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 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557
|
<pre>Independent Submission F. Gont
Request for Comments: 7943 SI6 Networks / UTN-FRH
Category: Informational W. Liu
ISSN: 2070-1721 Huawei Technologies
September 2016
A Method for Generating Semantically Opaque Interface Identifiers (IIDs)
with the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6)
Abstract
This document describes a method for selecting IPv6 Interface
Identifiers that can be employed by Dynamic Host Configuration
Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6) servers when leasing non-temporary IPv6
addresses to DHCPv6 clients. This method is a DHCPv6 server-side
algorithm that does not require any updates to the existing DHCPv6
specifications. The aforementioned method results in stable
addresses within each subnet, even in the presence of multiple DHCPv6
servers or DHCPv6 server reinstallments. It is a DHCPv6 variant of
the method specified in <a href="./rfc7217">RFC 7217</a> for IPv6 Stateless Address
Autoconfiguration.
IESG Note
A predecessor to this document was earlier a working group document
in the DHC WG. The WG decided to stop further work in this area
because such work was not considered useful.
The proposal described in this document has an unaddressed failure
case that makes it unsuitable for use as the mechanism to provide the
claimed failover features for DHCPv6 servers. Specifically, when a
DHCPv6 client DECLINEs a provided address there is no recovery
mechanism described that will result in the DHCPv6 client obtaining a
working IPv6 address.
<span class="grey">Gont & Liu Informational [Page 1]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-2" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc7943">RFC 7943</a> Stable and Opaque IIDs with DHCPv6 September 2016</span>
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 <a href="./rfc7841#section-2">Section 2 of RFC 7841</a>.
Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
<a href="http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7943">http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7943</a>.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to <a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp78">BCP 78</a> and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(<a href="http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info">http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info</a>) 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.
Table of Contents
<a href="#section-1">1</a>. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <a href="#page-3">3</a>
<a href="#section-2">2</a>. Applicability and Design Goals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <a href="#page-3">3</a>
<a href="#section-3">3</a>. Method Specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <a href="#page-4">4</a>
<a href="#section-4">4</a>. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <a href="#page-8">8</a>
<a href="#section-5">5</a>. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <a href="#page-8">8</a>
<a href="#section-5.1">5.1</a>. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <a href="#page-8">8</a>
<a href="#section-5.2">5.2</a>. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <a href="#page-8">8</a>
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <a href="#page-10">10</a>
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . <a href="#page-10">10</a>
<span class="grey">Gont & Liu Informational [Page 2]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-3" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc7943">RFC 7943</a> Stable and Opaque IIDs with DHCPv6 September 2016</span>
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-1" href="#section-1">1</a>. Introduction</span>
The benefits of stable IPv6 addresses are discussed in [<a href="./rfc7721" title=""Security and Privacy Considerations for IPv6 Address Generation Mechanisms"">RFC7721</a>].
Providing address stability across server reinstallations or when a
database of previous DHCPv6 address leases is unavailable is of use
not only when a DHCPv6 server must be reinstalled or the address-
lease database becomes corrupted, but is also of use when
implementation constraints (e.g., a DHCPv6 server implementation on
an embedded device) make it impossible for a DHCPv6 server
implementation to maintain a database of previous DHCPv6 address
leases. Additionally, [<a href="./rfc7031" title=""DHCPv6 Failover Requirements"">RFC7031</a>] describes scenarios where multiple
DHCPv6 servers are required to run in such a way as to provide
increased availability in case of server failures.
This document describes a method for selecting IPv6 Interface
Identifiers that can be employed by DHCPv6 servers when leasing non-
temporary IPv6 addresses to DHCPv6 clients (i.e., to be employed with
IA_NA options). This method is a DHCPv6 server-side algorithm that
does not require any updates to the existing DHCPv6 specifications.
The aforementioned method has the following properties:
o The resulting IPv6 addresses remain stable within each subnet for
the same network interface of the same client, even when different
DHCPv6 servers (implementing this specification) are employed.
o Predicting the IPv6 addresses that will be generated by the method
specified in this document, even with knowledge of the IPv6
addresses generated for other nodes within the same network,
becomes very difficult.
The method specified in this document achieves the aforementioned
properties by means of a calculated technique as opposed to, e.g.,
state sharing among DHCPv6 servers. This approach has already been
suggested in [<a href="./rfc7031" title=""DHCPv6 Failover Requirements"">RFC7031</a>]. We note that the method described in this
document is essentially a DHCPv6 version of the "Method for
Generating Semantically Opaque Interface Identifiers with IPv6
Stateless Address Autoconfiguration (SLAAC)" specified in [<a href="./rfc7217" title=""A Method for Generating Semantically Opaque Interface Identifiers with IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration (SLAAC)"">RFC7217</a>].
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-2" href="#section-2">2</a>. Applicability and Design Goals</span>
This document simply describes one possible approach for selecting
IPv6 Interface Identifiers to be employed by DHCPv6 servers when
leasing non-temporary IPv6 addresses to DHCPv6 clients, with the
following properties:
o The resulting IPv6 addresses remain stable within each subnet for
the same network interface of the same client.
<span class="grey">Gont & Liu Informational [Page 3]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-4" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc7943">RFC 7943</a> Stable and Opaque IIDs with DHCPv6 September 2016</span>
o The resulting IPv6 addresses cannot be predicted by an attacker
without knowledge of a secret key.
o The resulting IPv6 addresses remain stable across DHCPv6 server
reinstallations, or even if a database of previous DHCPv6 address
leases is not available.
o The resulting IPv6 addresses remain stable when different DHCPv6
servers (implementing this specification) are employed on the same
network.
We note that the algorithm specified in this document employs a
(lightweight) calculated technique (as opposed to, e.g., state
sharing among DHCPv6 servers) to achieve address stability in
scenarios where multiple DHCPv6 servers are required to run in such a
way as to provide increased availability, without the need of an
additional protocol to synchronize the lease databases of DHCPv6
servers.
Finally, we note that the algorithm in this document is only meant to
mitigate IPv6 address-based location tracking, device-specific
vulnerability exploitation, and host scanning (please see [<a href="./rfc7721" title=""Security and Privacy Considerations for IPv6 Address Generation Mechanisms"">RFC7721</a>]).
There are a number of ways in which DHCPv6 affects user privacy,
which the algorithm specified in this document does not mitigate (and
does not intend to). Please see [<a href="./rfc7844" title=""Anonymity Profiles for DHCP Clients"">RFC7844</a>] for a comprehensive
discussion of how DHCPv6 may affect user privacy.
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-3" href="#section-3">3</a>. Method Specification</span>
Implementations should provide the means for a system administrator
to enable or disable the use of this algorithm for generating IPv6
addresses.
A DHCPv6 server implementing this specification must select the IPv6
addresses to be leased with the following algorithm:
1. Compute a random (but stable) identifier with the expression:
RID = F(Prefix | Client_DUID | IAID | Counter | secret_key)
Where:
RID:
Random (but stable) Identifier
<span class="grey">Gont & Liu Informational [Page 4]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-5" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc7943">RFC 7943</a> Stable and Opaque IIDs with DHCPv6 September 2016</span>
F():
A Pseudorandom Function (PRF) that must not be computable from
the outside (without knowledge of the secret key). F() must
also be difficult to reverse, such that it resists attempts to
obtain the secret key, even when given samples of the output
of F() and knowledge or control of the other input parameters.
F() should produce an output of at least 64 bits. F() could
be implemented as a cryptographic hash of the concatenation of
each of the function parameters. The default algorithm to be
employed for F() should be SHA-256 [<a href="#ref-FIPS-SHS">FIPS-SHS</a>]. An
implementation may provide the means for selecting other
algorithms. Note: Message Digest 5 (MD5) [<a href="./rfc1321" title=""The MD5 Message-Digest Algorithm"">RFC1321</a>] is
considered unacceptable for F() [<a href="./rfc6151" title=""Updated Security Considerations for the MD5 Message-Digest and the HMAC-MD5 Algorithms"">RFC6151</a>].
Prefix:
The prefix employed for the local subnet, as a 128-bit
unsigned integer in network byte order (with the unused bits
set to 0). If multiple servers operate on the same network to
provide increased availability, all such DHCPv6 servers must
be configured with the same Prefix. It is the administrator's
responsibility that the aforementioned requirement is met.
|:
An operator representing "concatenation".
Client_DUID:
The DHCPv6 Unique Identifier (DUID) value contained in the
Client Identifier option received in the DHCPv6 client
message. The DUID can be treated as an array of 8-bit
unsigned integers.
IAID:
The Identity Association Identifier (IAID) value contained in
the IA_NA option received in the client message. It must be
interpreted as a 32-bit unsigned integer in network byte
order.
secret_key:
A secret key configured by the DHCPv6 server administrator,
which must not be known by the attacker. It must be encoded
as an array of 8-bit unsigned integers. An implementation of
this specification must provide an interface for viewing and
changing the secret key. All DHCPv6 servers leasing addresses
from the same address range must employ the same secret key.
<span class="grey">Gont & Liu Informational [Page 5]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-6" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc7943">RFC 7943</a> Stable and Opaque IIDs with DHCPv6 September 2016</span>
Counter:
A 32-bit unsigned integer in network byte order that is
employed to resolve address conflicts. It must be initialized
to 0.
2. A candidate IPv6 address (IPV6_ADDR) to be leased is obtained by
concatenating as many bits as necessary from the RID value
computed in the previous step (starting from the least
significant bit) to the Prefix employed in the equation above, as
follows:
IPV6_ADDR = IPV6_ADDR_LOW +
RID % (IPV6_ADDR_HI - IPV6_ADDR_LOW + 1)
where:
IPV6_ADDR:
The candidate IPv6 address to be leased.
IPV6_ADDR_HI:
An IPv6 address specifying the upper boundary of the IPv6
address pool from which the DHCPv6 server leases IPv6
addresses. If an address range is not explicitly selected,
IPV6_ADDR_HI must be set to the IPv6 address from the Prefix
(see the expression above) that has all of the bits of the
Interface Identifier set to 1.
IPV6_ADDR_LOW:
An IPv6 address specifying the lower boundary of the IPv6
address pool from which the DHCPv6 server leases IPv6
addresses. If an address range is not explicitly selected,
IPV6_ADDR_LOW must be set to the IPv6 address from the Prefix
(see the expression above) that has all of the bits of the
Interface Identifier set to 0.
3. The Interface Identifier of the selected IPv6 address must be
compared against the reserved IPv6 Interface Identifiers
[<a href="./rfc5453" title=""Reserved IPv6 Interface Identifiers"">RFC5453</a>] [<a href="#ref-IANA-RESERVED-IID">IANA-RESERVED-IID</a>]. In the event that an unacceptable
identifier has been generated, the Counter variable should be
incremented by 1, and a new IPv6 address should be computed with
the updated Counter value.
4. If the resulting address is not available (e.g., there is a
conflicting binding), the DHCPv6 server should increment the
Counter variable, and a new Interface Identifier and IPv6 address
should be computed with the updated Counter value.
<span class="grey">Gont & Liu Informational [Page 6]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-7" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc7943">RFC 7943</a> Stable and Opaque IIDs with DHCPv6 September 2016</span>
This document requires that SHA-256 be the default function to be
used for F(), such that (all other configuration parameters being the
same) different implementations of this specification result in the
same IPv6 addresses.
Including the Prefix in the PRF computation causes the Interface
Identifier to be different for each address from a different prefix
leased to the same client. This mitigates the correlation of
activities of multihomed nodes (since each of the corresponding
addresses will employ a different Interface Identifier), host
tracking (since the network prefix, and therefore the resulting
Interface Identifier, will change as the node moves from one network
to another), and any other attacks that benefit from predictable
Interface Identifiers [<a href="./rfc7721" title=""Security and Privacy Considerations for IPv6 Address Generation Mechanisms"">RFC7721</a>].
As required by [<a href="./rfc3315" title=""Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6)"">RFC3315</a>], an IAID is associated with each of the
client's network interfaces and is consistent across restarts of the
DHCPv6 client.
The Counter parameter provides the means to intentionally cause this
algorithm to produce different IPv6 addresses (all other parameters
being the same). This can be of use to resolve address conflicts
(e.g., the resulting address having a conflicting binding).
Note that the result of F() in the algorithm above is no more secure
than the secret key. If an attacker is aware of the PRF that is
being used by the DHCPv6 server (which we should expect), and the
attacker can obtain enough material (i.e., addresses generated by the
DHCPv6 server), the attacker may simply search the entire secret-key
space to find matches. To protect against this, the secret key
should be of at least 128 bits. Key lengths of at least 128 bits
should be adequate.
Providing a mechanism to display and change the secret_key is crucial
for having different DHCPv6 servers produce the same IPv6 addresses
and for causing a replacement system to generate the same IPv6
addresses as the system being replaced. We note that since the
privacy of the scheme specified in this document relies on the
secrecy of the secret_key parameter, implementations should constrain
access to the secret_key parameter to the extent practicable (e.g.,
require superuser privileges to access it). Furthermore, in order to
prevent leakages of the secret_key parameter, it should not be used
for any other purposes than being a parameter to the scheme specified
in this document.
<span class="grey">Gont & Liu Informational [Page 7]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-8" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc7943">RFC 7943</a> Stable and Opaque IIDs with DHCPv6 September 2016</span>
We note that all of the bits in the resulting Interface Identifiers
are treated as "opaque" bits [<a href="./rfc7136" title=""Significance of IPv6 Interface Identifiers"">RFC7136</a>]. For example, the universal/
local bit of Modified EUI-64 format identifiers is treated as any
other bit of such identifier.
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-4" href="#section-4">4</a>. Security Considerations</span>
The method specified in this document results in IPv6 Interface
Identifiers (and hence IPv6 addresses) that do not follow any
specific pattern. Thus, attacks that rely on predictable Interface
Identifiers (such as [<a href="./rfc7707" title=""Network Reconnaissance in IPv6 Networks"">RFC7707</a>]) are mitigated.
The method specified in this document neither mitigates nor
exacerbates the security considerations for DHCPv6 discussed in
[<a href="./rfc3315" title=""Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6)"">RFC3315</a>] and does not mitigate a range of other privacy implications
associated with DHCPv6. Please read [<a href="./rfc7844" title=""Anonymity Profiles for DHCP Clients"">RFC7844</a>] for a comprehensive
assessment of the privacy implications of DHCPv6.
Finally, we note that an attacker that is able to attach to each of
the links to which the victim attaches would still be able to
correlate the activities of the victim across networks.
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-5" href="#section-5">5</a>. References</span>
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-5.1" href="#section-5.1">5.1</a>. Normative References</span>
[<a id="ref-RFC3315">RFC3315</a>] Droms, R., Ed., Bound, J., Volz, B., Lemon, T., Perkins,
C., and M. Carney, "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol
for IPv6 (DHCPv6)", <a href="./rfc3315">RFC 3315</a>, DOI 10.17487/RFC3315, July
2003, <<a href="http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3315">http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3315</a>>.
[<a id="ref-RFC5453">RFC5453</a>] Krishnan, S., "Reserved IPv6 Interface Identifiers",
<a href="./rfc5453">RFC 5453</a>, DOI 10.17487/RFC5453, February 2009,
<<a href="http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5453">http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5453</a>>.
[<a id="ref-RFC7136">RFC7136</a>] Carpenter, B. and S. Jiang, "Significance of IPv6
Interface Identifiers", <a href="./rfc7136">RFC 7136</a>, DOI 10.17487/RFC7136,
February 2014, <<a href="http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7136">http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7136</a>>.
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-5.2" href="#section-5.2">5.2</a>. Informative References</span>
[<a id="ref-FIPS-SHS">FIPS-SHS</a>]
Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS), "Secure
Hash Standard (SHS)", FIPS 180-4, August 2015,
<<a href="http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/fips/fips180-4/fips-180-4.pdf">http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/fips/fips180-4/</a>
<a href="http://csrc.nist.gov/publications/fips/fips180-4/fips-180-4.pdf">fips-180-4.pdf</a>>.
<span class="grey">Gont & Liu Informational [Page 8]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-9" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc7943">RFC 7943</a> Stable and Opaque IIDs with DHCPv6 September 2016</span>
[<a id="ref-IANA-RESERVED-IID">IANA-RESERVED-IID</a>]
IANA, "Reserved IPv6 Interface Identifiers",
<<a href="http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv6-interface-ids">http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv6-interface-ids</a>>.
[<a id="ref-RFC1321">RFC1321</a>] Rivest, R., "The MD5 Message-Digest Algorithm", <a href="./rfc1321">RFC 1321</a>,
DOI 10.17487/RFC1321, April 1992,
<<a href="http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1321">http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1321</a>>.
[<a id="ref-RFC6151">RFC6151</a>] Turner, S. and L. Chen, "Updated Security Considerations
for the MD5 Message-Digest and the HMAC-MD5 Algorithms",
<a href="./rfc6151">RFC 6151</a>, DOI 10.17487/RFC6151, March 2011,
<<a href="http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6151">http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6151</a>>.
[<a id="ref-RFC7031">RFC7031</a>] Mrugalski, T. and K. Kinnear, "DHCPv6 Failover
Requirements", <a href="./rfc7031">RFC 7031</a>, DOI 10.17487/RFC7031, September
2013, <<a href="http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7031">http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7031</a>>.
[<a id="ref-RFC7217">RFC7217</a>] Gont, F., "A Method for Generating Semantically Opaque
Interface Identifiers with IPv6 Stateless Address
Autoconfiguration (SLAAC)", <a href="./rfc7217">RFC 7217</a>,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7217, April 2014,
<<a href="http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7217">http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7217</a>>.
[<a id="ref-RFC7707">RFC7707</a>] Gont, F. and T. Chown, "Network Reconnaissance in IPv6
Networks", <a href="./rfc7707">RFC 7707</a>, DOI 10.17487/RFC7707, March 2016,
<<a href="http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7707">http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7707</a>>.
[<a id="ref-RFC7721">RFC7721</a>] Cooper, A., Gont, F., and D. Thaler, "Security and Privacy
Considerations for IPv6 Address Generation Mechanisms",
<a href="./rfc7721">RFC 7721</a>, DOI 10.17487/RFC7721, March 2016,
<<a href="http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7721">http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7721</a>>.
[<a id="ref-RFC7844">RFC7844</a>] Huitema, C., Mrugalski, T., and S. Krishnan, "Anonymity
Profiles for DHCP Clients", <a href="./rfc7844">RFC 7844</a>,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7844, May 2016,
<<a href="http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7844">http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7844</a>>.
<span class="grey">Gont & Liu Informational [Page 9]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-10" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc7943">RFC 7943</a> Stable and Opaque IIDs with DHCPv6 September 2016</span>
Acknowledgements
This document is based on [<a href="./rfc7217" title=""A Method for Generating Semantically Opaque Interface Identifiers with IPv6 Stateless Address Autoconfiguration (SLAAC)"">RFC7217</a>], authored by Fernando Gont.
The authors would like to thank Marc Blanchet, Stephane Bortzmeyer,
Tatuya Jinmei, Andre Kostur, Tomek Mrugalski, Hosnieh Rafiee, Jim
Schaad, Jean-Francois Tremblay, Tina Tsou, and Bernie Volz for
providing valuable comments on earlier draft versions of this
documents.
The authors would like to thank Ted Lemon, who kindly answered some
DHCPv6-related questions, and Nevil Brownlee for his guidance while
pursuing this document.
Fernando Gont would like to thank Nelida Garcia and Guillermo Gont
for their love and support, and Diego Armando Maradona for his magic
and inspiration.
Authors' Addresses
Fernando Gont
SI6 Networks / UTN-FRH
Evaristo Carriego 2644
Haedo, Provincia de Buenos Aires 1706
Argentina
Phone: +54 11 4650 8472
Email: fgont@si6networks.com
URI: <a href="http://www.si6networks.com">http://www.si6networks.com</a>
Will (Shucheng) Liu
Huawei Technologies
Bantian, Longgang District
Shenzhen 518129
China
Email: liushucheng@huawei.com
Gont & Liu Informational [Page 10]
</pre>
|