draft-ietf-v6ops-nd-cache-init-02.txt   draft-ietf-v6ops-nd-cache-init-03.txt 
v6ops J. Linkova v6ops J. Linkova
Internet-Draft Google Internet-Draft Google
Intended status: Informational June 9, 2020 Intended status: Informational July 13, 2020
Expires: December 11, 2020 Expires: January 14, 2021
Neighbor Cache Entries on First-Hop Routers: Operational Considerations Neighbor Cache Entries on First-Hop Routers: Operational Considerations
draft-ietf-v6ops-nd-cache-init-02 draft-ietf-v6ops-nd-cache-init-03
Abstract Abstract
Neighbor Discovery (RFC4861) is used by IPv6 nodes to determine the Neighbor Discovery (RFC4861) is used by IPv6 nodes to determine the
link-layer addresses of neighboring nodes as well as to discover and link-layer addresses of neighboring nodes as well as to discover and
maintain reachability information. This document discusses how the maintain reachability information. This document discusses how the
neighbor discovery state machine on a first-hop router is causing neighbor discovery state machine on a first-hop router is causing
user-visible connectivity issues when a new (not being seen on the user-visible connectivity issues when a new (not being seen on the
network before) IPv6 address is being used. network before) IPv6 address is being used.
skipping to change at page 1, line 35 skipping to change at page 1, line 35
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on December 11, 2020. This Internet-Draft will expire on January 14, 2021.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 2, line 12 skipping to change at page 2, line 12
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1.2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. Proposed Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Proposed Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.1. Solution Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.1. Solution Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.2. Solution Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.2. Solution Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3. Solutions Considered but Discarded . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3. Solutions Considered but Discarded . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.1. Do Nothing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.1. Do Nothing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.2. Change to the Registration-Based Neighbor Discovery . . . 7 3.2. Change to the Registration-Based Neighbor Discovery . . . 7
3.3. Host Sending NS to the Router Address from Its GUA . . . 7 3.3. Host Sending NS to the Router Address from Its GUA . . . 7
3.4. Host Sending Router Solicitation from its GUA . . . . . . 8 3.4. Host Sending Router Solicitation from its GUA . . . . . . 8
3.5. Routers Populating Their Caches by Gleaning From Neighbor 3.5. Routers Populating Their Caches by Gleaning From Neighbor
Discovery Packets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Discovery Packets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.6. Initiating Hosts-to-Routers Communication . . . . . . . . 9 3.6. Initiating Hosts-to-Routers Communication . . . . . . . . 9
3.7. Transit Dataplane Traffic From a New Address Triggering 3.7. Transit Dataplane Traffic From a New Address Triggering
Address Resolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Address Resolution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
The section 7.2.5 of [RFC4861] states: "When a valid Neighbor The section 7.2.5 of [RFC4861] states: "When a valid Neighbor
Advertisement is received (either solicited or unsolicited), the Advertisement is received (either solicited or unsolicited), the
Neighbor Cache is searched for the target's entry. If no entry Neighbor Cache is searched for the target's entry. If no entry
exists, the advertisement SHOULD be silently discarded. There is no exists, the advertisement SHOULD be silently discarded. There is no
need to create an entry if none exists, since the recipient has need to create an entry if none exists, since the recipient has
apparently not initiated any communication with the target." apparently not initiated any communication with the target."
skipping to change at page 3, line 5 skipping to change at page 3, line 5
This approach is perfectly suitable for host-to-host communications, This approach is perfectly suitable for host-to-host communications,
which are in most cases bi-directional, and it could be expected that which are in most cases bi-directional, and it could be expected that
if a host A has an ND cache entry for the host B IPv6 address, host B if a host A has an ND cache entry for the host B IPv6 address, host B
also has the corresponding ND entry for the host A address in its also has the corresponding ND entry for the host A address in its
cache. However when a host communicates to off-link destinations via cache. However when a host communicates to off-link destinations via
its first-hop router, that logic does not apply. The most typical its first-hop router, that logic does not apply. The most typical
scenario when the problem may arise is a host joining the network, scenario when the problem may arise is a host joining the network,
forming a new address and using that address for accessing the forming a new address and using that address for accessing the
Internet: Internet:
1. A host joins the network and receives a Router Advertisement (RA( 1. A host joins the network and receives a Router Advertisement (RA)
packet from the first-hop router (either a periodic unsolicited packet from the first-hop router (either a periodic unsolicited
RA or a response to a Router Solicitation sent by the host). The RA or a response to a Router Solicitation sent by the host). The
RA contains information the host needs to perform SLAAC and to RA contains information the host needs to perform SLAAC and to
configure its network stack. As in most cases the RA also configure its network stack. As in most cases the RA also
contains the Source link-layer address of the router, the host contains the Source link-layer address of the router, the host
can populate its Neighbor Cache with the router's link-local and can populate its Neighbor Cache with the router's link-local and
link-layer addresses. link-layer addresses.
2. The host starts opening connections to off-link destinations. A 2. The host starts opening connections to off-link destinations. A
very common use case is a mobile device sending probes to detect very common use case is a mobile device sending probes to detect
the Internet connectivity and/or the captive portals presence on the Internet connectivity and/or the captive portals presence on
the network. To speed up that process many implementations use the network. To speed up that process many implementations use
Optimistic Duplicate Address Detection [RFC4429] which allows Optimistic Duplicate Address Detection [RFC4429] which allows
them to send probes from their GUA before the DAD process is them to send probes from their GUA before the DAD process is
completed. At that moment the device ND cache contains all completed. At that moment the device ND cache contains all
information required to send those probes (such as the default information required to send those probes (such as the default
gateway LLA and the link-layer address). The router ND cache, router link-local the link-layer addresses). The router ND
however, might contain an entry for the device link-local address cache, however, might contain an entry for the device link-local
(if the device has been performing the address resolution for the address (if the device has been performing the address resolution
router LLA) but there are no entries for the device GUA. for the router LLA) but there are no entries for the device GUA.
3. Return traffic is received by the first-hop router. As the 3. Return traffic is received by the first-hop router. As the
router does not have any ND cache entry for the host GUA yet, the router does not have any ND cache entry for the host GUA yet, the
router starts the neighbor discovery process by creating an router starts the neighbor discovery process by creating an
INCOMPLETE cache entry and then sending an NS to the Solicited INCOMPLETE cache entry and then sending an NS to the Solicited
Node Multicast Address. Most router implementations buffer only Node Multicast Address. Most router implementations buffer only
one data packet while resolving the packet destination address, one data packet while resolving the packet destination address,
so it would drop all subsequent packets for the host GUA, until so it would drop all subsequent packets for the host GUA, until
the address resolution process is completed. the address resolution process is completed.
skipping to change at page 4, line 46 skipping to change at page 4, line 46
TLLA: Target link-layer Address, an option in the ND packets TLLA: Target link-layer Address, an option in the ND packets
containing the link-layer address of the target, [RFC4861]. containing the link-layer address of the target, [RFC4861].
GUA: Global Unicast Address, [RFC4291]. GUA: Global Unicast Address, [RFC4291].
DAD: Duplicate Address Detection, [RFC4862]. DAD: Duplicate Address Detection, [RFC4862].
Optimistic DAD: a modification of DAD, [RFC4429]. Optimistic DAD: a modification of DAD, [RFC4429].
FCFS SAVI: First-Come, First-Served Source Address Validation,
[RFC6620].
2. Proposed Solution 2. Proposed Solution
2.1. Solution Requirements 2.1. Solution Requirements
It would be highly desirable to improve the Neighbor Discovery It would be highly desirable to improve the Neighbor Discovery
mechanics so routers have a usable cache entry for a host address by mechanics so routers have a usable cache entry for a host address by
the time the first packet for that address is received by the router. the time the first packet for that address is received by the router.
In particular, In particular:
o If the router does not have a Neighbor Cache entry for the o If the router does not have a Neighbor Cache entry for the
address, a STALE entry needs to be created. address, a STALE entry needs to be created.
o The solution needs to work for Optimistic addresses as well. o The solution needs to work for Optimistic addresses as well.
Devices implementing the Optimistic DAD usually attempt to Devices implementing the Optimistic DAD usually attempt to
minimize the delay in connecting to the network and therefore are minimize the delay in connecting to the network and therefore are
more likely to be affected by the problem described in this more likely to be affected by the problem described in this
document. document.
o In case of duplicate addresses present in the network, the o In case of duplicate addresses present in the network, the
proposed solution MUST NOT override the existing entry. proposed solution MUST NOT override the existing entry.
o In topologies with multiple first hop routers the cache needs to o In topologies with multiple first hop routers the cache needs to
be updated on all of them, as traffic might be asymmetric: be updated on all of them, as traffic might be asymmetric:
outgoing flows leaving the network via one router while the return outgoing flows leaving the network via one router while the return
traffic enters the segment via another one. traffic enters the segment via another one.
In addition the solution MUST NOT exacerbate issues described in
[RFC6583] and MUST be compatible with the recomendations provided in
[RFC6583].
2.2. Solution Overview 2.2. Solution Overview
The Neighbor Discovery is designed to allow IPv6 nodes to discover The Neighbor Discovery is designed to allow IPv6 nodes to discover
neighboring nodes reachability and learn IPv6 to link-layer addresses neighboring nodes reachability and learn IPv6 to link-layer addresses
mapping. Therefore ND seems to be the most appropriate tool to mapping. Therefore ND seems to be the most appropriate tool to
inform the first-hop routers about addresses the host is going to inform the first-hop routers about addresses the host is going to
use. use.
Section 4.4 of [RFC4861] says: Section 4.4 of [RFC4861] says:
"A node sends Neighbor Advertisements in response to Neighbor "A node sends Neighbor Advertisements in response to Neighbor
Solicitations and sends unsolicited Neighbor Advertisements in order Solicitations and sends unsolicited Neighbor Advertisements in order
to (unreliably) propagate new information quickly." to (unreliably) propagate new information quickly."
Propagating information about new GUA as quickly as possible is Propagating information about new GUA as quickly as possible is
exactly what is required to solve the problem outlined in this exactly what is required to solve the problem outlined in this
document. Therefore the host might send an unsolicited NA with the document. Therefore the host might send an unsolicited NA with the
target link-layer address option to advertize its GUA as soon as the target link-layer address option to advertise its GUA as soon as the
said address enters Optimistic or Preferred state. said address enters Optimistic or Preferred state.
The proposed solution is discussed in [I-D.ietf-6man-grand]. In The proposed solution is discussed in [I-D.ietf-6man-grand]. In
summary the following changes to [RFC4861] are suggested: summary the following changes to [RFC4861] are suggested:
o Hosts SHOULD send at least one unsolicited NA packet with the o Hosts SHOULD send at least one unsolicited NA packet with the
Override flag cleared to all-routers multicast address (ff02::2) Override flag cleared to all-routers multicast address (ff02::2)
as soon as one of the following events happens: as soon as one of the following events happens:
* (if Optimistic DAD is used): a new Optimistic GUA is assigned * (if Optimistic DAD is used): a new Optimistic GUA is assigned
skipping to change at page 6, line 23 skipping to change at page 6, line 28
tentative to preferred. tentative to preferred.
o Routers SHOULD create a new STALE ND cache entry upon receiving o Routers SHOULD create a new STALE ND cache entry upon receiving
unsolicited NAs. unsolicited NAs.
It should be noted that some routing and switching platforms have It should be noted that some routing and switching platforms have
implemented such behaviour already. Administrators could enable implemented such behaviour already. Administrators could enable
creating neighbor discovery cache entries based on unsolicited NA creating neighbor discovery cache entries based on unsolicited NA
packets sent from the previously unknown neighbors on that interface. packets sent from the previously unknown neighbors on that interface.
Network devices implementing First-Come, First-Served Source Address Network devices implementing FCFS SAVI might drop Neighbor
Validation (FCFS SAVI, [RFC6620]) might drop Neighbor Advertisements Advertisements received through a Validating Port which is in the
received through a Validating Port which is in the TENTATIVE state TENTATIVE state (see Section 2.3.2 of[RFC6620]). Therefore hosts
(see Section 2.3.2 of[RFC6620]). Therefore hosts using Optimistic using Optimistic DAD might not benefit from the proposed solution if
DAD might not benefit from the proposed solution if FCFS SAVI is FCFS SAVI is implemeneted on the network infrastructure.
implemeneted on the network infrastructure. [I-D.ietf-6man-grand] [I-D.ietf-6man-grand] discusses in more details how the proposed
discusses in more details how the proposed solution interacts with solution interacts with SAVI.
SAVI.
3. Solutions Considered but Discarded 3. Solutions Considered but Discarded
The problem could be addressed from different angles. Possible The problem could be addressed from different angles. Possible
approaches are: approaches are:
o Just do nothing. o Just do nothing.
o Migrate from the "reactive" Neighbor Discovery ([RFC4861]) to the o Migrate from the "reactive" Neighbor Discovery ([RFC4861]) to the
registration-based mechanisms ([RFC8505]). registration-based mechanisms ([RFC8505]).
skipping to change at page 7, line 9 skipping to change at page 7, line 13
the host GUA. the host GUA.
o Making the probing logic on hosts more robust. o Making the probing logic on hosts more robust.
o Increasing the buffer size on routers. o Increasing the buffer size on routers.
o Transit dataplane traffic from an unknown address (an address w/o o Transit dataplane traffic from an unknown address (an address w/o
the corresponding neighbor cache entry) triggers an address the corresponding neighbor cache entry) triggers an address
resolution process on the router. resolution process on the router.
The following sections discuss those approaches in more detail. It should be noted that some of those options are already implemented
by some vendors. The following sections discuss those approaches and
the reasons they were discarded.
3.1. Do Nothing 3.1. Do Nothing
One of the possible approaches might be to declare that everything is One of the possible approaches might be to declare that everything is
working as intended and let the upper-layer protocols to deal with working as intended and let the upper-layer protocols to deal with
packet loss. The obvious drawbacks include: packet loss. The obvious drawbacks include:
o Unhappy users. o Unhappy users.
o Many support tickets. o Many support tickets.
skipping to change at page 7, line 44 skipping to change at page 7, line 50
The host could force creating a STALE entry for its GUA in the router The host could force creating a STALE entry for its GUA in the router
ND cache by sending the following Neighbor Solicitation message: ND cache by sending the following Neighbor Solicitation message:
o The NS source address is the host GUA. o The NS source address is the host GUA.
o The destination address is the default router IPv6 address. o The destination address is the default router IPv6 address.
o The Source Link-Layer Address option contains the host link-layer o The Source Link-Layer Address option contains the host link-layer
address. address.
o The target address is the host default gateway address (the o The target address is the host default router address (the default
default router address the host received in the RA). router address the host received in the RA).
The main disadvantages of this approach are: The main disadvantages of this approach are:
o Would not work for Optimistic addresses as section 2.2 of o Would not work for Optimistic addresses as section 2.2 of
[RFC4429] explicitly prohibits sending Neighbor Solicitations from [RFC4429] explicitly prohibits sending Neighbor Solicitations from
an Optimistic Address. an Optimistic Address.
o If first-hop redundancy is deployed in the network, the NS would o If first-hop redundancy is deployed in the network, the NS would
reach the active router only, so all backup routers (or all active reach the active router only, so all backup routers (or all active
routers ex. one) would not get their neighbor cache updated. routers ex. one) would not get their neighbor cache updated.
skipping to change at page 8, line 42 skipping to change at page 8, line 48
the solicited RAs is sent as as a unicast. Routers sending the solicited RAs is sent as as a unicast. Routers sending
solicited RAs as multicast would not create a new cache entry as solicited RAs as multicast would not create a new cache entry as
they do not need to send a unicast packet back to the host. they do not need to send a unicast packet back to the host.
o There might be a random delay between receiving an RS and sending o There might be a random delay between receiving an RS and sending
a unicast RA back (and creating a cache entry) which might a unicast RA back (and creating a cache entry) which might
undermine the idea of creating the cache entry proactively. undermine the idea of creating the cache entry proactively.
o Some wireless devices are known to fiddle with ND packets and o Some wireless devices are known to fiddle with ND packets and
perform various non-obvious forms of ND proxy actions. In some perform various non-obvious forms of ND proxy actions. In some
cases RSes might not even reach the routers. cases the RS might not even reach the routers.
3.5. Routers Populating Their Caches by Gleaning From Neighbor 3.5. Routers Populating Their Caches by Gleaning From Neighbor
Discovery Packets Discovery Packets
Routers may be able to learn about new addresses by gleaning from the Routers may be able to learn about new addresses by gleaning from the
DAD Neighbor Solicitation messages. The router could listen to all DAD Neighbor Solicitation messages. The router could listen to all
solicited node multicast address groups and upon receiving a Neighbor solicited node multicast address groups and upon receiving a Neighbor
Solicitation from the unspecified address search its Neighbor Cache Solicitation from the unspecified address search its Neighbor Cache
for the solicitation's Target Address. If no entry exists the router for the solicitation's Target Address. If no entry exists the router
may create an entry, set its reachability state to 'INCOMPLETE' and may create an entry, set its reachability state to 'INCOMPLETE' and
skipping to change at page 9, line 28 skipping to change at page 9, line 37
host SHOULD silently ignore the received Neighbor Solicitation host SHOULD silently ignore the received Neighbor Solicitation
from the router as per the Section 5.4.3 of [RFC4862]. As a from the router as per the Section 5.4.3 of [RFC4862]. As a
result the router might not be able to complete the address result the router might not be able to complete the address
resolution before the return traffic arrives. resolution before the return traffic arrives.
3.6. Initiating Hosts-to-Routers Communication 3.6. Initiating Hosts-to-Routers Communication
The host may force the router to start address resolution by sending The host may force the router to start address resolution by sending
a data packet such as ping or traceroute to its default router link- a data packet such as ping or traceroute to its default router link-
local address, using the GUA as a source address. As the RTT to the local address, using the GUA as a source address. As the RTT to the
default gateway is lower than RTT to any off-link destinations it's default router is lower than RTT to any off-link destinations it's
quite likely that the router would start the neighbor discovery quite likely that the router would start the neighbor discovery
process for the host GUA before the first packet of the returning process for the host GUA before the first packet of the returning
traffic arrives. traffic arrives.
The downside of this approach includes: The downside of this approach includes:
o Data packets to the router LLA could be blocked by security policy o Data packets to the router LLA could be blocked by security policy
or control plane protection mechanism. or control plane protection mechanism.
o Additional overhead for routers control plane (in addition to o Additional overhead for routers control plane (in addition to
skipping to change at page 10, line 6 skipping to change at page 10, line 17
the active router would create a new cache entry. the active router would create a new cache entry.
3.7. Transit Dataplane Traffic From a New Address Triggering Address 3.7. Transit Dataplane Traffic From a New Address Triggering Address
Resolution Resolution
When a router receives a transit packet it might check the presence When a router receives a transit packet it might check the presence
of the neighbor cache entry for the packet source address and if the of the neighbor cache entry for the packet source address and if the
entry does not exist start address resolution process. This approach entry does not exist start address resolution process. This approach
does ensure that a Neighbor Cache entry is proactively created every does ensure that a Neighbor Cache entry is proactively created every
time a new, previously unseen GUA is used for sending offlink time a new, previously unseen GUA is used for sending offlink
traffic. However this functionality needs to be limited to traffic. However this approach has a number of limitations, in
explicitly configured networks/interfaces, as the router needs to particular:
distinguish between onlink addresses (ones the router needs to have
Neighbor Cache entries for) and the rest of the address space. In o If traffic flows are asymmetrical the return traffic might not
addition, implementing such functionality is much more complicated transit the same router as the original traffic which triggered
than all other solutions as it would involve complex data-control the address resolution. So the neighbor cache entry is created on
planes interaction. the "wrong" router, not the one which actually needs the neighbor
cache entry for the host address.
o The functionality needs to be limited to explicitly configured
networks/interfaces, as the router needs to distinguish between
onlink addresses (ones the router needs to have Neighbor Cache
entries for) and the rest of the address space.
o Implementing such functionality is much more complicated than all
other solutions as it would involve complex data-control planes
interaction.
4. IANA Considerations 4. IANA Considerations
This memo asks the IANA for no new parameters. This memo asks the IANA for no new parameters.
5. Security Considerations 5. Security Considerations
This memo documents the operational issue and does not introduce any This memo documents the operational issue and does not introduce any
new security considerations. Security considerations of the proposed new security considerations. Security considerations of the proposed
solution are discussed in the corresponding section of solution are discussed in the corresponding section of
[I-D.ietf-6man-grand]. [I-D.ietf-6man-grand].
6. Acknowledgements 6. Acknowledgements
Thanks to the following people (in alphabetical order) for their Thanks to the following people (in alphabetical order) for their
review and feedback: Mikael Abrahamsson, Lorenzo Colitti, Owen review and feedback: Mikael Abrahamsson, Lorenzo Colitti, Owen
DeLong, Igor Gashinsky, Fernando Gont, Tatuya Jinmei, Erik Kline, DeLong, Igor Gashinsky, Fernando Gont, Tatuya Jinmei, Erik Kline,
Warren Kumari, Michael Richardson, Dave Thaler, Pascal Thubert, Warren Kumari, Jordi Palet Martinez, Michael Richardson, Dave Thaler,
Loganaden Velvindron, Eric Vyncke. Pascal Thubert, Loganaden Velvindron, Eric Vyncke.
7. References 7. References
7.1. Normative References 7.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-6man-grand] [I-D.ietf-6man-grand]
Linkova, J., "Gratuitous Neighbor Discovery: Creating Linkova, J., "Gratuitous Neighbor Discovery: Creating
Neighbor Cache Entries on First-Hop Routers", draft-ietf- Neighbor Cache Entries on First-Hop Routers", draft-ietf-
6man-grand-00 (work in progress), March 2020. 6man-grand-00 (work in progress), March 2020.
skipping to change at page 11, line 19 skipping to change at page 11, line 37
[RFC4861] Narten, T., Nordmark, E., Simpson, W., and H. Soliman, [RFC4861] Narten, T., Nordmark, E., Simpson, W., and H. Soliman,
"Neighbor Discovery for IP version 6 (IPv6)", RFC 4861, "Neighbor Discovery for IP version 6 (IPv6)", RFC 4861,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4861, September 2007, DOI 10.17487/RFC4861, September 2007,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4861>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4861>.
[RFC4862] Thomson, S., Narten, T., and T. Jinmei, "IPv6 Stateless [RFC4862] Thomson, S., Narten, T., and T. Jinmei, "IPv6 Stateless
Address Autoconfiguration", RFC 4862, Address Autoconfiguration", RFC 4862,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4862, September 2007, DOI 10.17487/RFC4862, September 2007,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4862>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4862>.
[RFC6583] Gashinsky, I., Jaeggli, J., and W. Kumari, "Operational
Neighbor Discovery Problems", RFC 6583,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6583, March 2012,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6583>.
[RFC6620] Nordmark, E., Bagnulo, M., and E. Levy-Abegnoli, "FCFS [RFC6620] Nordmark, E., Bagnulo, M., and E. Levy-Abegnoli, "FCFS
SAVI: First-Come, First-Served Source Address Validation SAVI: First-Come, First-Served Source Address Validation
Improvement for Locally Assigned IPv6 Addresses", Improvement for Locally Assigned IPv6 Addresses",
RFC 6620, DOI 10.17487/RFC6620, May 2012, RFC 6620, DOI 10.17487/RFC6620, May 2012,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6620>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6620>.
[RFC6775] Shelby, Z., Ed., Chakrabarti, S., Nordmark, E., and C. [RFC6775] Shelby, Z., Ed., Chakrabarti, S., Nordmark, E., and C.
Bormann, "Neighbor Discovery Optimization for IPv6 over Bormann, "Neighbor Discovery Optimization for IPv6 over
Low-Power Wireless Personal Area Networks (6LoWPANs)", Low-Power Wireless Personal Area Networks (6LoWPANs)",
RFC 6775, DOI 10.17487/RFC6775, November 2012, RFC 6775, DOI 10.17487/RFC6775, November 2012,
skipping to change at page 12, line 10 skipping to change at page 12, line 32
[I-D.halpern-6man-nd-pre-resolve-addr] [I-D.halpern-6man-nd-pre-resolve-addr]
Chen, I. and J. Halpern, "Triggering ND Address Resolution Chen, I. and J. Halpern, "Triggering ND Address Resolution
on Receiving DAD-NS", draft-halpern-6man-nd-pre-resolve- on Receiving DAD-NS", draft-halpern-6man-nd-pre-resolve-
addr-00 (work in progress), January 2014. addr-00 (work in progress), January 2014.
[RFC4941] Narten, T., Draves, R., and S. Krishnan, "Privacy [RFC4941] Narten, T., Draves, R., and S. Krishnan, "Privacy
Extensions for Stateless Address Autoconfiguration in Extensions for Stateless Address Autoconfiguration in
IPv6", RFC 4941, DOI 10.17487/RFC4941, September 2007, IPv6", RFC 4941, DOI 10.17487/RFC4941, September 2007,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4941>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4941>.
[RFC6583] Gashinsky, I., Jaeggli, J., and W. Kumari, "Operational
Neighbor Discovery Problems", RFC 6583,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6583, March 2012,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6583>.
Author's Address Author's Address
Jen Linkova Jen Linkova
Google Google
1 Darling Island Rd 1 Darling Island Rd
Pyrmont, NSW 2009 Pyrmont, NSW 2009
AU AU
Email: furry@google.com Email: furry@google.com
 End of changes. 23 change blocks. 
44 lines changed or deleted 63 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.47. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/