RFC 6204
Basic Requirements for IPv6 Customer Edge Routers
RFC 6204: Basic Requirements for IPv6 Customer Edge Routers 🎀
Okay bestie, here's the title block tea ✨
- Category: Informational 💅 (published for information, not a Standards Track spec)
- Date: April 2011 🌸
- ISSN: 2070-1721
- Authors: H. Singh, W. Beebee, C. Donley, B. Stark, and O. Troan, Ed.
- Affiliations: Cisco Systems, Inc. (Singh, Beebee, and Troan), CableLabs (Donley), and AT&T (Stark)
- Obsoletes and updates: the title block doesn't list anything this one obsoletes or updates 🦋
Abstract ✨
okay so this doc lays out the requirements for an IPv6 Customer Edge (CE) router 🌈 the current version is mostly about getting the CE router provisioned itself, plus getting the IPv6 hosts attached to it set up too 💜
Status of This Memo 🫶
this is NOT an Internet Standards Track spec, it's just published for info purposes 💅
the doc is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and it reflects the consensus of the IETF community. it got public review and was approved for publication by the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). not every IESG-approved doc is a candidate for any level of Internet Standard, so check Section 2 of RFC 5741 if you want the deets 🔥
if you want the current status, any errata, or a way to send feedback, go to http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6204 🧚
Copyright Notice 🎀
Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. 💖
this doc is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) as they stand on the publication date. read them carefully because they spell out your rights and restrictions for this doc 👑
if you pull Code Components out of this doc, they have to include the Simplified BSD License text described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions. they come with no warranty, as the Simplified BSD License explains 🔥
Table of Contents 🦋
1. Introduction ....................................................2
1.1. Requirements Language ......................................3
2. Terminology .....................................................3
3. Architecture ....................................................4
3.1. Current IPv4 End-User Network Architecture .................4
3.2. IPv6 End-User Network Architecture .........................4
3.2.1. Local Communication .................................6
4. Requirements ....................................................6
4.1. General Requirements .......................................6
4.2. WAN-Side Configuration .....................................7
4.3. LAN-Side Configuration ....................................11
4.4. Security Considerations ...................................13
5. Acknowledgements ...............................................13
6. Contributors ...................................................14
7. References .....................................................14
7.1. Normative References ......................................14
7.2. Informative References ....................................161. Introduction ✨
okay so this doc defines the basic IPv6 features for a residential or small-office router, which we call an IPv6 CE router 🏠 these routers usually support IPv4 too 💜
mixed setups with dual-stack hosts and IPv6-only hosts behind the CE router can get messy if the IPv6-only devices use a translator to reach IPv4 servers [RFC6144] 😭 supporting those mixed setups is NOT in scope for this doc, so we're skipping them 🙈
this doc spells out how an IPv6 CE router automatically provisions its WAN interface, gets address space to provision its LAN interfaces, and fetches other config info from the service provider network 🫶 automatic provisioning for topologies more complex than one router with multiple LAN interfaces is out of scope too 🧚
for a look at the options for deploying IPv6 in service provider access networks, see [RFC4779] 🌸
1.1. Requirements Language 💅
the key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this doc are interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119] 🔥
2. Terminology 📖
here are the terms you need to know 🎀
End-User Network one or more links attached to the IPv6 CE
router that connect IPv6 hosts.
IPv6 Customer Edge Router a node intended for home or small-office
use that forwards IPv6 packets not
explicitly addressed to itself. The IPv6
CE router connects the end-user network to
a service provider network.
IPv6 Host any device implementing an IPv6 stack
receiving IPv6 connectivity through the
IPv6 CE router.
LAN Interface an IPv6 CE router's attachment to a link in
the end-user network. Examples are
Ethernets (simple or bridged), 802.11
wireless, or other LAN technologies. An
IPv6 CE router may have one or more
network-layer LAN interfaces.
Service Provider an entity that provides access to the
Internet. In this document, a service
provider specifically offers Internet
access using IPv6, and may also offer IPv4
Internet access. The service provider can
provide such access over a variety of
different transport methods such as DSL,
cable, wireless, and others.
WAN Interface an IPv6 CE router's attachment to a link
used to provide connectivity to the service
provider network; example link technologies
include Ethernets (simple or bridged), PPP
links, Frame Relay, or ATM networks, as
well as Internet-layer (or higher-layer)
"tunnels", such as tunnels over IPv4 or
IPv6 itself.3. Architecture 🏗️
3.1. Current IPv4 End-User Network Architecture 🌈
an end-user network will likely support both IPv4 and IPv6 💜 end-users aren't expected to change their existing topology just because IPv6 showed up ✨ IPv6 works and gets provisioned a bit differently, and those differences matter for the architecture 🙈 a typical IPv4 end-user network is a "plug and play" router with NAT functionality and a single link behind it, connected to the service provider network 🎀
a typical IPv4 NAT deployment blocks all incoming connections by default 🔒 ports usually get opened through a Universal Plug and Play Internet Gateway Device (UPnP IGD) [UPnP-IGD] or some other firewall control protocol 🦋
using private address space in the end-user network has another perk: it gives you stable addressing 💖 the addresses never change even when you switch service providers, and they're always there even when the WAN interface is down or the CE router hasn't been provisioned yet 🫶
rewriting addresses at the network edge also allows for some rudimentary multihoming 🧚 though, NATs for multihoming don't preserve connections during a fail-over event [RFC4864] 😭
a lot of existing routers support dynamic routing, so advanced end-users can build arbitrary, complex networks by manually configuring address prefixes and pairing them with a dynamic routing protocol 👑
3.2. IPv6 End-User Network Architecture 💖
the end-user network architecture for IPv6 should provide equivalent or better capabilities and functionality than the current IPv4 architecture ✨
the end-user network is a stub network 🌸 Figure 1 shows the model topology for it 💅
+-------+-------+ \
| Service | \
| Provider | | Service
| Router | | Provider
+-------+-------+ | network
| /
| Customer /
| Internet connection /
|
+------+--------+ \
| IPv6 | \
| Customer Edge | \
| Router | /
+---+-------+-+-+ /
Network A | | Network B | End-User
---+-------------+----+- --+--+-------------+--- | network(s)
| | | | \
+----+-----+ +-----+----+ +----+-----+ +-----+----+ \
|IPv6 Host | |IPv6 Host | | IPv6 Host| |IPv6 Host | /
| | | | | | | | /
+----------+ +-----+----+ +----------+ +----------+ /Figure 1: An Example of a Typical End-User Network 🧚
this architecture covers three big things 🎀
- basic capabilities of an IPv6 CE router 💅
- provisioning of the WAN interface that connects to the service provider 🌈
- provisioning of the LAN interfaces 🫶
for IPv6 multicast traffic, the IPv6 CE router may act as a Multicast Listener Discovery (MLD) proxy [RFC4605] and may support a dynamic multicast routing protocol 🔥
the IPv6 CE router may be manually configured in an arbitrary topology with a dynamic routing protocol 🦋 automatic provisioning and configuration are only described for a single IPv6 CE router 💜
3.2.1. Local Communication 🏡
Okay so link-local IPv6 addresses are for hosts that only chat with other hosts on the same link 🦋. Then there's ULAs ([RFC4193]), Unique Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses, which let hosts talk across multiple links inside the end-user network without the app needing a globally routable address 🌸. The IPv6 CE router is the main character here: by default it acts as the demarcation point between the two networks, with a ULA boundary, a multicast zone boundary, and ingress and egress traffic filters 💅.
Dual-stack hosts are multihomed to both IPv4 and IPv6 networks 🌈. The IPv4 and IPv6 topologies might not match up, and different addresses can have different reachability (ULAs are a classic example 🙈). So a host stack has to be able to fail over quickly and try a different source and destination address pair if communication breaks, as outlined in [HAPPY-EYEBALLS] 🫶.
Here's the tea 🍓: at the time of writing, several host implementations get confused when they have an IPv6 address configured but no actual IPv6 connectivity. That can happen because the address only has limited topological reachability (like a ULA), or because the IPv6 CE router isn't connected to the IPv6 network on its WAN interface. To keep those hosts happy in a multi-prefix environment [MULTIHOMING-WITHOUT-NAT], the IPv6 CE router should not, as detailed in the requirements below, advertise itself as a default router on the LAN interface(s) when it lacks IPv6 connectivity on the WAN interface or when it isn't provisioned with IPv6 addresses 💀. For local IPv6 communication, the mechanisms specified in [RFC4191] are used ✨.
ULA addressing is super useful when the IPv6 CE router has multiple LAN interfaces with hosts that need to talk to each other 👑. If the router only has a single LAN interface (one IPv6 link), link-local addressing can be used instead 🧚.
And if there's more than one IPv6 CE router on the LAN, coexistence with IPv4 requires all of them to conform to these recommendations, especially requirements ULA-5 and L-4 below 🎀.
4. Requirements ✨
4.1. General Requirements 💖
The IPv6 CE router is responsible for implementing IPv6 routing 🛣️. In other words, the IPv6 CE router MUST look up the IPv6 destination address in its routing table to decide which interface the packet goes out of.
In this role, the IPv6 CE router is also responsible for making sure that traffic using its ULA addressing does not go out the WAN interface and does not originate from the WAN interface 🔒.
G-1: An IPv6 CE router is an IPv6 node according to the IPv6 Node Requirements [RFC4294] specification 🌸.
G-2: The IPv6 CE router MUST implement ICMP according to [RFC4443]. In particular, point-to-point links MUST be handled as described in Section 3.1 of [RFC4443] 🫧.
G-3: The IPv6 CE router MUST NOT forward any IPv6 traffic between its LAN interface(s) and its WAN interface until the router has successfully completed the IPv6 address acquisition process 🚫.
G-4: By default, an IPv6 CE router that has no default router(s) on its WAN interface MUST NOT advertise itself as an IPv6 default router on its LAN interfaces. That is, the Router Lifetime field is set to zero in all Router Advertisement messages it originates [RFC4861] 🙈.
G-5: By default, if the IPv6 CE router is an advertising router and loses its IPv6 default router(s) on the WAN interface, it MUST explicitly invalidate itself as an IPv6 default router on each of its advertising interfaces by immediately transmitting one or more Router Advertisement messages with the Router Lifetime field set to zero [RFC4861] 😭.
4.2. WAN-Side Configuration 🛜
The IPv6 CE router needs to support connectivity to one or more access network architectures 🌍. This document describes an IPv6 CE router that isn't tied to any particular architecture or service provider, and that supports all the commonly used architectures 💅.
IPv6 Neighbor Discovery and DHCPv6 both work over any type of IPv6-supported link layer, so there's no need for a link-layer-specific configuration protocol for IPv6 network-layer configuration options, unlike PPP IP Control Protocol (IPCP) for IPv4 🧠. This section assumes that the same mechanism will work for any link layer, whether that's Ethernet, the Data Over Cable Service Interface Specification (DOCSIS), PPP, or something else 🌈.
WAN-side requirements:
W-1: When the router is attached to the WAN interface link, it MUST act as an IPv6 host for the purposes of stateless [RFC4862] or stateful [RFC3315] interface address assignment ✨.
W-2: The IPv6 CE router MUST generate a link-local address and finish Duplicate Address Detection according to [RFC4862] before sending any Router Solicitations on the interface. The source address used in the subsequent Router Solicitation MUST be the link-local address on the WAN interface 🔍.
W-3: Unless there's other routing information, the IPv6 CE router MUST use Router Discovery as specified in [RFC4861] to discover a default router(s), and install default route(s) in its routing table with the discovered router's address as the next hop 🗺️.
W-4: The router MUST act as a requesting router for the purposes of DHCPv6 prefix delegation ([RFC3633]) 🎀.
W-5: DHCPv6 address assignment (IA_NA) and DHCPv6 prefix delegation (IA_PD) SHOULD be done as a single DHCPv6 session 🫶.
W-6: The IPv6 CE router MUST use a persistent DHCP Unique Identifier (DUID) for DHCPv6 messages. The DUID MUST NOT change between network interface resets or IPv6 CE router reboots 🔐.
Link-layer requirements:
WLL-1: If the WAN interface supports Ethernet encapsulation, then the IPv6 CE router MUST support IPv6 over Ethernet [RFC2464] 🔌.
WLL-2: If the WAN interface supports PPP encapsulation, the IPv6 CE router MUST support IPv6 over PPP [RFC5072] 🧵.
WLL-3: If the WAN interface supports PPP encapsulation, in a dual-stack environment with IPCP and IPV6CP running over one PPP logical channel, the Network Control Protocols (NCPs) MUST be treated as independent of each other and start and terminate independently 🦋.
Address assignment requirements:
WAA-1: The IPv6 CE router MUST support Stateless Address Autoconfiguration (SLAAC) [RFC4862] 💖.
WAA-2: The IPv6 CE router MUST follow the recommendations in Section 4 of [RFC5942], and in particular the handling of the L flag in the Router Advertisement Prefix Information option 🏳️.
WAA-3: The IPv6 CE router MUST support DHCPv6 [RFC3315] client behavior 📬.
WAA-4: The IPv6 CE router MUST be able to support the following DHCPv6 options: IA_NA, Reconfigure Accept [RFC3315], and DNS_SERVERS [RFC3646] 🌐.
WAA-5: The IPv6 CE router SHOULD support the DHCPv6 Simple Network Time Protocol (SNTP) option [RFC4075] and the Information Refresh Time option [RFC4242] ⏰.
WAA-6: If the IPv6 CE router receives a Router Advertisement message (described in [RFC4861]) with the M flag set to 1, the IPv6 CE router MUST do DHCPv6 address assignment (request an IA_NA option) 📩.
WAA-7: If the IPv6 CE router is unable to assign address(es) through SLAAC, it MAY do DHCPv6 address assignment (request an IA_NA option) even if the M flag is set to 0 🤷♀️.
WAA-8: If the IPv6 CE router does not acquire global IPv6 address(es) from either SLAAC or DHCPv6, then it MUST create global IPv6 address(es) from its delegated prefix(es) and configure those on one of its internal virtual network interfaces 🪄.
WAA-9: As a router, the IPv6 CE router MUST follow the weak host (Weak ES) model [RFC1122]. When originating packets from an interface, it will use a source address from another one of its interfaces if the outgoing interface doesn't have an address of suitable scope 🕸️.
Prefix delegation requirements:
WPD-1: The IPv6 CE router MUST support DHCPv6 prefix delegation requesting router behavior as specified in [RFC3633] (IA_PD option) 🧁.
WPD-2: The IPv6 CE router MAY indicate as a hint to the delegating router the size of the prefix it requires. If so, it MUST ask for a prefix large enough to assign one /64 for each of its interfaces, rounded up to the nearest nibble, and MUST be configurable to ask for more 📏.
WPD-3: The IPv6 CE router MUST be prepared to accept a delegated prefix size different from what was given in the hint. If the delegated prefix is too small to address all of its interfaces, the IPv6 CE router SHOULD log a system management error 📝.
WPD-4: The IPv6 CE router MUST always initiate DHCPv6 prefix delegation, regardless of the M and O flags in a received Router Advertisement message 🚀.
WPD-5: If the IPv6 CE router initiates DHCPv6 before receiving a Router Advertisement, it MUST also request an IA_NA option in DHCPv6 🙌.
WPD-6: If the delegated prefix(es) are aggregate route(s) of multiple, more-specific routes, the IPv6 CE router MUST discard packets that match the aggregate route(s) but not any of the more-specific routes. In other words, the next hop for the aggregate route(s) should be the null destination. This is necessary to prevent forwarding loops when some addresses covered by the aggregate aren't reachable [RFC4632] 🔁.
- (a) The IPv6 CE router SHOULD send an ICMPv6 Destination Unreachable message in accordance with Section 3.1 of [RFC4443] back to the source of the packet, if the packet is to be dropped due to this rule 📨.
WPD-7: If the IPv6 CE router requests both an IA_NA and an IA_PD option in DHCPv6, it MUST accept an IA_PD option in DHCPv6 Advertise/Reply messages, even if the message doesn't contain any addresses 💜.
WPD-8: By default, an IPv6 CE router MUST NOT initiate any dynamic routing protocol on its WAN interface 🛑.
4.3. LAN-Side Configuration ✨
okay bestie, so the IPv6 CE router passes along all the config info it picked up during WAN interface provisioning 💖 to the IPv6 hosts, and it helps those hosts get their IPv6 addresses too 🎀. it's giving main character energy 👑 because it keeps devices connected even when there's no working WAN interface at all 🌸
An IPv6 CE router is expected to support an IPv6 end-user network and IPv6 hosts with these vibes:
- Link-local addresses might not be enough for IPv6 apps to talk to each other in the end-user network 🙈. So the IPv6 CE router will need to make that happen by providing globally scoped unicast addresses or ULAs [RFC4193], whether or not WAN connectivity exists.
- IPv6 hosts should be capable of using SLAAC and may be capable of using DHCPv6 for acquiring their addresses. 🧚
- IPv6 hosts may use DHCPv6 for other configuration info, like the DNS_SERVERS option for getting DNS info. 💅
Unless it says otherwise, these requirements only apply to the IPv6 CE router's LAN interfaces. 🦋
ULA requirements:
- ULA-1: The IPv6 CE router SHOULD be capable of generating a ULA prefix [RFC4193].
- ULA-2: An IPv6 CE router with a ULA prefix MUST maintain this prefix consistently across reboots.
- ULA-3: The value of the ULA prefix SHOULD be user-configurable.
- ULA-4: By default, the IPv6 CE router MUST act as a site border router according to Section 4.3 of [RFC4193] and filter packets with local IPv6 source or destination addresses accordingly. 🫶
- ULA-5: An IPv6 CE router MUST NOT advertise itself as a default router with a Router Lifetime greater than zero whenever all of its configured and delegated prefixes are ULA prefixes. 💀
LAN requirements:
- L-1: The IPv6 CE router MUST support router behavior according to Neighbor Discovery for IPv6 [RFC4861]. 🔥
- L-2: The IPv6 CE router MUST assign a separate /64 from its delegated prefix(es) (and ULA prefix if configured to provide ULA addressing) for each of its LAN interfaces. 🌈
- L-3: An IPv6 CE router MUST advertise itself as a router for the delegated prefix(es) (and ULA prefix if configured to provide ULA addressing) using the "Route Information Option" specified in Section 2.3 of [RFC4191]. This advertisement is independent of having or not having IPv6 connectivity on the WAN interface. ✨
- L-4: An IPv6 CE router MUST NOT advertise itself as a default router with a Router Lifetime [RFC4861] greater than zero if it has no prefixes configured or delegated to it. 🙅♀️
- L-5: The IPv6 CE router MUST make each LAN interface an advertising interface according to [RFC4861]. 📣
- L-6: In Router Advertisement messages, the Prefix Information option's A and L flags MUST be set to 1 by default. 💜
- L-7: The A and L flags' settings SHOULD be user-configurable. ⭐
- L-8: The IPv6 CE router MUST support a DHCPv6 server capable of IPv6 address assignment according to [RFC3315] OR a stateless DHCPv6 server according to [RFC3736] on its LAN interfaces. 🎀
- L-9: Unless the IPv6 CE router is configured to support the DHCPv6 IA_NA option, it SHOULD set the M flag to 0 and the O flag to 1 in its Router Advertisement messages [RFC4861]. 🍓
- L-10: The IPv6 CE router MUST support providing DNS information in the DHCPv6 DNS_SERVERS and DOMAIN_LIST options [RFC3646]. 🌸
- L-11: The IPv6 CE router SHOULD support providing DNS information in the Router Advertisement Recursive DNS Server (RDNSS) and DNS Search List (DNSSL) options as specified in [RFC6106]. 🫧
- L-12: The IPv6 CE router SHOULD make available a subset of DHCPv6 options (as listed in Section 5.3 of [RFC3736]) received from the DHCPv6 client on its WAN interface to its LAN-side DHCPv6 server. 🦄
- L-13: If the delegated prefix changes, i.e., the current prefix is replaced with a new prefix without any overlapping time period, then the IPv6 CE router MUST immediately advertise the old prefix with a Preferred Lifetime of zero and a Valid Lifetime of the lower of the current Valid Lifetime and 2 hours (which must be decremented in real time) in a Router Advertisement message as described in Section 5.5.3, (e) of [RFC4862]. ⏳
- L-14: The IPv6 CE router MUST send an ICMP Destination Unreachable message, code 5 (Source address failed ingress/egress policy) for packets forwarded to it that use an address from a prefix that has been deprecated. 🚫
4.4. Security Considerations 🔐
It's considered a best practice to filter obviously sus traffic (e.g., spoofed packets, "Martian" addresses, etc.) 🙈. So the IPv6 CE router ought to support basic stateless egress and ingress filters. The CE router is also expected to offer ways to filter traffic entering the customer network 🛡️. The method vendors use for configurable packet filtering is beyond the scope of this document, though.
Security requirements:
- S-1: The IPv6 CE router SHOULD support [RFC6092]. In particular, the IPv6 CE router SHOULD support functionality sufficient for implementing the set of recommendations in [RFC6092], Section 4. This document takes no position on whether such functionality is enabled by default or on the mechanisms by which users would configure it. 🔒
- S-2: The IPv6 CE router MUST support ingress filtering in accordance with BCP 38 [RFC2827]. 🚨
5. Acknowledgements 💜
Thanks to the following people (in alphabetical order) for their guidance and feedback 🫶:
Mikael Abrahamsson, Tore Anderson, Merete Asak, Scott Beuker, Mohamed Boucadair, Rex Bullinger, Brian Carpenter, Lorenzo Colitti, Remi Denis-Courmont, Gert Doering, Alain Durand, Katsunori Fukuoka, Tony Hain, Thomas Herbst, Kevin Johns, Erik Kline, Stephen Kramer, Victor Kuarsingh, Francois-Xavier Le Bail, Arifumi Matsumoto, David Miles, Shin Miyakawa, Jean-Francois Mule, Michael Newbery, Carlos Pignataro, John Pomeroy, Antonio Querubin, Hiroki Sato, Teemu Savolainen, Matt Schmitt, David Thaler, Mark Townsley, Bernie Volz, Dan Wing, James Woodyatt, and Cor Zwart.
This document is based in part on CableLabs' eRouter specification. The authors wish to acknowledge the additional contributors from the eRouter team:
Ben Bekele, Amol Bhagwat, Ralph Brown, Eduardo Cardona, Margo Dolas, Toerless Eckert, Doc Evans, Roger Fish, Michelle Kuska, Diego Mazzola, John McQueen, Harsh Parandekar, Michael Patrick, Saifur Rahman, Lakshmi Raman, Ryan Ross, Ron da Silva, Madhu Sudan, Dan Torbet, and Greg White.
6. Contributors 🌟
The following people have participated as co-authors or provided substantial contributions to this document: Ralph Droms, Kirk Erichsen, Fred Baker, Jason Weil, Lee Howard, Jean-Francois Tremblay, Yiu Lee, John Jason Brzozowski, and Heather Kirksey. 👑
7. References 📚
7.1. Normative References
[RFC1122]Braden, R., Ed., "Requirements for Internet Hosts - Communication Layers", STD 3, RFC 1122, October 1989.[RFC2119]Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.[RFC2464]Crawford, M., "Transmission of IPv6 Packets over Ethernet Networks", RFC 2464, December 1998.[RFC2827]Ferguson, P. and D. Senie, "Network Ingress Filtering: Defeating Denial of Service Attacks which employ IP Source Address Spoofing", BCP 38, RFC 2827, May 2000.[RFC3315]Droms, R., Ed., Bound, J., Volz, B., Lemon, T., Perkins, C., and M. Carney, "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6)", RFC 3315, July 2003.[RFC3633]Troan, O. and R. Droms, "IPv6 Prefix Options for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) version 6", RFC 3633, December 2003.[RFC3646]Droms, R., Ed., "DNS Configuration options for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6)", RFC 3646, December 2003.[RFC3736]Droms, R., "Stateless Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Service for IPv6", RFC 3736, April 2004.[RFC4075]Kalusivalingam, V., "Simple Network Time Protocol (SNTP) Configuration Option for DHCPv6", RFC 4075, May 2005.[RFC4191]Draves, R. and D. Thaler, "Default Router Preferences and More-Specific Routes", RFC 4191, November 2005.[RFC4193]Hinden, R. and B. Haberman, "Unique Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses", RFC 4193, October 2005.[RFC4242]Venaas, S., Chown, T., and B. Volz, "Information Refresh Time Option for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6)", RFC 4242, November 2005.[RFC4294]Loughney, J., Ed., "IPv6 Node Requirements", RFC 4294, April 2006.[RFC4443]Conta, A., Deering, S., and M. Gupta, Ed., "Internet Control Message Protocol (ICMPv6) for the Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Specification", RFC 4443, March 2006.[RFC4605]Fenner, B., He, H., Haberman, B., and H. Sandick, "Internet Group Management Protocol (IGMP) / Multicast Listener Discovery (MLD)-Based Multicast Forwarding ("IGMP/MLD Proxying")", RFC 4605, August 2006.[RFC4632]Fuller, V. and T. Li, "Classless Inter-domain Routing (CIDR): The Internet Address Assignment and Aggregation Plan", BCP 122, RFC 4632, August 2006.[RFC4779]Asadullah, S., Ahmed, A., Popoviciu, C., Savola, P., and J. Palet, "ISP IPv6 Deployment Scenarios in Broadband Access Networks", RFC 4779, January 2007.[RFC4861]Narten, T., Nordmark, E., Simpson, W., and H. Soliman, "Neighbor Discovery for IP version 6 (IPv6)", RFC 4861, September 2007.[RFC4862]Thomson, S., Narten, T., and T. Jinmei, "IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration", RFC 4862, September 2007.[RFC4864]Van de Velde, G., Hain, T., Droms, R., Carpenter, B., and E. Klein, "Local Network Protection for IPv6", RFC 4864, May 2007.[RFC5072]Varada, S., Ed., Haskins, D., and E. Allen, "IP Version 6 over PPP", RFC 5072, September 2007.[RFC5942]Singh, H., Beebee, W., and E. Nordmark, "IPv6 Subnet Model: The Relationship between Links and Subnet Prefixes", RFC 5942, July 2010.[RFC6092]Woodyatt, J., Ed., "Recommended Simple Security Capabilities in Customer Premises Equipment (CPE) for Providing Residential IPv6 Internet Service", RFC 6092, January 2011.[RFC6106]Jeong, J., Park, S., Beloeil, L., and S. Madanapalli, "IPv6 Router Advertisement Options for DNS Configuration", RFC 6106, November 2010.
7.2. Informative References 🦋
okay so these are the informative ones, bestie 📚 they're not required reading to implement the spec, but they're giving context and I'm not skipping them 💅
[HAPPY-EYEBALLS]
Wing, D. and A. Yourtchenko, "Happy Eyeballs: Trending
Towards Success with Dual-Stack Hosts", Work in Progress,
March 2011.
[MULTIHOMING-WITHOUT-NAT]
Troan, O., Ed., Miles, D., Matsushima, S., Okimoto, T.,
and D. Wing, "IPv6 Multihoming without Network Address
Translation", Work in Progress, March 2011.
[RFC6144] Baker, F., Li, X., Bao, C., and K. Yin, "Framework for
IPv4/IPv6 Translation", RFC 6144, April 2011.
[UPnP-IGD]
UPnP Forum, "Universal Plug and Play (UPnP) Internet
Gateway Device (IGD)", November 2001,
<http://www.upnp.org/>.Authors' Addresses 💖
and last but not least, the people who wrote this whole thing 🫶 these are the author contact details, so you know exactly who to slide into the DMs (professionally, obviously 💅)
Hemant Singh
Cisco Systems, Inc.
1414 Massachusetts Ave.
Boxborough, MA 01719
USA
Phone: +1 978 936 1622
EMail: shemant@cisco.com
URI: http://www.cisco.com/
Wes Beebee
Cisco Systems, Inc.
1414 Massachusetts Ave.
Boxborough, MA 01719
USA
Phone: +1 978 936 2030
EMail: wbeebee@cisco.com
URI: http://www.cisco.com/
Chris Donley
CableLabs
858 Coal Creek Circle
Louisville, CO 80027
USA
EMail: c.donley@cablelabs.com
Barbara Stark
AT&T
725 W Peachtree St.
Atlanta, GA 30308
USA
EMail: barbara.stark@att.com
Ole Troan (editor)
Cisco Systems, Inc.
Telemarksvingen 20
N-0655 OSLO,
Norway
EMail: ot@cisco.comthat's the whole RFC, bestie 🌈✨ we did it 😭🎀
📦 where this page comes from
- ietf: rfc6204 2011-04
- 💖 girlified by claude-haiku-5-5 on : a language model's rewrite of the original, under its terms