draft-ietf-ecrit-dhc-lost-discovery-01.txt		draft-ietf-ecrit-dhc-lost-discovery-02.txt
	ECRIT H. Schulzrinne		ECRIT H. Schulzrinne
	Internet-Draft Columbia U.		Internet-Draft Columbia University
	Intended status: Standards Track J. Polk		Intended status: Standards Track J. Polk
	Expires: September 21, 2007 Cisco		Expires: January 9, 2008 Cisco
	H. Tschofenig		H. Tschofenig
	Siemens Networks GmbH & Co KG		Nokia Siemens Networks
	March 20, 2007		July 8, 2007
	A Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) based Location-to-Service		A Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) based Location-to-Service
	Translation Protocol (LoST) Discovery Procedure		Translation Protocol (LoST) Discovery Procedure
	draft-ietf-ecrit-dhc-lost-discovery-01.txt		draft-ietf-ecrit-dhc-lost-discovery-02.txt
	Status of this Memo		Status of this Memo
	By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any		By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
	applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware		applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
	have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes		have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
	aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.		aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.
	Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering		Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
	Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that		Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
	skipping to change at page 1, line 38		skipping to change at page 1, line 38
	and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any		and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
	time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference		time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
	material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."		material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
	The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at		The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
	http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.		http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
	The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at		The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
	http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.		http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
	This Internet-Draft will expire on September 21, 2007.		This Internet-Draft will expire on January 9, 2008.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).		Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
	Abstract		Abstract
	The Location-to-Service Translation Protocol (LoST) describes an XML-		The Location-to-Service Translation Protocol (LoST) describes an XML-
	based protocol for mapping service identifiers and geospatial or		based protocol for mapping service identifiers and geospatial or
	civic location information to service contact Uniform Resource		civic location information to service contact Uniform Resource
	skipping to change at page 2, line 20		skipping to change at page 2, line 20
	using the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP).		using the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP).
	Table of Contents		Table of Contents
	1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3		1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
	2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3		2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
	3. Domain Name Encoding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3		3. Domain Name Encoding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
	4. LoST Server DHCPv4 Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4		4. LoST Server DHCPv4 Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
	5. LoST Server DHCPv6 Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4		5. LoST Server DHCPv6 Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
	6. Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5		6. Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
	7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5		7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
	7.1. IANA Consideration for DHCPv4 Option . . . . . . . . . . . 6		7.1. IANA Consideration for DHCPv4 Option . . . . . . . . . . . 6
	7.2. IANA Consideration for DHCPv6 Option . . . . . . . . . . . 6		7.2. IANA Consideration for DHCPv6 Option . . . . . . . . . . . 6
	8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6		8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
	9. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6		9. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
	10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6		10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6		10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8		Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
	Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 9		Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 9
	1. Introduction		1. Introduction
	The Location-to-Service Translation Protocol (LoST)		The Location-to-Service Translation Protocol (LoST)
	[I-D.ietf-ecrit-lost] describes an XML-based protocol for mapping		[I-D.ietf-ecrit-lost] describes an XML-based protocol for mapping
	service identifiers and geospatial or civic location information to		service identifiers and geospatial or civic location information to
	service contact Uniform Resource Locators (URLs).		service contact Uniform Resource Locators (URLs).
	In order to interact with a LoST server, the LoST client finally		In order to interact with a LoST server, the LoST client finally
	needs to know its IP address. Several mechanisms can be used to		needs to know its IP address. Several mechanisms can be used to
	learn this address, including manual configuration. In environments		learn this address, including manual configuration. In environments
	where the access network itself either deploys a LoST server or knows		where the access network itself either deploys a LoST server or knows
	a third party that operates a LoST server DHCP can provide the end		a third party that operates a LoST server DHCP can provide the end
	host with a domain name. This domain name is then used as input to		host with a domain name. This domain name is then used as input to
	the DNS-based resolution mechanism described in LoST		the DNS-based resolution mechanism described in LoST
	[I-D.ietf-ecrit-lost] that reuses the URI-enabled NAPTR specification		[I-D.ietf-ecrit-lost] that reuses the URI-enabled NAPTR specification
	(see [I-D.daigle-unaptr]).		(see [RFC4848]).
	This document specifies a DHCPv4 and a DHCPv6 option that allows LoST		This document specifies a DHCPv4 and a DHCPv6 option that allows LoST
	clients to discover local LoST servers.		clients to discover local LoST servers.
	Section 2 provides terminology. Section 4 describes the DHCPv4		Section 2 provides terminology. Section 4 describes the DHCPv4
	option while Section 5 describes the DHCPv6 option, with the same		option while Section 5 describes the DHCPv6 option, with the same
	functionality. IANA and Security Considerations complete the		functionality. IANA and Security Considerations complete the
	document in Section 7 and Section 8.		document in Section 7 and Section 8.
	2. Terminology		2. Terminology
	skipping to change at page 3, line 50		skipping to change at page 3, line 50
	3. Domain Name Encoding		3. Domain Name Encoding
	This section describes the encoding of the domain name used in the		This section describes the encoding of the domain name used in the
	DHCPv4 option shown in Section 4 and also used in the DHCPv6 option		DHCPv4 option shown in Section 4 and also used in the DHCPv6 option
	shown in Section 5.		shown in Section 5.
	The domain name is encoded according to Section 3.1 of RFC 1035		The domain name is encoded according to Section 3.1 of RFC 1035
	[RFC1035] whereby each label is represented as a one octet length		[RFC1035] whereby each label is represented as a one octet length
	field followed by that number of octets. The domain name ends with		field followed by that number of octets. The domain name ends with
	the null label of the root, a domain name is terminated by a length		the null label of the root, a domain name is terminated by a length
	byte of zero. The high order two bits of every length octet must be		byte of zero. The high order two bits of every length octet MUST be
	zero, and the remaining six bits of the length field limit the label		zero, and the remaining six bits of the length field limit the label
	to 63 octets or less. To simplify implementations, the total length		to 63 octets or less. To simplify implementations, the total length
	of a domain name (i.e., label octets and label length octets) is		of a domain name (i.e., label octets and label length octets) is
	restricted to 255 octets or less.		restricted to 255 octets or less.
	For DHCPv4 only: If the length of the domain name exceeds the		For DHCPv4 only: If the length of the domain name exceeds the
	maximum permissible within a single option (i.e., 254 octets), then		maximum permissible within a single option (i.e., 254 octets), then
	the domain name MUST be represented in the DHCP message as specified		the domain name MUST be represented in the DHCP message as specified
	in [RFC3396].		in [RFC3396].
	skipping to change at page 4, line 29		skipping to change at page 4, line 29
	The DHCP option for this encoding has the following format:		The DHCP option for this encoding has the following format:
	Code Len LoST Server Domain Name		Code Len LoST Server Domain Name
	+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+----		+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+----
	| TBD | n | s1 | s2 | s3 | s4 | s5 | ...		| TBD | n | s1 | s2 | s3 | s4 | s5 | ...
	+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+----		+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+----
	Figure 1: LoST FQDN DHCPv4 Option		Figure 1: LoST FQDN DHCPv4 Option
	Code: OPTION_LOST (TBD1)		Code: OPTION_V4_LOST (TBD1)
	Len: Length of the 'LoST Server Domain Name' field		Len: Length of the 'LoST Server Domain Name' field
	in octets; variable.		in octets; variable.
	LoST server Domain Name: The domain name of the LoST		LoST server Domain Name: The domain name of the LoST
	server for the client to use.		server for the client to use.
	The encoding of the domain name is described in Section 3.		The encoding of the domain name is described in Section 3.
	Only a single domain name MUST be present in the DHCPv4 option.		Only a single domain name MUST be present in the DHCPv4 option.
	5. LoST Server DHCPv6 Option		5. LoST Server DHCPv6 Option
	This document defines a DHCPv6 options to carry a domain name.		This document defines a DHCPv6 options to carry a domain name.
	The DHCPv6 option has the format shown in Figure 3.		The DHCPv6 option has the format shown in Figure 3.
	0 1 2 3		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		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_LOST | option-length |		| OPTION_V6_LOST | option-length |
	+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+		+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
	| LoST Server Domain Name |		| LoST Server Domain Name |
	| ... |		| ... |
	+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+		+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
	Figure 3: DHCPv6 Option for LoST Server Domain Name List		Figure 3: DHCPv6 Option for LoST Server Domain Name List
	option-code: OPTION_LOST (TBD2)		option-code: OPTION_V6_LOST (TBD2)
	option-length: Length of the 'LoST Server Domain Name' field		option-length: Length of the 'LoST Server Domain Name' field
	in octets; variable.		in octets; variable.
	LoST server Domain Name: The domain name of the LoST		LoST server Domain Name: The domain name of the LoST
	server for the client to use.		server for the client to use.
	A DHCPv6 client may request a LoST server domain name in an Options		A DHCPv6 client MAY request a LoST server domain name in an Options
	Request Option (ORO) as described in [RFC3315].		Request Option (ORO), as described in [RFC3315].
			A DHCPv4 client MAY request a LoST server domain name in an Parameter
			Request List option, as described in [RFC2131].
	The encoding of the domain name is described in Section 3.		The encoding of the domain name is described in Section 3.
	Only a single domain name MUST be present in the DHCPv6 option.		Only a single domain name MUST be present in the DHCPv6 option.
	6. Example		6. Example
	This section shows an example of a DHCPv4 option where the DHCP		This section shows an example of a DHCPv4 option where the DHCP
	server wants to offer the "example.com" domain name to the client as		server wants to offer the "example.com" domain name to the client as
	input to the U-NAPTR LoST discovery procedure. This domain name		input to the U-NAPTR LoST discovery procedure. This domain name
	skipping to change at page 6, line 12		skipping to change at page 6, line 14
	7. IANA Considerations		7. IANA Considerations
	7.1. IANA Consideration for DHCPv4 Option		7.1. IANA Consideration for DHCPv4 Option
	The following DHCPv4 option code for the Location-to-Service		The following DHCPv4 option code for the Location-to-Service
	Translation Protocol (LoST) server option must be assigned by IANA:		Translation Protocol (LoST) server option must be assigned by IANA:
	Option Name Value Described in		Option Name Value Described in
	-----------------------------------------------		-----------------------------------------------
	OPTION_LOST TBD Section 4		OPTION_V4_LOST TBD Section 4
	7.2. IANA Consideration for DHCPv6 Option		7.2. IANA Consideration for DHCPv6 Option
	IANA is requested to assign the following DHCPv6 option codes for the		IANA is requested to assign the following DHCPv6 option codes for the
	Location-to-Service Translation Protocol (LoST) options:		Location-to-Service Translation Protocol (LoST) options:
	Option Name Value Described in		Option Name Value Described in
	------------------------------------------------		------------------------------------------------
	OPTION_LOST TBD Section 5		OPTION_V6_LOST TBD Section 5
	8. Security Considerations		8. Security Considerations
	If an adversary manages to modify the response from a DHCP server or		If an adversary manages to modify the response from a DHCP server or
	insert its own response, a LoST client could be led to contact a		insert its own response, a LoST client could be led to contact a
	rogue LoST server under the control of the adversary or be given an		rogue LoST server under the control of the adversary or be given an
	invalid address. These threats are documented in		invalid address. These threats are documented in
	[I-D.ietf-ecrit-security-threats]. The security considerations in		[I-D.ietf-ecrit-security-threats]. The security considerations in
	[RFC2131], [RFC2132] and [RFC3315] are applicable to this document.		[RFC2131], [RFC2132] and [RFC3315] are applicable to this document.
	9. Acknowledgements		9. Acknowledgements
	The authors would like to thank Andrew Newton and Leslie Daigle for		The authors would like to thank Andrew Newton and Leslie Daigle for
	their draft review. We would like to particularly thank Andrew		their draft review. We would like to particularly thank Andrew
	Newton for the simplifications he proposed.		Newton for the simplifications he proposed.
			Mark Stapp did the document review of this document for the DHC
			working group as part of the joint working group last call.
	10. References		10. References
	10.1. Normative References		10.1. Normative References
	[I-D.ietf-ecrit-lost]		[RFC1034] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - concepts and facilities",
	Hardie, T., "LoST: A Location-to-Service Translation		STD 13, RFC 1034, November 1987.
	Protocol", draft-ietf-ecrit-lost-05 (work in progress),
	March 2007.
	[RFC1035] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and		[RFC1035] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and
	specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987.		specification", STD 13, RFC 1035, November 1987.
	[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate		[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
	Requirement Levels", RFC 2119, BCP 14, March 1997.		Requirement Levels", RFC 2119, BCP 14, March 1997.
	[RFC2131] Droms, R., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol",		[RFC2131] Droms, R., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol",
	RFC 2131, March 1997.		RFC 2131, March 1997.
	[RFC2132] Alexander, S. and R. Droms, "DHCP Options and BOOTP Vendor		[RFC2132] Alexander, S. and R. Droms, "DHCP Options and BOOTP Vendor
	Extensions", RFC 2132, March 1997.		Extensions", RFC 2132, March 1997.
	[RFC3315] Droms, R., Bound, J., Volz, B., Lemon, T., Perkins, C.,		[RFC3315] Droms, R., Bound, J., Volz, B., Lemon, T., Perkins, C.,
	and M. Carney, "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for		and M. Carney, "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for
	IPv6 (DHCPv6)", RFC 3315, July 2003.		IPv6 (DHCPv6)", RFC 3315, July 2003.
			[RFC3396] Lemon, T. and S. Cheshire, "Encoding Long Options in the
			Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCPv4)", RFC 3396,
			November 2002.
	10.2. Informative References		10.2. Informative References
	[I-D.daigle-unaptr]		[I-D.ietf-ecrit-lost]
	Daigle, L., "Domain-based Application Service Location		Hardie, T., "LoST: A Location-to-Service Translation
	Using URIs and the Dynamic Delegation Discovery Service		Protocol", draft-ietf-ecrit-lost-05 (work in progress),
	(DDDS)", draft-daigle-unaptr-02 (work in progress),		March 2007.
	February 2007.
	[I-D.ietf-ecrit-requirements]		[I-D.ietf-ecrit-requirements]
	Schulzrinne, H. and R. Marshall, "Requirements for		Schulzrinne, H. and R. Marshall, "Requirements for
	Emergency Context Resolution with Internet Technologies",		Emergency Context Resolution with Internet Technologies",
	draft-ietf-ecrit-requirements-13 (work in progress),		draft-ietf-ecrit-requirements-13 (work in progress),
	March 2007.		March 2007.
	[I-D.ietf-ecrit-security-threats]		[I-D.ietf-ecrit-security-threats]
	Taylor, T., "Security Threats and Requirements for		Taylor, T., "Security Threats and Requirements for
	Emergency Call Marking and Mapping",		Emergency Call Marking and Mapping",
	draft-ietf-ecrit-security-threats-03 (work in progress),		draft-ietf-ecrit-security-threats-04 (work in progress),
	July 2006.		April 2007.
	[RFC3319] Schulzrinne, H. and B. Volz, "Dynamic Host Configuration
	Protocol (DHCPv6) Options for Session Initiation Protocol
	(SIP) Servers", RFC 3319, July 2003.
	[RFC3361] Schulzrinne, H., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol
	(DHCP-for-IPv4) Option for Session Initiation Protocol
	(SIP) Servers", RFC 3361, August 2002.
	[RFC3396] Lemon, T. and S. Cheshire, "Encoding Long Options in the		[RFC4848] Daigle, L., "Domain-Based Application Service Location
	Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCPv4)", RFC 3396,		Using URIs and the Dynamic Delegation Discovery Service
	November 2002.		(DDDS)", RFC 4848, April 2007.
	Authors' Addresses		Authors' Addresses
	Henning Schulzrinne		Henning Schulzrinne
	Columbia University		Columbia University
	Department of Computer Science		Department of Computer Science
	450 Computer Science Building		450 Computer Science Building
	New York, NY 10027		New York, NY 10027
	US		US
	skipping to change at page 8, line 27		skipping to change at page 8, line 27
	James Polk		James Polk
	Cisco		Cisco
	2200 East President George Bush Turnpike		2200 East President George Bush Turnpike
	Richardson, Texas 75082		Richardson, Texas 75082
	US		US
	Email: jmpolk@cisco.com		Email: jmpolk@cisco.com
	Hannes Tschofenig		Hannes Tschofenig
	Siemens Networks GmbH & Co KG		Nokia Siemens Networks
	Otto-Hahn-Ring 6		Otto-Hahn-Ring 6
	Munich, Bavaria 81739		Munich, Bavaria 81739
	Germany		Germany
	Phone: +49 89 636 40390		Phone: +49 89 636 40390
	Email: Hannes.Tschofenig@siemens.com		Email: Hannes.Tschofenig@nsn.com
	URI: http://www.tschofenig.com		URI: http://www.tschofenig.com
	Full Copyright Statement		Full Copyright Statement
	Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).		Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
	This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions		This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
	contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors		contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
	retain all their rights.		retain all their rights.
End of changes. 23 change blocks.
	42 lines changed or deleted		41 lines changed or added
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.33. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/