File: rfc2855.txt

package info (click to toggle)
doc-rfc 20181229-2
  • links: PTS, VCS
  • area: non-free
  • in suites: buster
  • size: 570,944 kB
  • sloc: xml: 285,646; sh: 107; python: 90; perl: 42; makefile: 14
file content (283 lines) | stat: -rw-r--r-- 8,070 bytes parent folder | download | duplicates (5)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283






Network Working Group                                        K. Fujisawa
Request for Comments: 2855                              Sony Corporation
Category: Standards Track                                      June 2000


                           DHCP for IEEE 1394

Status of this Memo

   This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the
   Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
   improvements.  Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet
   Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state
   and status of this protocol.  Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2000).  All Rights Reserved.

Abstract

   IEEE Std 1394-1995 is a standard for a High Performance Serial Bus.
   Since 1394 uses a different link-layer addressing method than
   conventional IEEE802/Ethernet, the usage of some fields must be
   clarified to achieve interoperability.  This memo describes the 1394
   specific usage of some fields of DHCP messages.

1. Introduction

   IEEE Std 1394-1995 is a standard for a High Performance Serial Bus.
   IETF IP1394 Working Group specified the method to carry IPv4
   datagrams and 1394 ARP packets over an IEEE1394 network [RFC2734].

   The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) [RFC2131] provides a
   framework for passing configuration information to hosts on a TCP/IP
   network.

   Since 1394 uses a different link-layer addressing method than
   conventional IEEE802/Ethernet, the usage of some fields must be
   clarified to achieve interoperability.  This memo describes the 1394
   specific usage of some fields of DHCP.  See [RFC2131] for the
   mechanism of DHCP and the explanations of each field.

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED",  "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].





Fujisawa                    Standards Track                     [Page 1]

RFC 2855                   DHCP for IEEE 1394                  June 2000


2. Issues related to 1394 link address

   With conventional link-layer protocols, such as an Ethernet, the
   'chaddr' (client hardware address) field may be used to return a
   reply message from a DHCP server (or relay-agent) to a client.  Since
   a 1394 link address (node_ID) is transient and will not be consistent
   across the 1394 bridge, we have chosen not to put it in the 'chaddr'
   field.  A DHCP client should request that the server sends a
   broadcast reply by setting the BROADCAST flag when 1394 ARP is not
   possible yet.

      Note: In general, the use of a broadcast reply is discouraged, but
      we consider the impact in a 1394 network as a non issue.

3. 1394 specific usage of DHCP message fields

   Following rules should be used when a DHCP client is connected to an
   IEEE1394 network.

   'htype' (hardware address type) MUST be 24 [ARPPARAM].

   'hlen' (hardware address length) MUST be 0.

   The 'chaddr' (client hardware address) field is reserved.  The sender
   MUST set this field to zero, and the recipient and the relay agent
   MUST ignore its value on receipt.

   A DHCP client on 1394 SHOULD set a BROADCAST flag in DHCPDISCOVER and
   DHCPREQUEST messages (and set 'ciaddr' to zero) to ensure that the
   server (or the relay agent) broadcasts its reply to the client.

      Note: As described in [RFC2131], 'ciaddr' MUST be filled in with
      client's IP address during BOUND, RENEWING or REBINDING state,
      therefore, the BROADCAST flag MUST NOT be set.  In these cases,
      the DHCP server unicasts DHCPACK message to the address in
      'ciaddr'. The link address will be resolved by 1394 ARP.

   'client identifier' option MUST be used in DHCP messages from the
   client to the server due to the lack of the 'chaddr'.  'client
   identifier' option may consist of any data.  Because every IP over
   1394 node has an EUI-64 (node unique ID), the EUI-64 makes an obvious
   'client identifier'.  1394 clients SHOULD include an EUI-64
   identifier in the 'client identifier' option. The type value for the
   EUI-64 is 27 [ARPPARAM], and the format is illustrated as follows.







Fujisawa                    Standards Track                     [Page 2]

RFC 2855                   DHCP for IEEE 1394                  June 2000


    Code  Len   Type  Client-Identifier
   +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+
   |  61 |  9  | 27  |           EUI-64 (node unique ID)             |
   +-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+-----+

   Note that the use of other 'client identifier' type, such as a fully
   qualified domain name (FQDN), is not precluded by this memo.

   For more details, see "9.14. Client-identifier" in [RFC2132].

4. Security Considerations

   DHCP currently provides no authentication or security mechanisms.
   Potential exposures to attack are discussed in section 7 of the DHCP
   protocol specification [RFC2131].

   A malicious client can falsify its EUI-64 identifier, thus
   masquerading as another client.

Acknowledgments

   The author appreciates the members of the Dynamic Host Configuration
   Working Group for their review and valuable comments.

References

   [RFC2734]  Johansson, P., "IPv4 over IEEE 1394", RFC 2734, December
              1999.

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", RFC 2119, March 1997.

   [RFC2131]  Droms, R., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol", RFC
              2131, March 1997.

   [RFC2132]  Alexander, S. and R. Droms, "DHCP Options and BOOTP Vendor
              Extensions", RFC 2132, March 1997.

   [ARPPARAM] http://www.iana.org/numbers.html












Fujisawa                    Standards Track                     [Page 3]

RFC 2855                   DHCP for IEEE 1394                  June 2000


Author's Address

   Kenji Fujisawa
   Sony Corporation
   6-7-35, Kitashinagawa,
   Shinagawa-ku, Tokyo, 141-0001 Japan

   Phone: +81-3-5448-8507
   EMail: fujisawa@sm.sony.co.jp










































Fujisawa                    Standards Track                     [Page 4]

RFC 2855                   DHCP for IEEE 1394                  June 2000


Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2000).  All Rights Reserved.

   This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
   others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
   or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
   and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
   kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
   included on all such copies and derivative works.  However, this
   document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
   the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
   Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
   developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
   copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
   followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
   English.

   The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
   revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.

   This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
   "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
   TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
   BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
   HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
   MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

Acknowledgement

   Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
   Internet Society.



















Fujisawa                    Standards Track                     [Page 5]