Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) R. Droms
Request for Comments: 7083 Cisco Systems
Updates: 3315 November 2013
Category: Standards Track
ISSN: 2070-1721
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) R. Droms
Request for Comments: 7083 Cisco Systems
Updates: 3315 November 2013
Category: Standards Track
ISSN: 2070-1721
Modification to Default Values of SOL_MAX_RT and INF_MAX_RT
修改SOL_MAX_RT和INF_MAX_RT的默认值
Abstract
摘要
This document updates RFC 3315 by redefining the default values for SOL_MAX_RT and INF_MAX_RT and defining options through which a DHCPv6 server can override the client's default value for SOL_MAX_RT and INF_MAX_RT with new values.
本文档通过重新定义SOL_MAX_RT和INF_MAX_RT的默认值并定义选项来更新RFC 3315，通过这些选项，DHCPv6服务器可以使用新值覆盖客户机的SOL_MAX_RT和INF_MAX_RT的默认值。
Status of This Memo
关于下段备忘
This is an Internet Standards Track document.
这是一份互联网标准跟踪文件。
This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has received public review and has been approved for publication by the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 5741.
本文件是互联网工程任务组（IETF）的产品。它代表了IETF社区的共识。它已经接受了公众审查，并已被互联网工程指导小组（IESG）批准出版。有关互联网标准的更多信息，请参见RFC 5741第2节。
Information about the current status of this document, any errata, and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7083.
有关本文件当前状态、任何勘误表以及如何提供反馈的信息，请访问http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7083.
Copyright Notice
版权公告
Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.
版权所有（c）2013 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 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) 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. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.
本文件受BCP 78和IETF信托有关IETF文件的法律规定的约束(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info)自本文件出版之日起生效。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。从本文件中提取的代码组件必须包括信托法律条款第4.e节中所述的简化BSD许可证文本，并提供简化BSD许可证中所述的无担保。
Table of Contents
目录
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. Updates to SOL_MAX_RT and INF_MAX_RT in RFC 3315 . . . . . . 2
4. SOL_MAX_RT option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
5. INF_MAX_RT Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6. Updates for SOL_MAX_RT and INF_MAX_RT Options to RFC 3315 . . 4
7. DHCPv6 Client Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8. DHCPv6 Server Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
9. DHCPv6 Relay Agent Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
11. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
12. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
13. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
13.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
13.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. Updates to SOL_MAX_RT and INF_MAX_RT in RFC 3315 . . . . . . 2
4. SOL_MAX_RT option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
5. INF_MAX_RT Option . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6. Updates for SOL_MAX_RT and INF_MAX_RT Options to RFC 3315 . . 4
7. DHCPv6 Client Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8. DHCPv6 Server Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
9. DHCPv6 Relay Agent Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
11. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
12. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
13. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
13.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
13.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Section 5.5 of the DHCPv6 specification [RFC3315] defines the default values of SOL_MAX_RT and INF_MAX_RT to be 120 seconds. In some circumstances, these defaults will lead to an unacceptably high volume of aggregated traffic at a DHCPv6 server.
DHCPv6规范[RFC3315]第5.5节将SOL_MAX_RT和INF_MAX_RT的默认值定义为120秒。在某些情况下，这些默认值将导致DHCPv6服务器上的聚合通信量高得令人无法接受。
The change to SOL_MAX_RT is in response to DHCPv6 message rates observed on a DHCPv6 server in a deployment in which many DHCPv6 clients are sending Solicit messages, but the DHCPv6 server has been configured not to respond to those Solicit messages. While no explicit observations of traffic due to INF_MAX_RT have been conducted, this document updates INF_MAX_RT for consistency with SOL_MAX_RT.
对SOL_MAX_RT的更改是为了响应DHCPv6服务器上观察到的DHCPv6消息速率，在部署中，许多DHCPv6客户端正在发送请求消息，但DHCPv6服务器已配置为不响应这些请求消息。虽然没有对INF_MAX_RT引起的流量进行明确观察，但本文档更新了INF_MAX_RT，以确保与SOL_MAX_RT的一致性。
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].
本文件中的关键词“必须”、“不得”、“要求”、“应”、“不应”、“应”、“不应”、“建议”、“可”和“可选”应按照RFC 2119[RFC2119]中所述进行解释。
This document changes Section 5.5 of RFC 3315 as follows:
本文件将RFC 3315第5.5节更改如下：
OLD: SOL_MAX_RT 120 secs Max Solicit timeout value
旧：SOL_MAX_RT 120秒最大请求超时值
NEW: SOL_MAX_RT 3600 secs Max Solicit timeout value
新：SOL_MAX_RT 3600秒最大请求超时值
OLD: INF_MAX_RT 120 secs Max Information-request timeout value
旧：INF\u MAX\u RT 120秒最大信息请求超时值
NEW: INF_MAX_RT 3600 secs Max Information-request timeout value
新：INF\u MAX\u RT 3600秒最大信息请求超时值
With this change, a DHCPv6 client that does not receive a satisfactory response will send Solicit or Information-request messages with the same initial frequency and exponential backoff as specified in Sections 17.1.2 and 18.1.5 of RFC 3315. However, the long-term behavior of these DHCPv6 clients will be to send a Solicit or Information-request message every 3600 seconds rather than every 120 seconds, significantly reducing the aggregated traffic at the DHCPv6 server.
通过此更改，未收到满意响应的DHCPv6客户端将以RFC 3315第17.1.2节和第18.1.5节规定的相同初始频率和指数退避发送请求或信息请求消息。但是，这些DHCPv6客户端的长期行为将是每3600秒而不是每120秒发送请求或信息请求消息，从而显著减少DHCPv6服务器上的聚合流量。
A DHCPv6 server sends the SOL_MAX_RT option to a client to override the default value of SOL_MAX_RT. The value of SOL_MAX_RT in the option replaces the default value defined in Section 3. One use for the SOL_MAX_RT option is to set a longer value for SOL_MAX_RT, which reduces the Solicit traffic from a client that has not received a response to its Solicit messages.
DHCPv6服务器向客户端发送SOL_MAX_RT选项，以覆盖SOL_MAX_RT的默认值。该选项中的SOL_MAX_RT值替换第3节中定义的默认值。SOL_MAX_RT选项的一个用途是为SOL_MAX_RT设置一个较长的值，这将减少来自尚未收到请求消息响应的客户端的请求流量。
The format of the SOL_MAX_RT option is:
SOL_MAX_RT选项的格式为：
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| option-code | option-len |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| SOL_MAX_RT value |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| option-code | option-len |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| SOL_MAX_RT value |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
option-code OPTION_SOL_MAX_RT (82)
选项代码选项\u SOL\u MAX\u RT（82）
option-len 4
选项len 4
SOL_MAX_RT value Overriding value for SOL_MAX_RT
in seconds; MUST be in range:
60 <= "value" <= 86400 (1 day)
SOL_MAX_RT value Overriding value for SOL_MAX_RT
in seconds; MUST be in range:
60 <= "value" <= 86400 (1 day)
Figure 1: SOL_MAX_RT Option Format
图1:SOL_MAX_RT选项格式
A DHCPv6 server sends the INF_MAX_RT option to a client to override the default value of INF_MAX_RT. The value of INF_MAX_RT in the option replaces the default value defined in Section 3. One use for the INF_MAX_RT option is to set a longer value for INF_MAX_RT, which reduces the Information-request traffic from a client that has not received a response to its Information-request messages.
DHCPv6服务器将INF\u MAX\u RT选项发送给客户端，以覆盖INF\u MAX\u RT的默认值。该选项中的INF\u MAX\u RT值替换第3节中定义的默认值。INF_MAX_RT选项的一个用途是为INF_MAX_RT设置一个较长的值，这将减少来自尚未收到对其信息请求消息响应的客户端的信息请求流量。
The format of the INF_MAX_RT option is:
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| option-code | option-len |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| INF_MAX_RT value |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
The format of the INF_MAX_RT option is:
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| option-code | option-len |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| INF_MAX_RT value |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
option-code OPTION_INF_MAX_RT (83)
选项代码选项INF最大RT（83）
option-len 4
选项len 4
INF_MAX_RT value Overriding value for INF_MAX_RT
in seconds; MUST be in range:
60 <= "value" <= 86400 (1 day)
INF_MAX_RT value Overriding value for INF_MAX_RT
in seconds; MUST be in range:
60 <= "value" <= 86400 (1 day)
Figure 2: INF_MAX_RT Option Format
图2:INF\u MAX\u RT选项格式
Update to RFC 3315, Section 17.1.3:
更新至RFC 3315，第17.1.3节：
OLD:
旧的：
The client MUST ignore any Advertise message that includes a Status Code option containing the value NoAddrsAvail, with the exception that the client MAY display the associated status message to the user.
客户端必须忽略任何包含包含值NOADRSAVAIL的状态代码选项的播发消息，但客户端可能会向用户显示关联的状态消息除外。
NEW:
新的：
The client MUST ignore any Advertise message that includes a Status Code option containing the value NoAddrsAvail, with the exception that the client MUST process an included SOL_MAX_RT option, MUST process an included INF_MAX_RT option, and MAY display the associated status message to the user.
客户端必须忽略任何包含包含值NoAddrsAvail的状态代码选项的播发消息，但客户端必须处理包含的SOL\u MAX\u RT选项，必须处理包含的INF\u MAX\u RT选项，并且可能会向用户显示关联的状态消息除外。
Update to RFC 3315, Section 17.2.2:
更新至RFC 3315，第17.2.2节：
OLD:
旧的：
If the server will not assign any addresses to any IAs in a subsequent Request from the client, the server MUST send an Advertise message to the client that includes only a Status Code option with code NoAddrsAvail and a status message for the user, a Server Identifier option with the server's DUID, and a Client Identifier option with the client's DUID.
如果服务器在来自客户端的后续请求中不会将任何地址分配给任何IAs，则服务器必须向客户端发送一条播发消息，该消息仅包括一个带有代码NOADRSAVAIL的状态代码选项和一条针对用户的状态消息，一个带有服务器DUID的服务器标识符选项，以及一个带有客户端DUID的客户端标识符选项。
NEW:
新的：
If the server will not assign any addresses to any IAs in a subsequent Request from the client, the server MUST send an Advertise message to the client that includes only a Status Code option with code NoAddrsAvail and a status message for the user, a Server Identifier option with the server's DUID, a Client Identifier option with the client's DUID, and (optionally) SOL_MAX_RT and/or INF_MAX_RT options.
如果服务器在来自客户端的后续请求中不会将任何地址分配给任何IAs，则服务器必须向客户端发送一条播发消息，该消息仅包括一个带有代码NOADRSAVAIL的状态代码选项和一条针对用户的状态消息，一个带有服务器DUID的服务器标识符选项，带有客户端DUID的客户端标识符选项，以及（可选）SOL_MAX_RT和/或INF_MAX_RT选项。
Update to RFC 3315, Section 14 (Add text, clarifying client behavior while waiting for a response from a server):
更新至RFC 3315第14节（添加文本，澄清等待服务器响应时的客户端行为）：
NEW:
新的：
A client is not expected to listen for a response during the entire period between transmission of Solicit or Information-request messages.
在请求消息或信息请求消息传输之间的整个时间段内，客户端不需要侦听响应。
A DHCPv6 client MUST include the SOL_MAX_RT option code in any Option Request option [RFC3315] it sends as required by RFC 3315.
DHCPv6客户机必须按照RFC 3315的要求在其发送的任何选项请求选项[RFC3315]中包含SOL_MAX_RT选项代码。
A DHCPv6 client MUST include the INF_MAX_RT option code in any Option Request option it sends as required by RFC 3315.
DHCPv6客户机必须按照RFC 3315的要求在其发送的任何选项请求选项中包含INF_MAX_RT选项代码。
A DHCPv6 client MUST silently ignore any SOL_MAX_RT or INF_MAX_RT option values that are less than 60 or more than 86400.
DHCPv6客户端必须以静默方式忽略任何小于60或大于86400的SOL_MAX_RT或INF_MAX_RT选项值。
If a DHCPv6 client receives a message containing a SOL_MAX_RT option that has a valid value for SOL_MAX_RT, the client MUST set its internal SOL_MAX_RT parameter to the value contained in the SOL_MAX_RT option. This value of SOL_MAX_RT is then used by the retransmission mechanism defined in Sections 14 and 17.1.2 of RFC 3315.
如果DHCPv6客户端接收到包含SOL_MAX_RT选项的消息，该选项具有SOL_MAX_RT的有效值，则客户端必须将其内部SOL_MAX_RT参数设置为SOL_MAX_RT选项中包含的值。该SOL_MAX_RT值随后由RFC 3315第14节和第17.1.2节中定义的重传机制使用。
If a DHCPv6 client receives a message containing an INF_MAX_RT option that has a valid value for INF_MAX_RT, the client MUST set its internal INF_MAX_RT parameter to the value contained in the INF_MAX_RT option. This value of INF_MAX_RT is then used by the retransmission mechanism defined in Sections 14 and 18.1.5 of RFC 3315.
如果DHCPv6客户端接收到包含INF\u MAX\u RT选项的消息，该选项具有INF\u MAX\u RT的有效值，则客户端必须将其内部INF\u MAX\u RT参数设置为INF\u MAX\u RT选项中包含的值。该INF_MAX_RT值随后由RFC 3315第14节和第18.1.5节中定义的重传机制使用。
Updated SOL_MAX_RT and INF_MAX_RT values apply only to the network interface on which the client received SOL_MAX_RT and/or INF_MAX_RT options.
更新的SOL_MAX_RT和INF_MAX_RT值仅适用于客户端接收SOL_MAX_RT和/或INF_MAX_RT选项的网络接口。
Sections 17.2.2 and 18.2 of RFC 3315 govern server operation in regard to option assignment. As a convenience to the reader, we mention here that the server will send options SOL_MAX_RT and INF_MAX_RT only if configured with specific values for them, and the client requested those options using the Option Request option.
RFC 3315第17.2.2节和第18.2节规定了与选项分配有关的服务器操作。为了方便读者，我们在这里提到，只有在配置了特定值时，服务器才会发送选项SOL_MAX_RT和INF_MAX_RT，并且客户端使用选项请求选项请求这些选项。
The DHCPv6 server MAY include the SOL_MAX_RT option in any response it sends to a client that has included the SOL_MAX_RT option code in an Option Request option. The SOL_MAX_RT option is sent in the main body of the message to client, not as an encapsulated option in, e.g., an IA_NA, IA_TA [RFC3315], or IA_PD [RFC3633] option.
DHCPv6服务器可以在发送给已在选项请求选项中包含SOL_MAX_RT选项代码的客户端的任何响应中包含SOL_MAX_RT选项。SOL_MAX_RT选项在消息主体中发送给客户端，而不是作为封装选项发送给客户端，例如IA_NA、IA_TA[RFC3315]或IA_PD[RFC3633]选项。
The DHCPv6 server MAY include the INF_MAX_RT option in any response it sends to a client that has included the INF_MAX_RT option code in an Option Request option. The INF_MAX_RT option is sent in the main body of the message to client, not as an encapsulated option in, e.g., an IA_NA, IA_TA, or IA_PD option.
DHCPv6服务器可以在发送给已在选项请求选项中包含INF_MAX_RT选项代码的客户端的任何响应中包含INF_MAX_RT选项。INF_MAX_RT选项在消息主体中发送给客户端，而不是作为封装选项发送，例如IA_NA、IA_TA或IA_PD选项。
There are no additional requirements for relays.
对继电器没有额外要求。
This document introduces one security consideration beyond those described in RFC 3315. A malicious DHCPv6 server might cause a client to set its SOL_MAX_RT and INF_MAX_RT parameters to an unreasonably high value with the SOL_MAX_RT and INF_MAX_RT options, which may cause an undue delay in a client completing its DHCPv6 protocol transaction in the case no other valid response is received. Assuming the client also receives a response from a valid DHCPv6 server, large values for SOL_MAX_RT and INF_MAX_RT will not have any effect.
本文档介绍了RFC 3315中所述安全考虑因素之外的一个安全考虑因素。恶意的DHCPv6服务器可能会导致客户端使用SOL_MAX_RT和INF_MAX_RT选项将其SOL_MAX_RT和INF_MAX_RT参数设置为不合理的高值，在没有收到其他有效响应的情况下，这可能会导致客户端在完成其DHCPv6协议事务时出现不适当的延迟。假设客户端还从有效的DHCPv6服务器接收到响应，那么SOL_MAX_RT和INF_MAX_RT的大值将不会产生任何影响。
Tomek Mrugalski edited the text for compliance with "Guidelines for Creating New DHCPv6 Options" [DHC-OPTION] and added important details to the Security Considerations section.
Tomek Mrugalski编辑了文本，以符合“创建新DHCPv6选项的指南”[DHC-OPTION]，并在安全注意事项部分添加了重要细节。
IANA has assigned one option code each for OPTION_SOL_MAX_RT (82) and OPTION_INF_MAX_RT (83) from the "DHCP Option Codes" table of the "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol for IPv6 (DHCPv6)" registry.
IANA已从“IPv6动态主机配置协议（DHCPv6）”注册表的“DHCP选项代码”表中为选项\u SOL\u MAX\u RT（82）和选项\u INF\u MAX\u RT（83）分别分配了一个选项代码。
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2119]Bradner，S.，“RFC中用于表示需求水平的关键词”，BCP 14，RFC 2119，1997年3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.
[RFC3315]Droms，R.，Bound，J.，Volz，B.，Lemon，T.，Perkins，C.，和M.Carney，“IPv6的动态主机配置协议（DHCPv6）”，RFC3315，2003年7月。
[DHC-OPTION] Hankins, D., Mrugalski, T., Siodelski, M., Jiang, S., and S. Krishnan, "Guidelines for Creating New DHCPv6 Options", Work in Progress, September 2013.
[DHC-OPTION]Hankins，D.，Mrugalski，T.，Siodelski，M.，Jiang，S.，和S.Krishnan，“创建新DHCPv6选项的指南”，正在进行的工作，2013年9月。
[RFC3633] Troan, O. and R. Droms, "IPv6 Prefix Options for Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP) version 6", RFC 3633, December 2003.
[RFC3633]Troan，O.和R.Droms，“动态主机配置协议（DHCP）版本6的IPv6前缀选项”，RFC 3633，2003年12月。
Author's Address
作者地址
Ralph Droms Cisco Systems 1414 Massachusetts Avenue Boxborough, MA 01719 USA
Ralph Droms Cisco Systems美国马萨诸塞州Boxborough马萨诸塞大道1414号，邮编01719
Phone: +1 978 936 1674
EMail: rdroms@cisco.com
Phone: +1 978 936 1674
EMail: rdroms@cisco.com