[Docs] [txt|pdf] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]
Versions: 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 RFC 3004
Internet Engineering Task Force G. Stump
Dynamic Host Configuration Working Group IBM
Internet Draft R. Droms
Expires: January 2001 Bucknell University
draft-ietf-dhc-userclass-10.txt Y. Gu
R. Vyaghrapuri
A. Demirtjis
Microsoft
B. Beser
3Com
J. Privat
BT
August 2000
The User Class Option for DHCP
<draft-ietf-dhc-userclass-10.txt>
Status of this Memo
This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts. 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."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
Abstract
This option is used by a DHCP client to optionally identify the type
or category of user or applications it represents.
The information contained in this option is an opaque field that
represents the user class of which the client is a member.
Based on this class, a DHCP server selects the appropriate address
pool to assign an address to the client and the appropriate
configuration parameters.
This option should be configurable by a user.
The User Class Option for DHCP August 2000
1. Introduction
DHCP administrators may define specific user class identifiers to
convey information about a client's software configuration or about
its user's preferences. For example, the User Class option can be
used to configure all clients of people in the accounting department
with a different printer than clients of people in the marketing
department.
2. Requirements Terminology
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 [3].
3. DHCP Terminology
o "DHCP client"
A DHCP client or "client" is an Internet host using DHCP to obtain
configuration parameters such as a network address.
o "DHCP server"
A DHCP server or "server" is an Internet host that returns
configuration parameters to DHCP clients.
o "binding"
A binding is a collection of configuration parameters, including at
least an IP address, associated with or "bound to" a DHCP client.
Bindings are managed by DHCP servers.
4. User Class option
This option is used by a DHCP client to optionally identify the type
or category of user or applications it represents.
A DHCP server uses the User Class option to choose the address pool
it allocates an address from and/or to select any other
configuration option.
This option is a DHCP option [1, 2].
This option MAY carry multiple User Classes.
Servers may interpret the meanings of multiple class specifications
in an implementation dependent or configuration dependent manner,
and so the use of multiple classes by a DHCP client should be based
on the specific server implementation and configuration which will
be used to process that User class option.
The User Class Option for DHCP August 2000
The format of this option is as follows:
Code Len Value
+-----+-----+--------------------- . . . --+
| 77 | N | User Class Data ('Len' octets) |
+-----+-----+--------------------- . . . --+
where Value consists of one or more instances of User Class Data.
Each instance of User Class Data is formatted as follows:
UC_Len_i User_Class_Data_i
+--------+------------------------ . . . --+
| L_i | Opaque-Data ('UC_Len_i' octets) |
+--------+------------------------ . . . --+
Each User Class value (User_Class_Data_i) is indicated as an opaque
field.
The value in UC_Len_i does not include the length field itself and
MUST be non-zero.
Let m be the number of User Classes carried in the option. The
length of the option as specified in Len must be the sum of the
lengths of each of the class names plus m:
Len= UC_Len_1 + UC_Len_2 + ... + UC_Len_m + m.
If any instances of User Class Data are present, the minimum value
of Len is two (Len = UC_Len_1 + 1 = 1 + 1 = 2).
The Code for this option is 77.
A server that is not equipped to interpret any given user class
specified by a client MUST ignore it (although it may be reported).
If a server recognizes one or more user classes specified by the
client, but does not recognize one or more other user classes
specified by the client, the server MAY use the user classes it
recognizes.
DHCP clients implementing this option SHOULD allow users to enter
one or more user class values.
5. IANA Considerations
Option 77, which IANA has already assigned for this purpose, should
be used as the User Class Option for DHCP.
6. Security Considerations
DHCP currently provides no authentication or security mechanisms.
Potential exposures to attack are discussed is section 7 of the
protocol specification [1].
The User Class Option for DHCP August 2000
This lack of authentication mechanism means that a DHCP server
cannot check if a client or user is authorised to use a given User
Class.
This introduces an obvious vulnerability when using the User Class
option. For example, if the User Class is used to give out a special
parameter (e.g. a particular database server), there is no way to
authenticate a client and it is therefore impossible to check if a
client is authorised to use this parameter.
7. References
[1] Droms, R., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol", RFC 2131,
March 1997.
[2] Alexander, S., and Droms R., "DHCP Options and BOOTP Vendor
Extensions", RFC 2132, March 1997.
[3] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement
Levels," RFC 2119, March 1997.
8. Acknowledgments
This document is based on earlier drafts by Glenn Stump, Ralph
Droms, Ye Gu, Ramesh Vyaghrapuri and Burcak Beser.
Thanks to Ted Lemon, Steve Gonczi, Kim Kinnear, Bernie Volz, Richard
Jones, Barr Hibbs and Thomas Narten for their comments and
suggestions.
9. Author Information
Glenn Stump
IBM Networking Software
P.O. Box 12195
RTP, NC 27709
Phone: (919) 301-4277
Email: stumpga@us.ibm.com
Ralph Droms
Computer Science Department
323 Dana Engineering
Bucknell University
Lewisburg, PA 17837
Phone: (717) 524-1145
Email: droms@bucknell.edu
Ye Gu
Microsoft Corporation
The User Class Option for DHCP August 2000
One Microsoft Way
Redmond, WA 98052
Phone: 425 936 8601
Email: yegu@microsoft.com
Ramesh Vyaghrapuri
Microsoft Corporation
One Microsoft Way
Redmond, WA 98052
Phone: 425 703 9581
Email: rameshv@microsoft.com
Burcak Beser
3Com Corporation
3800 Golf Road
Rolling Meadows, IL
Phone: 847 262 2195
Email: Burcak_Beser@3com.com
Ann Demirtjis
Microsoft Corporation
One Microsoft Way
Redmond WA 98052
Phone: 425-705-2254
Email: annd@microsoft.com
Jerome Privat
BT Advanced Communications Technology Centre
Adastral Park, Martlesham Heath, IP5 3RE
UK
Phone: +44 1473 606304
Email: jprivat@talk21.com
The User Class Option for DHCP August 2000
Full Copyright Statement
"Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2000). All Rights Reserved.
This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
or assist in its implmentation may be prepared, copied, published
and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph
are included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
English.
The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.
This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE."
Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129d, available from
https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/