Browse Prior Art Database

RIPng Protocol Applicability Statement (RFC2081)

IP.com Disclosure Number: IPCOM000002633D
Original Publication Date: 1997-Jan-01
Included in the Prior Art Database: 2000-Sep-13
Document File: 5 page(s) / 6K

Publishing Venue

Internet Society Requests For Comment (RFCs)

Related People

G. Malkin: AUTHOR

Abstract

As required by Routing Protocol Criteria (RFC 1264), this report defines the applicability of the RIPng protocol within the Internet. This report is a prerequisite to advancing RIPng on the standards track.

This text was extracted from a ASCII document.
This is the abbreviated version, containing approximately 43% of the total text.

Network Working Group G. Malkin

Request for Comments: 2081 Xylogics

Category: Informational January 1997

RIPng Protocol Applicability Statement

Status of this Memo

This memo provides information for the Internet community. This memo

does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of

this memo is unlimited.

Abstract

As required by Routing Protocol Criteria (RFC 1264), this report

defines the applicability of the RIPng protocol within the Internet.

This report is a prerequisite to advancing RIPng on the standards

track.

1. Protocol Documents

The RIPng protocol description is defined in RFC 2080.

2. Introduction

This report describes how RIPng may be useful within the new IPv6

Internet. In essence, the environments in which RIPng is the IGP of

choice is comparable to the environments in which RIP-2 (RFC 1723) is

used in the IPv4 Internet. It is important to remember that RIPng is

a simple extrapolation of RIP-2; RIPng has nothing conceptually new.

Thus, the operational aspects of distance-vector routing protocols,

and RIP-2 in particular, within an autonomous system are well

understood.

It should be noted that RIPng is not intended to be a substitute for

OSPFng in large autonomous systems; the restrictions on AS diameter

and complexity which applied to RIP-2 also apply to RIPng. Rather,

RIPng allows the smaller, simpler, distance-vector protocol to be

used in environments which require authentication or the use of

variable length subnet masks, but are not of a size or complexity

which require the use of the larger, more complex, link-state

protocol.

The remainder of this report describes how each of the features of

RIPng is useful within IPv6.

3. Applicability

A goal in developing RIPng was to make the minimum necessary change

to RIP-2 to produce RIPng. In essence, the IPv4 address was expanded

into an IPv6 address, the IPv4 subnet mask was replaced with an IPv6

prefix length, the next-hop field was eliminated but the

functionality has been preserved, and authentication was removed.

The route tag field has been preserved. The maximum diameter of the

network (the maximum metric value) is 15; 16 still means infinity

(unreachable).

The basic RIP header is unchanged. However, the size of a routing

packet is no longer arbitrarily limited. Because routing updates are

never forwarded, the routing packet size is now determined by the

physical media and the sizes of the headers wh...