DHCPv6/SLAAC Address Configuration Interaction Problems

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Benoit Lourdelet Wojciech Dec Behcet Sarikaya Glen Zorn July 2009 IPv6 RADIUS attributes for IPv6 access networks IETF-75
Advertisements

Bing Liu(speaker), Ronald Bonica Xiangyang Gong, Wendong Wang
Recommendations for IPv6 in 3GPP Standards draft-wasserman-3gpp-advice-00.txt IPv6-3GPP Design Team Salt Lake City IETF December 2001.
Multicast Reconfiguration Protocol for Stateless DHCPv6 DHC 61 st IETF S. Daniel Park
Draft-ietf-dhc-stateless-dhcpv6- renumbering-01 Tim Chown dhc WG, IETF 60, San Diego, August 2, 2004.
Host Autoconfiguration ALTTC, Ghaziabad. IPv4 Address and IPv6 equivalents ALTTC, Ghaziabad.
1 Behcet Sarikaya Frank Xia July 2010 Flexible DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation in Mobile Networks IETF 78
1IETF59 DNSOP WG IPv6 DNS Discovery Issues Jaehoon Paul Jeong ETRI 1st March th IETF – Seoul,
DHCPv6/SLAAC Interaction Gaps ( draft-liu-6renum-dhcpv6-slaac-switching-01) [Note: the title is different with the original one in the draft] draft-liu-6renum-dhcpv6-slaac-switching-01.
DHCPv6 and other IPv6 docs Ralph Droms IETF 55, Atlanta.
Installing Active Directory on Windows Server 2008 R2 Installing Active Directory on a fresh Windows Server 2008 R2 machine in a home network. These instructions.
IPv6 Site Renumbering Gap Analysis draft-ietf-6renum-gap-analysis-02 draft-ietf-6renum-gap-analysis-02 Bing Liu (speaker), Sheng Jiang, Brian.E.Carpenter,
IPv6 Site Renumbering Gap Analysis draft-liu-6renum-gap-analysis-01 draft-liu-6renum-gap-analysis-01 Bing Liu Sheng Jiang IETF July
IPv6 RADIUS attributes for IPv6 access networks draft-lourdelet-radext-ipv6-access-01 Glen Zorn, Benoit Lourdelet Wojciech Dec, Behcet Sarikaya Radext/dhc.
IPv6 Renumbering Tim Chown Alan Ford Mark Thompson Stig Venaas University of Southampton (UK)
Dynamic IPv4 Provisioning for Lightweight 4over6 draft-liu-softwire-lw4over6-dhcp-deployment-04 C. Liu (Presenter), Q. Sun, J. Wu 1.
Draft-ietf-v6ops-scanning-implications-00 IPv6 Implications for Network Scanning Tim Chown University of Southampton (UK) IETF 66,
1 AutoconfBOF2.PPT / Aug / Singh,Perkins,Clausen IETF Not Confidential Ad hoc network autoconfiguration: definition and problem statement (draft-singh-autoconf-adp-00.txt)
Draft-chown-v6ops-renumber-thinkabout-05 Things to think about when Renumbering an IPv6 network Tim Chown IETF 67, November 6th, 2006.
A SAVI Solution for DHCP Draf-ietf-savi-dhcp-06 J. Bi, J. Wu, G. Yao, F. Baker IETF79, Beijing Nov. 9, 2010.
ISIS Auto-Configuration (draft-liu-isis-auto-conf-01) Bing Liu Bruno Decraene
Prefix Delegation Protocol Selection T.J. Kniveton MEXT Working Group IETF 70 - December ’07 - Vancouver.
Recommendations of Unique Local Addresses Usages draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations-02 draft-ietf-v6ops-ula-usage-recommendations-02 Bing Liu(speaker),
1 Behcet Sarikaya Frank Xia Ted Lemon July 2011 DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation as IPv6 Migration Tool in Mobile Networks IETF 81
1 UDP Encapsulation of 6RD IETF 78 Maastricht 2010 July 30.
Draft-vandevelde-v6ops-addcon-00.txt IPv6 Unicast Address Assignment Considerations Gunter Van de Velde (editor) Tim Chown Ciprian Popoviciu IETF 65, March.
IPv6 Address Accountability Considerations draft-chown-v6ops-address-accountability-01 IETF81, Quebec Tim Chown, July 28 th, 2011.
DHCPv6/SLAAC Address Configuration Interaction Problems and Operational Guidance Bing Liu, Ronald Bonica (Speaker) Sheng Jiang, Xiangyang Gong, Wendong.
DHCP Option for Proxy Server Vijayabhaskar A K DHC WG IETF 59 Seoul.
Draft Policy Allocation of IPv4 and IPv6 Address Space to Out-of-region Requestors 59.
Guidance for Running Multiple IPv6 Prefixes (draft-liu-v6ops-running-multiple-prefixes-02) Bing Liu, Sheng Jiang (Speaker), Yang Bo IETF91
IPv6 Site Renumbering Gap Analysis draft-ietf-6renum-gap-analysis-01 draft-ietf-6renum-gap-analysis-01 Bing Liu(speaker), Sheng Jiang, Brian.E.Carpenter.
Guidance of Using Unique Local Addresses draft-liu-v6ops-ula-usage-analysis-05 draft-liu-v6ops-ula-usage-analysis-05 Bing Liu(speaker), Sheng Jiang, Cameron.
IETF-90 (Toronto) DHC WG Meeting Wednesday, July 23, GMT IETF-90 DHC WG1 Last Updated: 07/21/ :10 EDT.
Analysis and recommendation for the ULA usage draft-liu-v6ops-ula-usage-analysis-00 draft-liu-v6ops-ula-usage-analysis-00 Bing Liu(speaker), Sheng Jiang.
IPv6 Site Renumbering Gap Analysis draft-ietf-6renum-gap-analysis-01 draft-ietf-6renum-gap-analysis-01 Bing Liu(speaker), Sheng Jiang, Brian.E.Carpenter,
IETF #65 Network Discovery and Selection Problem draft-ietf-eap-netsel-problem-04 Farooq Bari Jouni Korhonen.
DHCP Vrushali sonar. Outline DHCP DHCPv6 Comparison Security issues Summary.
Diameter Group Signaling Thursday, August 02 nd, 2013 draft-ietf-diameter-group-signaling-01 Mark Jones, Marco Liebsch, Lionel Morand IETF 87 Berlin, Germany.
IETF 80: NETEXT Working Group – Logical Interface Support for IP Hosts 1 Logical Interface Support for IP Hosts Telemaco Melia, Sri Gundavelli, Carlos.
1 Brian Carpenter Sheng Jiang IETF 85 November 2012 Next steps for 6renum work.
© 2015 Infoblox Inc. All Rights Reserved. Tom Coffeen, IPv6 Evangelist UKNOF January 2015 Tom Coffeen, IPv6 Evangelist UKNOF January 2015 DHCPv6 Operational.
Dhc WG 3/2/2004, IETF 59, Seoul. 3/2/2004dhc WG - IETF 59, Seoul2 Agenda Administrivia, Agenda bashing Ralph Droms 05 minutes DHCP Option for Proxy Server.
Bing Liu (speaker), Sheng WG, ietf96, July 2016
Instructor Materials Chapter 8: DHCP
Security Implications of IPv6 on IPv4 Networks
Zhenbin Li, Li Zhang(Huawei Technologies)
Bing Liu (speaker), Sheng WG, ietf97, November 2016
Autonomic Prefix Management in Large-scale Networks
6LoWPAN Backbone Router
Panagiotis Demestichas
IPv6 Site Renumbering Gap Analysis draft-ietf-6renum-gap-analysis-04
RIPE IPv6-wg and Renumbering
Ch.8 Dynamic IPv6 Address Allocation
Chapter 10: DHCP Routing & Switching Chapter 10: DHCP
Radius Attribute for MAP draft-jiang-softwire-map-radius-03
Migration-Issues-xx Where it’s been and might be going
Proposal for IEEE 802.1CQ-LAAP
Wednesday, 9:30-12:00 Morning session I, Van Horne
Tuesday , 9:30-12:00 Morning session I, Buckingham
Proposal for IEEE 802.1CQ-LAAP
RIFT YANG draft-zhang-rift-yang-00
IEEE MEDIA INDEPENDENT HANDOVER DCN:
IEEE MEDIA INDEPENDENT HANDOVER DCN:
PW Control Word Stitching
Sheng Jiang(Speaker) Bing Liu
IETF-104 (Prague) DHC WG Next steps
draft-ietf-stir-oob-02 Out of Band
RIFT YANG draft-zhang-rift-yang-01
IETF 87 DHC WG Berlin, Germany Thursday, 1 August, 2013
Presentation transcript:

DHCPv6/SLAAC Address Configuration Interaction Problems Bing Liu(speaker) Ronald Bonica Sheng Jiang Xiangyang Gong Wendong Wang Tianle Yang IETF 89@London, Mar 2014

Relevant Drafts ietf-v6ops-dhcpv6-slaac-problems liu-v6ops-dhcpv6-slaac-guidance (Today’s main topic) operational guidance to reduce the impact. should belong to v6ops liu-6man-dhcpv6-slaac-implementation-guide guidance to promote unified behaviors in implementations should belong to 6man

Problems summary In one sentence: ambiguities in the standards #1 Dependency between DHCPv6 and ND RAs are needed to initial DHCPv6; DHCPv6-only is not applicable (it is acceptable for current operation practice) #2 Advisory VS Prescriptive Some platforms interpret the flags as advisory while others interpret them as prescriptive; Might cause renumbering operation gaps #3 "Address Configuring Method" VS "Address Lifetime" When method changes, should the hosts immediately release the addresses or just wait them expired? Might cause unexpected behavior (e.g. address release) #4 Dependencies between the flags When A=0 & M=0 & O=1, should the host initiate a stand-alone stateless DHCPv6 session? If not, there will be an operational gap

Basic Guidelines Always Turn RAs On SLAAC be the bottom Line for Address Provisioning Administrators need to make sure every node could at least get one advertised prefix, in the case DHCPv6 is not supported A flag should be always on to allow the hosts do SLAAC Avoid Flags Transition as Possible the behavior would be unpredictable/un-controlled when flags are in transition the administrators need to carefully plan the network and try to avoid host address configuration method switch as possible

Guidance for DHCPv6-only Deployment RAs are still needed Set M=1 and A=0 (or not including PIO in the RAs) Installing DHCPv6 servers or relays on all links be sure that every node in their intended management scope supports DHCPv6 Note Might not be able to switch the DHCPv6-only hosts to SLAAC-only

Guidance for SLAAC-only deployment Must set A=1 Should set M=0 Note Some hosts might still initial DHCPv6 sessions even M=0 Might not be able to add another DHCPv6 configuration Might not be able to switch the SLAAC-only hosts to DHCPv6-only

Guidance for co-exist deployment Recommend to set A=M=1 to make sure every node could be configured Should set M=0 Note If the two mechanisms would bring two prefixes for the nodes respectively, then the administrators need to make sure M=1 before nodes get online, since once the nodes were configured with one prefix, later they might not care about the other newly added prefix. when administrators want to deprecate a SLAAC/DHCPv6 prefix/address, it's better NOT simply turning the A/M flag off since some platforms might immediately release the addresses.

Regarding the implementation guide draft take into account the cases that RAs are absent. E.g. the DHCPv6 protocol state machine should support DHCPv6 be initiated after a timeslot of RAs absent. interpret the flags as prescriptive rather than advisory not recommended that the program immediately release the address or information when configuration method change is detected. when M=0 and O=1, regardless A=1 or A=0, the host should try to get information configuration through a stateless DHCPv6 procedure. (Note: not today’s topic, but welcome you to discuss in 6man mailing list)

Comments? Adopt the operational guidance draft (draft-liu-v6ops-dhcpv6-slaac-guidance)? Thank you! IETF89@London