Network Working Group                                           J. Arkko
Request for Comments: 5494                                      Ericsson
Updates: 826, 951, 1044, 1329, 2131,                        C. Pignataro
         2132, 2176, 2225, 2834, 2835,                     Cisco Systems
         3315, 4338, 4361, 4701                               April 2009
Category: Standards Track
Network Working Group                                           J. Arkko
Request for Comments: 5494                                      Ericsson
Updates: 826, 951, 1044, 1329, 2131,                        C. Pignataro
         2132, 2176, 2225, 2834, 2835,                     Cisco Systems
         3315, 4338, 4361, 4701                               April 2009
Category: Standards Track

IANA Allocation Guidelines for the Address Resolution Protocol (ARP)


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.

本文件规定了互联网社区的互联网标准跟踪协议,并要求进行讨论和提出改进建议。有关本协议的标准化状态和状态,请参考当前版本的“互联网官方协议标准”(STD 1)。本备忘录的分发不受限制。

Copyright Notice


Copyright (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.

版权所有(c)2009 IETF信托基金和确定为文件作者的人员。版权所有。

This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 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.

本文件受BCP 78和IETF信托在本文件出版之日生效的与IETF文件有关的法律规定的约束( 请仔细阅读这些文件,因为它们描述了您对本文件的权利和限制。



This document specifies the IANA guidelines for allocating new values in the Address Resolution Protocol (ARP). This document also reserves some numbers for experimentation purposes. The changes also affect other protocols that employ values from the ARP name spaces.


1. Introduction
1. 介绍

This document specifies the IANA guidelines [RFC5226] for allocating new values for various fields in the Address Resolution Protocol (ARP) [RFC0826]. The change is also applicable to extensions of ARP that use the same message format, such as [RFC0903], [RFC1931], and [RFC2390].


The change also affects other protocols that employ values from the ARP name spaces. For instance, the ARP hardware address type (ar$hrd) number space is also used in the "htype" (hardware address type) fields in the Bootstrap Protocol (BOOTP) [RFC0951] and Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) [RFC2131], as well as in the "hardware type" field in the DHCP Unique Identifiers in DHCPv6 [RFC3315]. These protocols are therefore affected by the update in the IANA rules. Other affected specifications include the specialized address resolution mechanisms in:


o HYPERchannel [RFC1044]

o 超通道[RFC1044]

o DHCP options [RFC2132] [RFC4361]

o DHCP选项[RFC2132][RFC4361]

o ATM (Asynchronous Transfer Mode) ARP [RFC2225]

o ATM(异步传输模式)ARP[RFC2225]

o HARP (High-Performance Parallel Interface ARP) [RFC2834] [RFC2835]

o HARP(高性能并行接口ARP)[RFC2834][RFC2835]

o Dual MAC (Media Access Control) FDDI (Fiber Distributed Data Interface) ARP [RFC1329]

o 双MAC(媒体访问控制)FDDI(光纤分布式数据接口)ARP[RFC1329]

o MAPOS (Multiple Access Protocol over Synchronous Optical Network/ Synchronous Digital Hierarchy) ARP [RFC2176]

o MAPOS(同步光网络/同步数字体系上的多址协议)ARP[RFC2176]

o FC (Fibre Channel) ARP [RFC4338]

o FC(光纤通道)ARP[RFC4338]

o DNS DHCID Resource Record [RFC4701]

o DNS DHCID资源记录[RFC4701]

The IANA guidelines are given in Section 2. Previously, no IANA guidance existed for such allocations. The purpose of this document is to allow IANA to manage number assignments based on these guidelines in a consistent manner.


This document also reserves some numbers for experimentation purposes. These numbers are given in Section 3.


2. IANA Considerations
2. IANA考虑

The following rules apply to the fields of ARP:


ar$hrd (16 bits) Hardware address space


Requests for ar$hrd values below 256 or for a batch of more than one new value are made through Expert Review [RFC5226].


Note that certain protocols, such as BOOTP and DHCPv4, employ these values within an 8-bit field. The expert should determine that a need to allocate the new values exists and that the existing values are insufficient to represent the new hardware address types. The expert should also determine the applicability of the request and assign values higher than 255 for requests that do not apply to BOOTP/DHCPv4. Similarly, the expert should assign 1-octet values for requests that apply to BOOTP/DHCPv4, as for example the "IPsec tunnel" with value 31 [RFC3456]. Conversely, ARP-only uses, without a foreseeable reason to use the same value in BOOTP/DHCPv4, should favor 2-octet values.


Requests for individual new ar$hrd values that do not specify a value, or where the requested value is greater than 255, are made through First Come First Served [RFC5226]. The assignment will always result in a 2-octet value.


ar$pro (16 bits) Protocol address space


These numbers share the Ethertype space. The Ethertype space is administered as described in [RFC5342].


ar$op (16 bits) Opcode


Requests for new ar$op values are made through IETF Review or IESG Approval [RFC5226].


3. Allocations Defined in This Document
3. 本文件中定义的分配

When testing new protocol extension ideas, it is often necessary to use an actual constant in order to use the new function, even when testing in a closed environment. This document reserves the following numbers for experimentation purposes in ARP:


o Two new ar$hrd values are allocated for experimental purposes: HW_EXP1 (36) and HW_EXP2 (256). Note that these two new values were purposely chosen so that one would be below 256 and the other would be above 255, and so that there would be different values in the least and most significant octets.

o 分配两个新的ar$hrd值用于实验目的:HW_EXP1(36)和HW_EXP2(256)。请注意,这两个新值是特意选择的,以便一个值低于256,另一个值高于255,并且在最低和最高有效的八位字节中会有不同的值。

o Two new values for the ar$op are allocated for experimental purposes: OP_EXP1 (24) and OP_EXP2 (25).

o ar$op的两个新值分配用于实验目的:op_EXP1(24)和op_EXP2(25)。

Note that Appendix B.2 of [RFC5342] lists two Ethertypes that can be used for experimental purposes.


In addition, for both ar$hrd and ar$op, the values 0 and 65535 are marked as reserved. This means that they are not available for allocation.


4. Security Considerations
4. 安全考虑

This specification does not change the security properties of the affected protocols.


However, a few words are necessary about the use of the experimental code points defined in Section 3. Potentially harmful side effects from the use of the experimental values need to be carefully evaluated before deploying any experiment across networks that the owner of the experiment does not entirely control. Guidance given in [RFC3692] about the use of experimental values needs to be followed.


5. Acknowledgments
5. 致谢

The lack of any current rules has come up as new values were requested from IANA, who contacted the IESG for advice. The author would like to thank Michelle Cotton in particular for bringing up this issue. The author would also like to thank Brian Carpenter, Thomas Narten, Scott Bradner, Donald Eastlake, Andrew G. Malis, Brian Haberman, Robert Sparks, Larry Zhu, and Dave Thaler for feedback.

由于IANA要求提供新的值,因此出现了缺乏任何现行规则的情况,IANA已联系IESG寻求建议。作者要特别感谢Michelle Cotton提出这个问题。作者还要感谢Brian Carpenter、Thomas Narten、Scott Bradner、Donald Eastlake、Andrew G.Malis、Brian Haberman、Robert Sparks、Larry Zhu和Dave Thaler的反馈。

6. References
6. 工具书类
6.1. Normative References
6.1. 规范性引用文件

[RFC0826] Plummer, D., "Ethernet Address Resolution Protocol: Or converting network protocol addresses to 48.bit Ethernet address for transmission on Ethernet hardware", STD 37, RFC 826, November 1982.

[RFC0826]Plummer,D.,“以太网地址解析协议:或将网络协议地址转换为48位以太网地址,以便在以太网硬件上传输”,STD 37,RFC 826,1982年11月。

[RFC0951] Croft, B. and J. Gilmore, "Bootstrap Protocol", RFC 951, September 1985.

[RFC0951]Croft,B.和J.Gilmore,“引导协议”,RFC 9511985年9月。

[RFC1044] Hardwick, K. and J. Lekashman, "Internet Protocol on Network System's HYPERchannel: Protocol specification", STD 45, RFC 1044, February 1988.

[RFC1044]Hardwick,K.和J.Lekashman,“网络系统超通道上的互联网协议:协议规范”,STD 45,RFC 1044,1988年2月。

[RFC1329] Kuehn, P., "Thoughts on Address Resolution for Dual MAC FDDI Networks", RFC 1329, May 1992.

[RFC1329]Kuehn,P.,“关于双MAC FDDI网络地址解析的思考”,RFC1329,1992年5月。

[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.

[RFC2132]Alexander,S.和R.Droms,“DHCP选项和BOOTP供应商扩展”,RFC 21321997年3月。

[RFC2176] Murakami, K. and M. Maruyama, "IPv4 over MAPOS Version 1", RFC 2176, June 1997.

[RFC2176]Murakami,K.和M.Maruyama,“基于MAPOS版本1的IPv4”,RFC 2176,1997年6月。

[RFC2225] Laubach, M. and J. Halpern, "Classical IP and ARP over ATM", RFC 2225, April 1998.

[RFC2225]Laubach,M.和J.Halpern,“ATM上的经典IP和ARP”,RFC 2225,1998年4月。

[RFC2834] Pittet, J., "ARP and IP Broadcast over HIPPI-800", RFC 2834, May 2000.

[RFC2834]Pittet,J.,“HIPPI-800上的ARP和IP广播”,RFC 28342000年5月。

[RFC2835] Pittet, J., "IP and ARP over HIPPI-6400 (GSN)", RFC 2835, May 2000.

[RFC2835]Pittet,J.,“HIPPI-6400(GSN)上的IP和ARP”,RFC 28352000年5月。

[RFC3315] Droms, R., Bound, J., Volz, B., Lemon, T., Perkins, C., and M. Carney, "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6)", RFC 3315, July 2003.


[RFC3692] Narten, T., "Assigning Experimental and Testing Numbers Considered Useful", BCP 82, RFC 3692, January 2004.

[RFC3692]Narten,T.,“分配被认为有用的实验和测试数字”,BCP 82,RFC 3692,2004年1月。

[RFC4338] DeSanti, C., Carlson, C., and R. Nixon, "Transmission of IPv6, IPv4, and Address Resolution Protocol (ARP) Packets over Fibre Channel", RFC 4338, January 2006.

[RFC4338]DeSanti,C.,Carlson,C.,和R.Nixon,“通过光纤通道传输IPv6,IPv4和地址解析协议(ARP)数据包”,RFC 4338,2006年1月。

[RFC4361] Lemon, T. and B. Sommerfeld, "Node-specific Client Identifiers for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol Version Four (DHCPv4)", RFC 4361, February 2006.

[RFC4361]Lemon,T.和B.Sommerfeld,“动态主机配置协议第四版(DHCPv4)的节点特定客户端标识符”,RFC 4361,2006年2月。

[RFC4701] Stapp, M., Lemon, T., and A. Gustafsson, "A DNS Resource Record (RR) for Encoding Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) Information (DHCID RR)", RFC 4701, October 2006.

[RFC4701]Stapp,M.,Lemon,T.,和A.Gustafsson,“用于编码动态主机配置协议(DHCP)信息(DHCID RR)的DNS资源记录(RR)”,RFC 47012006年10月。

[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226, May 2008.

[RFC5226]Narten,T.和H.Alvestrand,“在RFCs中编写IANA注意事项部分的指南”,BCP 26,RFC 5226,2008年5月。

[RFC5342] Eastlake. , D., "IANA Considerations and IETF Protocol Usage for IEEE 802 Parameters", BCP 141, RFC 5342, September 2008.

[RFC5342]东湖,D.,“IEEE 802参数的IANA考虑因素和IETF协议使用”,BCP 141,RFC 5342,2008年9月。

6.2. Informative References
6.2. 资料性引用

[RFC0903] Finlayson, R., Mann, T., Mogul, J., and M. Theimer, "Reverse Address Resolution Protocol", STD 38, RFC 903, June 1984.

[RFC0903]Finlayson,R.,Mann,T.,Mogul,J.,和M.Theimer,“反向地址解析协议”,STD 38,RFC 903,1984年6月。

[RFC1931] Brownell, D., "Dynamic RARP Extensions for Automatic Network Address Acquisition", RFC 1931, April 1996.

[RFC1931]Brownell,D.,“用于自动网络地址获取的动态RARP扩展”,RFC 19311996年4月。

[RFC2390] Bradley, T., Brown, C., and A. Malis, "Inverse Address Resolution Protocol", RFC 2390, September 1998.

[RFC2390]Bradley,T.,Brown,C.和A.Malis,“反向地址解析协议”,RFC 23901998年9月。

[RFC3456] Patel, B., Aboba, B., Kelly, S., and V. Gupta, "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCPv4) Configuration of IPsec Tunnel Mode", RFC 3456, January 2003.

[RFC3456]Patel,B.,Aboba,B.,Kelly,S.,和V.Gupta,“IPsec隧道模式的动态主机配置协议(DHCPv4)配置”,RFC 3456,2003年1月。

Appendix A. Changes from the Original RFCs

This document specifies only the IANA rules associated with various fields in ARP. The specification of these rules also affects the allocation of corresponding fields in protocols listed in Section 1 that share the registry. This document does not make any changes in the operation of these protocols themselves.


Authors' Addresses


Jari Arkko Ericsson Jorvas 02420 Finland



Carlos Pignataro Cisco Systems 7200-12 Kit Creek Road Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 USA

Carlos Pignataro思科系统7200-12美国北卡罗来纳州Kit Creek路研究三角公园,邮编27709