Movatterモバイル変換


[0]ホーム

URL:


[RFC Home] [TEXT|PDF|HTML] [Tracker] [IPR] [Info page]

PROPOSED STANDARD
Network Working Group                                           M. StappRequest for Comments: 4702                                       B. VolzCategory: Standards Track                            Cisco Systems, Inc.                                                              Y. Rekhter                                                        Juniper Networks                                                            October 2006The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) ClientFully Qualified Domain Name (FQDN) OptionStatus of This Memo   This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the   Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for   improvements.  Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet   Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state   and status of this protocol.  Distribution of this memo is unlimited.Copyright Notice   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).Abstract   This document describes a Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for   IPv4 (DHCPv4) option that can be used to exchange information about a   DHCPv4 client's fully qualified domain name and about responsibility   for updating the DNS RR related to the client's address assignment.Stapp, et al.               Standards Track                     [Page 1]

RFC 4702              The DHCP Client FQDN Option           October 2006Table of Contents1. Introduction ....................................................31.1. Terminology ................................................31.2. Models of Operation ........................................32. The Client FQDN Option ..........................................42.1. The Flags Field ............................................52.2. The RCODE Fields ...........................................62.3. The Domain Name Field ......................................62.3.1. Deprecated ASCII Encoding ...........................73. DHCP Client Behavior ............................................73.1. Interaction with Other Options .............................73.2. Client Desires to Update A RRs .............................83.3. Client Desires Server to Do DNS Updates ....................83.4. Client Desires No Server DNS Updates .......................83.5. Domain Name and DNS Update Issues ..........................94. DHCP Server Behavior ...........................................104.1. When to Perform DNS Updates ...............................115. DNS RR TTLs ....................................................126. DNS Update Conflicts ...........................................127. IANA Considerations ............................................138. Security Considerations ........................................139. Acknowledgements ...............................................1410. References ....................................................1410.1. Normative References .....................................1410.2. Informative References ...................................15Stapp, et al.               Standards Track                     [Page 2]

RFC 4702              The DHCP Client FQDN Option           October 20061.  Introduction   DNS ([2], [3]) maintains (among other things) the information about   the mapping between hosts' Fully Qualified Domain Names (FQDNs) [11]   and IP addresses assigned to the hosts.  The information is   maintained in two types of Resource Records (RRs): A and PTR.  The   DNS update specification ([4]) describes a mechanism that enables DNS   information to be updated over a network.   The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv4 (DHCPv4 or just DHCP   in this document) [5] provides a mechanism by which a host (a DHCP   client) can acquire certain configuration information, along with its   address.  This document specifies a DHCP option, the Client FQDN   option, which can be used by DHCP clients and servers to exchange   information about the client's fully qualified domain name for an   address and who has the responsibility for updating the DNS with the   associated A and PTR RRs.1.1.  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 [1].1.2.  Models of Operation   When a DHCP client acquires a new address, a site's administrator may   desire that one or both of the A RR for the client's FQDN and the PTR   RR for the acquired address be updated.  Therefore, two separate DNS   update transactions may occur.  Acquiring an address via DHCP   involves two entities: a DHCP client and a DHCP server.  In   principle, each of these entities could perform none, one, or both of   the transactions.  However, in practice, not all permutations make   sense.  The DHCP Client FQDN option is primarily intended to operate   in the following two cases:   1.  DHCP client updates the A RR, DHCP server updates the PTR RR.   2.  DHCP server updates both the A and the PTR RRs.   The only difference between these two cases is whether the FQDN-to-   IP-address mapping is updated by a DHCP client or by a DHCP server.   The IP-address-to-FQDN mapping is updated by a DHCP server in both   cases.   The reason these two are important, while others are unlikely, has to   do with authority over the respective DNS domain names.  A DHCP   client may be given authority over mapping its own A RRs, or thatStapp, et al.               Standards Track                     [Page 3]

RFC 4702              The DHCP Client FQDN Option           October 2006   authority may be restricted to a server to prevent the client from   listing arbitrary addresses or associating its address with arbitrary   domain names.  In all cases, the only reasonable place for the   authority over the PTR RRs associated with the address is in the DHCP   server that allocates the address.   Note: A third case is supported: the client requests that the server   perform no updates.  However, this case is presumed to be rare   because of the authority issues.   It is considered local policy to permit DHCP clients and servers to   perform DNS updates to zones.  This document does not require any   specific administrative policy and does not propose one.   Furthermore, this specification applies only to DHCP client and   server processes; it does not apply to other processes that initiate   DNS updates.   This document describes a DHCP option which a client can use to   convey all or part of its domain name to a DHCP server.  Site-   specific policy determines whether DHCP servers use the names that   clients offer or not, and what DHCP servers may do in cases where   clients do not supply domain names.2.  The Client FQDN Option   To update the IP-address-to-FQDN mapping, a DHCP server needs to know   the FQDN of the client to which the server leases the address.  To   allow the client to convey its FQDN to the server, this document   defines a new DHCP option, called "Client FQDN".  The Client FQDN   option also contains Flags, which DHCP servers can use to convey   information about DNS updates to clients, and two deprecated RCODEs.   Clients MAY send the Client FQDN option, setting appropriate Flags   values, in both their DHCPDISCOVER and DHCPREQUEST messages.  If a   client sends the Client FQDN option in its DHCPDISCOVER message, it   MUST send the option in subsequent DHCPREQUEST messages though the   contents of the option MAY change.   Only one Client FQDN option MAY appear in a message, though it may be   instantiated in a message as multiple options [9].  DHCP clients and   servers supporting this option MUST implement DHCP option   concatenation [9].  In the terminology of [9], the Client FQDN option   is a concatenation-requiring option.   The code for this option is 81.  Len contains the number of octets   that follow the Len field, and the minimum value is 3 (octets).Stapp, et al.               Standards Track                     [Page 4]

RFC 4702              The DHCP Client FQDN Option           October 2006   The format of the Client FQDN option is:        Code   Len    Flags  RCODE1 RCODE2   Domain Name       +------+------+------+------+------+------+--       |  81  |   n  |      |      |      |       ...       +------+------+------+------+------+------+--   The above figure follows the conventions of [12].2.1.  The Flags Field   The format of the 1-octet Flags field is:        0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+       |  MBZ  |N|E|O|S|       +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+   The "S" bit indicates whether the server SHOULD or SHOULD NOT perform   the A RR (FQDN-to-address) DNS updates.  A client sets the bit to 0   to indicate the server SHOULD NOT perform the updates and 1 to   indicate the server SHOULD perform the updates.  The state of the bit   in the reply from the server indicates the action to be taken by the   server; if 1, the server has taken responsibility for A RR updates   for the FQDN.   The "O" bit indicates whether the server has overridden the client's   preference for the "S" bit.  A client MUST set this bit to 0.  A   server MUST set this bit to 1 if the "S" bit in its reply to the   client does not match the "S" bit received from the client.   The "N" bit indicates whether the server SHOULD NOT perform any DNS   updates.  A client sets this bit to 0 to request that the server   SHOULD perform updates (the PTR RR and possibly the A RR based on the   "S" bit) or to 1 to request that the server SHOULD NOT perform any   DNS updates.  A server sets the "N" bit to indicate whether the   server SHALL (0) or SHALL NOT (1) perform DNS updates.  If the "N"   bit is 1, the "S" bit MUST be 0.   The "E" bit indicates the encoding of the Domain Name field. 1   indicates canonical wire format, without compression, as described in   [3], Section 3.1.  This encoding SHOULD be used by clients and MUST   be supported by servers. 0 indicates a now-deprecated ASCII encoding   (seeSection 2.3.1).  A server MUST use the same encoding as thatStapp, et al.               Standards Track                     [Page 5]

RFC 4702              The DHCP Client FQDN Option           October 2006   used by the client.  A server that does not support the deprecated   ASCII encoding MUST ignore Client FQDN options that use that   encoding.   The remaining bits in the Flags field are reserved for future   assignment.  DHCP clients and servers that send the Client FQDN   option MUST clear the MBZ bits, and they MUST ignore these bits.2.2.  The RCODE Fields   The two 1-octet RCODE1 and RCODE2 fields are deprecated.  A client   SHOULD set these to 0 when sending the option and SHOULD ignore them   on receipt.  A server SHOULD set these to 255 when sending the option   and MUST ignore them on receipt.   As this option with these fields is already in wide use, the fields   are retained.  These fields were originally defined for use by a DHCP   server to indicate to a DHCP client the Response Code from any A   (RCODE1) or PTR (RCODE2) RR DNS updates it has performed, or a value   of 255 was used to indicate that an update had been initiated but had   not yet completed.  Each of these fields is one octet long.  These   fields were defined before EDNS0 [13], which describes a mechanism   for extending the length of a DNS RCODE to 12 bits, which is another   reason to deprecate them.   If the client needs to confirm that the DNS update has been done, it   MAY use a DNS query to check whether the mapping is up to date.   However, depending on the load on the DHCP and DNS servers and the   DNS propagation delays, the client can only infer success.  If the   information is not found to be up to date in DNS, the authoritative   servers might not have completed the updates or zone transfers, or   caching resolvers may yet have updated their caches.2.3.  The Domain Name Field   The Domain Name part of the option carries all or part of the FQDN of   a DHCP client.  The data in the Domain Name field SHOULD appear in   canonical wire format as specified in [3], Section 3.1.  If the DHCP   client uses the canonical wire format, it MUST set the "E" bit in the   Flags field to 1.  In order to determine whether the FQDN has changed   between message exchanges, the client and server MUST NOT alter the   Domain Name field contents unless the FQDN has actually changed.   A client MAY be configured with a fully qualified domain name or with   a partial name that is not fully qualified.  If a client knows only   part of its name, it MAY send a name that is not fully qualified,   indicating that it knows part of the name but does not necessarily   know the zone in which the name is to be embedded.Stapp, et al.               Standards Track                     [Page 6]

RFC 4702              The DHCP Client FQDN Option           October 2006   To send a fully qualified domain name, the Domain Name field is set   to the DNS-encoded domain name including the terminating zero-length   label.  To send a partial name, the Domain Name field is set to the   DNS encoded domain name without the terminating zero-length label.   A client MAY also leave the Domain Name field empty if it desires the   server to provide a name.2.3.1.  Deprecated ASCII Encoding   A substantial population of clients implemented an earlier draft of   this specification, which permitted an ASCII encoding of the Domain   Name field.  Server implementations SHOULD be aware that clients that   send the Client FQDN option with the "E" bit set to 0 are using an   ASCII encoding of the Domain Name field.  Servers MAY be prepared to   return an ASCII-encoded version of the Domain Name field to such   clients.  Servers that are not prepared to return an ASCII-encoded   version MUST ignore the Client FQDN option if the "E" bit is 0.  The   use of ASCII encoding in this option SHOULD be considered deprecated.   A DHCP client that used ASCII encoding was permitted to suggest a   single label if it was not configured with a fully qualified name.   Such clients send a single label as a series of ASCII characters in   the Domain Name field, excluding the "." (dot) character.   Clients and servers SHOULD follow the character set rules of [6],   fourth section ("Assumptions"), first 5 sentences, as modified by   [7], Section 2.1.  However, implementers SHOULD also be aware that   some client software may send data intended to be in other character   sets.  This specification does not require support for other   character sets.3.  DHCP Client Behavior   The following describes the behavior of a DHCP client that implements   the Client FQDN option.3.1.  Interaction with Other Options   Other DHCP options MAY carry data that is related to the Domain Name   field of the Client FQDN option.  The Host Name option [12], for   example, contains an ASCII string representation of the client's host   name.  In general, a client does not need to send redundant data, and   therefore clients that send the Client FQDN option in their messages   MUST NOT also send the Host Name option.  Clients that receive both   the Host Name option and the Client FQDN option from a server SHOULDStapp, et al.               Standards Track                     [Page 7]

RFC 4702              The DHCP Client FQDN Option           October 2006   prefer Client FQDN option data.Section 4 instructs servers to   ignore the Host Name option in client messages that include the   Client FQDN option.3.2.  Client Desires to Update A RRs   If a client that owns/maintains its own FQDN wants to be responsible   for updating the FQDN-to-IP-address mapping for the FQDN and   address(es) used by the client, the client MUST include the Client   FQDN option in the DHCPREQUEST message originated by the client.  A   DHCP client MAY choose to include the Client FQDN option in its   DHCPDISCOVER messages as well as its DHCPREQUEST messages.  The "S",   "O", and "N" bits in the Flags field in the option MUST be 0.   Once the client's DHCP configuration is completed (the client   receives a DHCPACK message and successfully completes a final check   on the parameters passed in the message), the client MAY originate an   update for the A RR (associated with the client's FQDN) unless the   server has set the "S" bit to 1.  If the "S" is 1, the DHCP client   SHOULD NOT initiate an update for the name in the server's returned   Client FQDN option Domain Name field.  However, a DHCP client that is   explicitly configured with a FQDN MAY ignore the state of the "S" bit   if the server's returned name matches the client's configured name.3.3.  Client Desires Server to Do DNS Updates   A client can choose to delegate the responsibility for updating the   FQDN-to-IP-address mapping for the FQDN and address(es) used by the   client to the server.  In order to inform the server of this choice,   the client SHOULD include the Client FQDN option in its DHCPREQUEST   message and MAY include the Client FQDN option in its DHCPDISCOVER.   The "S" bit in the Flags field in the option MUST be 1, and the "O"   and "N" bits MUST be 0.3.4.  Client Desires No Server DNS Updates   A client can choose to request that the server perform no DNS updates   on its behalf.  In order to inform the server of this choice, the   client SHOULD include the Client FQDN option in its DHCPREQUEST   message and MAY include the Client FQDN option in its DHCPDISCOVER.   The "N" bit in the Flags field in the option MUST be 1, and the "S"   and "O" bits MUST be 0.   Once the client's DHCP configuration is completed (the client   receives a DHCPACK message and successfully completes a final check   on the parameters passed in the message), the client MAY originateStapp, et al.               Standards Track                     [Page 8]

RFC 4702              The DHCP Client FQDN Option           October 2006   its DNS updates provided the server's "N" bit is 1.  If the server's   "N" bit is 0, the server MAY perform the PTR RR updates; it MAY also   perform the A RR updates if the "S" bit is 1.3.5.  Domain Name and DNS Update Issues   As there is a possibility that the DHCP server is configured to   complete or replace a domain name that the client sends, the client   MAY find it useful to send the Client FQDN option in its DHCPDISCOVER   messages.  If the DHCP server returns different Domain Name data in   its DHCPOFFER message, the client could use that data in performing   its own eventual A RR update, or in forming the Client FQDN option   that it sends in its DHCPREQUEST message.  There is no requirement   that the client send identical Client FQDN option data in its   DHCPDISCOVER and DHCPREQUEST messages.  In particular, if a client   has sent the Client FQDN option to its server, and the configuration   of the client changes so that its notion of its domain name changes,   it MAY send the new name data in a Client FQDN option when it   communicates with the server again.  This MAY cause the DHCP server   to update the name associated with the PTR record and, if the server   updated the A record representing the client, to delete that record   and attempt an update for the client's current domain name.   A client that delegates the responsibility for updating the FQDN-to-   IP-address mapping to a server will not receive any indication   (either positive or negative) from the server as to whether the   server was able to perform the update.  The client MAY use a DNS   query to check whether the mapping is up to date (seeSection 2.2).   If a client releases its lease prior to the lease expiration time and   is responsible for updating its A RR, the client SHOULD delete the A   RR associated with the leased address before sending a DHCPRELEASE   message.  Similarly, if a client was responsible for updating its A   RR, but is unable to renew its lease, the client SHOULD attempt to   delete the A RR before its lease expires.  A DHCP client that has not   been able to delete an A RR that it added (because it has lost the   use of its DHCP IP address) SHOULD attempt to notify its   administrator, perhaps by emitting a log message.   A client that desires to perform DNS updates to A RRs SHOULD NOT do   so if the client's address is a private address [8].Stapp, et al.               Standards Track                     [Page 9]

RFC 4702              The DHCP Client FQDN Option           October 20064.  DHCP Server Behavior   The following describes the behavior of a DHCP server that implements   the Client FQDN option when the client's message includes the Client   FQDN option.   The server examines its configuration and the Flag bits in the   client's Client FQDN option to determine how to respond:   o  If the client's "E" bit is 0 and the server does not support ASCII      encoding (Section 2.3.1), the server SHOULD ignore the Client FQDN      option.   o  The server sets to 0 the "S", "O", and "N" bits in its copy of the      option it will return to the client.  The server copies the      client's "E" bit.   o  If the client's "N" bit is 1 and the server's configuration allows      it to honor the client's request for no server initiated DNS      updates, the server sets the "N" bit to 1.   o  Otherwise, if the client's "S" bit is 1 and the server's      configuration allows it to honor the client's request for the      server to initiate A RR DNS updates, the server sets the "S" to 1.      If the server's "S" bit does not match the client's "S" bit, the      server sets the "O" bit to 1.   The server MAY be configured to use the name supplied in the client's   Client FQDN option, or it MAY be configured to modify the supplied   name or to substitute a different name.  The server SHOULD send its   notion of the complete FQDN for the client in the Domain Name field.   The server MAY simply copy the Domain Name field from the Client FQDN   option that the client sent to the server.  The server MUST use the   same encoding format (ASCII or DNS binary encoding) that the client   used in the Client FQDN option in its DHCPDISCOVER or DHCPREQUEST,   and it MUST set the "E" bit in the option's Flags field accordingly.   If a client sends both the Client FQDN and Host Name option, the   server SHOULD ignore the Host Name option.   The server SHOULD set the RCODE1 and RCODE2 fields to 255 before   sending the Client FQDN message to the client in a DHCPOFFER or   DHCPACK.Stapp, et al.               Standards Track                    [Page 10]

RFC 4702              The DHCP Client FQDN Option           October 20064.1.  When to Perform DNS Updates   The server SHOULD NOT perform any DNS updates if the "N" bit is 1 in   the Flags field of the Client FQDN option in the DHCPACK messages (to   be) sent to the client.  However, the server SHOULD delete any RRs   that it previously added via DNS updates for the client.   The server MAY perform the PTR RR DNS update (unless the "N" bit is   1).   The server MAY perform the A RR DNS update if the "S" bit is 1 in the   Flags field of the Client FQDN option in the DHCPACK message (to be)   sent to the client.   The server MAY perform these updates even if the client's DHCPREQUEST   did not carry the Client FQDN option.  The server MUST NOT initiate   DNS updates when responding to DHCPDISCOVER messages from a client.   The server MAY perform its DNS updates (PTR RR or PTR and A RR)   before or after sending the DHCPACK message to the client.   If the server's A RR DNS update does not complete until after the   server has replied to the DHCP client, the server's interaction with   the DNS server MAY cause the DHCP server to change the domain name   that it associates with the client.  This can occur, for example, if   the server detects and resolves a domain-name conflict [10].  In such   cases, the domain name that the server returns to the DHCP client   would change between two DHCP exchanges.   If the server previously performed DNS updates for the client and the   client's information has not changed, the server MAY skip performing   additional DNS updates.   When a server detects that a lease on an address that the server   leases to a client has expired, the server SHOULD delete any PTR RR   that it added via DNS update.  In addition, if the server added an A   RR on the client's behalf, the server SHOULD also delete the A RR.   When a server terminates a lease on an address prior to the lease's   expiration time (for instance, by sending a DHCPNAK to a client), the   server SHOULD delete any PTR RR that it associated with the address   via DNS update.  In addition, if the server took responsibility for   an A RR, the server SHOULD also delete that A RR.Stapp, et al.               Standards Track                    [Page 11]

RFC 4702              The DHCP Client FQDN Option           October 20065.  DNS RR TTLs   RRs associated with DHCP clients may be more volatile than statically   configured RRs.  DHCP clients and servers that perform dynamic   updates should attempt to specify resource-record TTLs that reflect   this volatility, in order to minimize the possibility that answers to   DNS queries will return records that refer to DHCP IP address   assignments that have expired or been released.   The coupling among primary, secondary, and caching DNS servers is   'loose'; that is a fundamental part of the design of the DNS.  This   looseness makes it impossible to prevent all possible situations in   which a resolver may return a record reflecting a DHCP-assigned IP   address that has expired or been released.  In deployment, this   rarely, if ever, represents a significant problem.  Most DHCP-managed   clients are infrequently looked up by name in the DNS, and the   deployment of IXFR ([16]) and NOTIFY ([17]) can reduce the latency   between updates and their visibility at secondary servers.   We suggest these basic guidelines for implementers.  In general, the   TTLs for RRs added as a result of DHCP IP address assignment activity   SHOULD be less than the initial lease time.  The RR TTL on a DNS   record added SHOULD NOT exceed 1/3 of the lease time, but SHOULD NOT   be less than 10 minutes.  We recognize that individual administrators   will have varying requirements: DHCP servers and clients SHOULD allow   administrators to configure TTLs and upper and lower bounds on the   TTL values, either as an absolute time interval or as a percentage of   the lease time.   While clients and servers MAY update the TTL of the records as the   lease is about to expire, there is no requirement that they do so, as   this puts additional load on the DNS system with likely little   benefit.6.  DNS Update Conflicts   This document does not resolve how a DHCP client or server prevents   name conflicts.  This document addresses only how a DHCP client and   server negotiate who will perform the DNS updates and the fully   qualified domain name requested or used.   Implementers of this work will need to consider how name conflicts   will be prevented.  If a DNS updater needs a security token in order   to successfully perform DNS updates on a specific name, name   conflicts can only occur if multiple updaters are given a security   token for that name.  Or, if the fully qualified domains are based onStapp, et al.               Standards Track                    [Page 12]

RFC 4702              The DHCP Client FQDN Option           October 2006   the specific address bound to a client, conflicts will not occur.   Or, a name conflict resolution technique as described in "Resolving   Name Conflicts" [10] SHOULD be used.7.  IANA Considerations   IANA has already assigned DHCP option 81 to the Client FQDN option.   As this document describes the option's use, IANA is requested to   reference this document for option 81.8.  Security Considerations   Unauthenticated updates to the DNS can lead to tremendous confusion,   through malicious attack or through inadvertent misconfiguration.   Administrators need to be wary of permitting unsecured DNS updates to   zones that are exposed to the global Internet.  Both DHCP clients and   servers should use some form of update request origin authentication   procedure (e.g., Secure DNS Dynamic Update [14]) when performing DNS   updates.   Whether a DHCP client is responsible for updating an FQDN-to-IP-   address mapping or whether this is the responsibility of the DHCP   server is a site-local matter.  The choice between the two   alternatives is likely based on the security model that is used with   the DNS update protocol (e.g., only a client may have sufficient   credentials to perform updates to the FQDN-to-IP-address mapping for   its FQDN).   Whether a DHCP server is always responsible for updating the FQDN-   to-IP-address mapping (in addition to updating the IP to FQDN   mapping), regardless of the wishes of an individual DHCP client, is   also a site-local matter.  The choice between the two alternatives is   likely based on the security model that is being used with DNS   updates.  In cases where a DHCP server is performing DNS updates on   behalf of a client, the DHCP server should be sure of the DNS name to   use for the client, and of the identity of the client.   Currently, it is difficult for DHCP servers to develop much   confidence in the identities of its clients, given the absence of   entity authentication from the DHCP protocol itself.  There are many   ways for a DHCP server to develop a DNS name to use for a client, but   only in certain relatively unusual circumstances will the DHCP server   know for certain the identity of the client.  If DHCP Authentication   [15] becomes widely deployed, this may become more customary.   One example of a situation that offers some extra assurances is when   the DHCP client is connected to a network through an Multimedia Cable   Network System (MCNS) cable modem, and the cable modem terminationStapp, et al.               Standards Track                    [Page 13]

RFC 4702              The DHCP Client FQDN Option           October 2006   system (CMTS), i.e., head-end, ensures that MAC address spoofing   simply does not occur.  Another example of a configuration that might   be trusted is one where clients obtain network access via a network   access server using PPP.  The NAS itself might be obtaining IP   addresses via DHCP, encoding a client identification into the DHCP   client-id option.  In this case, the network access server as well as   the DHCP server might be operating within a trusted environment, in   which case the DHCP server could be configured to trust that the user   authentication and authorization procedure of the remote access   server was sufficient, and would therefore trust the client   identification encoded within the DHCP client-id.   It is critical to implement proper conflict resolution, and the   security considerations of conflict resolution apply [10].9.  Acknowledgements   Many thanks to Mark Beyer, Jim Bound, Ralph Droms, Robert Elz, Peter   Ford, Olafur Gudmundsson, Edie Gunter, Andreas Gustafsson, David W.   Hankins, R. Barr Hibbs, Kim Kinnear, Stuart Kwan, Ted Lemon, Ed   Lewis, Michael Lewis, Josh Littlefield, Michael Patton, Pekka Savola,   Jyrki Soini, and Glenn Stump for their review and comments.10.  References10.1.  Normative References   [1]   Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement         Levels",BCP 14,RFC 2119, March 1997.   [2]   Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - concepts and facilities",         STD 13,RFC 1034, November 1987.   [3]   Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - implementation and         specification", STD 13,RFC 1035, November 1987.   [4]   Vixie, P., Thomson, S., Rekhter, Y., and J. Bound, "Dynamic         Updates in the Domain Name System (DNS UPDATE)",RFC 2136,         April 1997.   [5]   Droms, R., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol",RFC 2131,         March 1997.   [6]   Harrenstien, K., Stahl, M., and E. Feinler, "DoD Internet host         table specification",RFC 952, October 1985.   [7]   Braden, R., "Requirements for Internet Hosts - Application and         Support", STD 3,RFC 1123, October 1989.Stapp, et al.               Standards Track                    [Page 14]

RFC 4702              The DHCP Client FQDN Option           October 2006   [8]   Rekhter, Y., Moskowitz, R., Karrenberg, D., Groot, G., and E.         Lear, "Address Allocation for Private Internets",BCP 5,RFC 1918, February 1996.   [9]   Lemon, T. and S. Cheshire, "Encoding Long Options in the         Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCPv4)",RFC 3396,         November 2002.   [10]  Stapp, M. and B. Volz, "Resolution of Fully Qualified Domain         Name (FQDN) Conflicts among Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol         (DHCP) Clients",RFC 4703, October 2006.10.2.  Informative References   [11]  Marine, A., Reynolds, J., and G. Malkin, "FYI on Questions and         Answers - Answers to Commonly asked "New Internet User"         Questions", FYI 4,RFC 1594, March 1994.   [12]  Alexander, S. and R. Droms, "DHCP Options and BOOTP Vendor         Extensions",RFC 2132, March 1997.   [13]  Vixie, P., "Extension Mechanisms for DNS (EDNS0)",RFC 2671,         August 1999.   [14]  Wellington, B., "Secure Domain Name System (DNS) Dynamic         Update",RFC 3007, November 2000.   [15]  Droms, R. and W. Arbaugh, "Authentication for DHCP Messages",RFC 3118, June 2001.   [16]  Ohta, M., "Incremental Zone Transfer in DNS",RFC 1995,         August 1996.   [17]  Vixie, P., "A Mechanism for Prompt Notification of Zone Changes         (DNS NOTIFY)",RFC 1996, August 1996.Stapp, et al.               Standards Track                    [Page 15]

RFC 4702              The DHCP Client FQDN Option           October 2006Authors' Addresses   Mark Stapp   Cisco Systems, Inc.   1414 Massachusetts Ave.   Boxborough, MA  01719   USA   Phone: 978.936.1535   EMail: mjs@cisco.com   Bernie Volz   Cisco Systems, Inc.   1414 Massachusetts Ave.   Boxborough, MA  01719   USA   Phone: 978.936.0382   EMail: volz@cisco.com   Yakov Rekhter   Juniper Networks   1194 North Mathilda Avenue   Sunnyvale, CA  94089   USA   Phone: 408.745.2000   EMail: yakov@juniper.netStapp, et al.               Standards Track                    [Page 16]

RFC 4702              The DHCP Client FQDN Option           October 2006Full Copyright Statement   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).   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 provided by the IETF   Administrative Support Activity (IASA).Stapp, et al.               Standards Track                    [Page 17]

[8]ページ先頭

©2009-2025 Movatter.jp