--- 1/draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-36.txt 2022-05-02 20:13:10.783785754 -0700 +++ 2/draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-37.txt 2022-05-02 20:13:10.883788276 -0700 @@ -1,25 +1,25 @@ Network Working Group D. Farinacci Internet-Draft lispers.net Obsoletes: 6830 (if approved) V. Fuller Intended status: Standards Track vaf.net Internet Consulting -Expires: May 22, 2021 D. Meyer +Expires: November 3, 2022 D. Meyer 1-4-5.net D. Lewis Cisco Systems A. Cabellos (Ed.) UPC/BarcelonaTech - November 18, 2020 + May 2, 2022 The Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) - draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-36 + draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-37 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. @@ -38,25 +38,25 @@ 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 May 22, 2021. + This Internet-Draft will expire on November 3, 2022. Copyright Notice - Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the + 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 Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as @@ -94,50 +94,51 @@ 17. Network Management Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 18. Changes since RFC 6830 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 19. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 19.1. LISP UDP Port Numbers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 20. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 20.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 20.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Appendix A. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Appendix B. Document Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 - B.1. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-27 . . . . . . . . 41 - B.2. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-27 . . . . . . . . 41 - B.3. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-26 . . . . . . . . 41 - B.4. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-25 . . . . . . . . 42 - B.5. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-24 . . . . . . . . 42 - B.6. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-23 . . . . . . . . 42 - B.7. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-22 . . . . . . . . 42 - B.8. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-21 . . . . . . . . 42 - B.9. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-20 . . . . . . . . 42 - B.10. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-19 . . . . . . . . 42 - B.11. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-18 . . . . . . . . 43 - B.12. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-17 . . . . . . . . 43 - B.13. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-16 . . . . . . . . 43 - B.14. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-15 . . . . . . . . 43 - B.15. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-14 . . . . . . . . 43 - B.16. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-13 . . . . . . . . 43 - B.17. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-12 . . . . . . . . 44 - B.18. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-11 . . . . . . . . 44 - B.19. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-10 . . . . . . . . 44 - B.20. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-09 . . . . . . . . 44 - B.21. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-08 . . . . . . . . 45 - B.22. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-07 . . . . . . . . 45 - B.23. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-06 . . . . . . . . 45 - B.24. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-05 . . . . . . . . 45 - B.25. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-04 . . . . . . . . 46 - B.26. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-03 . . . . . . . . 46 - B.27. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-02 . . . . . . . . 46 - B.28. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-01 . . . . . . . . 46 - B.29. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-00 . . . . . . . . 46 - Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 + B.1. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-37 . . . . . . . . 41 + B.2. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-28 . . . . . . . . 41 + B.3. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-27 . . . . . . . . 41 + B.4. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-26 . . . . . . . . 42 + B.5. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-25 . . . . . . . . 42 + B.6. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-24 . . . . . . . . 42 + B.7. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-23 . . . . . . . . 42 + B.8. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-22 . . . . . . . . 42 + B.9. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-21 . . . . . . . . 42 + B.10. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-20 . . . . . . . . 42 + B.11. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-19 . . . . . . . . 43 + B.12. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-18 . . . . . . . . 43 + B.13. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-17 . . . . . . . . 43 + B.14. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-16 . . . . . . . . 43 + B.15. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-15 . . . . . . . . 43 + B.16. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-14 . . . . . . . . 43 + B.17. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-13 . . . . . . . . 44 + B.18. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-12 . . . . . . . . 44 + B.19. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-11 . . . . . . . . 44 + B.20. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-10 . . . . . . . . 44 + B.21. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-09 . . . . . . . . 44 + B.22. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-08 . . . . . . . . 45 + B.23. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-07 . . . . . . . . 45 + B.24. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-06 . . . . . . . . 45 + B.25. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-05 . . . . . . . . 46 + B.26. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-04 . . . . . . . . 46 + B.27. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-03 . . . . . . . . 46 + B.28. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-02 . . . . . . . . 46 + B.29. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-01 . . . . . . . . 46 + B.30. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-00 . . . . . . . . 47 + Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 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 routable Routing Locators (RLOCs), used to identify network @@ -749,23 +750,23 @@ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ E: The E-bit is the echo-nonce-request bit. This bit MUST be ignored and has no meaning when the N-bit is set to 0. When the N-bit is set to 1 and this bit is set to 1, an ITR is requesting that the nonce value in the 'Nonce' field be echoed back in LISP- encapsulated packets when the ITR is also an ETR. See Section 10.1 for details. V: The V-bit is the Map-Version present bit. When this bit is set to - 1, the N-bit MUST be 0. Refer to Section 13.2 for more details. - This bit indicates that the LISP header is encoded in this - case as: + 1, the N-bit MUST be 0. Refer to the [I-D.ietf-lisp-6834bis] + specification for more details on Database Map-Versioning. This + bit indicates that the LISP header is encoded in this case as: 0 x 0 1 x x x x +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |N|L|E|V|I|R|K|K| Source Map-Version | Dest Map-Version | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Instance ID/Locator-Status-Bits | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ I: The I-bit is the Instance ID bit. See Section 8 for more details. When this bit is set to 1, the 'Locator-Status-Bits' field is @@ -1201,31 +1202,33 @@ down. It will only resume using that RLOC if the corresponding Locator-Status-Bit returns to a value of 1. Locator-Status-Bits are associated with a Locator-Set per EID-Prefix. Therefore, when a Locator becomes unreachable, the Locator-Status-Bit that corresponds to that Locator's position in the list returned by the last Map-Reply will be set to zero for that particular EID-Prefix. Locator-Status-Bits MUST NOT be used over the public Internet and SHOULD only be used in trusted and closed deployments. In addition Locator-Status-Bits SHOULD be coupled with Map-Versioning - (Section 13.2) to prevent race conditions where Locator-Status-Bits - are interpreted as referring to different RLOCs than intended. Refer - to Section 16 for security issues regarding this mechanism. + [I-D.ietf-lisp-6834bis] to prevent race conditions where Locator- + Status-Bits are interpreted as referring to different RLOCs than + intended. Refer to Section 16 for security issues regarding this + mechanism. If an ITR encapsulates a packet to an ETR and the packet is received and decapsulated by the ETR, it is implied but not confirmed by the ITR that the ETR's RLOC is reachable. In most cases, the ETR can also reach the ITR but cannot assume this to be true, due to the possibility of path asymmetry. In the presence of unidirectional traffic flow from an ITR to an ETR, the ITR SHOULD NOT use the lack of return traffic as an indication that the ETR is unreachable. + Instead, it MUST use an alternate mechanism to determine reachability. The security considerations of Section 16 related to data-plane reachability applies to the data-plane RLOC reachability mechanisms described in this section. 10.1. Echo Nonce Algorithm When data flows bidirectionally between Locators from different @@ -1559,21 +1562,23 @@ A LISP-specific uRPF check is also possible. When decapsulating, an ETR can check that the source EID and RLOC are valid EID-to-RLOC mappings by checking the Mapping System. Map-Versioning is a Data-Plane mechanism used to signal a peering xTR that a local EID-to-RLOC mapping has been updated, so that the peering xTR uses LISP Control-Plane signaling message to retrieve a fresh mapping. This can be used by an attacker to forge the map- versioning field of a LISP encapsulated header and force an excessive - amount of signaling between xTRs that may overload them. + amount of signaling between xTRs that may overload them. Further + security considerations on Map-Versioning can be found in + [I-D.ietf-lisp-6834bis]. Locator-Status-Bits, echo-nonce and map-versioning MUST NOT be used over the public Internet and SHOULD only be used in trusted and closed deployments. In addition Locator-Status-Bits SHOULD be coupled with map-versioning to prevent race conditions where Locator- Status-Bits are interpreted as referring to different RLOCs than intended. LISP implementations and deployments which permit outer header fragments of IPv6 LISP encapsulated packets as a means of dealing @@ -1629,27 +1634,27 @@ lisp-data 4341 udp LISP Data Packets 20. 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-07 (work in progress), October 2020. + lisp-6834bis-09 (work in progress), August 2021. [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis] - Farinacci, D., Maino, F., Fuller, V., and A. Cabellos- - Aparicio, "Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) Control- - Plane", draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis-29 (work in progress), - September 2020. + Farinacci, D., Maino, F., Fuller, V., and A. Cabellos, + "Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) Control-Plane", + draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis-30 (work in progress), November + 2020. [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, . [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate @@ -1713,29 +1718,29 @@ 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 + Cabellos, A. and D. S. (Ed.), "An Architectural Introduction to the Locator/ID Separation Protocol - (LISP)", draft-ietf-lisp-introduction-13 (work in - progress), April 2015. + (LISP)", draft-ietf-lisp-introduction-15 (work in + progress), September 2021. [I-D.ietf-lisp-vpn] Moreno, V. and D. Farinacci, "LISP Virtual Private - Networks (VPNs)", draft-ietf-lisp-vpn-06 (work in - progress), August 2020. + Networks (VPNs)", draft-ietf-lisp-vpn-08 (work in + progress), January 2022. [I-D.ietf-tsvwg-datagram-plpmtud] Fairhurst, G., Jones, T., Tuexen, M., Ruengeler, I., and T. Voelker, "Packetization Layer Path MTU Discovery for Datagram Transports", draft-ietf-tsvwg-datagram-plpmtud-22 (work in progress), June 2020. [RFC1034] Mockapetris, P., "Domain names - concepts and facilities", STD 13, RFC 1034, DOI 10.17487/RFC1034, November 1987, . @@ -1884,218 +1889,226 @@ Kaduk, Eric Rescorla, Alvaro Retana, Alexey Melnikov, Alissa Cooper, Suresh Krishnan, Alberto Rodriguez-Natal, Vina Ermagen, Mohamed Boucadair, Brian Trammell, Sabrina Tanamal, and John Drake. The contributions they offered greatly added to the security, scale, and robustness of the LISP architecture and protocols. Appendix B. Document Change Log [RFC Editor: Please delete this section on publication as RFC.] -B.1. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-27 +B.1. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-37 + + o Posted May 2022. + + o Added references to 6834bis instead of pointing text to + Section 13.2. This is so we can advance the Map-Versioning draft + rfc6834bis to proposed standard. + +B.2. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-28 o Posted November 2019. o Fixed how LSB behave in the presence of new/removed locators. o Added ETR synchronization requirements when using Map-Versioning. o Fixed a large set of minor comments and edits. -B.2. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-27 +B.3. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-27 o Posted April 2019 post telechat. o Made editorial corrections per Warren's suggestions. o Put in suggested text from Luigi that Mirja agreed with. o LSB, Echo-Nonce and Map-Versioning SHOULD be only used in closed environments. o Removed paragraph stating that Instance-ID can be 32-bit in the control-plane. o 6831/8378 are now normative. o Rewritten Security Considerations according to the changes. o Stated that LSB SHOULD be coupled with Map-Versioning. -B.3. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-26 +B.4. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-26 o Posted late October 2018. o Changed description about "reserved" bits to state "reserved and unassigned". -B.4. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-25 +B.5. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-25 o Posted mid October 2018. o Added more to the Security Considerations section with discussion about echo-nonce attacks. -B.5. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-24 +B.6. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-24 o Posted mid October 2018. o Final editorial changes for Eric and Ben. -B.6. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-23 +B.7. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-23 o Posted early October 2018. o Added an applicability statement in section 1 to address security concerns from Telechat. -B.7. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-22 +B.8. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-22 o Posted early October 2018. o Changes to reflect comments post Telechat. -B.8. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-21 +B.9. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-21 o Posted late-September 2018. o Changes to reflect comments from Sep 27th Telechat. -B.9. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-20 +B.10. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-20 o Posted late-September 2018. o Fix old reference to RFC3168, changed to RFC6040. -B.10. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-19 +B.11. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-19 o Posted late-September 2018. o More editorial changes. -B.11. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-18 +B.12. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-18 o Posted mid-September 2018. o Changes to reflect comments from Secdir review (Mirja). -B.12. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-17 +B.13. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-17 o Posted September 2018. o Indicate in the "Changes since RFC 6830" section why the document has been shortened in length. o Make reference to RFC 8085 about UDP congestion control. o More editorial changes from multiple IESG reviews. -B.13. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-16 +B.14. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-16 o Posted late August 2018. o Distinguish the message type names between ICMP for IPv4 and ICMP for IPv6 for handling MTU issues. -B.14. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-15 +B.15. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-15 o Posted August 2018. o Final editorial changes before RFC submission for Proposed Standard. o Added section "Changes since RFC 6830" so implementers are informed of any changes since the last RFC publication. -B.15. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-14 +B.16. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-14 o Posted July 2018 IETF week. o Put obsolete of RFC 6830 in Intro section in addition to abstract. -B.16. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-13 +B.17. 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.17. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-12 +B.18. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-12 o Posted July 2018. o Fixed Luigi editorial comments to ready draft for RFC status. -B.18. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-11 +B.19. 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.19. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-10 +B.20. 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.20. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-09 +B.21. 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.21. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-08 +B.22. 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.22. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-07 +B.23. 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.23. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-06 +B.24. 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". @@ -2104,61 +2117,61 @@ 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 addresses can be used. -B.24. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-05 +B.25. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-05 o Posted August 2017. o Make it clear that a Re-encapsulating Tunnel Router is an RTR. -B.25. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-04 +B.26. 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.26. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-03 +B.27. 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.27. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-02 +B.28. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-02 o Posted April 2017. o Reflect some editorial comments from Damien Sausez. -B.28. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-01 +B.29. 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.29. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-00 +B.30. 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 lispers.net