Network Working Group M. Cotton
Internet-Draft L. Vegoda
Obsoletes: 3171, 3138 ICANN
(if approved) D. Meyer
Intended status: BCP November 17, 2009
Expires: May 21, 2010
IANA Guidelines for IPv4 Multicast Address Assignments
draft-ietf-mboned-rfc3171bis-08
Abstract
This document provides guidance for the Internet Assigned Numbers
Authority (IANA) in assigning IPv4 multicast addresses. It obsoletes
RFC 3171 and RFC 3138 and updates RFC 2780.
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on May 21, 2010.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
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
Cotton, et al. Expires May 21, 2010 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft IPv4 Multicast Guidelines November 2009
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 BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Definition of Current Assignment Practice . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Local Network Control Block (224.0.0/24) . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.1. Assignment Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5. Internetwork Control Block (224.0.1/24) . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5.1. Assignment Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6. AD-HOC blocks (including 224.0.2.0 - 224.0.255.255,
224.3.0.0 - 224.4.255.255 and 233.252.0.0 -
233.255.255.255) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6.1. Assignment Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7. SDP/SAP Block (224.2/16) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7.1. Assignment Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
8. Source Specific Multicast Block (232/8) . . . . . . . . . . . 6
8.1. Assignment Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
9. GLOP Block (233/8) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
9.1. Assignment Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
9.2. AD-HOC Block III . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
10. Administratively Scoped Address Block (239/8) . . . . . . . . 7
10.1. Assignment Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
11. Application Form . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
11.1. Size of assignments of IPv4 Multicast Addresses . . . . . 8
12. Annual Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
12.1. Address Reclamation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
12.2. Positive renewal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
13. Use of IANA Reserved Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
14. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
15. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
16. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
17. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
17.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
17.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Cotton, et al. Expires May 21, 2010 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft IPv4 Multicast Guidelines November 2009
1. Introduction
The Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) (www.iana.org) is
charged with allocating parameter values for fields in protocols
which have been designed, created or are maintained by the Internet
Engineering Task Force (IETF). RFC 2780 [RFC2780] provides the IANA
guidance in the assignment of parameters for fields in newly
developed protocols. This memo expands on section 4.4.2 of RFC 2780
and attempts to codify existing IANA practice used in the assignment
IPv4 multicast addresses.
This document is a revision of RFC 3171 [RFC3171], which it
obsoletes. It also obsoletes RFC 3138 [RFC3138] and updates
[RFC2780].
The terms "Specification Required", "Expert Review", "IESG Approval",
"IETF Review", and "Standards Action", are used in this memo to refer
to the processes described in [RFC5226].
In general, due to the relatively small size of the IPv4 multicast
address space, further assignment of IPv4 multicast address space is
recommended only in limited circumstances. Specifically, the IANA
should only assign addresses in those cases where:
- the dynamic selection Session Description Protocol/Session
Announcement Protocol (SDP/SAP);
- GLOP (not an acronym);
- Source Specific Multicast (SSM); or
- Administratively Scoped address spaces
cannot be used. The guidelines described below are reflected in
[IANA-protocols]. Network operators should also be aware of the
availability of IPv6 multicast addresses and consider using them
where feasible.
2. Terminology
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 BCP 14, RFC 2119
[RFC2119].
The word "allocation" designates a block of addresses managed by a
registry for the purpose of making assignments and allocations. The
word "assignment" designates a block of addresses, or a single
address, registered to an end-user for use on a specific network, or
set of networks.
Cotton, et al. Expires May 21, 2010 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft IPv4 Multicast Guidelines November 2009
3. Definition of Current Assignment Practice
Unlike IPv4 unicast address assignment, where blocks of addresses are
delegated to Regional Internet Registries (RIRs), IPv4 multicast
addresses are assigned directly by the IANA. Current registration
groups appear as follows [IANA]:
Address Range Size Designation
------------- ---- -----------
224.0.0.0 - 224.0.0.255 (/24) Local Network Control Block
224.0.1.0 - 224.0.1.255 (/24) Internetwork Control Block
224.0.2.0 - 224.0.255.255 (65024) AD-HOC Block I
224.1.0.0 - 224.1.255.255 (/16) RESERVED
224.2.0.0 - 224.2.255.255 (/16) SDP/SAP Block
224.3.0.0 - 224.4.255.255 (2 /16s) AD-HOC Block II
224.5.0.0 - 224.255.255.255 (251 /16s) RESERVED
225.0.0.0 - 231.255.255.255 (7 /8s) RESERVED
232.0.0.0 - 232.255.255.255 (/8) Source Specific Multicast Block
233.0.0.0 - 233.251.255.255 (16515072) GLOP Block
233.252.0.0 - 233.255.255.255 (/14) AD-HOC Block III
234.0.0.0 - 238.255.255.255 (5 /8s) RESERVED
239.0.0.0 - 239.255.255.255 (/8) Administratively Scoped Block
The IANA generally assigns addresses from the Local Network Control,
Internetwork Control and AD-HOC blocks. Assignment guidelines for
each of these blocks, as well as for the Source Specific Multicast,
GLOP and Administratively Scoped Blocks, are described below.
4. Local Network Control Block (224.0.0/24)
Addresses in the Local Network Control block are used for protocol
Cotton, et al. Expires May 21, 2010 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft IPv4 Multicast Guidelines November 2009
control traffic that is not forwarded off link. Examples of this
type of use include OSPFIGP All Routers (224.0.0.5) [RFC2328].
4.1. Assignment Guidelines
Pursuant to section 4.4.2 of [RFC2780], assignments from the Local
Network Control block follow an Expert Review, IESG Approval or
Standards Action process. See IANA [IANA] for the current set of
assignments.
5. Internetwork Control Block (224.0.1/24)
Addresses in the Internetwork Control block are used for protocol
control traffic that MAY be forwarded through the Internet. Examples
include 224.0.1.1 (NTP [RFC4330]) and 224.0.1.68 (mdhcpdiscover
[RFC2730]).
5.1. Assignment Guidelines
Pursuant to section 4.4.2 of [RFC2780], assignments from the
Internetwork Control block follow an Expert Review, IESG Approval or
Standards Action process. See IANA [IANA] for the current set of
assignments.
6. AD-HOC blocks (including 224.0.2.0 - 224.0.255.255, 224.3.0.0 -
224.4.255.255 and 233.252.0.0 - 233.255.255.255)
Addresses in the AD-HOC blocks were traditionally used for
assignments for those applications that don't fit in either the Local
or Internetwork Control blocks. These addresses MAY be globally
routed and are typically used by applications that require small
blocks of addressing (e.g., less than a /24 ). Future assignments of
blocks of addresses that do not fit in the Local or Internetwork
block will be made in the Ad-Hoc Block III.
6.1. Assignment Guidelines
In general, the IANA SHOULD NOT assign addressing in the AD-HOC
Blocks. However, the IANA MAY under special circumstances, assign
addresses from these blocks. Pursuant to section 4.4.2 of [RFC2780],
assignments from the AD-HOC blocks follow an Expert Review, IESG
Approval or Standards Action process. See [IANA] for the current set
of assignments.
Cotton, et al. Expires May 21, 2010 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft IPv4 Multicast Guidelines November 2009
7. SDP/SAP Block (224.2/16)
Addresses in the SDP/SAP block are used by applications that receive
addresses through the Session Announcement Protocol [RFC2974] for use
via applications like the session directory tool (such as SDR [SDR]).
7.1. Assignment Guidelines
Since addresses in the SDP/SAP block are chosen randomly from the
range of addresses not already in use [RFC2974], no IANA assignment
policy is required. Note that while no additional IANA assignment is
required, addresses in the SDP/SAP block are explicitly for use by
SDP/SAP and MUST NOT be used for other purposes.
8. Source Specific Multicast Block (232/8)
SSM [RFC4607] is an extension of IP Multicast in which traffic is
forwarded to receivers from only those multicast sources for which
the receivers have explicitly expressed interest, and is primarily
targeted at one-to-many (broadcast) applications. Note that this
block was initially assigned to the Versatile Message Transaction
Protocol (VMTP) transient groups [IANA].
8.1. Assignment Guidelines
Because the SSM model essentially makes the entire multicast address
space local to the host, no IANA assignment policy is required.
Note, however, that while no additional IANA assignment is required,
addresses in the SSM block are explicitly for use by SSM and MUST NOT
be used for other purposes.
9. GLOP Block (233/8)
Addresses in the GLOP block are globally scoped statically assigned
addresses. The assignment is made, for a domain with 16 bit
Autonomous System Number (ASN), by mapping a domain's autonomous
system number, expressed in octets as X.Y, into the middle two octets
of the GLOP block, yielding an assignment of 233.X.Y.0/24. The
mapping and assignment is defined in [RFC3180]. Domains with a 32
bit ASN MAY apply for space in AD-HOC Block III, or consider using
IPv6 multicast addresses.
9.1. Assignment Guidelines
Because addresses in the GLOP block are algorithmically pre-assigned,
no IANA assignment policy is required.
Cotton, et al. Expires May 21, 2010 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft IPv4 Multicast Guidelines November 2009
9.2. AD-HOC Block III
[RFC3138] delegated to the RIRs the assignment of the GLOP sub-block
(233.252.0.0 - 233.255.255.255) mapped by the private Auronomous
System (AS) space (64512-65534) and the IANA reserved ASN 65535
[RFC1930]. This space was known as Extended GLOP (EGLOP). RFC 3138
should not have asked the RIRs to develop policies for the EGLOP
space because [RFC2860] reserves that to the IETF. It is important
to make this space available for use by network operators and it is
therefore appropriate to obsolete RFC 3138 and classify this address
range as available for AD-HOC assignment as per the guidelines in
section 6.
The first /24 in this range, 233.252.0.0/24, is assigned as "MCAST-
TEST-NET" for use in documentation and example code. 233.252.0.0/24
SHOULD be used in conjunction with the [RFC2606] domain names
example.com or example.net in vendor and protocol documentation.
Addresses within 233.252.0.0/24 MUST NOT appear on the public
Internet.
10. Administratively Scoped Address Block (239/8)
Addresses in the Administratively Scoped Address block are for local
use within a domain and are described in [RFC2365].
10.1. Assignment Guidelines
Since addresses in this block are local to a domain, no IANA
assignment policy is required.
10.1.1. Relative Offsets
The relative offsets [RFC2365] are used to ensure that a service can
be located independent of the extent of the enclosing scope (see
[RFC3180] for details). Since there are only 256 such offsets, the
IANA should only assign a relative offset to a protocol that provides
an infrastructure supporting service. Examples of such services
include the Session Announcement Protocol [RFC2974]. Pursuant to
section 4.4.2 of [RFC2780], assignments of Relative Offsets follow an
Expert Review, IESG Approval or Standards Action process. See [IANA]
for the current set of assignments.
11. Application Form
Requests for multicast address assignments can be submitted through
the application form on the IANA web site at[IANA-registration]. It
Cotton, et al. Expires May 21, 2010 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft IPv4 Multicast Guidelines November 2009
is important to submit sufficient detail to allow the IESG designated
expert to review the application. If the details given in the
request are not clear, or further information is needed, the IESG
designated expert may request additional information before assigning
an address.
11.1. Size of assignments of IPv4 Multicast Addresses
Occasionally more than one multicast address is required. In these
cases multiple addresses are available in AD-HOC Block III. Where
there is a requirement for a very large number of addresses, the
assignment will be staged. The additional stages will only be made
after the complete use of the initial assignment(s).
A separate document describing the policy governing assignment of
addresses in the AD-HOC blocks I, II and III will be developed and
published. The format, location and content has not yet been decided
and so these will be documented in a future version of this document.
12. Annual Review
Given the dynamic nature of IPv4 multicast and its associated
infrastructure, and the previously undocumented IPv4 multicast
address assignment guidelines, the IANA should conduct an annual
review of currently assigned addresses.
12.1. Address Reclamation
During the review described above, addresses that were mis-assigned
should, where possible, be reclaimed or reassigned.
The IANA should also review assignments in the AD-HOC, "DIS Transient
Groups", and ST Multicast Groups [RFC1819] blocks and reclaim those
addresses that are not in use on the global Internet (i.e, those
applications which can use SSM, GLOP, or Administratively Scoped
addressing, or are not globally routed).
12.2. Positive renewal
It is occasionally appropriate to make temporary assignments that can
be renewed as necessary. In cases where this happens the registrant
needs to positively request an extension to the temporary assignment
or the addresses assigned. When the IANA has not received a request
to renew the registration of a temporary assignment within 30 days of
the expiry of the assignment it MUST be removed from the multicast
registry.
Cotton, et al. Expires May 21, 2010 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft IPv4 Multicast Guidelines November 2009
Addresses returned to the IANA when a temporary assignment ends MUST
NOT be assigned to anyone other than the last registrant for at least
one calendar year.
13. Use of IANA Reserved Addresses
Applications MUST NOT use addressing in the IANA reserved blocks.
14. IANA Considerations
IANA is requested to update its IPv4 multicast request and assignment
procedures to reflect this document.
15. Security Considerations
The assignment guidelines described in this document do not alter the
security properties of either the Any Source or Source Specific
multicast service models.
16. Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Joe St. Sauver, John Meylor, Randy
Bush, Thomas Narten, Marshall Eubanks, Zaid Albanna (co-author of
RFC3171), Kevin Almeroth (co-author of RFC3171) Pekka Savola and
Alfred Hoenes for their constructive feedback and comments.
17. References
17.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
May 2008.
17.2. Informative References
[IANA] IANA, "IANA Protocol Registries", .
[IANA-protocols]
IANA, "IANA Protocol Registries",
Cotton, et al. Expires May 21, 2010 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft IPv4 Multicast Guidelines November 2009
.
[IANA-registration]
IANA, "IANA Protocol Registration Forms",
.
[RFC1819] Delgrossi, L., Berger, L., Duong, D., Jackowski, S., and
S. Schaller, "Internet Stream Protocol Version 2 (ST2)
Protocol Specification - Version ST2+", RFC 1819,
August 1995.
[RFC1930] Hawkinson, J. and T. Bates, "Guidelines for creation,
selection, and registration of an Autonomous System (AS)",
BCP 6, RFC 1930, March 1996.
[RFC2328] Moy, J., "OSPF Version 2", STD 54, RFC 2328, April 1998.
[RFC2365] Meyer, D., "Administratively Scoped IP Multicast", BCP 23,
RFC 2365, July 1998.
[RFC2606] Eastlake, D. and A. Panitz, "Reserved Top Level DNS
Names", BCP 32, RFC 2606, June 1999.
[RFC2730] Hanna, S., Patel, B., and M. Shah, "Multicast Address
Dynamic Client Allocation Protocol (MADCAP)", RFC 2730,
December 1999.
[RFC2780] Bradner, S. and V. Paxson, "IANA Allocation Guidelines For
Values In the Internet Protocol and Related Headers",
BCP 37, RFC 2780, March 2000.
[RFC2860] Carpenter, B., Baker, F., and M. Roberts, "Memorandum of
Understanding Concerning the Technical Work of the
Internet Assigned Numbers Authority", RFC 2860, June 2000.
[RFC2974] Handley, M., Perkins, C., and E. Whelan, "Session
Announcement Protocol", RFC 2974, October 2000.
[RFC3138] Meyer, D., "Extended Assignments in 233/8", RFC 3138,
June 2001.
[RFC3171] Albanna, Z., Almeroth, K., Meyer, D., and M. Schipper,
"IANA Guidelines for IPv4 Multicast Address Assignments",
BCP 51, RFC 3171, August 2001.
[RFC3180] Meyer, D. and P. Lothberg, "GLOP Addressing in 233/8",
BCP 53, RFC 3180, September 2001.
Cotton, et al. Expires May 21, 2010 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft IPv4 Multicast Guidelines November 2009
[RFC4330] Mills, D., "Simple Network Time Protocol (SNTP) Version 4
for IPv4, IPv6 and OSI", RFC 4330, January 2006.
[RFC4607] Holbrook, H. and B. Cain, "Source-Specific Multicast for
IP", RFC 4607, August 2006.
[SDR] UCL/ISI, "Session Directory Tool",
.
Authors' Addresses
Michelle Cotton
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330
Marina del Rey 90292
United States of America
Phone: +310-823-9358
Email: michelle.cotton@icann.org
URI: http://www.iana.org/
Leo Vegoda
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330
Marina del Rey 90292
United States of America
Phone: +310-823-9358
Email: leo.vegoda@icann.org
URI: http://www.iana.org/
David Meyer
Email: dmm@1-4-5.net
Cotton, et al. Expires May 21, 2010 [Page 11]