Browse Prior Art Database

Recommendations for Prefix Binding in the Context of Softwire Dual-Stack Lite (RFC7785)

IP.com Disclosure Number: IPCOM000245178D
Original Publication Date: 2016-Feb-01
Included in the Prior Art Database: 2016-Feb-17
Document File: 18 page(s) / 21K

Publishing Venue

Internet Society Requests For Comment (RFCs)

Related People

S. Vinapamula: AUTHOR [+2]

Abstract

IPv6 deployment models assume IPv6 prefixes are delegated by Service Providers to the connected CPEs (Customer Premises Equipment) or hosts, which in turn derive IPv6 addresses from that prefix. In the case of Dual-Stack Lite (DS-Lite) [RFC6333], which is an IPv4 service continuity mechanism over an IPv6 network, the Basic Bridging BroadBand (B4) element derives an IPv6 address for the IPv4-in-IPv6 softwire setup purposes.

This text was extracted from an ASCII text file.
This is the abbreviated version, containing approximately 13% of the total text.

Independent Submission                                     S. Vinapamula Request for Comments: 7785                              Juniper Networks Category: Informational                                     M. Boucadair ISSN: 2070-1721                                                   Orange                                                            February 2016

                    Recommendations for Prefix Binding                in the Context of Softwire Dual-Stack Lite

Abstract

   This document discusses issues induced by the change of the Dual-    Stack Lite (DS-Lite) Basic Bridging BroadBand (B4) IPv6 address and    sketches a set of recommendations to solve those issues.

Status of This Memo

   This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is    published for informational purposes.

   This is a contribution to the RFC Series, independently of any other    RFC stream.  The RFC Editor has chosen to publish this document at    its discretion and makes no statement about its value for    implementation or deployment.  Documents approved for publication by    the RFC Editor are not a candidate for any level of Internet    Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 5741.

   Information about the current status of this document, any errata,    and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at    http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7785.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the    document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 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.

 Vinapamula & Boucadair        Informational                     [Page 1]
 RFC 7785               Prefix Binding for DS-Lite          February 2016

 Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2      1.1.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2    2.  The Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3    3.  Introducing Subscriber-Mask . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4    4.  Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5    5.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6    6.  Privacy Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6    7.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7   ...