--- 1/draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-14.txt 2018-08-24 11:13:20.418804436 -0700 +++ 2/draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-15.txt 2018-08-24 11:13:20.506806570 -0700 @@ -1,22 +1,22 @@ Network Working Group D. Farinacci Internet-Draft V. Fuller Obsoletes: 6830 (if approved) D. Meyer Intended status: Standards Track D. Lewis -Expires: January 18, 2019 Cisco Systems +Expires: February 25, 2019 Cisco Systems A. Cabellos (Ed.) UPC/BarcelonaTech - July 17, 2018 + August 24, 2018 The Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) - draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-14 + draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-15 Abstract This document describes the Data-Plane protocol for the Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP). LISP defines two namespaces, End-point Identifiers (EIDs) that identify end-hosts and Routing Locators (RLOCs) that identify network attachment points. With this, LISP effectively separates control from data, and allows routers to create overlay networks. LISP-capable routers exchange encapsulated packets according to EID-to-RLOC mappings stored in a local Map-Cache. @@ -35,21 +35,21 @@ 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 January 18, 2019. + This Internet-Draft will expire on February 25, 2019. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2018 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 @@ -79,42 +79,45 @@ 10. Routing Locator Reachability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 10.1. Echo Nonce Algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 11. EID Reachability within a LISP Site . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 12. Routing Locator Hashing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 13. Changing the Contents of EID-to-RLOC Mappings . . . . . . . . 28 13.1. Database Map-Versioning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 14. Multicast Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 15. Router Performance Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 16. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 17. Network Management Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 - 18. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 - 18.1. LISP UDP Port Numbers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 - 19. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 - 19.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 - 19.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 + 18. Changes since RFC 6830 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 + 19. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 + 19.1. LISP UDP Port Numbers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 + 20. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 + 20.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 + 20.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 + Appendix A. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Appendix B. Document Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 - B.1. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-14 . . . . . . . . 38 - B.2. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-13 . . . . . . . . 38 - B.3. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-12 . . . . . . . . 38 - B.4. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-11 . . . . . . . . 38 - B.5. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-10 . . . . . . . . 38 - B.6. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-09 . . . . . . . . 39 - B.7. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-08 . . . . . . . . 39 - B.8. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-07 . . . . . . . . 39 - B.9. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-06 . . . . . . . . 39 - B.10. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-05 . . . . . . . . 40 - B.11. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-04 . . . . . . . . 40 - B.12. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-03 . . . . . . . . 40 - B.13. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-02 . . . . . . . . 40 - B.14. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-01 . . . . . . . . 40 - B.15. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-00 . . . . . . . . 41 + B.1. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-15 . . . . . . . . 38 + B.2. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-14 . . . . . . . . 38 + B.3. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-13 . . . . . . . . 38 + B.4. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-12 . . . . . . . . 38 + B.5. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-11 . . . . . . . . 38 + B.6. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-10 . . . . . . . . 38 + B.7. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-09 . . . . . . . . 39 + B.8. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-08 . . . . . . . . 39 + B.9. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-07 . . . . . . . . 39 + B.10. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-06 . . . . . . . . 39 + B.11. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-05 . . . . . . . . 40 + B.12. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-04 . . . . . . . . 40 + B.13. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-03 . . . . . . . . 40 + B.14. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-02 . . . . . . . . 40 + B.15. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-01 . . . . . . . . 41 + B.16. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-00 . . . . . . . . 41 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 1. Introduction This document describes the Locator/Identifier Separation Protocol (LISP). LISP is an encapsulation protocol built around the fundamental idea of separating the topological location of a network attachment point from the node's identity [CHIAPPA]. As a result LISP creates two namespaces: Endpoint Identifiers (EIDs), that are used to identify end-hosts (e.g., nodes or Virtual Machines) and @@ -149,21 +152,22 @@ found in [RFC7215] and [RFC6835] describes considerations for network operational management. Finally, [I-D.ietf-lisp-introduction] describes the LISP architecture. This document obsoletes RFC 6830. 2. Requirements Notation 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]. + document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119] and + [RFC8174]. 3. Definition of Terms Address Family Identifier (AFI): AFI is a term used to describe an address encoding in a packet. An address family that pertains to the Data-Plane. See [AFN] and [RFC3232] for details. An AFI value of 0 used in this specification indicates an unspecified encoded address where the length of the address is 0 octets following the 16-bit AFI value of 0. @@ -1325,25 +1328,25 @@ well as setting the corresponding Locator-Status-Bit to 0. This forces ITRs with old or new mappings to avoid using the removed Locator. If many changes occur to a mapping over a long period of time, one will find empty record slots in the middle of the Locator-Set and new records appended to the Locator-Set. At some point, it would be useful to compact the Locator-Set so the Locator-Status-Bit settings can be efficiently packed. - We propose here a Data-Plane mechanism (Map-Versioning) to update the - contents of EID-to-RLOC mappings. Please note that in addition the - Solicit-Map Request (specified in [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis]) is a - Control-Plane mechanisms that can be used to update EID-to-RLOC - mappings. + We propose here a Data-Plane mechanism (Map-Versioning specified in + [I-D.ietf-lisp-6834bis]) to update the contents of EID-to-RLOC + mappings. Please note that in addition the Solicit-Map Request + (specified in [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis]) is a Control-Plane + mechanisms that can be used to update EID-to-RLOC mappings. 13.1. Database Map-Versioning When there is unidirectional packet flow between an ITR and ETR, and the EID-to-RLOC mappings change on the ETR, it needs to inform the ITR so encapsulation to a removed Locator can stop and can instead be started to a new Locator in the Locator-Set. An ETR, when it sends Map-Reply messages, conveys its own Map-Version Number. This is known as the Destination Map-Version Number. ITRs @@ -1478,47 +1481,69 @@ or gleaning) SHOULD be verified with other reachability mechanisms. In addition, systematic rate-limitation and filtering is an effective technique to mitigate attacks that aim to overload the Control-Plane. 17. Network Management Considerations Considerations for network management tools exist so the LISP protocol suite can be operationally managed. These mechanisms can be found in [RFC7052] and [RFC6835]. -18. IANA Considerations +18. Changes since RFC 6830 + + For implementation considerations, the following changes have been + made to this document since RFC 6830 was published: + + o It is no longer mandated that a maximum number of 2 LISP headers + be prepended to a packet. If there is a application need for more + than 2 LISP headers, an implementation can support more. However, + this document recommends a maximum of 2 LISP headers. + + o The 3 reserved flag bits in the LISP header have been allocated + for [RFC8060]. The low-order 2 bits of the 3-bit field (now named + the KK bits) are used as a key identifier. The 1 remaining bit is + still documented as reserved. + + o Data-Plane gleaning for creating map-cache entries has been made + optional. If any ITR implementations depend or assume the remote + ETR is gleaning should not do so. This does not create any + interoperability problems since the control-plane map-cache + population procedures are unilateral and are the typical method + for map-cache population. + +19. IANA Considerations This section provides guidance to the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) regarding registration of values related to this Data-Plane LISP specification, in accordance with BCP 26 [RFC8126]. -18.1. LISP UDP Port Numbers +19.1. LISP UDP Port Numbers The IANA registry has allocated UDP port number 4341 for the LISP Data-Plane. IANA has updated the description for UDP port 4341 as follows: lisp-data 4341 udp LISP Data Packets -19. References +20. References -19.1. Normative References +20.1. Normative References [I-D.ietf-lisp-6834bis] Iannone, L., Saucez, D., and O. Bonaventure, "Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) Map-Versioning", draft-ietf- lisp-6834bis-00 (work in progress), July 2018. [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis] Fuller, V., Farinacci, D., and A. Cabellos-Aparicio, "Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) Control-Plane", - draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis-10 (work in progress), March + draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis-12 (work in progress), July 2018. [RFC0768] Postel, J., "User Datagram Protocol", STD 6, RFC 768, DOI 10.17487/RFC0768, August 1980, . [RFC0791] Postel, J., "Internet Protocol", STD 5, RFC 791, DOI 10.17487/RFC0791, September 1981, . @@ -1531,21 +1556,21 @@ [RFC3168] Ramakrishnan, K., Floyd, S., and D. Black, "The Addition of Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) to IP", RFC 3168, DOI 10.17487/RFC3168, September 2001, . [RFC8200] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6) Specification", STD 86, RFC 8200, DOI 10.17487/RFC8200, July 2017, . -19.2. Informative References +20.2. Informative References [AFN] IANA, "Address Family Numbers", August 2016, . [CHIAPPA] Chiappa, J., "Endpoints and Endpoint names: A Proposed", 1999, . [I-D.ietf-lisp-introduction] Cabellos-Aparicio, A. and D. Saucez, "An Architectural @@ -1666,20 +1691,24 @@ [RFC8111] Fuller, V., Lewis, D., Ermagan, V., Jain, A., and A. Smirnov, "Locator/ID Separation Protocol Delegated Database Tree (LISP-DDT)", RFC 8111, DOI 10.17487/RFC8111, May 2017, . [RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017, . + [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC + 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, + May 2017, . + [RFC8378] Moreno, V. and D. Farinacci, "Signal-Free Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) Multicast", RFC 8378, DOI 10.17487/RFC8378, May 2018, . Appendix A. Acknowledgments An initial thank you goes to Dave Oran for planting the seeds for the initial ideas for LISP. His consultation continues to provide value to the LISP authors. @@ -1716,103 +1745,113 @@ The LISP working group would like to give a special thanks to Jari Arkko, the Internet Area AD at the time that the set of LISP documents were being prepared for IESG last call, and for his meticulous reviews and detailed commentaries on the 7 working group last call documents progressing toward standards-track RFCs. Appendix B. Document Change Log [RFC Editor: Please delete this section on publication as RFC.] -B.1. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-14 +B.1. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-15 - o Posted July 2018 IETF week. + o Posted August 2018. - o Put obsolete of RFC 6830 in Intro section in addition to abstract. + o Final editorial changes before RFC submission for Proposed + Standard. -B.2. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-13 + o Added section "Changes since RFC 6830" so implementators are + informed of any changes since the last RFC publication. - o Posted July 2018. +B.2. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-14 - o Fixed Luigi editorial comments to ready draft for RFC status. + o Posted July 2018 IETF week. -B.3. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-12 + o Put obsolete of RFC 6830 in Intro section in addition to abstract. + +B.3. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-13 o Posted March IETF Week 2018. o Clarified that a new nonce is required per RLOC. o Removed 'Clock Sweep' section. This text must be placed in a new OAM document. o Some references changed from normative to informative -B.4. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-11 +B.4. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-12 + + o Posted July 2018. + + o Fixed Luigi editorial comments to ready draft for RFC status. + +B.5. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-11 o Posted March 2018. o Removed sections 16, 17 and 18 (Mobility, Deployment and Traceroute considerations). This text must be placed in a new OAM document. -B.5. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-10 +B.6. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-10 o Posted March 2018. o Updated section 'Router Locator Selection' stating that the Data- Plane MUST follow what's stored in the Map-Cache (priorities and weights). o Section 'Routing Locator Reachability': Removed bullet point 2 (ICMP Network/Host Unreachable),3 (hints from BGP),4 (ICMP Port Unreachable),5 (receive a Map-Reply as a response) and RLOC probing o Removed 'Solicit-Map Request'. -B.6. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-09 +B.7. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-09 o Posted January 2018. o Add more details in section 5.3 about DSCP processing during encapsulation and decapsulation. o Added clarity to definitions in the Definition of Terms section from various commenters. o Removed PA and PI definitions from Definition of Terms section. o More editorial changes. o Removed 4342 from IANA section and move to RFC6833 IANA section. -B.7. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-08 +B.8. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-08 o Posted January 2018. o Remove references to research work for any protocol mechanisms. o Document scanned to make sure it is RFC 2119 compliant. o Made changes to reflect comments from document WG shepherd Luigi Iannone. o Ran IDNITs on the document. -B.8. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-07 +B.9. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-07 o Posted November 2017. o Rephrase how Instance-IDs are used and don't refer to [RFC1918] addresses. -B.9. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-06 +B.10. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-06 o Posted October 2017. o Put RTR definition before it is used. o Rename references that are now working group drafts. o Remove "EIDs MUST NOT be used as used by a host to refer to other hosts. Note that EID blocks MAY LISP RLOCs". @@ -1821,61 +1860,61 @@ o ETRs may, rather than will, be the ones to send Map-Replies. o Recommend, rather than mandate, max encapsulation headers to 2. o Reference VPN draft when introducing Instance-ID. o Indicate that SMRs can be sent when ITR/ETR are in the same node. o Clarify when private addreses can be used. -B.10. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-05 +B.11. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-05 o Posted August 2017. o Make it clear that a Reencapsulating Tunnel Router is an RTR. -B.11. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-04 +B.12. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-04 o Posted July 2017. o Changed reference of IPv6 RFC2460 to RFC8200. o Indicate that the applicability statement for UDP zero checksums over IPv6 adheres to RFC6936. -B.12. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-03 +B.13. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-03 o Posted May 2017. o Move the control-plane related codepoints in the IANA Considerations section to RFC6833bis. -B.13. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-02 +B.14. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-02 o Posted April 2017. o Reflect some editorial comments from Damien Sausez. -B.14. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-01 +B.15. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-01 o Posted March 2017. o Include references to new RFCs published. o Change references from RFC6833 to RFC6833bis. o Clarified LCAF text in the IANA section. o Remove references to "experimental". -B.15. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-00 +B.16. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-00 o Posted December 2016. o Created working group document from draft-farinacci-lisp -rfc6830-00 individual submission. No other changes made. Authors' Addresses Dino Farinacci Cisco Systems