





Network Working Group                                          P. Arberg
Request for Comments: 4937                              Redback Networks
Category: Informational                                     V. Mammoliti
                                                           Cisco Systems
                                                               June 2007


           IANA Considerations for PPP over Ethernet (PPPoE)

Status of This Memo

   This memo provides information for the Internet community.  It does
   not specify an Internet standard of any kind.  Distribution of this
   memo is unlimited.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).

Abstract

   This document describes the IANA considerations for the PPP over
   Ethernet (PPPoE) protocol.

Table of Contents

   1. Introduction ....................................................2
      1.1. Terminology ................................................2
      1.2. Specification of Requirements ..............................2
   2. IANA Considerations .............................................2
      2.1. Registration Policies for PPPoE TAG Values .................2
      2.2. Reserved PPPoE TAG Values ..................................3
      2.3. Registration Policies for PPPoE Code Fields ................3
      2.4. Reserved PPPoE Code fields .................................4
   3. Security Considerations .........................................4
   4. References ......................................................4
      4.1. Normative References .......................................4
      4.2. Informative References .....................................4













Arberg & Mammoliti           Informational                      [Page 1]

RFC 4937             IANA Considerations for PPPoE             June 2007


1.  Introduction

   This document provides guidance to the Internet Assigned Numbers
   Authority (IANA) regarding the registration of values related to the
   PPP over Ethernet Protocol (PPPoE), defined in [RFC2516], in
   accordance with BCP 26, [RFC2434].  It also reserves PPPoE TAG values
   as well as PPPoE packet Code fields, which are or have been in use on
   the Internet.

1.1.  Terminology

   The following terms are used here with the meanings defined in BCP
   26:  "name space", "registration".

   The following policies are used here with the meanings defined in BCP
   26: "First Come First Served".

1.2.  Specification of Requirements

   In this document, several words are used to signify the requirements
   of the specification.  These words are often capitalized.  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 [RFC2119].

2.  IANA Considerations

   The PPPoE protocol, as defined in [RFC2516], defines two name spaces
   that require registration, the PPPoE TAG and the PPPoE Code field.

2.1.  Registration Policies for PPPoE TAG Values

   IANA has set up a registry of "PPPoE TAG Values".  These are 16-bit
   values.  PPPoE TAG values already in use are specified as reserved in
   this document.  All other TAG values between 0 and 65535 are to be
   assigned by IANA, using the "First Come First Served" policy defined
   in [RFC2434].

   A TAG-Name and a description for the usage, as well as a point of
   contact, MUST be provided for any assignment from this registry.  A
   document reference SHOULD also be provided.










Arberg & Mammoliti           Informational                      [Page 2]

RFC 4937             IANA Considerations for PPPoE             June 2007


2.2.  Reserved PPPoE TAG Values

   TAG Value     TAG Name              Tag Description         Reference
   -----------   -------------------   ---------------------   ---------
   0    0x0000   End-Of-List           See the reference       [RFC2516]

   257  0x0101   Service-Name          See the reference       [RFC2516]
   258  0x0102   AC-Name               See the reference       [RFC2516]
   259  0x0103   Host-Uniq             See the reference       [RFC2516]
   260  0x0104   AC-Cookie             See the reference       [RFC2516]
   261  0x0105   Vendor-Specific       See the reference       [RFC2516]
   262  0x0106   Credits               See the reference       [RFC4938]
   263  0x0107   Metrics               See the reference       [RFC4938]
   264  0x0108   Sequence Number       See the reference       [RFC4938]

   272  0x0110   Relay-Session-Id      See the reference       [RFC2516]
   273  0x0111   HURL                  See the reference       [CARREL]
   274  0x0112   MOTM                  See the reference       [CARREL]

   288  0x0120   PPP-Max-Payload       See the reference       [RFC4638]
   289  0x0121   IP_Route_Add          See the reference       [CARREL]

   513  0x0201   Service-Name-Error    See the reference       [RFC2516]
   514  0x0202   AC-System-Error       See the reference       [RFC2516]
   515  0x0203   Generic-Error         See the reference       [RFC2516]

2.3.  Registration Policies for PPPoE Code Fields

   IANA has set up a registry of PPPoE Active Discovery Code fields.
   These are 8-bit values.  PPPoE Code fields already in use are
   specified as reserved in this document.  All other Code values
   between 0 and 255 are to be assigned by IANA, using the "First Come
   First Served" policy defined in [RFC2434].

   A PPPoE Active Discovery packet name and a description for the usage,
   as well as a point of contact, MUST be provided for any assignment
   from this registry.

   A document reference SHOULD also be provided.












Arberg & Mammoliti           Informational                      [Page 3]

RFC 4937             IANA Considerations for PPPoE             June 2007


2.4.  Reserved PPPoE Code fields

   Code      PPPoE Packet Name              Description        Reference
   --------  -----------------------------  -----------------  ---------
   0   0x00  PPP Session Stage              See the reference  [RFC2516]

   7   0x07  PADO, Offer                    See the reference  [RFC2516]
   9   0x09  PADI, Initiation               See the reference  [RFC2516]

   10  0x0a  PADG, Session-Grant            See the reference  [RFC4938]
   11  0x0b  PADC, Session-Credit Response  See the reference  [RFC4938]
   12  0x0c  PADQ, Quality                  See the reference  [RFC4938]

   25  0x19  PADR, Request                  See the reference  [RFC2516]
   101 0x65  PADS, Session-confirmation     See the reference  [RFC2516]

   167 0xa7  PADT, Terminate                See the reference  [RFC2516]

   211 0xd3  PADM, Message                  See the reference  [CARREL]
   212 0xd4  PADN, Network                  See the reference  [CARREL]

3.  Security Considerations

   This document focuses on IANA considerations for the PPPoE protocol,
   and as such, should help remove the possibility of the same PPPoE
   code field and PPPoE TAG value being used for different
   functionalities.

4.  References

4.1.  Normative References

   [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
             Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

   [RFC2434] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
             IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 2434,
             October 1998.

   [RFC2516] Mamakos, L., Lidl, K., Evarts, J., Carrel, D., Simone, D.,
             and R. Wheeler, "A Method for Transmitting PPP Over
             Ethernet (PPPoE)", RFC 2516, February 1999.

4.2.  Informative References

   [CARREL]  Carrel D., Simone D., Ho C. and T. Stoner, "Extensions to a
             Method for Transmitting PPP Over Ethernet (PPPoE)", Work in
             Progress.



Arberg & Mammoliti           Informational                      [Page 4]

RFC 4937             IANA Considerations for PPPoE             June 2007


   [RFC4938] Berry, B. and H. Holgate, "PPP Over Ethernet (PPPoE)
             Extensions for Credit Flow and Link Metrics", RFC 4938,
             June 2007.

   [RFC4638] Arberg, P., Kourkouzelis, D., Duckett, M., Anschutz, T.,
             and J. Moisand, "Accommodating a Maximum Transit
             Unit/Maximum Receive Unit (MTU/MRU) Greater Than 1492 in
             the Point-to-Point Protocol over Ethernet (PPPoE)", RFC
             4638, September 2006.

Authors' Addresses

   Peter Arberg
   Redback Networks, Inc.
   300 Holger Way
   San Jose, CA 95134
   USA
   EMail: parberg@redback.com


   Vince Mammoliti
   Cisco Systems, Inc.
   181 Bay Street, Suite 3400
   Toronto, Ontario, M5J 2T3
   Canada
   EMail: vince@cisco.com

























Arberg & Mammoliti           Informational                      [Page 5]

RFC 4937             IANA Considerations for PPPoE             June 2007


Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).

   This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
   contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
   retain all their rights.

   This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
   "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
   OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND
   THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS
   OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF
   THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
   WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

Intellectual Property

   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
   Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
   pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
   this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
   might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
   made any independent effort to identify any such rights.  Information
   on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
   found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
   assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
   attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
   such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
   specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
   http://www.ietf.org/ipr.

   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
   rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
   this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF at
   ietf-ipr@ietf.org.

Acknowledgement

   Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
   Internet Society.







Arberg & Mammoliti           Informational                      [Page 6]

