--- 1/draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-relay-supplied-options-00.txt 2010-09-18 07:13:02.000000000 +0200 +++ 2/draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-relay-supplied-options-01.txt 2010-09-18 07:13:02.000000000 +0200 @@ -1,19 +1,19 @@ dhc T. Lemon Internet-Draft Nominum Intended status: Standards Track Q. Wu -Expires: March 18, 2011 Huawei - September 14, 2010 +Expires: March 22, 2011 Huawei + September 18, 2010 Relay-Supplied DHCP Options - draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-relay-supplied-options-00 + draft-ietf-dhc-dhcpv6-relay-supplied-options-01 Abstract This document describes a general mechanism whereby a DHCPv6 relay agent can provide options to a DHCPv6 server that the DHCPv6 server can then provide to the DHCPv6 client. Status of this Memo This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the @@ -22,21 +22,21 @@ 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 March 18, 2011. + This Internet-Draft will expire on March 22, 2011. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2010 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 @@ -50,39 +50,40 @@ 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Protocol Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. Encoding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4. DHCP Relay Agent Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 5. DHCP Server Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 - 8. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 - Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 + 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 + 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 + 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 + Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 1. Introduction - There are some cases where a DHCP relay agent has information that - would be useful to provide to a DHCP client, and the DHCP server does - not have that information. The DHCPv6 specification [RFC3315] does - not provide a mechanism whereby the DHCP relay can provide options to - the DHCP client. This document defines an extension to DHCP that - allows DHCP relay agents to propose options to be sent to DHCP + The DHCPv6 specification [RFC3315] allows DHCP relay agents to + forward DHCPv6 messages between clients and servers that are not on + the same IPv6 link. In some cases the DHCP relay agent has + information the DHCP server does not have that would be useful to + provide to a DHCP client. For example, the DHCP client may need to + learn the EAP local domain name [I.D-ietf-hokey-ldn-discovery] for + use in EAP re-authentication [RFC5296], which is known to the relay + agent but not the server. The DHCPv6 protocol specification does not + provide a mechanism whereby the relay agent can provide options to + the client. This document extends DHCP with a mechanism that allows + DHCP relay agents to propose options for the server to send to DHCP clients. - The initial motivation for this draft came from a proposal from the - Mobile IPv6 working group that proposed a single-use mechanism - whereby a particular relay option would be forwarded to the client. - Subsequent independent effort in another working group has confirmed - the need for a general mechanism to do this. - 1.1. 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 RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. 1.2. Terminology The following terms and acronyms are used in this document: @@ -175,29 +176,41 @@ the client, rather than using this mechanism to cause the server to produce a message containing forged information. 7. IANA Considerations We request that IANA assign one new option code from the registry of DHCP Option Codes maintained at http://www.iana.org/assignments/dhcpv6-parameters. This option code will be assigned to the Relay-Supplied Options option. -8. Normative References +8. References + +8.1. 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. +8.2. Informative References + + [I.D-ietf-hokey-ldn-discovery] + Zorn, G., Wu, Q., and Y. Wang, "The Local Domain Name + DHCPv6 Option", draft-ietf-hokey-ldn-discovery-05 (work in + progress), September 2010. + + [RFC5296] Narayanan, V. and L. Dondeti, "EAP Extensions for EAP Re- + authentication Protocol (ERP)", RFC 5296, August 2008. + Authors' Addresses Ted Lemon Nominum 2000 Seaport Blvd Redwood City, CA 94063 USA Phone: +1 650 381 6000 Email: mellon@nominum.com