Movatterモバイル変換

Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                      C. PignataroRequest for Comments: 6814                                 Cisco SystemsObsoletes:1385,1393,1475,1770                                F. GontCategory: Standards Track                         UTN-FRH / SI6 NetworksISSN: 2070-1721                                            November 2012Formally Deprecating Some IPv4 OptionsAbstract   A number of IPv4 options have become obsolete in practice, but have   never been formally deprecated.  This document deprecates such IPv4   options, thus cleaning up the corresponding IANA registry.   Additionally, it obsoletes RFCs 1385, 1393, 1475, and 1770, and   requests that the RFC Editor change their status to Historic.Status of This Memo   This is an Internet Standards Track document.   This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force   (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has   received public review and has been approved for publication by the   Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Further information on   Internet Standards is available inSection 2 of RFC 5741.   Information about the current status of this document, any errata,   and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained athttp://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6814.Copyright Notice   Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the   document authors.  All rights reserved.   This document is subject toBCP 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   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.Pignataro & Gont             Standards Track                    [Page 1]

RFC 6814              Deprecating Some IPv4 Options        November 2012Table of Contents1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22.  Discussion of Deprecated Options  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22.1.  Stream ID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22.2.  Extended Internet Protocol  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32.3.  Traceroute  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32.4.  ENCODE  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32.5.  VISA  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32.6.  Address Extension . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32.7.  Selective Directed Broadcast  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32.8.  Dynamic Packet State  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .32.9.  Upstream Multicast Pkt. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .33.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .44.  Changing the Status of the Corresponding RFCs to Historic . . .45.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .46.  Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .47.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .57.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .57.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .51.  Introduction   The Internet Protocol version 4 (IPv4) [RFC791] provides for   expansion of the protocol by supporting a number of "options" in the   variable-length IPv4 header.  IPv4 options are identified by an   option "type" value, whose registration is managed by IANA [IANA-IP].   A number of IPv4 options have become obsolete in practice, but have   never been formally deprecated.  This document deprecates such IPv4   options, thus cleaning up the corresponding IANA registry.   This document also obsoletes [RFC1385], [RFC1393], [RFC1475], and   [RFC1770], and requests that the RFC Editor change their status to   Historic.2.  Discussion of Deprecated Options   The following subsections discuss the options being deprecated.  No   other reference information has been found.2.1.  Stream ID   The Stream ID option is obsolete.  It is specified inRFC 791   [RFC791], and is deprecated inSection 3.2.1.8 of RFC 1122 [RFC1122]   andSection 4.2.2.1 of RFC 1812 [RFC1812].Pignataro & Gont             Standards Track                    [Page 2]

RFC 6814              Deprecating Some IPv4 Options        November 20122.2.  Extended Internet Protocol   The Extended Internet Protocol option is defined in [RFC1385] and is   superseded by [RFC2460].2.3.  Traceroute   The Traceroute option is defined in [RFC1393].  The Traceroute option   is defined as Experimental; it was never widely deployed on the   public Internet.2.4.  ENCODE   This option was used for experimentation around IP-layer encryption.   No products are known to ever have shipped with support for this   option.2.5.  VISA   This option was part of an experiment [VISA87] [VISA89] at USC and   was never widely deployed.2.6.  Address Extension   The Address Extension option is defined in an Experimental RFC   [RFC1475] and marked as IPv7.  IPv7 was never widely deployed.2.7.  Selective Directed Broadcast   The Selective Directed Broadcast option was originally defined in   [RFC1770].  This option was never widely deployed and the approach   was abandoned.2.8.  Dynamic Packet State   The Dynamic Packet State option was specified in [DIFFSERV-DPS].  The   aforementioned document was meant to be published as Experimental,   but it never became an RFC.  The IP option was never widely deployed.2.9.  Upstream Multicast Pkt.   This option was originally specified in [BIDIR-PIM].  Its use was   deprecated by [RFC5015], which employs a control-plane mechanism to   solve the problem of doing upstream forwarding of multicast packets   on a multi-access LAN.Pignataro & Gont             Standards Track                    [Page 3]

RFC 6814              Deprecating Some IPv4 Options        November 20123.  IANA Considerations   The "IP OPTION NUMBERS" registry [IANA-IP] contains the list of   currently assigned IP option numbers.  This registry also denotes a   deprecated IP Option Number by marking it with a footnote.   This document formally deprecates the following options.  IANA has   marked them as such in the corresponding registry [IANA-IP].   Copy Class Number Value Name                                Reference   ---- ----- ------ ----- -------------------------------  ------------      1     0      8   136 SID    - Stream ID               [RFC791,JBP]      1     0     14   142 VISA   - Experimental Access Control [Estrin]      0     0     15    15 ENCODE - ???                       [VerSteeg]      1     0     17   145 EIP    - Extended Internet Protocol [RFC1385]      0     2     18    82 TR     - Traceroute                 [RFC1393]      1     0     19   147 ADDEXT - Address Extension     [Ullmann IPv7]      1     0     21   149 SDB    - Selective Directed Broadcast [Graff]      1     0     23   151 DPS    - Dynamic Packet State         [Malis]      1     0     24   152 UMP    - Upstream Multicast Pkt.  [Farinacci]   The IP options "MTU Probe" (MTUP, value 11) and "MTU Reply" (MTUR,   value 12) were initially defined in [RFC1063] and have already been   deprecated by [RFC1191].4.  Changing the Status of the Corresponding RFCs to Historic   Per this document, the RFC Editor has changed the status of   [RFC1385], [RFC1393], [RFC1475], and [RFC1770] to Historic.5.  Security Considerations   This document does not modify the security properties of the IPv4   options being deprecated.6.  Acknowledgments   The authors would like to thank Ron Bonica for his guidance.   The authors would like to thank Ran Atkinson, Fred Baker, Deborah   Estrin, Dino Farinacci, Andrew Malis, Gene Tsudik, and Bill VerSteeg   for providing insights on some of the options being formally   deprecated by this document.Pignataro & Gont             Standards Track                    [Page 4]

RFC 6814              Deprecating Some IPv4 Options        November 20127.  References7.1.  Normative References   [RFC791]   Postel, J., "Internet Protocol", STD 5,RFC 791, September              1981.   [RFC1122]  Braden, R., Ed., "Requirements for Internet Hosts -              Communication Layers", STD 3,RFC 1122, October 1989.7.2.  Informative References   [BIDIR-PIM] Estrin, D. and D. Farinacci, "Bi-Directional Shared Trees              in PIM-SM",  Work in Progress, May 1999.   [DIFFSERV-DPS]              Stoica, I., Zhang, H., Venkitaraman, N., and J. Mysore,              "Per Hop Behaviors Based on Dynamic Packet State", Work in              Progress, October 2002.   [IANA-IP]  Internet Assigned Numbers Authority, "IP OPTION NUMBERS",              <http://www.iana.org/assignments/ip-parameters>.   [RFC1063]  Mogul, J., Kent, C., Partridge, C., and K. McCloghrie, "IP              MTU discovery options",RFC 1063, July 1988.   [RFC1191]  Mogul, J. and S. Deering, "Path MTU discovery",RFC 1191,              November 1990.   [RFC1385]  Wang, Z., "EIP: The Extended Internet Protocol",RFC 1385,              November 1992.   [RFC1393]  Malkin, G., "Traceroute Using an IP Option",RFC 1393,              January 1993.   [RFC1475]  Ullmann, R., "TP/IX: The Next Internet",RFC 1475, June              1993.   [RFC1770]  Graff, C., "IPv4 Option for Sender Directed Multi-              Destination Delivery",RFC 1770, March 1995.   [RFC1812]  Baker, F., Ed., "Requirements for IP Version 4 Routers",RFC 1812, June 1995.   [RFC2460]  Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6              (IPv6) Specification",RFC 2460, December 1998.Pignataro & Gont             Standards Track                    [Page 5]

RFC 6814              Deprecating Some IPv4 Options        November 2012   [RFC5015]  Handley, M., Kouvelas, I., Speakman, T., and L. Vicisano,              "Bidirectional Protocol Independent Multicast (BIDIR-              PIM)",RFC 5015, October 2007.   [VISA87]   Estrin, D. and G. Tsudik, "VISA Scheme for Inter-              Organizational Network Security", IEEE Symposium on              Security and Privacy (S&P), 1987.   [VISA89]   Estrin, D., Mogul, J., and G. Tsudik, "VISA Protocols for              Controlling Inter-Organizational Datagram Flow", IEEE              Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 1989.Authors' Addresses   Carlos Pignataro   Cisco Systems   7200-12 Kit Creek Road   Research Triangle Park, NC  27709   United States   EMail: cpignata@cisco.com   Fernando Gont   UTN-FRH / SI6 Networks   Evaristo Carriego 2644   Haedo, Provincia de Buenos Aires  1706   Argentina   Phone: +54 11 4650 8472   EMail: fgont@si6networks.com   URI:http://www.si6networks.comPignataro & Gont             Standards Track                    [Page 6]