Movatterモバイル変換

Network Working Group                                      P. Nesser, IIRequest for Comments: 3793                    Nesser & Nesser ConsultingCategory: Informational                                A. Bergstrom, Ed.                                              Ostfold University College                                                                May 2004Survey of IPv4 Addresses in Currently DeployedIETF Sub-IP Area Standards Track and Experimental DocumentsStatus of this Memo   This memo provides information for the Internet community.  It does   not specify an Internet standard of any kind.  Distribution of this   memo is unlimited.Copyright Notice   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004).  All Rights Reserved.Abstract   This document seeks to document all usage of IPv4 addresses in   currently deployed IETF Sub-IP Area documented standards.  In order   to successfully transition from an all IPv4 Internet to an all IPv6   Internet, many interim steps will be taken.  One of these steps is   the evolution of current protocols that have IPv4 dependencies.  It   is hoped that these protocols (and their implementations) will be   redesigned to be network address independent, but failing that will   at least dually support IPv4 and IPv6.  To this end, all Standards   (Full, Draft, and Proposed) as well as Experimental RFCs will be   surveyed and any dependencies will be documented.Table of Contents1.  Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22.  Document Organisation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23.  Full Standards. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24.  Draft Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25.  Proposed Standards. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36.  Experimental RFCs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37.  Summary of Results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47.01. Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47.02. Draft Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47.03. Proposed Standards. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47.04. Experimental RFCs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .48.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .49.  Acknowledgements. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4Nesser II & Bergstrom        Informational                      [Page 1]

RFC 3793         IPv4 Addresses in the IETF Sub-IP Area         May 200410. Normative Reference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .511. Authors' Addresses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .512. Full Copyright Statement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .61.  Introduction   This document is part of a document set aiming to document all usage   of IPv4 addresses in IETF standards.  In an effort to have the   information in a manageable form, it has been broken into 7 documents   conforming to the current IETF areas (Application,  Internet,   Operations & Management, Routing, Security, Sub-IP and Transport).   For a full introduction, please see the introduction [1].2.  Document Organization   The rest of the document sections are described below.   Sections3,4,5, and6 each describe the raw analysis of Full,   Draft, and Proposed Standards, and Experimental RFCs.  Each RFC is   discussed in its turn starting withRFC 1 and ending with (around)RFC 3100. The comments for each RFC are "raw" in nature.  That is,   each RFC is discussed in a vacuum and problems or issues discussed do   not "look ahead" to see if the problems have already been fixed.Section 7 is an analysis of the data presented in Sections3,4,5,   and 6.  It is here that all of the results are considered as a whole   and the problems that have been resolved in later RFCs are   correlated.3.  Full Standards   Full Internet Standards (most commonly simply referred to as   "Standards") are fully mature protocol specification that are widely   implemented and used throughout the Internet.   There are no full standards within the scope of this document.4.  Draft Standards   Draft Standards represent the penultimate standard level in the IETF.   A protocol can only achieve draft standard when there are multiple,   independent, interoperable implementations.  Draft Standards are   usually quite mature and widely used.   There are no draft standards within the scope of this document.Nesser II & Bergstrom        Informational                      [Page 2]

RFC 3793         IPv4 Addresses in the IETF Sub-IP Area         May 20045.  Proposed Standards   Proposed Standards are introductory level documents.  There are no   requirements for even a single implementation.  In many cases   Proposed are never implemented or advanced in the IETF standards   process.  They therefore are often just proposed ideas that are   presented to the Internet community.  Sometimes flaws are exposed or   they are one of many competing solutions to problems.  In these later   cases, no discussion is presented as it would not serve the purpose   of this discussion.   5.01.RFC 3031 Multiprotocol Label Switching Architecture (MPLS)      There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.   5.02.RFC 3032 MPLS Label Stack Encoding      This specification is both IPv4 and IPv6 aware and needs no      changes.   5.03.RFC 3034 Use of Label Switching on Frame Relay Networks         Specification      There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.   5.04.RFC 3035 MPLS using LDP and ATM VC Switching      There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.   5.05.RFC 3036 LDP Specification      This specification is both IPv4 and IPv6 aware and needs no      changes.   5.06.RFC 3038 VCID Notification over ATM link for LDP      There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.6.  Experimental RFCs   Experimental RFCs typically define protocols that do not have   widescale implementation or usage on the Internet.  They are often   propriety in nature or used in limited arenas.  They are documented   to the Internet community in order to allow potential   interoperability or some other potential useful scenario.  In a few   cases they are presented as alternatives to the mainstream solution   to an acknowledged problem.Nesser II & Bergstrom        Informational                      [Page 3]

RFC 3793         IPv4 Addresses in the IETF Sub-IP Area         May 2004   6.01.RFC 3063 MPLS Loop Prevention Mechanism      There are no IPv4 dependencies in this specification.7.  Summary of Results   In the initial survey of RFCs 0 positives were identified out of a   total of 7, broken down as follows:         Standards:                         0 out of  0 or  0.00%         Draft Standards:                   0 out of  0 or  0.00%         Proposed Standards:                0 out of  6 or  0.00%         Experimental RFCs:                 0 out of  1 or  0.00%   Of those identified many require no action because they document   outdated and unused protocols, while others are document protocols   that are actively being updated by the appropriate working groups.   Additionally there are many instances of standards that should be   updated but do not cause any operational impact if they are not   updated.  The remaining instances are documented below.   7.01.  Standards      There are no standards within the scope of this document.   7.02.  Draft Standards      There are no draft standards within the scope of this document.   7.03.  Proposed Standards      There are no proposed standards with recommendations in this      document.   7.04.  Experimental RFCs      There are no experimental standards with recommendations in this      document.8.  Security Considerations   This memo examines the IPv6-readiness of specifications; this does   not have security considerations in itself.9.  Acknowledgements   The authors would like to acknowledge the support of the Internet   Society in the research and production of this document.Nesser II & Bergstrom        Informational                      [Page 4]

RFC 3793         IPv4 Addresses in the IETF Sub-IP Area         May 2004   Additionally the author, Philip J. Nesser II, would like to thank his   partner in all ways, Wendy M. Nesser.   The editor, Andreas Bergstrom, would like to thank Pekka Savola for   guidance and collection of comments for the editing of this document.10.  Normative Reference   [1]  Nesser, II, P. and A. Bergstrom, Editor, "Introduction to the        Survey of IPv4 Addresses in Currently Deployed IETF Standards",RFC 3789, May 2004.11.  Authors' Addresses   Please contact the authors with any questions, comments or   suggestions at:   Philip J. Nesser II   Principal   Nesser & Nesser Consulting   13501 100th Ave NE, #5202   Kirkland, WA 98034   Phone:  +1 425 481 4303   Fax:    +1 425 48   EMail:  phil@nesser.com   Andreas Bergstrom, Editor   Ostfold University College   Rute 503 Buer   N-1766 Halden   Norway   EMail: andreas.bergstrom@hiof.noNesser II & Bergstrom        Informational                      [Page 5]

RFC 3793         IPv4 Addresses in the IETF Sub-IP Area         May 200412.  Full Copyright Statement   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004).  This document is subject   to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained inBCP 78, and   except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.   This document and the information contained herein are provided on an   "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE   REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE   INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM 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.Intellectual Property   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any   Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed   to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology   described in this document or the extent to which any license   under such rights might or might not be available; nor does it   represent that it has made any independent effort to identify any   such rights.  Information on the procedures with respect to   rights in RFC documents can be found inBCP 78 andBCP 79.   Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any   assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an   attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use   of such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this   specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository   athttp://www.ietf.org/ipr.   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention   any copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other   proprietary rights that may cover technology that may be required   to implement this standard.  Please address the information to the   IETF at ietf-ipr@ietf.org.Acknowledgement   Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the   Internet Society.Nesser II & Bergstrom        Informational                      [Page 6]