JUNHYUK SONG INTERNET DRAFT CHAEYOUNG CHONG October 2001 SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS DONGKIE LEIGH SK TELECOM MIPv6 IPCP configuration option for PPP IPv6CP draft-song-pppext-mipv6-ppp-support-01.txt Status of This Memo Distribution of this memo is unlimited. 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 The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) [1] provides a standard method for transporting multi-protocol datagrams over point-to-point links. PPP defines an extensible Link Control Protocol (LCP) for establishing, configuring, and testing the data-link connection; and a family of Network Control Protocols (NCPs) for establishing and configuring different network-layer protocols. The MIPv6 link local router that support Mobile Node connection via PPP, need to know whether the PPP client is MIPv6 node or not. Because the local operator may have different local access policy such as user authentication for the user mobility support [5] over MIPv6 [6]. Currently, the IPv6CP option [2] supports establishment and configuration of the IPv6 over PPP. However, MIPv6 link local router cannot differentiate between IPv6 node and MIPv6 mobile node which is connected over PPP. This document defines the new IPCP option for the MIPv6 support. Song et al. Expires April 2002 [Page 1] Internet Draft 12 October 2001 1. Introduction The MIPv6 link local router that support Mobile Node connection via PPP, need to know whether the PPP client is MIPv6 node or not. Because the local operator may have different local access policy such as user authentication for the user mobility support [5] over MIPv6 [6]. Currently, the IPv6CP option [2] supports establishment and configuration of the IPv6 over PPP. However, MIPv6 link local router cannot differentiate between IPv6 node and MIPv6 mobile node which is connected over PPP. This document defines the new IPCP option for the MIPv6 support. 2. Configuration Options The Configuration Option format and basic options are already defined for IPCP [3]. The most updated value of the IPCP Option Type field are specified in the IANA web site [4]. This document concerns the following values: [?] Mobile IPv6 (Pending for the IANA number assignment) 2.1. Mobile IPv6 Option Description Some operator may want to differentiate IPv6 node and MIPv6 node. This mechanism will let Mobile Node to specify MIPv6 service. A summary of the Configuration Option format is shown below. The fields are transmitted from left to right. The Mobile-IPv6 Configuration Option for IPCP is defined as follows: 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type | Length | Interface-Identifier (MS Bytes) +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Interface-Identifier (cont) +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Interface-Identifier (LS Bytes) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Song et al. Expires April 2002 [Page 2] Internet Draft 12 October 2001 Type ? (MIPv6) Length 10 Interface-Identifier The 64-bit Interface-Identifier which is very likely to be unique on the link or zero if a good source of uniqueness can not be found. Default If no valid interface identifier can be successfully negotiated, no default Interface-Identifier value should be assumed. The procedures for recovering from such a case are unspecified. One approach is to manually configure the interface identifier of the interface. [2] 3. IANA Considerations Requires IPCP option number assignment 4. Acknowledgements Special thanks to Prof. Murali Venkatesh of Syracuse University. Song et al. Expires April 2002 [Page 3] Internet Draft 12 October 2001 References [1] Simpson, W., "The Point-to-Point Protocol", STD 51, RFC 1661, July 1994. [2] Dimitry Haskin and Ed Allen, "IP version 6 over PPP", RFC 2472 December 1998 [3] G. McGregor, "The PPP Internet Protocol Control Protocol (IPCP) May 1992 [4] www.iana.org [5] JH SONG, CY CHONG, DK LEE, "IP user Mobility Support model" October 2002, draft-song-network-user-mobility-00.txt [6] David B. Johnson and C. Perkins. "Mobility Support in IPv6" draft-ietf-mobileip-ipv6-14.txt Addresses Questions about this memo can be directed to the authors: JUNHYUK SONG SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS. Mobile Development Team Network Systems Division Phone: +82-31-779-6822 Email: santajun@lycos.co.kr FAX: +82-31-7798769 CHAE YONG CHONG SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS. Mobile Development Team Network Systems Division Phone: +82-31-779-6822 Email:cychong@samsung.com DONGKIE LEIGH SK TELECOM Core Network Development Team Network R&D Center Phone +82-2-829-4640 Email: galahad@netsgo.com FAX:+82-2-829-4612 Song et al. Expires April 2002 [Page 4]