping of Address and Port using Translation
   (MAP-T) [RFC7599], and Lightweight 4over6 [RFC7596] mechanisms.  For
   definitions of the terminology used in this document, please see the
   relevant terminology sections in [RFC7597], [RFC7599], and [RFC7596].

   MAP-E, MAP-T, and Lightweight 4over6 are essentially providing the
   same functionality: IPv4 service to a CE router over an IPv6-only
   access network.  MAP-E and MAP-T may embed parts of the IPv4 address
   in IPv6 prefixes, thereby supporting many clients with a fixed set of
   mapping rules and Mesh mode (direct CE-to-CE communication).  MAP-E
   and MAP-T CEs may also be provisioned in hub-and-spoke mode and in
   1:1 mode (with no embedded address bits).  The difference between
   MAP-E and MAP-T is that they use different means to connect to the
   IPv6 domain.  MAP-E uses IPv4-over-IPv6 tunneling [RFC2473], while
   MAP-T uses IPv4-to-IPv6 translation based on [RFC6145].  Lightweight
   4over6 is a hub-and-spoke IPv4-over-IPv6 tunneling mechanism, with
   complete independence of IPv4 and IPv6 addressing (zero embedded
   address bits).

   The DHCPv6 options described here tie the provisioning parameters,
   and hence the IPv4 service itself, to the End-user IPv6 prefix
   lifetime.  The validity of a Softwire46's IPv4 address, prefix, or
   shared IPv4 address; port set; and any authorization and accounting
   are tied to the lifetime of its associated End-user IPv6 prefix.

   To support more than one mechanism at a time and to allow for a
   possibility of transition between them, the DHCPv6 Option Request
   Option (ORO) [RFC3315] is used.  Each mechanism has a corresponding
   DHCPv6 container option.  A DHCPv6 client can request a particular
   mechanism by including the option code for a particular container
   option in its ORO.  The provisioning parameters for that mechanism
   are expressed by embedding the common format options within the
   respective container option.

   This approach implies that all of the provisioning options appear
   only within the container options.  Softwire46 DHCPv6 clients that
   receive provisioning options that are not encapsulated in container
   options MUST silently ignore these options.  DHCPv6 server
   administrators are advised to ensure that DHCPv6 servers are
   configured to send these options in the proper encapsulation.







Mrugalski, et al.            Standards Track                    [Page 4]
^L
RFC 7598               DHCPv6 for Softwire 46 CEs              July 2015


   This document is organized with the common encapsulated options
   described first (Section 4), followed by the three container options
   (Section 5).  Some encapsulated options are mandatory in some
   containers, some are optional, and some are not permitted.  This is
   shown in Table 1 (Section 6).

4.  Common Softwire46 DHCPv6 Options

   The DHCPv6 protocol is used for Softwire46 CE provisioning following
   regular DHCPv6 notions, with the CE assuming the role of a DHCPv6
   client, and the DHCPv6 server providing options following DHCPv6
   server-side policies.  The format and usage of the options are
   defined in the following subsections.

   Each CE needs to be provisioned with enough information to calculate
   its IPv4 address, IPv4 prefix, or shared IPv4 address.  MAP-E and
   MAP-T use the OPTION_S46_RULE option, while Lightweight 4over6 uses
   the OPTION_S46_V4V6BIND option.  A CE that needs to communicate
   outside of the A+P domain also needs the address or prefix of the BR.
   MAP-E and Lightweight 4over6 use the OPTION_S46_BR option to
   communicate the IPv6 address of the BR.  MAP-T forms an IPv6
   destination address by embedding an IPv4 destination address into the
   BR's IPv6 prefix conveyed via the OPTION_S46_DMR option.  Optionally,
   all mechanisms can include the OPTION_S46_PORTPARAMS option to
   specify parameters and port sets for the port-range algorithm.

   Softwire46 options use addresses rather than Fully Qualified Domain
   Names (FQDNs).  For the rationale behind this design choice, see
   Section 8 of [RFC7227].

4.1.  S46 Rule Option

   Figure 1 shows the format of the S46 Rule option (OPTION_S46_RULE)
   used for conveying the Basic Mapping Rule (BMR) and Forwarding
   Mapping Rule (FMR).

   This option follows behavior described in Sections 17.1.1 and 18.1.1
   of [RFC3315].  Clients can send those options, encapsulated in their
   respective container options, with specific values as hints for the
   server.  See Section 5 for details.  Depending on the server
   configuration and policy, it may accept or ignore the hints.  Clients
   MUST be able to process received values that are different than the
   hints it sent earlier.








Mrugalski, et al.            Standards Track                    [Page 5]
^L
RFC 7598               DHCPv6 for Softwire 46 CEs              July 2015


      0                   1                   2                   3
      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
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |        OPTION_S46_RULE        |         option-length         |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |     flags     |     ea-len    |  prefix4-len  | ipv4-prefix   |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                  (continued)                  |  prefix6-len  |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                           ipv6-prefix                         |
     |                       (variable length)                       |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                                                               |
     .                        S46_RULE-options                       .
     .                                                               .
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                         Figure 1: S46 Rule Option

   o  option-code: OPTION_S46_RULE (89)

   o  option-length: length of the option, excluding option-code and
      option-length fields, including length of all encapsulated
      options; expressed in octets.

   o  flags: 8 bits long; carries flags applicable to the rule.  The
      meanings of the specific bits are explained in Figure 2.

   o  ea-len: 8 bits long; specifies the Embedded Address (EA) bit
      length.  Allowed values range from 0 to 48.

   o  prefix4-len: 8 bits long; expresses the prefix length of the
      Rule IPv4 prefix specified in the ipv4-prefix field.  Allowed
      values range from 0 to 32.

   o  ipv4-prefix: a fixed-length 32-bit field that specifies the IPv4
      prefix for the S46 rule.  The bits in the prefix after prefix4-len
      number of bits are reserved and MUST be initialized to zero by the
      sender and ignored by the receiver.

   o  prefix6-len: 8 bits long; expresses the length of the
      Rule IPv6 prefix specified in the ipv6-prefix field.  Allowed
      values range from 0 to 128.

   o  ipv6-prefix: a variable-length field that specifies the IPv6
      domain prefix for the S46 rule.  The field is padded on the right
      with zero bits up to the nearest octet boundary when prefix6-len
      is not evenly divisible by 8.



Mrugalski, et al.            Standards Track                    [Page 6]
^L
RFC 7598               DHCPv6 for Softwire 46 CEs              July 2015


   o  S46_RULE-options: a variable-length field that may contain zero or
      more options that specify additional parameters for this S46 rule.
      This document specifies one such option: OPTION_S46_PORTPARAMS.

   The format of the S46 Rule Flags field is:

                              0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
                             +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
                             |Reserved     |F|
                             +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                         Figure 2: S46 Rule Flags

   o  Reserved: 7 bits; reserved for future use as flags.

   o  F-flag: 1-bit field that specifies whether the rule is to be used
      for forwarding (FMR).  If set, this rule is used as an FMR; if not
      set, this rule is a BMR only and MUST NOT be used for forwarding.
      Note: A BMR can also be used as an FMR for forwarding if the
      F-flag is set.  The BMR is determined by a longest-prefix match of
      the Rule IPv6 prefix against the End-user IPv6 prefix(es).

   It is expected that in a typical mesh deployment scenario there will
   be a single BMR, which could also be designated as an FMR using the
   F-flag.

4.2.  S46 BR Option

   The S46 BR option (OPTION_S46_BR) is used to convey the IPv6 address
   of the Border Relay.  Figure 3 shows the format of the OPTION_S46_BR
   option.

      0                   1                   2                   3
      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
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |         OPTION_S46_BR         |         option-length         |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                      br-ipv6-address                          |
     |                                                               |
     |                                                               |
     |                                                               |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                          Figure 3: S46 BR Option

   o  option-code: OPTION_S46_BR (90)

   o  option-length: 16



Mrugalski, et al.            Standards Track                    [Page 7]
^L
RFC 7598               DHCPv6 for Softwire 46 CEs              July 2015


   o  br-ipv6-address: a fixed-length field of 16 octets that specifies
      the IPv6 address for the S46 BR.

   BR redundancy can be implemented by using an anycast address for the
   BR IPv6 address.  Multiple OPTION_S46_BR options MAY be included in
   the container; this document does not further explore the use of
   multiple BR IPv6 addresses.

4.3.  S46 DMR Option

   The S46 DMR option (OPTION_S46_DMR) is used to convey values for the
   Default Mapping Rule (DMR).  Figure 4 shows the format of the
   OPTION_S46_DMR option used for conveying a DMR.

      0                   1                   2                   3
      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
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |        OPTION_S46_DMR         |         option-length         |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |dmr-prefix6-len|            dmr-ipv6-prefix                    |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+           (variable length)                   |
     .                                                               .
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                         Figure 4: S46 DMR Option

   o  option-code: OPTION_S46_DMR (91)

   o  option-length: 1 + length of dmr-ipv6-prefix specified in octets.

   o  dmr-prefix6-len: 8 bits long; expresses the bitmask length of the
      IPv6 prefix specified in the dmr-ipv6-prefix field.  Allowed
      values range from 0 to 128.

   o  dmr-ipv6-prefix: a variable-length field specifying the IPv6
      prefix or address for the BR.  This field is right-padded with
      zeros to the nearest octet boundary when dmr-prefix6-len is not
      divisible by 8.













Mrugalski, et al.            Standards Track                    [Page 8]
^L
RFC 7598               DHCPv6 for Softwire 46 CEs              July 2015


4.4.  S46 IPv4/IPv6 Address Binding Option

   The S46 IPv4/IPv6 Address Binding option (OPTION_S46_V4V6BIND) MAY be
   used to specify the full or shared IPv4 address of the CE.  The IPv6
   prefix field is used by the CE to identify the correct prefix to use
   for the tunnel source.

      0                   1                   2                   3
      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
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |      OPTION_S46_V4V6BIND      |         option-length         |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                         ipv4-address                          |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |bindprefix6-len|             bind-ipv6-prefix                  |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+             (variable length)                 |
     .                                                               .
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                                                               |
     .                      S46_V4V6BIND-options                     .
     .                                                               .
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

              Figure 5: S46 IPv4/IPv6 Address Binding Option

   o  option-code: OPTION_S46_V4V6BIND (92)

   o  option-length: length of the option, excluding option-code and
      option-length fields, including length of all encapsulated
      options; expressed in octets.

   o  ipv4-address: a fixed-length field of 4 octets specifying an IPv4
      address.

   o  bindprefix6-len: 8 bits long; expresses the bitmask length of the
      IPv6 prefix specified in the bind-ipv6-prefix field.  Allowed
      values range from 0 to 128.

   o  bind-ipv6-prefix: a variable-length field specifying the IPv6
      prefix or address for the S46 CE.  This field is right-padded with
      zeros to the nearest octet boundary when bindprefix6-len is not
      divisible by 8.

   o  S46_V4V6BIND-options: a variable-length field that may contain
      zero or more options that specify additional parameters.  This
      document specifies one such option: OPTION_S46_PORTPARAMS.





Mrugalski, et al.            Standards Track                    [Page 9]
^L
RFC 7598               DHCPv6 for Softwire 46 CEs              July 2015


4.5.  S46 Port Parameters Option

   The S46 Port Parameters option (OPTION_S46_PORTPARAMS) specifies
   optional port set information that MAY be provided to CEs.

   See Section 5.1 of [RFC7597] for a description of the MAP algorithm
   and detailed explanation of all of the parameters.

      0                   1                   2                   3
      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
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |     OPTION_S46_PORTPARAMS     |         option-length         |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |   offset      |    PSID-len   |              PSID             |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                   Figure 6: S46 Port Parameters Option

   o  option-code: OPTION_S46_PORTPARAMS (93)

   o  option-length: 4

   o  offset: Port Set Identifier (PSID) offset.  8 bits long; specifies
      the numeric value for the S46 algorithm's excluded port range/
      offset bits (a-bits), as per Section 5.1 of [RFC7597].  Allowed
      values are between 0 and 15.  Default values for this field are
      specific to the softwire mechanism being implemented and are
      defined in the relevant specification document.

   o  PSID-len: 8 bits long; specifies the number of significant bits in
      the PSID field (also known as 'k').  When set to 0, the PSID field
      is to be ignored.  After the first 'a' bits, there are k bits in
      the port number representing the value of the PSID.  Consequently,
      the address-sharing ratio would be 2^k.

   o  PSID: 16 bits long.  The PSID value algorithmically identifies a
      set of ports assigned to a CE.  The first k bits on the left of
      this field contain the PSID binary value.  The remaining (16 - k)
      bits on the right are padding zeros.

   When receiving the OPTION_S46_PORTPARAMS option with an explicit
   PSID, the client MUST use this explicit PSID when configuring its
   softwire interface.  The OPTION_S46_PORTPARAMS option with an
   explicit PSID MUST be discarded if the S46 CE isn't configured with a
   full IPv4 address (e.g., IPv4 prefix).

   The OPTION_S46_PORTPARAMS option is contained within an
   OPTION_S46_RULE option or an OPTION_S46_V4V6BIND option.



Mrugalski, et al.            Standards Track                   [Page 10]
^L
RFC 7598               DHCPv6 for Softwire 46 CEs              July 2015


5.  Softwire46 Containers

5.1.  S46 MAP-E Container Option

   The S46 MAP-E Container option (OPTION_S46_CONT_MAPE) specifies the
   container used to group all rules and optional port parameters for a
   specified domain.

      0                   1                   2                   3
      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
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |        OPTION_S46_CONT_MAPE   |         option-length         |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                                                               |
     .            encapsulated-options (variable length)             .
     .                                                               .
     +---------------------------------------------------------------+

                   Figure 7: S46 MAP-E Container Option

   o  option-code: OPTION_S46_CONT_MAPE (94)

   o  option-length: length of encapsulated options, expressed in
      octets.

   o  encapsulated-options: options associated with this Softwire46
      MAP-E domain.

   The encapsulated-options field conveys options specific to the
   OPTION_S46_CONT_MAPE option.  Currently, there are two encapsulated
   options specified: OPTION_S46_RULE and OPTION_S46_BR.  There MUST be
   at least one OPTION_S46_RULE option and at least one OPTION_S46_BR
   option.

   Other options applicable to a domain may be defined in the future.  A
   DHCPv6 message MAY include multiple OPTION_S46_CONT_MAPE options
   (representing multiple domains).














Mrugalski, et al.            Standards Track                   [Page 11]
^L
RFC 7598               DHCPv6 for Softwire 46 CEs              July 2015


5.2.  S46 MAP-T Container Option

   The S46 MAP-T Container option (OPTION_S46_CONT_MAPT) specifies the
   container used to group all rules and optional port parameters for a
   specified domain.

      0                   1                   2                   3
      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
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |     OPTION_S46_CONT_MAPT      |         option-length         |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                                                               |
     .            encapsulated-options (variable length)             .
     .                                                               .
     +---------------------------------------------------------------+

                   Figure 8: S46 MAP-T Container Option

   o  option-code: OPTION_S46_CONT_MAPT (95)

   o  option-length: length of encapsulated options, expressed in
      octets.

   o  encapsulated-options: options associated with this Softwire46
      MAP-T domain.

   The encapsulated-options field conveys options specific to the
   OPTION_S46_CONT_MAPT option.  Currently, there are two options
   specified: the OPTION_S46_RULE and OPTION_S46_DMR options.  There
   MUST be at least one OPTION_S46_RULE option and exactly one
   OPTION_S46_DMR option.




















Mrugalski, et al.            Standards Track                   [Page 12]
^L
RFC 7598               DHCPv6 for Softwire 46 CEs              July 2015


5.3.  S46 Lightweight 4over6 Container Option

   The S46 Lightweight 4over6 Container option (OPTION_S46_CONT_LW)
   specifies the container used to group all rules and optional port
   parameters for a specified domain.

      0                   1                   2                   3
      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
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |      OPTION_S46_CONT_LW       |         option-length         |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                                                               |
     +            encapsulated-options (variable length)             .
     .                                                               .
     +---------------------------------------------------------------+

             Figure 9: S46 Lightweight 4over6 Container Option

   o  option-code: OPTION_S46_CONT_LW (96)

   o  option-length: length of encapsulated options, expressed in
      octets.

   o  encapsulated-options: options associated with this Softwire46
      Lightweight 4over6 domain.

   The encapsulated-options field conveys options specific to the
   OPTION_S46_CONT_LW option.  Currently, there are two options
   specified: OPTION_S46_V4V6BIND and OPTION_S46_BR.  There MUST be at
   most one OPTION_S46_V4V6BIND option and at least one OPTION_S46_BR
   option.




















Mrugalski, et al.            Standards Track                   [Page 13]
^L
RFC 7598               DHCPv6 for Softwire 46 CEs              July 2015


6.  Softwire46 Options Encapsulation

   The table below shows which encapsulated options are mandatory,
   optional, or not permitted for each defined container option.

      +-----------------------+-------+-------+--------------------+
      | Option                | MAP-E | MAP-T | Lightweight 4over6 |
      +-----------------------+-------+-------+--------------------+
      | OPTION_S46_RULE       |   M   |   M   |        N/P         |
      | OPTION_S46_BR         |   M   |  N/P  |         M          |
      | OPTION_S46_PORTPARAMS |   O   |   O   |         O          |
      | OPTION_S46_DMR        |  N/P  |   M   |        N/P         |
      | OPTION_S46_V4V6BIND   |  N/P  |  N/P  |         O          |
      +-----------------------+-------+-------+--------------------+

             M - Mandatory, O - Optional, N/P - Not Permitted

                  Table 1: Options for Container Mappings

   Softwire46 DHCPv6 clients that receive container options that violate
   any of the above rules MUST silently ignore such container options.

7.  DHCPv6 Server Behavior

   Section 17.2.2 of [RFC3315] describes how a DHCPv6 client and server
   negotiate configuration values using the ORO.  As a convenience for
   the reader, we mention here that by default a server will not reply
   with a Softwire46 container option if the client has not explicitly
   enumerated one in its ORO.

   A CE router may support several (or all) of the mechanisms mentioned
   here.  In the case where a client requests multiple mechanisms in its
   ORO, the server will reply with the corresponding Softwire46
   container options for which it has configuration information.

8.  DHCPv6 Client Behavior

   An S46 CE acting as a DHCPv6 client will request S46 configuration
   parameters from the DHCPv6 server located in the IPv6 network.  Such
   a client MUST request the S46 container option(s) that it is
   configured for in its ORO in SOLICIT, REQUEST, RENEW, REBIND, and
   INFORMATION-REQUEST messages.









Mrugalski, et al.            Standards Track                   [Page 14]
^L
RFC 7598               DHCPv6 for Softwire 46 CEs              July 2015


   When processing received S46 container options, the following
   behavior is expected:

   o  A client MUST support processing multiple received OPTION_S46_RULE
      options in a container OPTION_S46_CONT_MAPE or
      OPTION_S46_CONT_MAPT option.

   o  A client receiving an unsupported S46 option or an invalid
      parameter value SHOULD discard that S46 container option and log
      the event.

   The behavior of a client that supports multiple Softwire46 mechanisms
   is out of scope for this document.  [Unified-v4-in-v6] describes
   client behavior for the prioritization and handling of multiple
   mechanisms simultaneously.

   Note that a system implementing CE functionality may have multiple
   network interfaces, and these interfaces may be configured
   differently; some may be connected to networks using a Softwire46
   mechanism, and some may be connected to networks that are using
   normal dual-stack or other means.  The CE should approach this
   specification on an interface-by-interface basis.  For example, if
   the CE system is MAP-E capable and is attached to multiple networks
   that provide the OPTION_S46_CONT_MAPE option, then the CE MUST
   configure MAP-E for each interface separately.

   Failure modes are out of scope for this document.  Failure recovery
   mechanisms may be defined in the future.  See Section 5 of [RFC7597]
   for a discussion of valid MAP Rule combinations.  See Section 11 of
   [RFC7227] and Sections 18.1.3, 18.1.4, and 19.1 of [RFC3315] for
   parameter-update mechanisms in DHCPv6 that can be leveraged to update
   configuration after a failure.

9.  Security Considerations

   Section 23 of [RFC3315] discusses DHCPv6-related security issues.

   As with all DHCPv6-derived configuration states, it is possible that
   configuration is actually being delivered by a third party (Man in
   the Middle).  As such, there is no basis on which access over MAP or
   Lightweight 4over6 can be trusted.  Therefore, softwires should not
   bypass any security mechanisms such as IP firewalls.

   In IPv6-only networks that lack IPv4 firewalls, a device that
   supports MAP could be tricked into enabling its IPv4 stack and
   directing IPv4 traffic to the attacker, thus exposing itself to
   previously infeasible IPv4 attack vectors.




Mrugalski, et al.            Standards Track                   [Page 15]
^L
RFC 7598               DHCPv6 for Softwire 46 CEs              July 2015


   Section 10 of [RFC7597] discusses security issues related to the
   MAP-E mechanism, Section 9 of [RFC7596] discusses security issues
   related to the Lightweight 4over6 mechanism, and Section 13 of
   [RFC7599] discusses security issues related to the MAP-T mechanism.

   Readers concerned with the security of Softwire46 provisioning over
   DHCPv6 are encouraged to read [Secure-DHCPv6].

10.  IANA Considerations

   IANA has allocated the following DHCPv6 option codes:

      89 for OPTION_S46_RULE

      90 for OPTION_S46_BR

      91 for OPTION_S46_DMR

      92 for OPTION_S46_V4V6BIND

      93 for OPTION_S46_PORTPARAMS

      94 for OPTION_S46_CONT_MAPE

      95 for OPTION_S46_CONT_MAPT

      96 for OPTION_S46_CONT_LW

   All values have been added to the "Dynamic Host Configuration
   Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6)" option code space defined in Section 24.3
   of [RFC3315].

11.  References

11.1.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

   [RFC3315]  Droms, R., Ed., Bound, J., Volz, B., Lemon, T., Perkins,
              C., and M. Carney, "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol
              for IPv6 (DHCPv6)", RFC 3315, DOI 10.17487/RFC3315,
              July 2003, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3315>.






Mrugalski, et al.            Standards Track                   [Page 16]
^L
RFC 7598               DHCPv6 for Softwire 46 CEs              July 2015


11.2.  Informative References

   [RFC2131]  Droms, R., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol",
              RFC 2131, DOI 10.17487/RFC2131, March 1997,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2131>.

   [RFC2473]  Conta, A. and S. Deering, "Generic Packet Tunneling in
              IPv6 Specification", RFC 2473, DOI 10.17487/RFC2473,
              December 1998, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2473>.

   [RFC6145]  Li, X., Bao, C., and F. Baker, "IP/ICMP Translation
              Algorithm", RFC 6145, DOI 10.17487/RFC6145, April 2011,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6145>.

   [RFC6346]  Bush, R., Ed., "The Address plus Port (A+P) Approach to
              the IPv4 Address Shortage", RFC 6346,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC6346, August 2011,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6346>.

   [RFC7227]  Hankins, D., Mrugalski, T., Siodelski, M., Jiang, S., and
              S. Krishnan, "Guidelines for Creating New DHCPv6 Options",
              BCP 187, RFC 7227, DOI 10.17487/RFC7227, May 2014,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7227>.

   [RFC7596]  Cui, Y., Sun, Q., Boucadair, M., Tsou, T., Lee, Y., and
              I. Farrer, "Lightweight 4over6: An Extension to the
              Dual-Stack Lite Architecture", RFC 7596,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC7596, July 2015,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7596>.

   [RFC7597]  Troan, O., Ed., Dec, W., Li, X., Bao, C., Matsushima, S.,
              Murakami, T., and T. Taylor, Ed., "Mapping of Address and
              Port with Encapsulation (MAP-E)", RFC 7597,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC7597, July 2015,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7597>.

   [RFC7599]  Li, X., Bao, C., Dec, W., Ed., Troan, O., Matsushima, S.,
              and T. Murakami, "Mapping of Address and Port using
              Translation (MAP-T)", RFC 7599, DOI 10.17487/RFC7599,
              July 2015, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7599>.











Mrugalski, et al.            Standards Track                   [Page 17]
^L
RFC 7598               DHCPv6 for Softwire 46 CEs              July 2015


   [Secure-DHCPv6]
              Jiang, S., Ed., Shen, S., Zhang, D., and T. Jinmei,
              "Secure DHCPv6", Work in Progress,
              draft-ietf-dhc-sedhcpv6-08, June 2015.

   [Unified-v4-in-v6]
              Boucadair, M., Farrer, I., Perreault, S., Ed., and S.
              Sivakumar, Ed., "Unified IPv4-in-IPv6 Softwire CPE", Work
              in Progress, draft-ietf-softwire-unified-cpe-01, May 2013.

Acknowledgements

   This document was created as a product of a MAP design team.  The
   following people were members of that team: Congxiao Bao, Mohamed
   Boucadair, Gang Chen, Maoke Chen, Wojciech Dec, Xiaohong Deng, Jouni
   Korhonen, Xing Li, Satoru Matsushima, Tomek Mrugalski, Tetsuya
   Murakami, Jacni Qin, Necj Scoberne, Qiong Sun, Tina Tsou, Dan Wing,
   Leaf Yeh, and Jan Zorz.

   The authors would like to thank Bernie Volz and Tom Taylor for their
   insightful comments and suggestions.






























Mrugalski, et al.            Standards Track                   [Page 18]
^L
RFC 7598               DHCPv6 for Softwire 46 CEs              July 2015


Authors' Addresses

   Tomek Mrugalski
   Internet Systems Consortium, Inc.
   950 Charter Street
   Redwood City, CA  94063
   United States

   Phone: +1 650 423 1345
   Email: tomasz.mrugalski@gmail.com
   URI:   http://www.isc.org/


   Ole Troan
   Cisco Systems
   Philip Pedersens vei 1
   Lysaker  1366
   Norway

   Email: ot@cisco.com


   Ian Farrer
   Deutsche Telekom AG
   CTO-ATI, Landgrabenweg 151
   Bonn, NRW  53227
   Germany

   Email: ian.farrer@telekom.de


   Simon Perreault
   Jive Communications
   Quebec, QC
   Canada

   Email: sperreault@jive.com


   Wojciech Dec
   Cisco Systems, Inc.
   The Netherlands

   Email: wdec@cisco.com
   URI:   http://cisco.com






Mrugalski, et al.            Standards Track                   [Page 19]
^L
RFC 7598               DHCPv6 for Softwire 46 CEs              July 2015


   Congxiao Bao
   CERNET Center/Tsinghua University
   Room 225, Main Building, Tsinghua University
   Beijing  100084
   China

   Phone: +86 10-62785983
   Email: congxiao@cernet.edu.cn


   Leaf Y. Yeh
   Freelancer Technologies
   China

   Email: leaf.y.yeh@hotmail.com


   Xiaohong Deng
   The University of New South Wales
   Sydney  NSW 2052
   Australia

   Email: dxhbupt@gmail.com
   URI:   https://www.unsw.edu.au/



























Mrugalski, et al.            Standards Track                   [Page 20]
^L