draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-21.txt   draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-22.txt 
Network Working Group D. Farinacci Network Working Group D. Farinacci
Internet-Draft V. Fuller Internet-Draft V. Fuller
Obsoletes: 6830 (if approved) D. Meyer Obsoletes: 6830 (if approved) D. Meyer
Intended status: Standards Track D. Lewis Intended status: Standards Track D. Lewis
Expires: March 31, 2019 Cisco Systems Expires: April 4, 2019 Cisco Systems
A. Cabellos (Ed.) A. Cabellos (Ed.)
UPC/BarcelonaTech UPC/BarcelonaTech
September 27, 2018 October 1, 2018
The Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) The Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP)
draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-21 draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-22
Abstract Abstract
This document describes the Data-Plane protocol for the Locator/ID This document describes the Data-Plane protocol for the Locator/ID
Separation Protocol (LISP). LISP defines two namespaces, End-point Separation Protocol (LISP). LISP defines two namespaces, End-point
Identifiers (EIDs) that identify end-hosts and Routing Locators Identifiers (EIDs) that identify end-hosts and Routing Locators
(RLOCs) that identify network attachment points. With this, LISP (RLOCs) that identify network attachment points. With this, LISP
effectively separates control from data, and allows routers to create effectively separates control from data, and allows routers to create
overlay networks. LISP-capable routers exchange encapsulated packets overlay networks. LISP-capable routers exchange encapsulated packets
according to EID-to-RLOC mappings stored in a local Map-Cache. according to EID-to-RLOC mappings stored in a local Map-Cache.
skipping to change at page 1, line 46 skipping to change at page 1, line 46
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on March 31, 2019. This Internet-Draft will expire on April 4, 2019.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 2, line 25 skipping to change at page 2, line 25
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Requirements Notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Requirements Notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Basic Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 4. Basic Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.1. Packet Flow Sequence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4.1. Packet Flow Sequence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5. LISP Encapsulation Details . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 5. LISP Encapsulation Details . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.1. LISP IPv4-in-IPv4 Header Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 5.1. LISP IPv4-in-IPv4 Header Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
5.2. LISP IPv6-in-IPv6 Header Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 5.2. LISP IPv6-in-IPv6 Header Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
5.3. Tunnel Header Field Descriptions . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 5.3. Tunnel Header Field Descriptions . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
6. LISP EID-to-RLOC Map-Cache . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 6. LISP EID-to-RLOC Map-Cache . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
7. Dealing with Large Encapsulated Packets . . . . . . . . . . . 20 7. Dealing with Large Encapsulated Packets . . . . . . . . . . . 20
7.1. A Stateless Solution to MTU Handling . . . . . . . . . . 21 7.1. A Stateless Solution to MTU Handling . . . . . . . . . . 21
7.2. A Stateful Solution to MTU Handling . . . . . . . . . . . 22 7.2. A Stateful Solution to MTU Handling . . . . . . . . . . . 22
8. Using Virtualization and Segmentation with LISP . . . . . . . 22 8. Using Virtualization and Segmentation with LISP . . . . . . . 22
9. Routing Locator Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 9. Routing Locator Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
skipping to change at page 2, line 48 skipping to change at page 2, line 48
10.1. Echo Nonce Algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 10.1. Echo Nonce Algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
11. EID Reachability within a LISP Site . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 11. EID Reachability within a LISP Site . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
12. Routing Locator Hashing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 12. Routing Locator Hashing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
13. Changing the Contents of EID-to-RLOC Mappings . . . . . . . . 29 13. Changing the Contents of EID-to-RLOC Mappings . . . . . . . . 29
13.1. Database Map-Versioning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 13.1. Database Map-Versioning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
14. Multicast Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 14. Multicast Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
15. Router Performance Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 15. Router Performance Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
16. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 16. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
17. Network Management Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 17. Network Management Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
18. Changes since RFC 6830 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 18. Changes since RFC 6830 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
19. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 19. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
19.1. LISP UDP Port Numbers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 19.1. LISP UDP Port Numbers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
20. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 20. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
20.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 20.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
20.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 20.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Appendix A. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Appendix A. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Appendix B. Document Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Appendix B. Document Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
B.1. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-21 . . . . . . . . 40 B.1. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-22 . . . . . . . . 40
B.2. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-20 . . . . . . . . 40 B.2. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-21 . . . . . . . . 40
B.3. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-19 . . . . . . . . 40 B.3. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-20 . . . . . . . . 40
B.4. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-18 . . . . . . . . 40 B.4. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-19 . . . . . . . . 40
B.5. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-17 . . . . . . . . 40 B.5. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-18 . . . . . . . . 40
B.6. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-16 . . . . . . . . 40 B.6. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-17 . . . . . . . . 40
B.7. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-15 . . . . . . . . 40 B.7. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-16 . . . . . . . . 40
B.8. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-14 . . . . . . . . 41 B.8. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-15 . . . . . . . . 41
B.9. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-13 . . . . . . . . 41 B.9. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-14 . . . . . . . . 41
B.10. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-12 . . . . . . . . 41 B.10. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-13 . . . . . . . . 41
B.11. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-11 . . . . . . . . 41 B.11. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-12 . . . . . . . . 41
B.12. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-10 . . . . . . . . 41 B.12. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-11 . . . . . . . . 41
B.13. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-09 . . . . . . . . 42 B.13. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-10 . . . . . . . . 41
B.14. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-08 . . . . . . . . 42 B.14. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-09 . . . . . . . . 42
B.15. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-07 . . . . . . . . 42 B.15. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-08 . . . . . . . . 42
B.16. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-06 . . . . . . . . 42 B.16. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-07 . . . . . . . . 42
B.17. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-05 . . . . . . . . 43 B.17. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-06 . . . . . . . . 42
B.18. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-04 . . . . . . . . 43 B.18. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-05 . . . . . . . . 43
B.19. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-03 . . . . . . . . 43 B.19. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-04 . . . . . . . . 43
B.20. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-02 . . . . . . . . 43 B.20. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-03 . . . . . . . . 43
B.21. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-01 . . . . . . . . 43 B.21. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-02 . . . . . . . . 43
B.22. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-00 . . . . . . . . 44 B.22. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-01 . . . . . . . . 44
B.23. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-00 . . . . . . . . 44
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
This document describes the Locator/Identifier Separation Protocol This document describes the Locator/Identifier Separation Protocol
(LISP). LISP is an encapsulation protocol built around the (LISP). LISP is an encapsulation protocol built around the
fundamental idea of separating the topological location of a network fundamental idea of separating the topological location of a network
attachment point from the node's identity [CHIAPPA]. As a result attachment point from the node's identity [CHIAPPA]. As a result
LISP creates two namespaces: Endpoint Identifiers (EIDs), that are LISP creates two namespaces: Endpoint Identifiers (EIDs), that are
used to identify end-hosts (e.g., nodes or Virtual Machines) and used to identify end-hosts (e.g., nodes or Virtual Machines) and
skipping to change at page 4, line 28 skipping to change at page 4, line 28
specifies the LISP control plane. LISP deployment guidelines can be specifies the LISP control plane. LISP deployment guidelines can be
found in [RFC7215] and [RFC6835] describes considerations for network found in [RFC7215] and [RFC6835] describes considerations for network
operational management. Finally, [I-D.ietf-lisp-introduction] operational management. Finally, [I-D.ietf-lisp-introduction]
describes the LISP architecture. describes the LISP architecture.
This document obsoletes RFC 6830. This document obsoletes RFC 6830.
2. Requirements Notation 2. Requirements Notation
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119] and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
[RFC8174]. 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here.
3. Definition of Terms 3. Definition of Terms
Address Family Identifier (AFI): AFI is a term used to describe an Address Family Identifier (AFI): AFI is a term used to describe an
address encoding in a packet. An address family that pertains to address encoding in a packet. An address family that pertains to
addresses found in Data-Plane headers. See [AFN] and [RFC3232] addresses found in Data-Plane headers. See [AFN] and [RFC3232]
for details. An AFI value of 0 used in this specification for details. An AFI value of 0 used in this specification
indicates an unspecified encoded address where the length of the indicates an unspecified encoded address where the length of the
address is 0 octets following the 16-bit AFI value of 0. address is 0 octets following the 16-bit AFI value of 0.
skipping to change at page 24, line 35 skipping to change at page 24, line 35
outer-header source RLOC of received packets. The client-side ITR outer-header source RLOC of received packets. The client-side ITR
controls how traffic is returned and can alternate using an outer- controls how traffic is returned and can alternate using an outer-
header source RLOC, which then can be added to the list the header source RLOC, which then can be added to the list the
server-side ETR uses to return traffic. Since no Priority or server-side ETR uses to return traffic. Since no Priority or
Weights are provided using this method, the server-side ETR MUST Weights are provided using this method, the server-side ETR MUST
assume that each client-side ITR RLOC uses the same best Priority assume that each client-side ITR RLOC uses the same best Priority
with a Weight of zero. In addition, since EID-Prefix encoding with a Weight of zero. In addition, since EID-Prefix encoding
cannot be conveyed in data packets, the EID-to-RLOC Cache on cannot be conveyed in data packets, the EID-to-RLOC Cache on
Tunnel Routers can grow to be very large. Tunnel Routers can grow to be very large.
Alternatively, RLOC information MAY be gleaned from received tunneled Instead of using the Map-Cache or mapping system, RLOC information
packets or EID-to-RLOC Map-Request messages. A "gleaned" Map-Cache MAY be gleaned from received tunneled packets or EID-to-RLOC Map-
entry, one learned from the source RLOC of a received encapsulated Request messages. A "gleaned" Map-Cache entry, one learned from the
packet, is only stored and used for a few seconds, pending source RLOC of a received encapsulated packet, is only stored and
verification. Verification is performed by sending a Map-Request to used for a few seconds, pending verification. Verification is
the source EID (the inner-header IP source address) of the received performed by sending a Map-Request to the source EID (the inner-
encapsulated packet. A reply to this "verifying Map-Request" is used header IP source address) of the received encapsulated packet. A
to fully populate the Map-Cache entry for the "gleaned" EID and is reply to this "verifying Map-Request" is used to fully populate the
stored and used for the time indicated from the 'TTL' field of a Map-Cache entry for the "gleaned" EID and is stored and used for the
received Map-Reply. When a verified Map-Cache entry is stored, data time indicated from the 'TTL' field of a received Map-Reply. When a
gleaning no longer occurs for subsequent packets that have a source verified Map-Cache entry is stored, data gleaning no longer occurs
EID that matches the EID-Prefix of the verified entry. This for subsequent packets that have a source EID that matches the EID-
"gleaning" mechanism is OPTIONAL, refer to Section 16 for security Prefix of the verified entry. This "gleaning" mechanism is OPTIONAL,
issues regarding this mechanism. refer to Section 16 for security issues regarding this mechanism.
RLOCs that appear in EID-to-RLOC Map-Reply messages are assumed to be RLOCs that appear in EID-to-RLOC Map-Reply messages are assumed to be
reachable when the R-bit [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis] for the Locator reachable when the R-bit [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis] for the Locator
record is set to 1. When the R-bit is set to 0, an ITR or PITR MUST record is set to 1. When the R-bit is set to 0, an ITR or PITR MUST
NOT encapsulate to the RLOC. Neither the information contained in a NOT encapsulate to the RLOC. Neither the information contained in a
Map-Reply nor that stored in the mapping database system provides Map-Reply nor that stored in the mapping database system provides
reachability information for RLOCs. Note that reachability is not reachability information for RLOCs. Note that reachability is not
part of the mapping system and is determined using one or more of the part of the mapping system and is determined using one or more of the
Routing Locator reachability algorithms described in the next Routing Locator reachability algorithms described in the next
section. section.
skipping to change at page 26, line 44 skipping to change at page 26, line 44
10.1. Echo Nonce Algorithm 10.1. Echo Nonce Algorithm
When data flows bidirectionally between Locators from different When data flows bidirectionally between Locators from different
sites, a Data-Plane mechanism called "nonce echoing" can be used to sites, a Data-Plane mechanism called "nonce echoing" can be used to
determine reachability between an ITR and ETR. When an ITR wants to determine reachability between an ITR and ETR. When an ITR wants to
solicit a nonce echo, it sets the N- and E-bits and places a 24-bit solicit a nonce echo, it sets the N- and E-bits and places a 24-bit
nonce [RFC4086] in the LISP header of the next encapsulated data nonce [RFC4086] in the LISP header of the next encapsulated data
packet. packet.
When this packet is received by the ETR, the encapsulated packet is When this packet is received by the ETR, the encapsulated packet is
forwarded as normal. When the ETR next sends a data packet to the forwarded as normal. When the ETR is an xTR (co-located as an ITR),
ITR, it includes the nonce received earlier with the N-bit set and it next sends a data packet to the ITR (when it is an xTR co-located
E-bit cleared. The ITR sees this "echoed nonce" and knows that the as an ETR), it includes the nonce received earlier with the N-bit set
path to and from the ETR is up. and E-bit cleared. The ITR sees this "echoed nonce" and knows that
the path to and from the ETR is up.
The ITR will set the E-bit and N-bit for every packet it sends while The ITR will set the E-bit and N-bit for every packet it sends while
in the echo-nonce-request state. The time the ITR waits to process in the echo-nonce-request state. The time the ITR waits to process
the echoed nonce before it determines the path is unreachable is the echoed nonce before it determines the path is unreachable is
variable and is a choice left for the implementation. variable and is a choice left for the implementation.
If the ITR is receiving packets from the ETR but does not see the If the ITR is receiving packets from the ETR but does not see the
nonce echoed while being in the echo-nonce-request state, then the nonce echoed while being in the echo-nonce-request state, then the
path to the ETR is unreachable. This decision MAY be overridden by path to the ETR is unreachable. This decision MAY be overridden by
other Locator reachability algorithms. Once the ITR determines that other Locator reachability algorithms. Once the ITR determines that
skipping to change at page 28, line 36 skipping to change at page 28, line 41
destination addresses only from the header are used to compute destination addresses only from the header are used to compute
the hash. the hash.
2. Take the hash value and divide it by the number of Locators 2. Take the hash value and divide it by the number of Locators
stored in the Locator-Set for the EID-to-RLOC mapping. stored in the Locator-Set for the EID-to-RLOC mapping.
3. The remainder will yield a value of 0 to "number of Locators 3. The remainder will yield a value of 0 to "number of Locators
minus 1". Use the remainder to select the Locator in the minus 1". Use the remainder to select the Locator in the
Locator-Set. Locator-Set.
The specific hash algorithm the ITR uses for load-sharing is out of
scope for this document and does not prevent interoperability.
Note that when a packet is LISP encapsulated, the source port number Note that when a packet is LISP encapsulated, the source port number
in the outer UDP header needs to be set. Selecting a hashed value in the outer UDP header needs to be set. Selecting a hashed value
allows core routers that are attached to Link Aggregation Groups allows core routers that are attached to Link Aggregation Groups
(LAGs) to load-split the encapsulated packets across member links of (LAGs) to load-split the encapsulated packets across member links of
such LAGs. Otherwise, core routers would see a single flow, since such LAGs. Otherwise, core routers would see a single flow, since
packets have a source address of the ITR, for packets that are packets have a source address of the ITR, for packets that are
originated by different EIDs at the source site. A suggested setting originated by different EIDs at the source site. A suggested setting
for the source port number computed by an ITR is a 5-tuple hash for the source port number computed by an ITR is a 5-tuple hash
function on the inner header, as described above. The source port function on the inner header, as described above. The source port
SHOULD be the same for all packets belonging to the same flow. SHOULD be the same for all packets belonging to the same flow.
skipping to change at page 40, line 5 skipping to change at page 40, line 5
The LISP working group would like to give a special thanks to Jari 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 Arkko, the Internet Area AD at the time that the set of LISP
documents were being prepared for IESG last call, and for his documents were being prepared for IESG last call, and for his
meticulous reviews and detailed commentaries on the 7 working group meticulous reviews and detailed commentaries on the 7 working group
last call documents progressing toward standards-track RFCs. last call documents progressing toward standards-track RFCs.
Appendix B. Document Change Log Appendix B. Document Change Log
[RFC Editor: Please delete this section on publication as RFC.] [RFC Editor: Please delete this section on publication as RFC.]
B.1. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-21 B.1. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-22
o Late-September 2018. o Posted early October 2018.
o Changes to reflect comments post Telechat.
B.2. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-21
o Posted late-September 2018.
o Changes to reflect comments from Sep 27th Telechat. o Changes to reflect comments from Sep 27th Telechat.
B.2. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-20 B.3. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-20
o Posted late-September 2018. o Posted late-September 2018.
o Fix old reference to RFC3168, changed to RFC6040. o Fix old reference to RFC3168, changed to RFC6040.
B.3. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-19 B.4. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-19
o Posted late-September 2018. o Posted late-September 2018.
o More editorial changes. o More editorial changes.
B.4. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-18 B.5. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-18
o Posted mid-September 2018. o Posted mid-September 2018.
o Changes to reflect comments from Secdir review (Mirja). o Changes to reflect comments from Secdir review (Mirja).
B.5. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-17 B.6. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-17
o Posted September 2018. o Posted September 2018.
o Indicate in the "Changes since RFC 6830" section why the document o Indicate in the "Changes since RFC 6830" section why the document
has been shortened in length. has been shortened in length.
o Make reference to RFC 8085 about UDP congestion control. o Make reference to RFC 8085 about UDP congestion control.
o More editorial changes from multiple IESG reviews. o More editorial changes from multiple IESG reviews.
B.6. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-16 B.7. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-16
o Posted late August 2018. o Posted late August 2018.
o Distinguish the message type names between ICMP for IPv4 and ICMP o Distinguish the message type names between ICMP for IPv4 and ICMP
for IPv6 for handling MTU issues. for IPv6 for handling MTU issues.
B.7. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-15 B.8. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-15
o Posted August 2018. o Posted August 2018.
o Final editorial changes before RFC submission for Proposed o Final editorial changes before RFC submission for Proposed
Standard. Standard.
o Added section "Changes since RFC 6830" so implementers are o Added section "Changes since RFC 6830" so implementers are
informed of any changes since the last RFC publication. informed of any changes since the last RFC publication.
B.8. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-14 B.9. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-14
o Posted July 2018 IETF week. o Posted July 2018 IETF week.
o Put obsolete of RFC 6830 in Intro section in addition to abstract. o Put obsolete of RFC 6830 in Intro section in addition to abstract.
B.9. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-13 B.10. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-13
o Posted March IETF Week 2018. o Posted March IETF Week 2018.
o Clarified that a new nonce is required per RLOC. o Clarified that a new nonce is required per RLOC.
o Removed 'Clock Sweep' section. This text must be placed in a new o Removed 'Clock Sweep' section. This text must be placed in a new
OAM document. OAM document.
o Some references changed from normative to informative o Some references changed from normative to informative
B.10. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-12 B.11. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-12
o Posted July 2018. o Posted July 2018.
o Fixed Luigi editorial comments to ready draft for RFC status. o Fixed Luigi editorial comments to ready draft for RFC status.
B.11. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-11 B.12. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-11
o Posted March 2018. o Posted March 2018.
o Removed sections 16, 17 and 18 (Mobility, Deployment and o Removed sections 16, 17 and 18 (Mobility, Deployment and
Traceroute considerations). This text must be placed in a new OAM Traceroute considerations). This text must be placed in a new OAM
document. document.
B.12. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-10 B.13. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-10
o Posted March 2018. o Posted March 2018.
o Updated section 'Router Locator Selection' stating that the Data- o Updated section 'Router Locator Selection' stating that the Data-
Plane MUST follow what's stored in the Map-Cache (priorities and Plane MUST follow what's stored in the Map-Cache (priorities and
weights). weights).
o Section 'Routing Locator Reachability': Removed bullet point 2 o Section 'Routing Locator Reachability': Removed bullet point 2
(ICMP Network/Host Unreachable),3 (hints from BGP),4 (ICMP Port (ICMP Network/Host Unreachable),3 (hints from BGP),4 (ICMP Port
Unreachable),5 (receive a Map-Reply as a response) and RLOC Unreachable),5 (receive a Map-Reply as a response) and RLOC
probing probing
o Removed 'Solicit-Map Request'. o Removed 'Solicit-Map Request'.
B.13. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-09 B.14. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-09
o Posted January 2018. o Posted January 2018.
o Add more details in section 5.3 about DSCP processing during o Add more details in section 5.3 about DSCP processing during
encapsulation and decapsulation. encapsulation and decapsulation.
o Added clarity to definitions in the Definition of Terms section o Added clarity to definitions in the Definition of Terms section
from various commenters. from various commenters.
o Removed PA and PI definitions from Definition of Terms section. o Removed PA and PI definitions from Definition of Terms section.
o More editorial changes. o More editorial changes.
o Removed 4342 from IANA section and move to RFC6833 IANA section. o Removed 4342 from IANA section and move to RFC6833 IANA section.
B.14. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-08 B.15. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-08
o Posted January 2018. o Posted January 2018.
o Remove references to research work for any protocol mechanisms. o Remove references to research work for any protocol mechanisms.
o Document scanned to make sure it is RFC 2119 compliant. o Document scanned to make sure it is RFC 2119 compliant.
o Made changes to reflect comments from document WG shepherd Luigi o Made changes to reflect comments from document WG shepherd Luigi
Iannone. Iannone.
o Ran IDNITs on the document. o Ran IDNITs on the document.
B.15. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-07 B.16. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-07
o Posted November 2017. o Posted November 2017.
o Rephrase how Instance-IDs are used and don't refer to [RFC1918] o Rephrase how Instance-IDs are used and don't refer to [RFC1918]
addresses. addresses.
B.16. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-06 B.17. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-06
o Posted October 2017. o Posted October 2017.
o Put RTR definition before it is used. o Put RTR definition before it is used.
o Rename references that are now working group drafts. 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 o Remove "EIDs MUST NOT be used as used by a host to refer to other
hosts. Note that EID blocks MAY LISP RLOCs". hosts. Note that EID blocks MAY LISP RLOCs".
skipping to change at page 43, line 15 skipping to change at page 43, line 22
o ETRs may, rather than will, be the ones to send Map-Replies. o ETRs may, rather than will, be the ones to send Map-Replies.
o Recommend, rather than mandate, max encapsulation headers to 2. o Recommend, rather than mandate, max encapsulation headers to 2.
o Reference VPN draft when introducing Instance-ID. o Reference VPN draft when introducing Instance-ID.
o Indicate that SMRs can be sent when ITR/ETR are in the same node. o Indicate that SMRs can be sent when ITR/ETR are in the same node.
o Clarify when private addresses can be used. o Clarify when private addresses can be used.
B.17. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-05 B.18. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-05
o Posted August 2017. o Posted August 2017.
o Make it clear that a Re-encapsulating Tunnel Router is an RTR. o Make it clear that a Re-encapsulating Tunnel Router is an RTR.
B.18. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-04 B.19. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-04
o Posted July 2017. o Posted July 2017.
o Changed reference of IPv6 RFC2460 to RFC8200. o Changed reference of IPv6 RFC2460 to RFC8200.
o Indicate that the applicability statement for UDP zero checksums o Indicate that the applicability statement for UDP zero checksums
over IPv6 adheres to RFC6936. over IPv6 adheres to RFC6936.
B.19. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-03 B.20. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-03
o Posted May 2017. o Posted May 2017.
o Move the control-plane related codepoints in the IANA o Move the control-plane related codepoints in the IANA
Considerations section to RFC6833bis. Considerations section to RFC6833bis.
B.20. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-02 B.21. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-02
o Posted April 2017. o Posted April 2017.
o Reflect some editorial comments from Damien Sausez. o Reflect some editorial comments from Damien Sausez.
B.21. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-01 B.22. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-01
o Posted March 2017. o Posted March 2017.
o Include references to new RFCs published. o Include references to new RFCs published.
o Change references from RFC6833 to RFC6833bis. o Change references from RFC6833 to RFC6833bis.
o Clarified LCAF text in the IANA section. o Clarified LCAF text in the IANA section.
o Remove references to "experimental". o Remove references to "experimental".
B.22. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-00 B.23. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-00
o Posted December 2016. o Posted December 2016.
o Created working group document from draft-farinacci-lisp o Created working group document from draft-farinacci-lisp
-rfc6830-00 individual submission. No other changes made. -rfc6830-00 individual submission. No other changes made.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Dino Farinacci Dino Farinacci
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
 End of changes. 34 change blocks. 
73 lines changed or deleted 85 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.47. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/