<?xml version="1.0" encoding="US-ASCII"?>
<!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd" []>
<?xml-stylesheet type='text/xsl' href='rfc2629.xslt' ?>
<?rfc toc="yes"?>
<?rfc tocdepth="2"?>
<?rfc symrefs="yes"?>
<?rfc sortrefs="yes" ?>
<?rfc compact="no" ?>
<rfc category="exp" docName="draft-ietf-babel-v4viav6-00"
    ipr="trust200902"
    updates="6126bis">
<front>
<title abbrev="IPv4 routes with an IPv6 next-hop">
IPv4 routes with an IPv6 next-hop in the Babel routing protocol
</title>
<author fullname="Theophile Bastian" initials="T." surname="Bastian">
<organization>Ecole Normale Superieure, Paris</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street></street>
<city></city>
<region></region>
<code></code>
<country>France</country>
</postal>
<email>contact@tobast.fr</email>
</address>
</author>
<author fullname="Juliusz Chroboczek" initials="J." surname="Chroboczek">
<organization>IRIF, University of Paris-Diderot</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>Case 7014</street>
<city>75205 Paris Cedex 13</city>
<region></region>
<code></code>
<country>France</country>
</postal>
<email>jch@irif.fr</email>
</address>
</author>

<date day="20" month="October" year="2020"/>

<abstract>
<t>This document defines an extension to the Babel routing protocol that
allows annoncing routes to an IPv4 prefix with an IPv6 next-hop, which
makes it possible for IPv4 traffic to flow through interfaces that have
not been assigned an IPv4 address.</t>
</abstract>
</front>

<middle>

<section title="Introduction">

<t>Traditionally, a routing table maps a network prefix of a given address
family to a next-hop address in the same address family.  The sole purpose
of this next-hop address is to serve as an input to a protocol that will
map it to a link-layer address, Neighbour Discovery (ND) <xref target="RFC4861"/>
in the case of IPv6, Address Resolution (ARP) <xref target="RFC0826"/> in
the case of IPv4.  Therefore, there is no reason why the address family of
the next hop address should match that of the prefix being announced: an
IPv6 next-hop yields a link-layer address that is suitable for forwarding
both IPv6 or IPv4 traffic.</t>

<t>We call a route towards an IPv4 prefix that uses an IPv6 next hop
a "v4-over-v6" route.  Since an IPv6 next-hop can use a link-local address
that is autonomously configured, the use of v4-over-v6 routes enables
a mode of operation where the network core has no statically assigned IP
addresses of either family, thus significantly reducing the amount of
manual configuration.</t>

<t>This document describes an extension that allows the Babel routing
protocol <xref target="RFC6126bis"/> to announce routes towards IPv6
prefixes with IPv4 next hops.  The extension is inspired by a previously
defined extension to the BGP protocol <xref target="RFC5549"/>.</t>

<section title="Specification of Requirements">

<t>The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14
<xref target="RFC2119"/> <xref target="RFC8174"/> when, and only when,
they appear in all capitals, as shown here.</t>

</section>

</section>

<section title="Protocol operation">

<t>The Babel protocol fully supports double-stack operation: all data that
represent a neighbour address or a network prefix are tagged by an Address
Encoding (AE), a small integer that identifies the address family (IPv4 or
IPv6) of the address of prefix, and describes how it is encoded.  This
extension defines a new AE, called v4-over-v6, which has the same format
as the existing AE for IPv4 addresses.  This new AE is only allowed in
TLVs that carry network prefixes: TLVs that carry a neighbour address use
the normal encodings for IPv6 addresses.</t>

<section title="Announcing v4-over-v6 routes" anchor="updates">

<t>A Babel node that needs to announce an IPv4 route over an interface
that has no assigned IPv4 address MAY make a v4-over-v6 announcement.  In
order to do so, it first establishes an IPv6 next-hop address in the usual
manner (either by sending the Babel packet over IPv6, or by including
a Next Hop TLV containing an IPv6 address); it then sends an Update with
AE equal to TBD containing the IPv4 prefix being announced.</t>

<t>If the outgoing interface has been assigned an IPv4 address, then, in
the interest of maximising compatibility with existing routers, the sender
SHOULD prefer an ordinary IPv4 announcement; even in that case, however,
it MAY use a v4-over-v6 announcement.  A node SHOULD NOT send both
ordinary IPv4 and v4-over-v6 annoucements for the same prefix over
a single interface (if the update is sent to a multicast address) or to
a single neighbour (if sent to a unicast address), since doing that
doubles the amount of routing traffic while providing no benefit.</t>

</section>

<section title="Receiving v4-over-v6 routes" anchor="receiving-updates">

<t>Upon reception of an Update TLV with a v4-over-v6 AE, a Babel node
computes the IPv6 next-hop, as described in Section 4.6.9 of
<xref target="RFC6126bis"/>.  If no IPv6 next-hop exists, then the Update
MUST be silently ignored.  If an IPv6 next-hop exists, then the node MAY
acquire the route being announced, as described in Section 3.5.3 of
<xref target="RFC6126bis"/>; the parameters of the route are as follows:
<list style="symbols">
<t>the prefix, plen, router-id, seqno, metric MUST be computed as for an
IPv4 route, as described in Section 4.6.9 of <xref target="RFC6126bis"/>;</t>
<t>the next-hop MUST be computed as for an IPv6 route, as described in
Section 4.6.9 of <xref target="RFC6126bis"/>: it is taken from the last
preceding Next-Hop TLV with an AE field equal to 2 or 3; if no such
entry exists, and if the Update TLV has been sent in a Babel packet
carried over IPv6, then the next-hop is the network-layer source address
of the packet.</t>
</list></t>

<t>As usual, a node MAY ignore the update, e.g., due to filtering
(Appendix C of <xref target="RFC6126bis"/>).  If a node cannot install
v4-over-v6 routes, eg., due to hardware or software limitations, then
routes to an IPv4 prefix with an IPv6 next-hop MUST NOT be selected, as
described in Section&nbsp;3.5.3 of <xref target="RFC6126bis"/>.</t>

</section>

<section title="Prefix and seqno requests" anchor="requests">

<t>Prefix and seqno requests are used to request an update for a given
prefix.  Since they are not related to a specific Next-Hop, there is no
semantic difference between ordinary IPv4 and v4-over-v6 requests.</t>

<t>A node SHOULD NOT send requests of either kind with the AE field being
set to TBD (v4-over-v6); instead, it SHOULD request IPv4 updates using
requests with the AE field being set to 1 (IPv4).</t>

<t>When receiving requests, AEs 1 (IPv4) and TBD (v4-over-v6) MUST be
treated in the same manner: the receiver processes the request as described
in Section 3.8 of <xref target="RFC6126bis"/>.  If an Update is sent, then
it MAY be sent with AE 1 or TBD, as described in <xref target="updates"/>
above, irrespective of which AE was used in the request.</t>

<t>When receiving a request with AE 0 (wildcard), the receiver SHOULD send
a full route dump, as described in Section 3.8.1.1 of
<xref target="RFC6126bis"/>.  Any IPv4 routes contained in the route dump
MAY use either AE 1 or AE TBD, as described in <xref target="updates"/>
above.</t>

</section>

<section title="Other TLVs">

<t>The only other TLV defined by <xref target="RFC6126bis"/> that carries
an AE field is the IHU TLV.  IHU TLVs MUST NOT carry the AE TBD
(v4-over-v6).</t>

</section>

</section>

<section title="Backwards compatibility">

<t>This protocol extension adds no new TLVs or sub-TLVs.</t>

<t>This protocol extension uses a new AE.  As discussed in Appendix&nbsp;D of
<xref target="RFC6126bis"/> and specified in the same document, implementations
that do not understand the present extension will silently ignore the various
TLVs that use this new AE.  As a result, incompatible versions will ignore
v4-over-v6 routes.  They will also ignore requests with AE TBD, which, as
stated in <xref target="requests"/>, are NOT RECOMMENDED.</t>

<t>Using a new AE introduces a new compression state, used to parse the
network prefixes.  As this compression state is separate from other AEs'
states, it will not interfere with the compression state of unextended
nodes.</t>

<t>This extension reuses the next-hop state from AEs 2 and 3 (IPv6), but
makes no changes to the way it is updated, and therefore causes no
compatibility issues.</t>

<t>As mentioned in <xref target="updates"/>, ordinary IPv4 announcements
are preferred to v4-over-v6 announcements when the outgoing interface has
an assigned IPv4 address; doing otherwise would prevent routers that do
not implement this extension from learning the route being announced.</t>

</section>

<section title="Protocol encoding">

<t>This extension defines the v4-over-v6 AE, whose value is TBD. This AE is
solely used to tag network prefixes, and MUST NOT be used to tag peers'
addresses, eg. in Next-Hop or IHU TLVs.</t>

<t>This extension defines no new TLVs or sub-TLVs.</t>

<section title="Prefix encoding" anchor="prefix-encoding">
<t>Network prefixes tagged with AE TBD MUST be encoded and decoded as
prefixes tagged with AE 1 (IPv4), as described in Section&nbsp;4.3.1 of
<xref target="RFC6126bis"/>.</t>

<t>A new compression state for AE TBD (v4-over-v6) distinct from that of AE 1
(IPv4) is introduced, and MUST be used for address compression of prefixes
tagged with AE TBD, as described in Section&nbsp;4.6.9 of
<xref target="RFC6126bis"/></t>

</section>

<section title="Changes for existing TLVs">
<t>The following TLVs MAY be tagged with AE TBD:

<list style="symbols">
<t>Update (Type = 8)</t>
<t>Route Request (Type = 9)</t>
<t>Seqno Request (Type = 10)</t>
</list>
</t>

<t>As AE TBD is suitable only to tag network prefixes, IHU (Type = 5) and
Next-Hop (Type = 7) TLVs MUST NOT be tagged with AE TBD. Such TLVs MUST be
silently ignored.</t>

<section title="Update">

<t>An Update (Type = 8) TLV with AE = TBD is constructed as described in
Section&nbsp;4.6.9 of <xref target="RFC6126bis"/> for AE 1 (IPv4), with the
following specificities:

<list style="symbols">

<t>Prefix.  The Prefix field is constructed according to the
<xref target="prefix-encoding"/> above.</t>

<t>Next hop.  The next hop is determined as described in
<xref target="receiving-updates"/> above.</t>

</list>
</t>

</section>

<section title="Other valid TLVs tagged with AE = TBD">

<t>Any other valid TLV tagged with AE = TBD MUST be constructed and decoded as
described in Section&nbsp;4.6 of <xref target="RFC6126bis"/>.  Network prefixes
within MUST be constructed and decoded as described in <xref
target="prefix-encoding"/> above.</t>

</section>

</section>
</section>

<section title="IANA Considerations">

<t>IANA is requested to allocate a value (4 suggested) in the "Babel Address
Encodings" registry as follows:</t>

<texttable>
<ttcol>AE</ttcol><ttcol>Name</ttcol><ttcol>Reference</ttcol>
<c>TBD</c><c>v4-over-v6</c><c>(this document)</c>
</texttable>

</section>

<section title="Security Considerations">

<t>This extension does not fundamentally change the security properties of
the Babel protocol: as described in Section 6 of <xref target="RFC6126bis"/>,
Babel must be protected by a suitable cryptographic mechanism in order to
be made secure.</t>

<t>However, enabling this extension will allow IPv4 traffic to flow
through sections of a network that have not been assigned IPv4 addresses,
which, in turn, might allow IPv4 traffic to reach areas of the network
that were previously inaccessible to such traffic.  If this is
undesirable, the flow of IPv4 traffic must be restricted by the use of
suitable filtering rules (Appendix C of <xref target="RFC6126bis"/>)
together with matching access control rules in the data plane.</t>

</section>

</middle>

<back>

<references title="Normative References">

<reference anchor="RFC2119"><front>
<title>Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels</title>
<author initials="S." surname="Bradner" fullname="S. Bradner"/>
<date year="1997" month="March"/>
</front>
<seriesInfo name="BCP" value="14"/>
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="2119"/>
<seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC2119"/>
</reference>

<reference anchor="RFC8174"><front>
<title>Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words</title>
<author initials="B." surname="Leiba" fullname="B. Leiba"/>
<date year="2017" month="May"/>
</front>
<seriesInfo name="BCP" value="14"/>
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="8174"/>
<seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC8174"/>
</reference>

<reference anchor='RFC6126bis'><front>
<title>The Babel Routing Protocol</title>
<author initials='J' surname='Chroboczek' fullname='Juliusz Chroboczek'/>
<author initials='D' surname='Schinazi' fullname='David Schinazi'/>
<date month='February' day='6' year='2020' />
</front>
<seriesInfo name='Internet-Draft' value='draft-ietf-babel-rfc6126bis-17'/>
</reference>

</references>

<references title="Informative References">

<reference anchor="RFC0826"><front>
<title>An Ethernet Address Resolution Protocol: Or Converting Network
Protocol Addresses to 48.bit Ethernet Address for Transmission on Ethernet
Hardware</title>
<author initials="D." surname="Plummer" fullname="D. Plummer"/>
<date year="1982" month="November"/>
</front>
<seriesInfo name="STD" value="37"/>
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="826"/>
<seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC0826"/>
</reference>

<reference anchor="RFC4861"><front>
<title>Neighbor Discovery for IP version 6 (IPv6)</title>
<author initials="T." surname="Narten" fullname="T. Narten"/>
<author initials="E." surname="Nordmark" fullname="E. Nordmark"/>
<author initials="W." surname="Simpson" fullname="W. Simpson"/>
<author initials="H." surname="Soliman" fullname="H. Soliman"/>
<date year="2007" month="September"/>
</front>
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="4861"/>
<seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC4861"/>
</reference>

<reference anchor="RFC5549">
<front>
<title>
Advertising IPv4 Network Layer Reachability Information with an IPv6 Next Hop
</title>
<author initials="F." surname="Le Faucheur" fullname="F. Le Faucheur"/>
<author initials="E." surname="Rosen" fullname="E. Rosen"/>
<date year="2009" month="May"/>
</front>
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="5549"/>
<seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.17487/RFC5549"/>
</reference>

</references>
</back>
</rfc>
