rfc1888.txt
来自「RFC 的详细文档!」· 文本 代码 · 共 900 行 · 第 1/3 页
TXT
900 行
Network Working Group J. Bound
Request for Comments: 1888 Digital Equipment Corporation
Category: Experimental B. Carpenter
CERN
D. Harrington
Digital Equipment Corporation
J. Houldsworth
ICL Network Systems
A. Lloyd
Datacraft Technologies
August 1996
OSI NSAPs and IPv6
Status of this Memo
This memo defines an Experimental Protocol for the Internet
community. This memo does not specify an Internet standard of any
kind. Discussion and suggestions for improvement are requested.
Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
Abstract
This document recommends that network implementors who have planned
or deployed an OSI NSAP addressing plan, and who wish to deploy or
transition to IPv6, should redesign a native IPv6 addressing plan to
meet their needs. However, it also defines a set of mechanisms for
the support of OSI NSAP addressing in an IPv6 network. These
mechanisms are the ones that MUST be used if such support is
required. This document also defines a mapping of IPv6 addresses
within the OSI address format, should this be required.
Table of Contents
1. General recommendation on NSAP addressing plans..............2
2. Summary of defined mechanisms................................4
3. Restricted NSAPA in a 16-byte IPv6 address for ICD and DCC...4
3.1 Routing restricted NSAPAs...................................5
4. Truncated NSAPA used as an IPv6 address......................6
4.1 Routing truncated NSAPAs....................................8
5. Carriage of full NSAPAs in IPv6 destination option...........9
6. IPv6 addresses inside an NSAPA..............................10
7. Security Considerations.....................................11
Acknowledgements...............................................11
References.....................................................12
Annex A: Summary of NSAP Allocations...........................13
Annex B: Additional Rationale..................................14
Authors' Addresses.............................................16
Bound, et. al. Experimental [Page 1]
RFC 1888 OSI NSAPs and IPv6 August 1996
1. General recommendation on NSAP addressing plans
This recommendation is addressed to network implementors who have
already planned or deployed an OSI NSAP addressing plan for the usage
of OSI CLNP [IS8473] according to the OSI network layer addressing
plan [IS8348] using ES-IS and IS-IS routing [IS9542, IS10589]. It
recommends how they should adapt their addressing plan for use with
IPv6 [RFC1883].
The majority of known CLNP addressing plans use either the Digital
Country Code (DCC) or the International Code Designator (ICD) formats
defined in [IS8348]. A particular example of this is the US
Government OSI Profile Version 2 (GOSIP) addressing plan [RFC1629].
The basic NSAP addressing scheme and current implementations are
summarised in Annex A.
[IS8348] specifies a maximum NSAPA (NSAP address) size of 20 bytes
and some network implementors have designed address allocation
schemes which make use of this 20 byte address space.
Other NSAP addressing plans have been specified by the ITU-T for
public data services, such as X.25 and ISDN, and these can also have
addresses up to 20 bytes in length.
The general recommendation is that implementors SHOULD design native
IPv6 addressing plans according to [RFC1884], but doing so as a
natural re-mapping of their CLNP addressing plans. While it is
impossible to give a general recipe for this, CLNP addresses in DCC
or ICD format can normally be split into two parts: the high order
part relating to the network service provider and the low order part
relating to the user network topology and host computers.
For example, in some applications of US GOSIP the high order part is
the AFI, ICD, DFI, AA and RD fields, together occupying 9 bytes. The
low order part is the Area and ID fields, together occupying 8 bytes.
(The selector byte and the two reserved bytes are not part of the
addressing plan.) Thus, in such a case, the high-order part could be
replaced by the provider part of an IPv6 provider-based addressing
plan. An 8-byte prefix is recommended for this case and [RFC1884]
MUST be followed in planning such a replacement. The low order part
would then be mapped directly in the low-order half of the IPv6
address space, and user site address plans are unchanged. A 6-byte
ID field, exactly as used in US GOSIP and other CLNP addressing
plans, will be acceptable as the token for IPv6 autoconfiguration
[RFC1971].
Analogous rules would be applied for other CLNP addressing plans
similar to US GOSIP, which is used only as a well known example.
Bound, et. al. Experimental [Page 2]
RFC 1888 OSI NSAPs and IPv6 August 1996
Three warnings must be carefully considered in every case:
1. The ES-IS/IS-IS model employs a routing hierarchy down to the Area
level, but not all end systems in an Area need to be in the same
physical subnet (on the same "wire" or "link"). IS routers on
different links within a given Area exchange information about the
end systems they can each reach directly. In contrast, the IPv6
routing model extends down to the subnet level and all hosts in the
same subnet are assumed to be on the same link. In mapping a CLNP
addressing plan into IPv6 format, without changing the physical
topology, it may be necessary to add an extra level of hierarchy to
cope with this mismatch. In other words, the Area number cannot
blindly be mapped as a subnet number, unless the physical network
topology corresponds to this mapping.
2. It is highly desirable that subnet addresses can be aggregated for
wide area routing purposes, to minimise the size of routing tables.
Thus network implementors should ensure that the address prefix used
for all their subnets is the same, regardless of whether a particular
subnet is using a pure IPv6 addressing scheme or one derived from a
CLNP scheme as above.
3. Some hosts have more than one physical network interface. In the
ES-IS model, an end system may have more than one NSAP address, each
of which identifies the host as a whole. Such an end system with
more than one physical interface may be referenced by any one of the
NSAPs, and reached via any one of the physical connections. In the
IPv6 model, a host may have multiple IPv6 addresses per interface,
but each of its physical interfaces must have its own unique
addresses. This restriction must be applied when mapping an NSAP
addressing plan into an IPv6 addressing plan for such hosts.
This document does not address the issues associated with migrating
the routing protocols used with CLNP (ES-IS or IS-IS) and transition
of their network infrastructure.
Bound, et. al. Experimental [Page 3]
RFC 1888 OSI NSAPs and IPv6 August 1996
2. Summary of defined mechanisms
This document defines four distinct mechanisms. All of these are
ELECTIVE mechanisms, i.e. they are not mandatory parts of an IPv6
implementation, but if such mechanisms are needed they MUST be
implemented as defined in this document.
1. Restricted NSAPA mapping into 16-byte IPv6 address
2. Truncated NSAPA for routing, full NSAPA in IPv6 option
3. Normal IPv6 address, full NSAPA in IPv6 option
4. IPv6 address carried as OSI address
To clarify the relationship between the first three mechanisms, note
that:
If the first byte of an IPv6 address is hexadecimal 0x02 (binary
00000010), then the remaining 15 bytes SHALL contain a restricted
NSAPA mapped as in Chapter 3 below. The term "restricted" is used
to indicate that this format is currently restricted to a subset
of the ICD and DCC formats.
If the first byte of an IPv6 address is hexadecimal 0x03 (binary
00000011), then the remaining 15 bytes SHALL contain a truncated
NSAPA as described in Chapter 4 below. EITHER a destination option
containing the complete NSAPA of any format, as described in
Chapter 5 below, OR an encapsulated CLNP packet, SHALL be present.
With any other format of IPv6 address, a destination option
containing a complete NSAPA, as defined in Chapter 5 below, MAY be
present.
3. Restricted NSAPA in a 16-byte IPv6 address for ICD and DCC
Some organizations may decide for various reasons not to follow the
above general recommendation to redesign their addressing plan. They
may wish to use their existing OSI NSAP addressing plan unchanged for
IPv6. It should be noted that such a decision has serious
implications for routing, since it means that routing between such
organizations and the rest of the Internet is unlikely to be
optimised. An organization using both native IPv6 addresses and NSAP
addresses for IPv6 would be likely to have inefficient internal
routing. Nevertheless, to cover this eventuality, the present
document defines a way to map a subset of the NSAP address space into
the IPv6 address space. The mapping is algorithmic and reversible
within this subset of the NSAP address space.
Bound, et. al. Experimental [Page 4]
RFC 1888 OSI NSAPs and IPv6 August 1996
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
0-3 |0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0| AFcode| IDI (last 3 digits) |Prefix(octet 0)|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
4-7 | Prefix (octets 1 through 4) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
8-11 | Area (octets 0 and 1) | ID (octets 0 and 1) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
12-15| ID (octets 2 through 5) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
The AFcode nibble is overloaded, and encoded as follows
0000-1001 Implied AFI value is 47 (ICD)
(0-9 decimal) AFcode is first BCD digit of the ICD
IDI is last three BCD digits of the ICD
1010 Implied AFI value is 39 (DCC)
(hex. A) IDI is the three BCD digits of the DCC
1011-1111 Reserved, not to be used.
(hex. B-F)
The NSEL octet is not included. It is of no use for TCP and UDP
traffic. In any case where it is needed, the mechanism described in
the next chapter should be used.
The longest CLNP routing prefixes known to be in active use today are
5 octets (subdivided into AA and RD fields in US GOSIP version 2).
Thus the semantics of existing 20-octet NSAPAs can be fully mapped.
DECnet/OSI (Registered Trade Mark) address semantics are also fully
mapped.
It is expected that hosts using restricted NSAPAs could be configured
using IPv6 auto-configuration [RFC1971], and that they could use
normal IPv6 neighbour discovery mechanisms [RFC1970].
Restricted NSAPAs, assuming that they can be fully routed using IPv6
routing protocols, may be used in IPv6 routing headers.
3.1 Routing restricted NSAPAs
As mentioned in Chapter 1, there is a mismatch between the OSI or
GOSIP routing model and the IPv6 routing model. Restricted NSAPAs can
be routed hierarchically down to the Area level but must be flat-
routed within an Area. Normal IPv6 addresses can be routed
Bound, et. al. Experimental [Page 5]
RFC 1888 OSI NSAPs and IPv6 August 1996
hierarchically down to physical subnet (link) level and only have to
be flat-routed on the physical subnet.
Thus, packets whose destination address is a restricted NSAPA can be
routed using any normal IPv6 routing protocol only as far as the
Area. If the Area contains more than one physical subnet reached by
more than one router, no IPv6 routing protocol can route the packet
to the correct final router. There is no solution to this problem
within the existing IPv6 mechanisms. Presumably a flooding
algorithm, or a suitably adapted implementation of ES-IS, could solve
this problem.
In the absence of such a routing protocol, either the Area number
must be hierarchically structured to correspond to physical subnets,
⌨️ 快捷键说明
复制代码Ctrl + C
搜索代码Ctrl + F
全屏模式F11
增大字号Ctrl + =
减小字号Ctrl + -
显示快捷键?