| Internet-Draft | Automatic Stub Networks | October 2022 |
| Lemon | Expires 17 April 2023 | [Page] |
This document describes a set of practices for connecting stub networks to adjacent infrastructure networks. This is applicable in cases such as constrained (Internet of Things) networks where there is a need to provide functional parity of service discovery and reachability between devices on the stub network and devices on an adjacent infrastructure link (for example, a home network).¶
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 17 April 2023.¶
Copyright (c) 2022 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 (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 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 Revised BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.¶
This document describes a set of practices for connecting stub networks to adjacent infrastructure networks. There are several use cases for stub networks. Motivating factors include:¶
What makes stub networks a distinct type of network is simply that a stub network never provides transit between networks to which it is connected. The term "stub" refers to the way the network is seen by the link to which it is connected: there is reachability through a stub network router to devices on the stub network from the infrastructure link, but there is no reachability through the stub network to any link beyond that one.¶
Eliminating transit routing is not intended to be seen as a virtue in itself, but rather as a simplifying assumption that makes it possible to solve a subset of the general problem of automating multi-link networks. Stub networks may be globally reachable, or may be only locally reachable. This document addresses local reachability. A host on a locally reachable stub network can only interoperate with hosts on the network link(s) to which it is connected.¶
It may be noted that just as you can plug several home routers together in series to form multi-layer NATs, there is nothing preventing the owner of a stub network router from plugging it into another stub network router. In the case of an IoT wireless network, there may be no way to do this, nor would it be desirable, but a stub router that uses ethernet on both the infrastructure and stub network sides could be connected this way. Nothing in this document is intended to prevent this from being done, but neither do we attempt to solve the problems that this could create.¶
The goal of this document is to describe the minimal set of changes or behaviors required to use existing IETF specifications to support the stub network use case. The result is intended to be deployable on existing networks without requiring changes to those networks.¶
The goal here is for hosts on the stub network to be able to interoperate with hosts on the adjacent infrastructure link or links. What we mean by "interoperate" is that a host on a stub network:¶
Discoverability here means "discoverable using DNS, or DNS Service Discovery". As an example, when one host connected to a specific WiFi network wishes to discover services on hosts connected to that same WiFi network, it can do so using multicast DNS (RFC6762), which is an example of DNS Service Discovery. Similarly, when a host on some other network wishes to discover the same service, it must use DNS-based DNS Service Discovery [RFC6763]. In both cases, "discoverable using DNS" means that the host has an entry in the DNS.¶
We lump discoverability in with reachability and addressability, both of which are essentially Layer 3 issues. The reason for this is that it does us no good to automatically set up connectivity between stub network hosts and infrastructure hosts if the infrastructure hosts have no means to learn about the availability of services provided by stub network hosts. For stub network hosts that only consume cloud services this will not be an issue, but for stub networks that provide services, such as IoT devices on stub networks with incompatible media, discoverability is necessary in order for stub network connectivity to be useful.¶
Ability to acquire an IP address that can be used to communicate means that the IP address a host on the stub network acquires can be used to communicate with it by hosts on adjacent links, for locally reachable stub networks.¶
Reachability to hosts on adjacent links means that when a host (A) on the stub network has the IP address of such a host (B), with which it intends to communicate, host (A) knows of a next-hop router to which it can send datagrams, so that they will ultimately reach host (B).¶
Reachability from hosts on adjacent links means that when host (A) on an adjacent link has a datagram destined for the IP address of a host (B) on the stub network, a next-hop router is known by host (A) such that, when the datagram is sent to that router, it will ultimately reach host (B) on the stub network.¶
In addition to the interoperability goals we've described above, the additional goal for stub networks is that they be able to be connected automatically, with no user intervention. The experience of connecting a stub network to an infrastructure should be as straightforward as connecting a new host to the same infrastructure network.¶
We assume that the adjacent infrastructure link supports Router and Prefix Discovery using router advertisements. Adjacent infrastructure links on networks where this is not supported are out of scope for this document.¶
In order to provide IPv6 routing to the stub network, IPv6 addressing must be available on the adjacent infrastructure link. Ideally such addressing is already present on the link, and need not be provided. However, if it is not present, the stub router must provide it. The possible states of the on-link prefix on the infrastructure are described here, along with actions required to be taken to monitor the state.¶
IPv6 addressing is considered to be present on the link if a usable on-link prefix is advertised on the adjacent infrastructure link. A usable on-link prefix is a prefix advertised on the link that has a preferred time of 30 minutes or more, is marked on-link and allows autonomous configuration.¶
A prefix is not considered a usable on-link prefix if it is advertised on the link as on-link, but the 'm' bit is set in the Router Advertisement message header ([RFC4861], Section 4.2) that contains the Prefix option. This indicates that node addressibility is being managed using DHCPv6. Such prefixes are not universally usable.¶
A prefix is considered to be advertised on the link if, when a Router Solicit message ([RFC4861], Section 4.1) is sent, a Router Advertisement message is received in response which contains a prefix information option ([RFC4861], Section 4.6.2) for that prefix.¶
After an RA message containing a usable prefix has been received, it can be assumed for some period of time thereafter that the prefix is still valid on the link. However, prefix lifetimes and router lifetimes are often quite long. The mere fact that a prefix that has been advertised is still within its valid lifetime does not mean that that prefix is still being advertised on the link.¶
When the stub router first connects to the adjacent infrastructure link, it MUST begin router discovery.¶
If, after router discovery has completed, no usable on-link prefix has been found, the router moves to STATE-ADVERTISING-USABLE (Section 3.1.5).¶
If, during router discovery, a usable on-link prefix is found, the router moves to STATE-USABLE (Section 3.1.3).¶
This is important because when a new host appears on the adjacent infrastructure link and sends an initial router solicit, if it does not receive a usable on-link prefix, it will not be able to communicate. Consequently, the stub router MUST monitor router solicits and advertisements on the link in order to determine whether a prefix that has been advertised on the link is still being advertised.¶
There are several methods that can be used to accomplish this:¶
The stub router MUST listen for router advertisements on the adjacent infrastructure link, and record the time at which each router advertisement was received. A router advertisement that is more than STALE_RA_TIME seconds old MUST be assumed to no longer be advertised on the link. When the last non-stale router advertisement containing a usable prefixes on the link is marked stale, the stub router MUST move to STATE-BEGIN-ADVERTISING.¶
In addition, for each usable route, the stub router MUST monitor the state of reachability to the router(s) that advertised it as described in ([RFC4861], Section 7.3.1) using a ReachableTime value of no more than 60,000 milliseconds (one minute). The reason for this is that if no router providing the on-link prefix on the infrastructure link is reachable, then when a new host joins the network, it will have no usable on-link prefix to use for autoconfiguration, and thus will be unable to communicate with hosts on the stub network.¶
The stub router MUST listen for router solicits on the adjacent infrastructure link. When a router solicit is received, if none of the on-link routers on the adjacent infrastructure link are marked reachable, the stub router MUST move to the STATE-BEGIN-ADVERTISING state (Section 3.1.4).¶
In this state, the stub router generates its own on-link prefix. This prefix has a valid and preferred lifetime of STUB_PROVIDED_PREFIX_LIFETIME seconds. This prefix MUST allow for autonomous configuration (SLAAC). The stub router sends a router advertisement containing this prefix, advertised as a on-link prefix, with the Stub Router bit ([I-D.hui-stub-router-ra-flag]) set in the prefix header. This RA MUST also include a route to the stub network. If the stub router is also a normal router (e.g. a home WiFi router), it SHOULD include all other routes that it is advertising in the RA, if there is space.¶
After having sent the initial router advertisement, the stub router moves into the STATE-ADVERTISING-USABLE state (Section 3.1.5).¶
The stub router sends an RA message, formatted as described in Section 3.1.4, every BEACON_INTERVAL seconds.¶
The stub router may receive a router advertisement containing a usable on-link prefix on the adjacent infrastructure link. If the advertised prefix is different than the prefix the stub router is advertising as the on-link usable prefix, and the Stub Router bit is not set in the advertisement, the stub router moves to STATE-DEPRECATING (xref target="state-deprecating").¶
If the stub router bit is set in the received prefix, then one of the following must be true:¶
When the stub router has detected the availability of an infrastructure-provided on-link prefix on the adjacent infrastructure link, it continues to advertise its own prefix, but deprecates it:¶
In this state, the valid lifetime (VALID) is computed based on three values: the current time when a router advertisement is being generated (NOW), the time at which the new usable on-link prefix advertisement was received (DEPRECATE_TIME), and STUB_PROVIDED_PREFIX_LIFETIME. All of these values are in seconds. VALID is computed as follows:¶
VALID = STUB_PROVIDED_PREFIX_LIFETIME - (NOW - DEPRECATE_TIME)¶
If VALID is less than BEACON_INTERVAL, the stub router does not include the deprecated prefix in the router advertisement. Note that VALID could be less than zero. Otherwise, the prefix is provided in the advertisement, but with a valid lifetime of VALID.¶
How addressability is managed on stub networks depends on the nature of the stub network. For some stub networks, the stub router can be sure that it is the only router. For example, a stub router that is providing a Wi-Fi network for tethering will advertise its own SSID and use its own joining credentials; in this case, it can assume that it is the only router for that network, and advertise a default route and on-link prefix just like any other router.¶
However, some stub networks are more cooperative in nature, for example IP mesh networks. On such networks, multiple stub routers may be present and be providing addressability and reachability.¶
In either case, some stub router connected to the stub network MUST provide a usable on-link prefix (the OSNR prefix) for the stub network. If the stub network is a multicast-capable medium where Router Advertisements are used for router discovery, the same mechanism described in section [Support for adjacent infrastructure links] is used.¶
Stub networks that do not support the use of Router Advertisements for router discovery must use some similar mechanism that is compatible with that type of network. Describing the process of establishing a common OSNR prefix on such networks is out of scope for this document.¶
Stub routers may restart from time to time; when a restart occurs, the stub router may have been advertising state to the network which, following the restart, is no longer required.¶
For example, suppose there are two stub routers connected to the same infrastructure link. When the first stub router is restarted, the second takes over providing an on-link prefix. Now the first router rejoins the link. It sees that the second stub router's prefix is advertised on the infrastructure link, and therefore does not advertise its own.¶
This behavior can cause problems because the first stub router no longer sees the on-link prefix it had been advertising on infrastructure as on-link. Consequently, if it receives a packet to forward to such an address, it will forward that packet directly to a default router, if one is present; otherwise, it will have no route to the destination, and will drop the packet.¶
To address this problem, stub routers SHOULD remember the last time a prefix was advertised across restarts. On restart, the router can immediately begin deprecating the prefix, and can stop after the prefix valid lifetime goes to zero, based on the recorded time that the last advertisement was sent.¶
When a stub router has only flash memory with limited write lifetime, it may be inappropriate to do a write to flash every time a prefix beacon happens. In this case, the router SHOULD record the set of prefixes that have been advertised on infrastructure and the maximum valid lifetime that was advertised. On restart, the router should assume that hosts on the infrastructure link have received advertisements for any such prefixes, and should immediately deprecate them, and continue to do so until the maximum valid lifetime has elapsed after restart.¶
In order to be able to provide addressability either on the stub network or on an adjacent infrastructure network, a stub router must allocate its own ULA prefix. ULA prefixes, described in Unique Local IPv6 Unicast Addresses ([RFC4193]) are randomly allocated prefixes. A stub router MUST allocate a single ULA prefix for use in providing on-link prefixes to the stub network and the infrastructure network, as needed.¶
The ULA prefix allocated by a stub router SHOULD be maintained across reboots, and SHOULD remain stable over time. For privacy reasons, a stub router that roams from network to network may wish to allocate a different ULA prefix each time it connects to a different infrastructure network.¶
If IPv6 prefix delegation is available, which implies that IPv6 service is also available on the infrastructure link, then the stub router MAY use IPv6 prefix delegation to acquire a prefix to advertise on the stub network, rather than allocating one out of its ULA prefix.¶
Stub routers MUST advertise reachability to stub network OSNR prefixes on any AIL to which they are connected.¶
Each stub network will have some set of prefixes that are advertised as on-link for that network. A stub router connected to that network SHOULD advertise reachability to all such prefixes on any AIL to which it is attached using router advertisements¶
The stub router MAY advertise itself as a default router on the stub network, if it itself has a default route on the AIL. In some cases it may not be desirable to advertise reachability to the Internet as a whole; in this case the stub router need not advertise itself as a default router.¶
If the stub router is not advertising itself as a default on the stub network, it MUST advertise reachability to any prefixes that are being advertised as on-link on AILs to which it is attached. This is true for prefixes it is advertising, and for other prefixes being advertised on that link.¶
Note that in some stub network configurations, it is possible for more than one stub router to be connected to the stub network, and each stub router may be connected to a different AIL. In this case, a stub router advertising a default route may receive a packet destined for a link that is not an AIL for that router, but is an AIL for a different router. In such a case, if the infrastructure is not capable of routing between these two AILs, a packet which could have been delivered by another stub router will be lost by the stub router that received it.¶
Consequently, stub routers SHOULD be configurable to not advertise themselves as default routers on the stub network. Stub routers SHOULD be configurable to explicitly advertise AIL prefixes on the stub network even if they are advertising as a default router. Stub routers SHOULD be configurable to advertise NAIL prefixes on the stub network; such configuration would include a list of NAIL prefixes to advertise. This list may be configured in a management interface or as a result of these routes being delivered in a routing protocol or through router discovery. The mechanisms by which such configuration can be accomplished are out of scope for this document.¶
In some cases it will be necessary for hosts on the adjacent infrastructure link to be able to discover devices on the stub network. In other cases, this will be unnecessary or even undesirable. For example, it may be undesirable for devices on an adjacent infrastructure link to be able to discover devices on a Wi-Fi tether, for example provided by a mobile phone.¶
One example of a use case for stub networks where such discovery is desirable is the constrained network use case. In this case a low-power, low-cost stub network provides connectivity for devices that provide services to the infrastructure. For such networks, it is necessary that devices on the infrastructure be able to discover devices on the stub network.¶
The most basic use case for this is to provide feature parity with existing solutions like multicast DNS (mDNS). For example, a light bulb with built-in Wi-Fi connectivity might be discoverable on the infrastructure link to which it is connected, using mDNS, but likely is not discoverable on other links. To provide equivalent functionality for an equivalent device on a constrained network that is a stub network, the stub network device must be discoverable on the infrastructure link (which is an AIL from the perspective of the stub network).¶
If services are to be advertised using DNS Service Discovery [RFC6763], there are in principle two ways to accomplish this. One is to present services on the stub network as a DNS zone which can then be configured as a browsing domain in the DNS ([RFC6763], Section 11). The second is to advertise stub network services on the AIL using multicast DNS (mDNS) [RFC6762].¶
Stub network routers cannot be assumed to be able to integrate into the DNS naming hierarchy of the infrastructure network. Therefore, stub networks must be able to rely on ad-hoc service advertisement protocols. Since mDNS is in wide use, this is a suitable protocol for this use case. This is not to say that mDNS is the only such protocol that could be used, but it is the one that we suggest implementing.¶
In order to provide mDNS discovery for devices on the stub network, one of two solutions is likely to be applicable, depending on the operational practicalities of the stub network. For a constrained stub network, on which battery operated devices may be attached, mass multicast traffic for service discovery is impractical, since every device needs to wake up for every service discovery, even if they don't offer that service, and since many such devices may be operating on battery power. For such a network, multicast DNS is not a good choice.¶
For such networks, a unicast service registration protocol such as DNS-SD Service Registration Protocol (SRP) [I-D.ietf-dnssd-srp] is a good solution. The stub router can act as an SRP server on the stub network, accepting service advertisements from stub network devices. On the adjacent infrastructure network, it can advertise those services as multicast DNS Advertising Proxy [I-D.sctl-advertising-proxy].¶
For other stub networks, for example a Wi-Fi-based Personal Area Network provided as part of a tethering function on a mobile device, multicast DNS may be the only option. For Wi-Fi stub networks, there is such a large installed base of devices supporting mDNS that requiring some other service advertisement solution would be problematic simply because it would require new software for that entire installed base. For other networks, particularly constrained networks, where devices do not currently support mDNS, no such obstacle exists.¶
Because the primary use case for discovery of devices on a stub network is the use case where the stub network is joining a constrained network to an existing infrastructure link, we currently only describe a solution (DNS-SD SRP) for that use case. A solution for the use case where the stub router must provide discoverability for a stub network where mDNS advertising is preferred is out of scope for this document.¶
Hosts on the stub network may need to discover hosts on the adjacent infrastructure network. In the IoT network example we've been using, there might be a light switch on the stub network which needs to be able to actuate a light bulb connected to the adjacent infrastructure network. In order to know where to send the actuation messages, the light switch will need to be able to discover the light bulb's address somehow.¶
In the case of a Wi-Fi stub network, devices on the stub network will need to be able to access the Internet, and may also need to be able to access local services on the adjacent infrastructure link.¶
In order to address these use cases, the stub network router SHOULD provide a DNS-SD Discovery Proxy [RFC8766] and a DNS resolver. Since these two functions are combined, if the stub router provides them, it MUST offer both services on the standard DNS UDP and TCP ports.¶
Stub networks are defined to be IPv6-only because it would be difficult to implement a stub network using IPv4 technology. However, stub network devices may need to be able to communicate with IPv4-only services either on the adjacent infrastructure, or on the global internet. Ideally, the infrastructure network fully supports IPv6, and all services on the infrastructure network are IPv6-capable. In this case, perhaps the infrastructure network provides NAT64 service to IPv4-only hosts on the internet. In this ideal setting, the stub router need do nothing-the infrastructure network is doing it all.¶
In this situation, if there are multiple stub routers, each connected to the same adjacent infrastructure link, there is no need for special behavior-each stub router can advertise a default route, and any stub router will do to route NAT64 traffic. If some stub routers are connected to different adjacent infrastructure links than others, some of which support NAT64 and some of which do not, then the default route may not carry traffic to the correct link for NAT64 service. In this case, a more specific address to the infrastructure NAT64 prefix(es) MUST be advertised by those stub routers that are able to discover it.¶
Most infrastructure networks at present do not provide NAT64 service. It is therefore necessary for stub routers to be able to provide NAT64 service if IPv4 hosts are to be reachable from the stub network.¶
To provide NAT64 service, a stub router must allocate a NAT64 prefix. For convenience, the stub network allocates a single prefix out of the /48 ULA prefix that it maintains. Out of the 2^16 possible subnets of the /48, the stub router SHOULD use the numerically highest /64 prefix.¶
If there are multiple stub routers providing connectivity between the stub network and infrastructure, each stub network uses its own NAT64 prefix-there is no common NAT64 prefix. The reason for this is that NAT64 translation is not stateless, and is tied to the stub router's IPv4 address. Therefore each NAT64 egress is not equivalent.¶
A stub network that services a Wi-Fi stub network SHOULD provide DNS64 translation: hosts on the stub network cannot be assumed to be able to do DNS64 synthesis in the stub resolver. In this case the DNS resolver on the stub router MUST honor the CD and DO bits if received in a request, since this indicates that the stub resolver on the requestor intends to do DNSSEC validation. In this case, the resolver on the stub router MUST NOT perform DNS64 synthesis.¶
On specific stub networks it may be desirable to require the stub network device to perform DNS64 synthesis. Stub network routers for such networks do not need to provide DNS64 synthesis. Instead, they MUST provide an ipv4only.arpa answer that advertises the NAT64 prefix for that stub router, and MUST provide an explicit route to that NAT64 prefix on the stub network using RA or whatever technology is specific to that stub network type.¶
In constrained networks it can be very useful if stub network resolvers provide the information required to do DNS64 translation in the answer to the AAAA query. If the answer to an AAAA query comes back with "no data" (not NXDOMAIN), this suggests that there may be an A record. In this case, the stub network's resolver SHOULD attempt to look up an A record on the same name. If such a record exists, the resolver SHOULD return no data in the Answer section of the DNS response, and SHOULD provide any CNAME records that were involved in returning the "no data" answer to the AAAA query, and SHOULD provide any A records that were ultimately returned, in the Additional section. The resolver should also include an ipv4only.arpa record in the Additional section.¶
If a stub network is constructed using mesh technology, it may become partitioned. In such a situation, it may be one stub router is connected to one partition, and another stub router is connected to the other partition. In this situation, in order for all nodes to be reachable, it is necessary that each partition of the stub network have its own prefix. When such a partition occurs, the stub routers must detect that it has occurred. If a stub router is currently providing a prefix on the stub network, it need take no action. If a stub router had not been providing a prefix on the stub network, and now discovers that there is no stub router providing a prefix on the network, it MUST begin to provide its own prefix on the stub network. It MUST also advertise reachability to that new prefix on its adjacent infrastructure link(s).¶
When partitions of this type occur, they may also heal. When a partition heals in a situation where two stub routers have both been advertising a prefix, it will now appear that there are two prefixes on the stub network. Since partition events may represent a recurring situation, stub routers SHOULD wait for at least PARTITION_HEAL_WAIT_TIME before deprecating one of these prefixes.¶
When the time comes to deprecate one or more prefixes as a result of a network partition healing, only one prefix should remain. If there are any GUA prefixes, and if there is no specific configuration contradicting this, the GUA prefix that is numerically lowest should be kept, and all others deprecated. If there are no GUA prefixes, then the ULA prefix that is numerically lowest should be kept, and the others deprecated. By using this approach, it is not necessary for the routers to coordinate in advance.¶
There are two ways that connectivity to non-adjacent links can be established. The first is that if the infrastructure network as a whole has a working IPv4 routing fabric, NAT64 can be used to enable hosts on the stub network to establish communications with hosts on non-adjacent links, including the Internet. In some cases, this is all that is needed.¶
However, if it will be necessary for nodes on non-adjacent networks to establish communications with nodes on the stub network, this will require a working IPv6 routing fabric connecting the stub network to any non-adjacent links from which communications will need to be established.¶
In order for such routing to work, the stub network will also need to acquire a prefix that the infrastructure network is aware of and can route to. The ULA prefix that can work for communicating to adjacent infrastructure links will not work for communicating to non-adjacent links.¶
A prefix may be acquired by using DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation ([RFC8415], Section 6.3). The stub router then advertises this prefix as the on-link prefix for the stub network, as before. It also advertises reachability to this prefix using router advertisements, as before.¶
In the case where there is more than one stub router, it would be best if only one stub router requested a delegated prefix. This can be managed through the mechanism described earlier: the stub router only acquires a prefix to advertise when it has decided that it needs to advertise a prefix, and so in most cases only one stub router at a time will request a delegated prefix.¶
In order to avoid excessive consumption of delegated prefixes, stub routers connected to stub networks that support multiple stub routers SHOULD request short lifetimes for delegated prefixes and renew frequently. Stub routers SHOULD request a lifetime of PREFIX_DELEGATION_INTERVAL. Stub routers SHOULD record the time that a prefix was acquired in stable storage, and SHOULD release the prefix using a "DHCP Release" transaction when shutting down, or when it determines that a prefix is no longer needed (See "graceful shutdown" in Figure 9 of [RFC8415] for details). Stub routers SHOULD release any remembered still-valid prefix after reboot, if after rebooting it is discovered that another prefix is being advertised on the stub network.¶
We can assume that a side effect of the prefix delegation process will be to establish routing to the stub router that requested the prefix. This should mean that any node that wishes to establish communication with a node on the stub network will be able to do so through the delegating router that provides the prefix or, if it is attached to an infrastructure link that is adjacent to the stub router, through the stub router itself by means of the router advertisement it is providing.¶
The case of multiple stub routers is more complicated however. Any routing that comes as a side-effect of DHCPv6 Prefix Delegation will only route through the stub router that acquired the prefix. Other stub routers can provide reachability on their respective adjacent infrastructure links, but reachability across the full routing fabric of the infrastructure network will only be possible if there is some routing protocol present on the infrastructure network. Addressing this problem is out of scope for this document.¶
In order for service advertisements to be available on non-adjacent infrastructure, the infrastructure must provide SRP service for constrained stub networks, and must advertise the availability of such service so that stub routers can forward SRP updates to that SRP service, rather than providing SRP as a local service. This SRP service can be discovered using DNS-SD, using the _dnssd-srp-tls service type. If the stub network requires UDP-based SRP rather than tls-based SRP, the stub router MUST act as a proxy to deliver SRP updates over the tcp+tls transport.¶
For stub networks that use multicast DNS, stub routers must provide a discovery proxy service, and most advertise that service to the infrastructure. In turn, the infrastructure must configure that service to be discoverable by devices on the infrastructure, as described in [RFC8766], Section 6.¶
The mechanism described previously for making service advertisements available to non-adjacent infrastructure also scales to the internet, since it uses DNS. Indeed, the question an operator should ask before enabling such discovery is, do they want their stub network devices to be discoverable on the internet. If it becomes possible to configure service advertising automatically, behavior similar to that specified in [RFC6092], Section 3.2 and 3.3, would be advised: do not automatically advertise stub network devices on the Internet.¶
Stub routers may be mobile, or fixed. That is, they may move from location to location along with some or all of their connected devices, attaching to whatever infrastructure is available. Or they may be fixed devices that are only ever expected to exist in one particular location.¶
For devices that are intended to be in a fixed location, the distinction between infrastructure links and the internet as a whole is meaningful; for mobile nodes it most likely is not, unless such a node is only going to ever attach to trusted infrastructure as it moves from location to location-not a common scenario.¶
For fixed links, the infrastructure may be trusted, in which case the distinction between infrastructure and internet can be expected to be managed by the infrastructure, and therefore only visible to the stub router in the sense that some non-adjacent destinations may be reachable (infrastructure destinations, for example) while others are not.¶
The reason for mentioning this here is to point out that the stub router can't be expected to manage this interface: it is up to the infrastructure network to do so, either implicitly or explicitly. [RFC7084] provides a set of default behaviors for home routers that may be adequate for automatically managing this interface, but further work in this area may be warranted.¶