Internet DRAFT - draft-sarikaya-6man-sadr-ra
draft-sarikaya-6man-sadr-ra
Network Working Group B. Sarikaya
Internet-Draft Huawei USA
Intended status: Standards Track June 8, 2015
Expires: December 10, 2015
IPv6 RA Option for Source Address Dependent Routing
draft-sarikaya-6man-sadr-ra-03
Abstract
This document proposes the router advertisement extensions for source
address dependent routing. New Router Advertisement option is
defined for configuring route prefixes and their corresponding source
prefixes on the mobile or fixed nodes. Using this option, an
operator can easily configure nodes with multiple interfaces (or
otherwise multi-homed) to enable them to select the routes to a
destination. The option is defined together with definitions of host
and router behaviors.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
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 December 10, 2015.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2015 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
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
Sarikaya Expires December 10, 2015 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft New RA Options June 2015
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. Default Route Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. Source Address Dependent Routing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. Host Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6. Router Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7. Route Prefix with Source Address/Prefix Option . . . . . . . 6
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
10. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1. Introduction
IPv6 Neighbor Discovery and IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration
protocols can be used to configure fixed and mobile nodes with
various parameters related to addressing and routing [RFC4861],
[RFC4862], [RFC4191]. DNS Recursive Server Addresses and Domain Name
Search Lists are additional parameters that can be configured using
router advertisements [RFC6106].
Router Advertisements can also be used to configure fixed and mobile
nodes in multi-homed scenarios with route information and source
address/prefix. Different scenarios exist such as the node is
simultaneously connected to multiple access network of e.g. WiFi and
3G. The node may also be connected to more than one gateway. Such
connectivity may be realized by means of dedicated physical or
logical links that may also be shared with other users nodes such as
in residential access networks.
2. 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 [RFC2119].
Sarikaya Expires December 10, 2015 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft New RA Options June 2015
3. Default Route Configuration
A host, usually a mobile host interested in obtaining routing
information usually sends a Router Solicitation (RS) message on the
link. The router, when configured to do so, provides the route
information using zero, one or more Route Prefix with Source Address/
Prefix options in the router advertisement (RA) messages sent in
response.
The route option is extensible, as well as convey detailed
information for routes.
Source address/prefix and related route information are provided
directly by the next hop routers. In this document we assume that
next hop routers are able to provide this information.
A non-trustworthy network may be available at the same time as a
trustworthy network, with the risk of bad consequences if the host
gets confused between the two. These are basically the two models
for hosts with multiple interfaces, both of which are valid, but
which are incompatible with each other. In the first model, an
interface is connected to something like a corporate network, over a
Virtual Private Network (VPN). This connection is trusted because it
has been authenticated. Routes obtained over such a connection can
probably be trusted, and indeed it may be important to use those
routes. This is because in the VPN case, you may also be connected
to a network that's offered you a default route, and you could be
attacked over that connection if you attempt to connect to resources
on the enterprise network over it.
On the other, non-trustworthy network scenario, none of the networks
to which the host is connected are meaningfully more or less
trustworthy. In this scenario, the untrustworthy network may hand
out routes to other hosts, e.g. those in the VPN going through some
malicious nodes. This will have bad consequences because the host's
traffic intended for the corporate VPN may be hijacked by the
intermediate nodes.
Router advertisement extensions described in this document can be
used to install the routes. However, the use of such a technique
makes sense only in the former case above, i.e. trusted network. So
the host MUST have an authenticated connection to the network it
connects so that the router advertisements can be trusted before
establishing routes.
Sarikaya Expires December 10, 2015 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft New RA Options June 2015
4. Source Address Dependent Routing
In multihomed networks there is a need to do source address based
routing if some providers are performing the ingress filtering
defined in BCP38 [RFC2827]. This requires the routers to consider
the source addresses as well as the destination addresses in
determining the next hop to send the packet to.
The routers may be informed about the source addresses to use in
routing using extensions to the routing protocols like IS-IS defined
in [ISO.10589.1992] [I-D.baker-ipv6-isis-dst-src-routing] and OSPF
defined in [RFC5340] [I-D.baker-ipv6-ospf-dst-src-routing]. In this
document we define the router advertisement extensions for source
address dependent routing.
Routing protocol extensions for source address dependent routing does
not avoid a host using a source address that may be subject to
ingress filtering when sending a packet to one of the next hops. In
that case the host receives an ICMP source address failed ingress/
egress policy error message in which case the host must resend the
packet trying a different source address. The extensions defined in
this document aims at avoiding this inefficiency in packet forwarding
at the host.
More information on the scenarios, their analysis and why host based
approach to source address dependent routing is needed, are presented
in [I-D.sarikaya-6man-sadr-overview].
5. Host Configuration
Router advertisement option defined in this document is used by Type
C hosts.
As defined in [RFC4191] Type C host uses a Routing Table instead of a
Default Router List.
The hosts set up their routing tables based on the router
advertisement extensions defined in this document. The routes
established are used in forwarding the packets to a next hop based on
the destination prefix/address using the longest match algorithm.
The hosts MUST keep Route Prefix that it received together with the
Source Address in a stable storage. This will enable the host to
consistently use these options as described next.
When the host receives Router Prefix option with Source Address, the
host uses source and destination prefix/address using the longest
match algorithm in order to send its packets to this next hop router.
Sarikaya Expires December 10, 2015 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft New RA Options June 2015
The routes advertised have route lifetime values. The host considers
the routes in its routing table stale when the lifetime expires. The
router MUST refresh these routes periodically in order to avoid stale
routing table entries in the hosts.
The hosts with ingress filtering policy do not receive Route
Information Option defined in [RFC4191]. If they do the hosts MUST
ignore the router advertisement messages with the Route Information
Option.
6. Router Configuration
The router MAY send one or more Route Prefix options that represent
the IPv6 destination prefixes reachable via the given next hop.
Router includes Route Prefix option and Source Address/Prefix in the
message to indicate that given prefix is available directly on-link
and that any source addresses derived from the source prefix will not
be subject to ingress filtering on these routes supported by these
next hops.
For the Source Address, Source Prefix option is used with prefix
length set to 128.
Each Route Prefix may be associated with zero, one or more Source
Address/Prefixes that represent the source addresses that are
assigned from the prefixes that belong to this router. Route Prefix
options represent the IPv6 destination prefixes reachable via the
given next hop. Router includes Route Prefix option in the message
to indicate that given prefix is available directly on-link. Route
Prefix option MUST be followed by a Source Address/Prefix option all
defined in Section 7 to indicate that any source addresses derived
from the source prefix will not be subject to ingress filtering on
these routes supported by these next hops.
In home networks, each interface of the host can be configured using
Router Advertisements sent from their next hop routers. The Route
Prefix with Source Address Option defined in Figure 1 is used to
indicate that any source addresses derived from the source prefix
will not be subject to ingress filtering on these routes supported by
this router.
Intermediate routers also need to take action in realizing the source
address dependent routing. These are defined for ISIS in
[I-D.baker-ipv6-isis-dst-src-routing] and for OSPF in
[I-D.baker-ipv6-ospf-dst-src-routing].
In networks with ingress filtering policy, routers MUST associate the
route prefixes they advertise with source address/prefixes. This
Sarikaya Expires December 10, 2015 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft New RA Options June 2015
means that routers MUST not advertise route prefixes alone, i.e.
Route Information Option defined in [RFC4191].
7. Route Prefix with Source Address/Prefix Option
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 | Prefix Length |Resvd|Prf|Resvd|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Route Lifetime |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Route Prefix (Variable Length) |
. .
. .
. .
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|SrcPrefixLength| Padding |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Source Address/Prefix Prefix (Variable Length) |
. .
. .
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 1: Route Prefix with Source Address/Prefix option
Fields:
Type: TBD.
Length: The length of the option (including the type and length
fields) in units of 8 octets. For example, the length for a prefix
of length 16 is 5.
Prefix Length: 8-bit signed integer. The number of leading bits in
the Route Prefix that are valid.
Prf: Route Preference. As in [RFC4191].
Route Lifetime: Time in seconds (relative to the time the packet is
sent) that the prefix is valid for route determination. A value of
all one bits (0xffffffff) represents infinity.
Route Prefix: Variable-length field containing an IP address or a
prefix of an IP address.
Sarikaya Expires December 10, 2015 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft New RA Options June 2015
SrcPrefixLength: 8-bit signed integer. The number of leading bits in
the Source Prefix that are valid. It is 128 if this field represents
an address.
Padding field is used to insert 3 octets of zero.
Source Prefix: Variable-length field containing an IP address or a
prefix of an IP address padded to the next 8-bits boundary.
8. Security Considerations
Neighbor Discovery is subject to attacks that cause IP packets to
flow to unexpected places. Because of this, neighbor discovery
messages SHOULD be secured, possibly using Secure Neighbor Discovery
(SEND) protocol [RFC3971].
9. IANA Considerations
Authors of this document request IANA to assign the following new RA
option:
+------------------------------------------+-------+
| Option Name | Type |
+------------------------------------------+-------+
| Route Prefix with Source Address/Prefix | |
+------------------------------------------+-------+
Table 1:
10. Acknowledgements
TBD.
11. References
11.1. Normative References
[ISO.10589.1992]
International Organization for Standardization,
"Intermediate system to intermediate system intra-domain-
routing routine information exchange protocol for use in
conjunction with the protocol for providing the
connectionless-mode Network Service (ISO 8473), ISO
Standard 10589", ISO ISO.10589.1992, 1992.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
Sarikaya Expires December 10, 2015 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft New RA Options June 2015
[RFC2460] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6
(IPv6) Specification", RFC 2460, December 1998.
[RFC2629] Rose, M., "Writing I-Ds and RFCs using XML", RFC 2629,
June 1999.
[RFC2827] Ferguson, P. and D. Senie, "Network Ingress Filtering:
Defeating Denial of Service Attacks which employ IP Source
Address Spoofing", BCP 38, RFC 2827, May 2000.
[RFC3971] Arkko, J., Kempf, J., Zill, B., and P. Nikander, "SEcure
Neighbor Discovery (SEND)", RFC 3971, March 2005.
[RFC4191] Draves, R. and D. Thaler, "Default Router Preferences and
More-Specific Routes", RFC 4191, November 2005.
[RFC4605] Fenner, B., He, H., Haberman, B., and H. Sandick,
"Internet Group Management Protocol (IGMP) / Multicast
Listener Discovery (MLD)-Based Multicast Forwarding
("IGMP/MLD Proxying")", RFC 4605, August 2006.
[RFC4861] Narten, T., Nordmark, E., Simpson, W., and H. Soliman,
"Neighbor Discovery for IP version 6 (IPv6)", RFC 4861,
September 2007.
[RFC4862] Thomson, S., Narten, T., and T. Jinmei, "IPv6 Stateless
Address Autoconfiguration", RFC 4862, September 2007.
[RFC5340] Coltun, R., Ferguson, D., Moy, J., and A. Lindem, "OSPF
for IPv6", RFC 5340, July 2008.
[RFC7157] Troan, O., Miles, D., Matsushima, S., Okimoto, T., and D.
Wing, "IPv6 Multihoming without Network Address
Translation", RFC 7157, March 2014.
11.2. Informative References
[I-D.baker-ipv6-isis-dst-src-routing]
Baker, F. and D. Lamparter, "IPv6 Source/Destination
Routing using IS-IS", draft-baker-ipv6-isis-dst-src-
routing-02 (work in progress), October 2014.
[I-D.baker-ipv6-ospf-dst-src-routing]
Baker, F., "IPv6 Source/Destination Routing using OSPFv3",
draft-baker-ipv6-ospf-dst-src-routing-03 (work in
progress), August 2013.
Sarikaya Expires December 10, 2015 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft New RA Options June 2015
[I-D.sarikaya-6man-sadr-overview]
Sarikaya, B., "Source Address Dependent Routing and Source
Address Selection for IPv6 Hosts", draft-sarikaya-6man-
sadr-overview-06 (work in progress), March 2015.
[RFC6106] Jeong, J., Park, S., Beloeil, L., and S. Madanapalli,
"IPv6 Router Advertisement Options for DNS Configuration",
RFC 6106, November 2010.
Author's Address
Behcet Sarikaya
Huawei USA
5340 Legacy Dr. Building 175
Plano, TX 75024
Email: sarikaya@ieee.org
Sarikaya Expires December 10, 2015 [Page 9]
