Movatterモバイル変換

Network Working Group                                          G. HustonRequest for Comments: 4147                                         APNICCategory: Informational                                      August 2005Proposed Changes to the Format of the IANA IPv6 RegistryStatus 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 (2005).Abstract   This document proposes a revised format for the IANA IPv6 address   registries.  Rather than providing a formal definition of the format,   it is described by giving examples of the (current as of preparation   of this document) contents of the registries in the proposed format.   The proposed format would bring the IANA IPv6 address registries into   alignment with the current IPv6 Address Architecture specification,   as well as update it to a more useful and generally accepted format.1.  Introduction   This document proposes a revised format for the IANA IPv6 address   registries.  The proposed format would bring the IANA IPv6 address   registries into alignment with the current IPv6 Address Architecture   specification, as well as update it to a more useful and generally   accepted format.   The current (as of preparation of this document) IANA IPv6 registries   [iana-ipv6-registry] [iana-ipv6-tla] are based on a now-deprecated   address architecture that used the concept of Top Level Aggregation   Identifiers (TLAs) and sub-TLAs.  The current IPv6 Address   Architecture [RFC3513] uses the terminology of Global Identifiers   instead of TLAs and sub-TLAs.Huston                       Informational                      [Page 1]

RFC 4147                   IANA IPv6 Registry                August 20052.  IPv6 Address Registry   The proposed format for the IPv6 address registry is indicated by   example, using the registry state that is current as of preparation   of this document, in Figure 1.  The registry explicitly notes which   entity is placing a reservation on an address block and notes the   defining RFC document for each allocation.   The proposed format of the registry is a title line, the date of the   last change to the registry, the registry in a tabular format, notes   and references.   The table uses 4 columns.  Within the table, the first column   contains an IPv6 address prefix, using a hexadecimal notation of the   address prefix and a prefix length.  There are no overlapping address   blocks in the first column, and the set of address blocks in the   registry spans the entire IPv6 address space.  The second column   denotes the current disposition of the address block, using notation   derived from the defining RFC document.  The third column contains a   reference to the RFC that describes the current disposition of the   address block.  The fourth column uses numeric footnote notation to   reference any additional text associated with the address block.   The notes in the registry may include a summary of previous   disposition status values associated with an address block, as this   summary is specifically not included in the registry table.  The   notes are numbered sequentially.   The reference section uses a conventional citation format.  The   references include documents referenced in the registry table and   documents referenced in the notes.   -----------------------------------------------------   INTERNET PROTOCOL VERSION 6 ADDRESS SPACE   [last updated 13 January 2005]     IPv6 Prefix           Allocation              Reference      Note     -----------           ----------              ---------      ----     0000::/8              Reserved by IETFRFC3513        [1]     0100::/8              Reserved by IETFRFC3513     0200::/7              Reserved by IETFRFC4048        [2]     0400::/6              Reserved by IETFRFC3513     0800::/5              Reserved by IETFRFC3513     1000::/4              Reserved by IETFRFC3513     2000::/3              Global UnicastRFC3513        [3]     4000::/3              Reserved by IETFRFC3513Huston                       Informational                      [Page 2]

RFC 4147                   IANA IPv6 Registry                August 2005     6000::/3              Reserved by IETFRFC3513     8000::/3              Reserved by IETFRFC3513     A000::/3              Reserved by IETFRFC3513     C000::/3              Reserved by IETFRFC3513     E000::/4              Reserved by IETFRFC3513     F000::/5              Reserved by IETFRFC3513     F800::/6              Reserved by IETFRFC3513     FA00::/7              Reserved by IETFRFC3513     FC00::/7              Reserved by IETFRFC3513     FE00::/9              Reserved by IETFRFC3513     FE80::/10             Link Local UnicastRFC3513     FEC0::/10             Reserved by IETFRFC3879        [4]     FF00::/8              MulticastRFC3513   Notes:     [0]  The IPv6 address management function was formally delegated to          IANA in December 1995 [RFC1881].     [1]  The "unspecified address", the "loopback address", and the          IPv6 Addresses with Embedded IPv4 Addresses are assigned out          of the 0000::/8 address block.     [2]  0200::/7 was previously defined as an OSI NSAP-mapped prefix          set [RFC1888].  This definition has been deprecated as of          December 2004 [RFC4048].     [3]  The IPv6 Unicast space encompasses the entire IPv6 address          range with the exception of FF00::/8. [RFC3513] IANA unicast          address assignments are currently limited to the IPv6 unicast          address range of 2000::/3.  IANA assignments from this block          are registered in the IANA registry: iana-ipv6-unicast-          address-assignments.     [4]  FEC0::/10 was previously defined as a Site-Local scoped          address prefix.  This definition has been deprecated as of          September 2004 [RFC3879].   References:     [RFC1881]   The IAB and IESG, "IPv6 Address Allocation Management",RFC 1881, December 1995.     [RFC1888]   J. Bound et al, "OSI NSAPs and IPv6",RFC 1888, August                 1996.     [RFC3513]   R. Hinden and S. Deering, "IP Version 6 Addressing                 Architecture",RFC 3513, April 2003.Huston                       Informational                      [Page 3]

RFC 4147                   IANA IPv6 Registry                August 2005     [RFC3879]   C. Huitema and B. Carpenter, "Deprecating Site Local                 Addresses",RFC 3879, September 2004.     [RFC4048]   B. Carpenter, "RFC 1888 Is Obsolete",RFC 4048, April                 2005.   -----------------------------------------------------                                 Figure 12.1.  Notes on Proposed Format Changes to the Registry   o  The textual preamble at the start of the registry has been      removed, in deference to the use of standard IPv6 prefix notation      in the registry.   o  Binary prefix notation has been replaced by standard IPv6 prefix      hexadecimal notation, and the fraction of address space column has      been replaced with the reference to the relevant RFC that defines      the disposition of the address block.  Footnote references are      also displayed in a consistent fashion.   o  The terminology "Unassigned" has been replaced by the more precise      phrase "Reserved by IETF", indicating the body that has the token      to permit reassignment of the status of this address block.   o  The "Formerly Site-Local" entry in the body of the registry has      been replaced with an explicit reference to deprecation.  A      similar treatment is proposed for 0200::/8, although the RFC      number for the deprecation document has yet to be assigned.  There      is a distinction drawn between the current status of a registry      and the set of registry actions that have lead to the current      state.  The registry table describes the current status of the      registry, while the text footnotes are used to describe the set of      transactions leading to the current state, including any former      states.   o  Annotations that are references to footnotes are included in the      registry in a separate column.   o  The text commentary on unicast, multicast and anycast addresses      has been removed, as there is no distinction between anycast and      unicast addresses and multicast addresses are explicitly flagged      in the registry.Huston                       Informational                      [Page 4]

RFC 4147                   IANA IPv6 Registry                August 2005   o  A note and a corresponding reference toRFC1881 was added to      record the formal delegation of the IPv6 address management      function to IANA.3.  Global Unicast IPv6 Address Registry   The proposed registry format for Global Unicast IPv6 address block   allocations is indicated by example, using the registry state that   was current as of preparation of this document, in Figure 2.  The   registry notes the current allocations, and does not include any   notation of intended future allocations or reservations.  All address   space not listed in this registry forms the IANA unallocated address   pool, to be allocated by IANA as per the prevailing address   allocation policies.   The proposed format of the registry is a title line, the date of the   last change to the registry, the registry in a tabular format, notes   and references.   The table uses 4 columns.  Within the table, the first column is an   IPv6 address prefix, using a hexadecimal notation of the address   prefix and a prefix length.  There are no overlapping address blocks   in the first column.  The entries here describe only IANA allocations   of address blocks.  Temporary IANA reservations for future   allocations, allocation expansion windows and any other internal IANA   states are not described in this registry.  The second column   describes the current disposition of the address block, by noting   either the Regional Internet Registry (RIR) to whom the address block   was assigned, or the intended use of the address block.  The third   column is the date of the IANA allocation, including the day of the   month.  The fourth column uses numeric footnote notation to reference   any additional text associated with the address block.   The notes in the registry may include a summary of previous   disposition status values associated with an address block, as this   summary is specifically not included in the registry table.  The   notes are numbered sequentially.   The reference section uses a conventional citation format.  The   references include documents referenced in the registry table and   documents referenced in the notes.Huston                       Informational                      [Page 5]

RFC 4147                   IANA IPv6 Registry                August 2005   -----------------------------------------------------   IPV6 GLOBAL UNICAST ADDRESS ASSIGNMENTS   [last updated 13 January 2005]     Global Unicast Prefix Assignment     Date        Note     --------------------- ----------     ------      ----     2001:0000::/23        IANA           01 Jul 99   [1]     2001:0200::/23        APNIC          01 Jul 99     2001:0400::/23        ARIN           01 Jul 99     2001:0600::/23        RIPE NCC       01 Jul 99     2001:0800::/23        RIPE NCC       01 May 02     2001:0A00::/23        RIPE NCC       02 Nov 02     2001:0C00::/23        APNIC          01 May 02   [2]     2001:0E00::/23        APNIC          01 Jan 03     2001:1200::/23        LACNIC         01 Nov 02     2001:1400::/23        RIPE NCC       01 Feb 03     2001:1600::/23        RIPE NCC       01 Jul 03     2001:1800::/23        ARIN           01 Apr 03     2001:1A00::/23        RIPE NCC       01 Jan 04     2001:1C00::/22        RIPE NCC       01 May 04     2001:2000::/20        RIPE NCC       01 May 04     2001:3000::/21        RIPE NCC       01 May 04     2001:3800::/22        RIPE NCC       01 May 04     2001:4000::/23        RIPE NCC       11 Jun 04     2001:4200::/23        ARIN           01 Jun 04     2001:4400::/23        APNIC          11 Jun 04     2001:4600::/23        RIPE NCC       17 Aug 04     2001:4800::/23        ARIN           24 Aug 04     2001:4A00::/23        RIPE NCC       15 Oct 04     2001:4C00::/23        RIPE NCC       17 Dec 04     2001:5000::/20        RIPE NCC       10 Sep 04     2001:8000::/19        APNIC          30 Nov 04     2001:A000::/20        APNIC          30 Nov 04     2002::/16             6to4           01 Feb 01   [3]     2003:0000::/18        RIPE NCC       12 Jan 05     3FFE::/16             6BONE          01 Dec 98   [4]   Notes:     [0]  The assignable Global Unicast Address space is defined          in [RFC3513] as being the address block defined by the          prefix 2000::/3.  All address space in this block not          listed in the table above is reserved by IANA for          future allocation.Huston                       Informational                      [Page 6]

RFC 4147                   IANA IPv6 Registry                August 2005     [1]  The prefix assigned to the IANA, 2001:0000::/23, is for          assignment for testing, experimental and trial usage by IANA          [RFC2928].     [2]  2001:0DB8::/32 has been assigned as a NON-ROUTABLE          range to be used for documentation purposes [RFC3849].     [3]  2002::/16 is reserved for use in 6to4 deployments [RFC3056]     [4]  3FFE::/16 is an experimental allocation to the 6BONE          [RFC2471].  This prefix will be returned to the unassigned          address pool on the 6th June 2006 [RFC3701].   References:     [RFC2471]   R. Hinden, R. Fink and J. Postel, "IPv6 Testing                 Address Allocation",RFC 2471, December 1998.     [RFC2928]   R. Hinden, S. Deering, R. Fink and T. Hain,                 "Initial IPv6 Sub-TLA ID Assignments",RFC 2928,                 September 2000.     [RFC3056]   B. Carpenter and K. Moore, "Connection of IPv6 Domains                 via IPv4 Clouds",RFC 3056, February 2001.     [RFC3513]   R. Hinden and S. Deering, "Internet Protocol Version 6                 (IPv6) Addressing Architecture",RFC 3513, April 2003.     [RFC3701]   R. Fink and R. Hinden, "6bone (IPv6 Testing Address                 Allocation) Phaseout",RFC 3701, March 2004.     [RFC3849]   G. Huston, A. Lord, A and P. Smith, "IPv6 Address                 Prefix Reserved for Documentation",RFC 3849, July                 2004.   -----------------------------------------------------                                 Figure 2Huston                       Informational                      [Page 7]

RFC 4147                   IANA IPv6 Registry                August 20053.1.  Notes on Proposed Format Changes to the Registry   o  The current registry name "iana-ipv6-tla-assignments" should be      changed to "iana-ipv6-unicast-address-assignments".   o  The title of the registry has been altered to remove the reference      to "TOP LEVEL AGGREGATION IDENTIFIER".   o  The TLA and Sub-TLA identifier assignments have been rolled into a      single set of address prefixes and their assignment.   o  The text commentary at the start of the registry contents has been      removed.   o  Binary value notation of the address prefixes has been removed.   o  Further commentary on assignments, such as the planned phaseout of      the 6BONE, is placed in a footnote.   o  The registry continuation lines using ellipsis notation have been      removed.   o  Only assigned addresses are listed.  All unassigned addresses,      marked in the original IANA registry with the assignment note of      "(future assignment)" have been removed, as has the entry marked      "reserved *)".   o  Address assignments are listed using prefix size notation of the      actual allocation, rather than reporting the allocation in sub-      units of /23 prefixes.   o  The date of the IANA action includes the day of the month as well      as the month and year.4.  IANA Considerations   IANA is advised to adopt these formats for the IPv6 address registry   and the IPv6 Global Unicast address registry.5.  Security Considerations   Security of the Internet's routing system relies on the ability to   authenticate an assertion of unique control of an address block.   Measures to authenticate such assertions rely on validation that the   address block forms part of an existing allocated address block, and   that there is a trustable reference from the IANA address registry to   the RIR, and a trustable reference from the RIR's registry to a Local   Internet Registry or end-user Internet Service Provider.Huston                       Informational                      [Page 8]

RFC 4147                   IANA IPv6 Registry                August 2005   The proposed format for the IANA registry is a small step towards the   creation of a registry that can be used as a trust point for   commencing a chain of address validation.  Consideration should be   given to IANA registry publication formats that are machine   parseable, and also the use of file signatures and associated   certificate mechanisms to allow applications to confirm that the   registry contents are current, and that they have been published by   the IANA.6.  Acknowledgements   This document was prepared with the assistance of Kurt Lindqvist,   Thomas Narten, Paul Wilson, David Kessens, Bob Hinden and Brian   Haberman.  Pekka Savola, Brian Carpenter, Christian Huitema and   Michael Patton provided helpful review comments.7.  References7.1.  Normative References   [RFC3513]             Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "Internet Protocol                         Version 6 (IPv6) Addressing Architecture",RFC 3513, April 2003.7.2.  Informative References   [iana-ipv6-registry]  IANA, "IANA IPv6 Address Registry",                         December 2004.   [iana-ipv6-tla]       IANA, "IANA Registry of IPv6 Top Level                         Aggregation Identifier Assignments",                         December 2004.Author's Address   Geoff Huston   Asia Pacific Network Information Centre   EMail: gih@apnic.net   URI:http://www.apnic.netHuston                       Informational                      [Page 9]

RFC 4147                   IANA IPv6 Registry                August 2005Full Copyright Statement   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005).   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.Huston                       Informational                     [Page 10]