Internet-Draft IPv6 Mapping Prefix PDU for the RPKI-Rou April 2026
Dong & Xie Expires 31 October 2026 [Page]
Workgroup:
sidrops Working Group
Internet-Draft:
draft-dong-sidrops-rtr-moa-pdu-00
Published:
Intended Status:
Standards Track
Expires:
Authors:
G. Dong
China Telecom
C. Xie
China Telecom

IPv6 Mapping Prefix PDU for the RPKI-Router Protocol

Abstract

This document defines a new Protocol Data Unit (PDU) type for the RPKI to Router Protocol to convey Mapping Origin Authorization (MOA) information from RPKI caches to routers. The new PDU, named the "IPv6 Mapping Prefix" PDU, carries the authorization mapping between one or more IPv4 prefixes and their corresponding authorized IPv6 mapping prefix. This extension enables routers to perform Mapping Origin Validation (MOV) for IPv4-to-IPv6 address mapping announcements in IPv6-only underlay networks.

Status of This Memo

This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

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."

This Internet-Draft will expire on 31 October 2026.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction

In IPv6-only network deployments, IPv4 service delivery relies on stateless address mapping mechanisms (e.g., 4map6, MAP-T, MAP-E, IVI) where an IPv6 mapping prefix is configured at Provider Edge (PE) devices to identify the location of IPv4 address blocks[I-D.ietf-v6ops-framework-md-ipv6only-underlay]. For any given IPv4 address block, its corresponding IPv6 mapping prefix is considered the mapping origin. PE devices distribute these mapping relationships through MP-BGP extensions[I-D.ietf-idr-mpbgp-extension-4map6].

The authenticity of these address mapping relationships is critical. Without proper validation, an attacker could announce a fake IPv6 mapping prefix for an IPv4 address block, causing IPv4 service traffic to be redirected to the wrong egress PE and resulting in IPv4 prefix hijacking. To address this security concern, the Mapping Origin Authorization (MOA) framework was introduced[I-D.ietf-sidrops-moa-profile]. MOA is a cryptographically signed RPKI object that authorizes an IPv6 mapping prefix to originate mapping for one or more IPv4 prefixes.

The RPKI to Router Protocol[RFC8210] provides a simple, reliable mechanism for routers to receive validated RPKI data from trusted caches. Currently, the protocol defines two payload PDU types: IPv4 Prefix (Type 4) for Route Origin Authorization (ROA) data for IPv4, and IPv6 Prefix (Type 6) for ROA data for IPv6. However, no PDU type currently exists to convey MOA data-specifically, the authorization mapping from IPv4 prefixes to an IPv6 mapping prefix.

This document defines a new PDU type, the "IPv6 Mapping Prefix" PDU (Type TBD1), that extends the RPKI to Router Protocol to carry MOA information. This enables routers to perform Mapping Origin Validation (MOV) for IPv4-to-IPv6 address mapping announcements, thereby preventing IPv4 prefix hijacking in IPv6-only underlay networks.

1.1. Requirements Language

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[RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.

2. Terminology

The following terms are used in this document:

3. MOA IPv6 Mapping Prefix PDU Format

The IPv6 Mapping Prefix PDU is a payload PDU type that conveys a set of IPv4 prefixes authorized to be mapped by a specific IPv6 mapping prefix. The format is analogous to the existing IPv4 Prefix and IPv6 Prefix PDUs defined in[RFC8210], with modifications to accommodate the mapping relationship.

3.1. PDU Fields

The IPv6 Mapping Prefix PDU contains the following fields:

3.2. Diagram

The MOA IPv6 Mapping Prefix PDU:

       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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |    Protocol   |      PDU      |                               |
      |    Version    |      Type     |              Zero             |
      |       1       |               |                               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                            Length                             |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |     Flags     | IPv6 Mapping  |  IPv4 Prefix  |     Zero      |
      |               | Prefix Length |    Count      |               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                                                               |
      |                     IPv6 Mapping Prefix                       |
      |                                                               |
      |                                                               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                                                               |
      |                  IPv4 Prefixes (variable)                     |
      |                                                               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
              Figure 1: The MOA IPv6 Mapping Prefix PDU

The IPv4 Prefixes field:

       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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |IPv4 Prefix Len|                   Zero                        |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                       IPv4 Prefix                             |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
                      Figure 2: The IPv4 Prefixes

4. PDU Semantics

4.1. Flags Field

As with the IPv4 Prefix and IPv6 Prefix PDUs in[RFC8210], the lowest-order bit of the Flags field indicates whether this PDU announces a new mapping authorization (1) or withdraws a previously announced mapping authorization (0). The semantics of announcement and withdrawal follow the same rules defined in[RFC8210] Section 5.6.

4.2. IPv4 Prefixes Field

The IPv4 Prefixes field encodes a set of IPv4 prefixes that are authorized to be mapped by the IPv6 mapping prefix. The canonical ordering for the IPv4 prefixes SHOULD follow the definition in[I-D.ietf-sidrops-rpki-prefixlist], where each prefix is represented by its first IPv4 address (addr) and prefix length (plen), and the set is sorted by addr (lower first) then plen (lower first). This canonical representation allows relying party software to more easily verify the contents of the PDU.

4.3. Uniqueness Requirements

The cache server MUST ensure that it sends only one IPv6 Mapping Prefix PDU for a unique tuple {IPv6 Mapping Prefix, set of IPv4 prefixes} at any point in time. If the router receives multiple IPv6 Mapping Prefix PDUs with the same tuple (including the same Flags value), the behavior follows[RFC8210] Section 5.6: the router SHOULD raise a Duplicate Announcement Received error.

5. Operational Considerations

5.1. PDU Generation from MOA Objects

When a cache receives MOA objects from the RPKI repository, it MUST parse each MOA to extract the IPv6 mapping prefix and the associated set of IPv4 prefixes. The cache then constructs one or more IPv6 Mapping Prefix PDUs:

5.2. Router Processing

Upon receiving an IPv6 Mapping Prefix PDU with Flags=1, the router SHOULD install the mapping authorization into its local MOV database. For each mapping announcement received via 4map6 MP-BGP, the router can then validate whether the announcing IPv6 mapping prefix is authorized for the announced IPv4 prefix by checking against the MOA data conveyed via this PDU.

When the router receives an IPv6 Mapping Prefix PDU with Flags=0, it SHOULD remove the corresponding mapping authorization from its local MOV database.

6. IANA Considerations

IANA is requested to assign a new PDU Type code for the "IPv6 Mapping Prefix" PDU in the "RPKI-Router Protocol PDU Types" registry.

          +--------+-------------+--------------------------------------+ |
          Value | Name | Description |
          +----------------------+--------------------------------------+ |
          TBD |IPv6 Mapping | MOA: set of IPv4 prefixes authorized | | |
          Prefix | by an IPv6 mapping prefix |
          +--------+-------------+--------------------------------------+

7. Security Considerations

The security considerations for the RPKI to Router Protocol described in [RFC8210] Section 13 apply equally to this extension. In particular:

8. Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the authors of [RFC8210] and [I-D.ietf-sidrops-moa-profile] for their foundational work. Special thanks to the SIDROPS working group for their reviews and feedback on this extension.

9. References

9.1. Normative References

[RFC2119]
Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC8174]
Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
[RFC8210]
Bush, R. and R. Austein, "The Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI) to Router Protocol, Version 1", RFC 8210, DOI 10.17487/RFC8210, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8210>.
[I-D.ietf-sidrops-moa-profile]
Xie, C., Dong, G., Li, X., Huston, G., and D. Ma, "A Profile for Mapping Origin Authorizations (MOAs)", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-sidrops-moa-profile-03, , <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-sidrops-moa-profile-03>.

9.2. Informative References

[RFC6480]
Lepinski, M. and S. Kent, "An Infrastructure to Support Secure Internet Routing", RFC 6480, DOI 10.17487/RFC6480, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6480>.
[I-D.ietf-v6ops-framework-md-ipv6only-underlay]
Xie, C., Ma, C., Li, X., Mishra, G. S., and T. Graf, "Framework for Multi-domain IPv6-only Underlay Network and IPv4-as-a-Service", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-v6ops-framework-md-ipv6only-underlay-20, , <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-v6ops-framework-md-ipv6only-underlay-20>.
[I-D.ietf-idr-mpbgp-extension-4map6]
Xie, C., Dong, G., Li, X., Han, G., and Z. Guo, "MP-BGP Extension and the Procedures for IPv4/IPv6 Mapping Advertisement", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-idr-mpbgp-extension-4map6-05, , <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-idr-mpbgp-extension-4map6-05>.
[I-D.ietf-sidrops-rpki-prefixlist]
Snijders, J. and G. Huston, "A profile for Signed Prefix Lists for Use in the Resource Public Key Infrastructure (RPKI)", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-sidrops-rpki-prefixlist-05, , <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-sidrops-rpki-prefixlist-05>.

Authors' Addresses

Guozhen Dong
China Telecom
Beiqijia Town, Changping District
Beijing
102209
China
Chongfeng Xie
China Telecom
Beiqijia Town, Changping District
Beijing
102209
China