draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt-06.txt		draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt-07.txt
	Network Working Group L. Iannone		Network Working Group L. Iannone
	Internet-Draft Telecom ParisTech		Internet-Draft Telecom ParisTech
	Intended status: Informational R. Jorgensen		Intended status: Informational R. Jorgensen
	Expires: February 25, 2016 Bredbandsfylket Troms		Expires: October 8, 2016 Bredbandsfylket Troms
	D. Conrad		D. Conrad
	Virtualized, LLC		Virtualized, LLC
	G. Huston		G. Huston
	APNIC - Asia Pacific Network		APNIC - Asia Pacific Network
	Information Center		Information Center
	August 24, 2015		April 6, 2016
	LISP EID Block Management Guidelines		LISP EID Block Management Guidelines
	draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt-06.txt		draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt-07.txt
	Abstract		Abstract
	This document proposes a framework for the management of the LISP EID		This document proposes a framework for the management of the LISP EID
	Prefix. The framework described relies on hierarchical distribution		Address Block. The framework described relies on hierarchical
	of the address space, granting temporary usage of sub-prefixes of		distribution of the address space, granting temporary usage of
	such space to requesting organizations.		prefixes of such space to requesting organizations.
	Status of this Memo		Status of this Memo
	This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the		This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
	provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.		provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
	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 http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.		Drafts is at http://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 February 25, 2016.		This Internet-Draft will expire on October 8, 2016.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the		Copyright (c) 2016 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
	(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of		(http://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
	carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect		carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
	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
	skipping to change at page 2, line 21 ¶		skipping to change at page 2, line 21 ¶
	1. Requirements Notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3		1. Requirements Notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
	2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3		2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
	3. Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3		3. Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
	4. EID Prefix Registration Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3		4. EID Prefix Registration Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
	5. EID Prefixes Registration Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . 4		5. EID Prefixes Registration Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
	6. EID Prefix Request Template . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5		6. EID Prefix Request Template . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
	7. Policy Validity Period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6		7. Policy Validity Period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
	8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	10. Procedures to be followed by RIPE NCC . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		10. Procedures to be followed by RIPE NCC . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
	11. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8		11. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
	12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8		12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
	12.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8		12.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
	12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8		12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
	Appendix A. LISP Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10		Appendix A. Document Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
	Appendix B. Document Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12		Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
	Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
	1. Requirements Notation		1. 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", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
	document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].		document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
	2. Introduction		2. Introduction
	The Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP - [RFC6830]) and related		The Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP - [RFC6830]) and related
	mechanisms ([RFC6831], [RFC6832], [RFC6833], [RFC6834], [RFC6835],		mechanisms ([RFC6831], [RFC6832], [RFC6833], [RFC6834], [RFC6835],
	[RFC6836], [RFC6837]) separates the IP addressing space into two		[RFC6836], [RFC6837]) separate the IP addressing space into two
	logical spaces, the End-point IDentifier (EID) space and the Routing		logical spaces, the End-point IDentifier (EID) space and the Routing
	LOCator (RLOC) space. The first space is used to identify		LOCator (RLOC) space. The first space is used to identify
	communication end-points, while the second is used to locate EIDs in		communication end-points, while the second is used to locate EIDs in
	the Internet routing infrastructure topology.		the Internet routing infrastructure topology.
	The document [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block] requested an IPv6 address		The document [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block] requested an IPv6 address
	block reservation exclusively for use as EID prefixes in the LISP		block reservation exclusively for use as EID prefixes in the LISP
	experiment. The rationale, intent, size, and usage of the EID		experiment. The rationale, intent, size, and usage of the EID
	address block are described in [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block].		address block are described in [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block].
	This document proposes a management framework for the registration of		This document proposes a management framework for the registration of
	EID prefixes from that block, allowing the requesting organisation		EID prefixes from that block, allowing the requesting organization
	exclusive use of those EID prefixes limited to the duration of the		exclusive use of those EID prefixes limited to the duration of the
	LISP experiment.		LISP experiment.
	3. Definition of Terms		3. Definition of Terms
	This document does not introduce any new terms related to the set of		This document does not introduce any new terms related to the set of
	LISP Specifications ( [RFC6830], [RFC6831], [RFC6832], [RFC6833],		LISP Specifications ([RFC6830], [RFC6831], [RFC6832], [RFC6833],
	[RFC6834], [RFC6835], [RFC6836], [RFC6837]). To help the reading of		[RFC6834], [RFC6835], [RFC6836], [RFC6837]), but assumes that the
	this document the terminology introduced by LISP is summarized in		reader is familiar with the LISP terminology.
	Appendix A.		[I-D.ietf-lisp-introduction] provides an introduction to the LISP
			technology, including its terminology. .
	4. EID Prefix Registration Policy		4. EID Prefix Registration Policy
	The request registration of EID prefixes MUST be done under the		The request for registration of EID prefixes MUST be done under the
	following policies:		following policies:
	1. EID prefixes are made available in the reserved space on a		1. EID prefixes are made available in the reserved space on a
	temporary basis and for experimental uses. The requester of an		temporary basis and for experimental uses. The requester of an
	experimental prefix MUST provide a short description of the		experimental prefix MUST provide a short description of the
	intended use or experiment that will be carried out (see		intended use or experiment that will be carried out (see
	Section 6). If the prefix will be used for activities not		Section 6). If the prefix will be used for activities not
	documented in the original description, the renewal of the		documented in the original description, the renewal of the
	registration may be denied.		registration may be denied.
	2. EID prefix registrations SHOULD be renewed on a regular basis to		2. EID prefix registrations MUST be renewed on a regular basis to
	ensure their use by active participants in the experiment. The		ensure their use by active participants in the experiment. The
	registration period is proposed to be 12 months. Registration		registration period is 12 months. A renewal SHOULD NOT cause a
	renewal SHOULD NOT cause a change in the registered EID prefix.		change in the EID prefix registered in the previous request. The
	The conditions of registration renewal should no different to the		conditions of registration renewal are the same as the conditions
	conditions of registration.		of first EID prefix registration request.
	3. It is preferable not to reuse EID prefixes whose registration is		3. It is preferable not to reuse EID prefixes whose registration is
	expired. When an EID prefix registration is removed from the		expired. When an EID prefix registration is removed from the
	registry, then the reuse of the EID prefix in a subsequent		registry, then the reuse of the EID prefix in a subsequent
	registration on behalf of a different end user should be avoided		registration on behalf of a different end user should be avoided
	where possible. If the considerations of overall usage of the		where possible. If the considerations of overall usage of the
	EID block prefix requires reuse of a previously registered EID		EID block prefix requires reuse of a previously registered EID
	prefix, then a minimum delay of at least one week between removal		prefix, then a minimum delay of at least one week between removal
	and subsequent registration SHOULD be applied by the registry		and subsequent registration SHOULD be applied by the registry
	operator.		operator.
	skipping to change at page 4, line 36 ¶		skipping to change at page 4, line 37 ¶
	entries is to be specified in the announcement of the cessation		entries is to be specified in the announcement of the cessation
	of this experiment.		of this experiment.
	5. EID Prefixes Registration Requirements		5. EID Prefixes Registration Requirements
	All EID prefix registrations MUST respect the following requirements:		All EID prefix registrations MUST respect the following requirements:
	1. All EID prefix registrations MUST use a globally unique EID		1. All EID prefix registrations MUST use a globally unique EID
	prefix.		prefix.
	2. If there is more than one registry operator, all operators MUST		2. The EID Prefix registration information, as specified in
	use the same registry management policies and practices.
	3. The EID Prefix registration information as specified in
	Section 6, MUST be collected upon initial registration and		Section 6, MUST be collected upon initial registration and
	renewal, and made publicly available though interfaces allowing		renewal, and made publicly available through interfaces allowing
	both retrieval of specific registration details (search) and		both retrieval of specific registration details (search) and
	enumeration of the entire registry contents (e.g., [RFC7481],		enumeration of the entire registry contents (e.g., [RFC7481],
	whois, http, or similar access methods).		WHOIS, HTTP, or similar access methods).
	4. The registry operator MUST permit the delegation of EID prefixes		3. The registry operator MUST permit the delegation of EID prefixes
	in the reverse DNS space to holders of registered EID prefixes.		in the reverse DNS space to holders of registered EID prefixes.
	5. Anyone can obtain an entry in the EID prefix registry, on the		4. Anyone can obtain an entry in the EID prefix registry, on the
	understanding that the prefix so registered is for the exclusive		understanding that the prefix so registered is for the exclusive
	use in the LISP experimental network, and that their registration		use in the LISP experimental network, and that their registration
	details (as specified in Section 6) are openly published in the		details (as specified in Section 6) are openly published in the
	EID prefix registry.		EID prefix registry.
	6. EID Prefix Request Template		6. EID Prefix Request Template
	The following is a basic request template for prefix registration so		The following is a basic request template for prefix registration so
	to ensure a uniform process. Such a template is inspired by the IANA		to ensure a uniform process. Such a template is inspired by the IANA
	Private Enterprise Number online request form		Private Enterprise Number online request form
	(http://pen.iana.org/pen/PenApplication.page).		(http://pen.iana.org/pen/PenApplication.page).
	Note that all details in this registration become part of the		Note that all details in this registration become part of the
	registry, and will be published in the LISP EID Prefix Registry.		registry and will be published in the LISP EID Prefix Registry.
	The EID Prefix Request template MUST at minimum contain:		The EID Prefix Request template MUST at minimum contain:
	1. Organization (In case of individuals requesting an EID prefix		1. Organization (In the case of individuals requesting an EID prefix
	this section can be left empty)		this section can be left empty)
	(a) Organization Name		(a) Organization Name
	(b) Organization Address		(b) Organization Address
	(c) Organization Phone		(c) Organization Phone
			(d) Organization WebSite
	2. Contact Person (Mandatory)		2. Contact Person (Mandatory)
	(a) Name		(a) Name
	(b) Address		(b) Address
	(c) Phone		(c) Phone
	(d) Fax (optional)		(d) Fax (optional)
	skipping to change at page 6, line 11 ¶		skipping to change at page 6, line 11 ¶
	(a) Prefix Size		(a) Prefix Size
	+ Expressed as an address prefix length.		+ Expressed as an address prefix length.
	(b) Prefix Size Rationale		(b) Prefix Size Rationale
	(c) Lease Period		(c) Lease Period
	+ Note Well: All EID Prefix registrations will be valid		+ Note Well: All EID Prefix registrations will be valid
	until the earlier date of 12 months from the date of		until the earlier date of 12 months from the date of
	registration or 31 December 2017.		registration or MMMM/YYYY3.
	+ All registrations may be renewed by the applicant for		+ All registrations may be renewed by the applicant for
	further 12 month periods, ending on 31 December 2017.		further 12 month periods, ending on MMMM/YYYY3.
	+ According to the 3+3 year experimentation plan, defined		+ According to the 3+3 year experimentation plan, defined
	in [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block], all registrations MUST end		in [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block], all registrations MUST end
	by 31 December 2017, unless the IETF community decides to		by MMMM/YYYY3, unless the IETF community decides to grant
	grant a permanent LISP EID address block. In the latter		a permanent LISP EID address block. In the latter case,
	case, registrations following the present document policy		registrations following the present document policy MUST
	MUST end by 31 December 2020 and a new policy (to be		end by MMMM/YYYY6 and a new policy (to be decided - see
	decided - see Section 7) will apply starting 1 January		Section 7) will apply afterwards.
	2021.
	4. Experiment Description		4. Experiment Description
	(a) Experiment and Deployment Description		(a) Experiment and Deployment Description
	(b) Interoperability with existing LISP deployments		(b) Interoperability with existing LISP deployments
	(c) Interoperability with Legacy Internet		(c) Interoperability with Legacy Internet
	5. Reverse DNS Servers (Optional)		5. Reverse DNS Servers (Optional)
	skipping to change at page 6, line 49 ¶		skipping to change at page 6, line 48 ¶
	(c) Name server name:		(c) Name server name:
	(d) Name server address:		(d) Name server address:
	(Repeat if necessary)		(Repeat if necessary)
	7. Policy Validity Period		7. Policy Validity Period
	Policy outlined in the present document is tied to the existence of		Policy outlined in the present document is tied to the existence of
	the experimental LISP EID block requested in		the experimental LISP EID block requested in
	[I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block] and valid until 31 December 2017.		[I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block] and valid until MMMM/YYYY3.
	If the IETF decides to transform the block in a permanent allocation,		If the IETF decides to transform the block in a permanent allocation,
	the LISP EID block reserved usage period will be extended for three		the LISP EID block reserved usage period will be extended for three
	years (until 31 December 2020) so to give time to the IETF to define,		years (until MMMM/YYYY6) so as to give time to the IETF to define,
	following the policies outlined in [RFC5226], the final size of the		following the policies outlined in [RFC5226], the final size of the
	EID block and create a transition plan, while the policy in the		EID block and create a transition plan, while the policy in the
	present document will still apply.		present document will still apply.
	Note that, as stated in [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block], the transition of		Note that, as stated in [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block], the transition of
	the EID block into a permanent allocation, has the potential to pose		the EID block into a permanent allocation has the potential to pose
	policy issues (as recognized in [RFC2860], section 4.3) and hence		policy issues (as recognized in [RFC2860], section 4.3) and hence
	discussion with the IANA, the RIR communities, and the IETF community		discussion with the IANA, the RIR communities, and the IETF community
	will be necessary to determine appropriate policy for permanent EID		will be necessary to determine appropriate policy for permanent EID
	prefix management, which will be effective starting 1 January 2021.		prefix management, which will be effective after MMMM/YYYY6.
			[RFC Editor: please replace MMMM and all its occurrences in the
			document with the month of publication of [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block]
			as RFC.]
			[RFC Editor: please replace YYYY0 and all its occurrences in the
			document with the year of publication of [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block] as
			RFC.]
			[RFC Editor: please replace YYYY3 and all its occurrences in the
			document with the year of publication of [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block] as
			RFC plus 3 years, e.g., if published in 2016 then put 2019.]
			[RFC Editor: please replace YYYY6 and all its occurrences in the
			document with the year of publication of [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block] as
			RFC plus 6 years, e.g., if published in 2016 then put 2022.]
	8. Security Considerations		8. Security Considerations
	This document does not introduce new security threats in the LISP		This document does not introduce new security threats in the LISP
	architecture nor in the Legacy Internet architecture.		architecture nor in the Legacy Internet architecture.
	For accountability reasons, and in line with the security		For accountability reasons and in line with the security
	considerations in [RFC7020], each registration request MUST contain		considerations in [RFC7020], each registration request MUST contain
	accurate information on the requesting entity (company, institution,		accurate information on the requesting entity (company, institution,
	individual, etc.) and valid and accurate contact information of a		individual, etc.) and valid and accurate contact information of a
	referral person (see Section 6).		referral person (see Section 6).
	9. IANA Considerations		9. IANA Considerations
	This document provides only management guidelines for the reserved		IANA allocated the following IPv6 address block for experimental use
	LISP EID prefix requested in [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block].		as LISP EID prefix [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block]:
	There is an operational requirement for an EID registration service		o Address Block: 2001:5::/32
	that ensures uniqueness of EIDs according to the requirements
	described in Section 5. Furthermore, there is an operational
	requirement for EID registration service that allows a lookup of the
	contact information of the entity that registered the EID.
	IANA and RIPE NCC agreed for the latter to run such service on behalf		o Name: EID Space for LISP
	of the former, for the duration of the experiment and following the
	procedures outlined in Section 10.		o RFC: [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block]
			o Further Details at: http://www.iana.org/assignments/
			iana-ipv6-special-registry/iana-ipv6-special-registry.xhtml
			In order to grant requesting organisations and individuals exclusive
			use of EID prefixes out of such reserved block (limited to the
			duration of the LISP experiment as outlined in Section 7) there is an
			operational requirement for an EID registration service.
			Provided that the policies and requirements outlined in Section 4,
			Section 5, and Section 6 are respected, EID prefix registration is
			accorded based on a "First Come First Served" basis.
			There is no hard limit in the number of registrations an organization
			or individual can submit as long as information described in
			Section 6 is provided, in particular point 4: "Experiment
			Description".
			For the duration defined in [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block] RIPE NCC will
			manage the the LISP EID prefix as described herein. Therefore, this
			document has no IANA actions.
	10. Procedures to be followed by RIPE NCC		10. Procedures to be followed by RIPE NCC
	RIPE NCC will provide the registration service following the EID		RIPE NCC will provide the registration service following the EID
	Prefix Registration Policy (Section 4) and the EID Prefix		Prefix Registration Policy (Section 4) and the EID Prefix
	Registration Requirements (Section 5) provided in this document. The		Registration Requirements (Section 5) provided in this document. The
	request form provided by RIPE NCC will include at least the		request form provided by RIPE NCC will include at least the
	information from the template in Section 6. RIPE NCC will make		information from the template in Section 6. RIPE NCC will make
	publicly available all received requests. While this document does		publicly available all received requests. While this document does
	not suggests any minimum allocation size, RIPE NCC is allowed to		not suggests any minimum allocation size, RIPE NCC is allowed to
	introduce such minimum size for menagement purposes.		introduce such minimum size for management purposes.
	11. Acknowledgments		11. Acknowledgments
	Thanks to A. de la Haye, A. Cima, A Pawlik, J. Curran, A. Severin, B.		Thanks to A. Retana, J. Arko, P. Yee, A. de la Haye, A. Cima, A
	Haberman, T. Manderson, D. Lewis, D. Farinacci, M. Binderberger, D.		Pawlik, J. Curran, A. Severin, B. Haberman, T. Manderson, D. Lewis,
	Saucez, E. Lear, for their helpful comments.		D. Farinacci, M. Binderberger, D. Saucez, E. Lear, for their helpful
			comments.
	The work of Luigi Iannone has been partially supported by the ANR-13-		The work of Luigi Iannone has been partially supported by the ANR-13-
	INFR-0009 LISP-Lab Project (www.lisp-lab.org) and the EIT KIC ICT-		INFR-0009 LISP-Lab Project (www.lisp-lab.org) and the EIT KIC ICT-
	Labs SOFNETS Project.		Labs SOFNETS Project.
	12. References		12. References
	12.1. Normative References		12.1. Normative References
	[I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block]		[I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block]
	Iannone, L., Lewis, D., Meyer, D., and V. Fuller, "LISP		Iannone, L., Lewis, D., Meyer, D., and V. Fuller, "LISP
	EID Block", draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-12 (work in		EID Block", draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-13 (work in
	progress), May 2015.		progress), February 2016.
	[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate		[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
	Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/		Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/
	RFC2119, March 1997,		RFC2119, March 1997,
	<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.		<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
	[RFC4632] Fuller, V. and T. Li, "Classless Inter-domain Routing
	(CIDR): The Internet Address Assignment and Aggregation
	Plan", BCP 122, RFC 4632, DOI 10.17487/RFC4632,
	August 2006, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4632>.
	[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an		[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
	IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,		IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC5226, May 2008,		DOI 10.17487/RFC5226, May 2008,
	<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5226>.		<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5226>.
	12.2. Informative References		12.2. Informative References
			[I-D.ietf-lisp-introduction]
			Cabellos-Aparicio, A. and D. Saucez, "An Architectural
			Introduction to the Locator/ID Separation Protocol
			(LISP)", draft-ietf-lisp-introduction-13 (work in
			progress), April 2015.
	[RFC2860] Carpenter, B., Baker, F., and M. Roberts, "Memorandum of		[RFC2860] Carpenter, B., Baker, F., and M. Roberts, "Memorandum of
	Understanding Concerning the Technical Work of the		Understanding Concerning the Technical Work of the
	Internet Assigned Numbers Authority", RFC 2860,		Internet Assigned Numbers Authority", RFC 2860,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC2860, June 2000,		DOI 10.17487/RFC2860, June 2000,
	<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2860>.		<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2860>.
	[RFC6830] Farinacci, D., Fuller, V., Meyer, D., and D. Lewis, "The		[RFC6830] Farinacci, D., Fuller, V., Meyer, D., and D. Lewis, "The
	Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP)", RFC 6830,		Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP)", RFC 6830,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC6830, January 2013,		DOI 10.17487/RFC6830, January 2013,
	<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6830>.		<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6830>.
	skipping to change at page 10, line 7 ¶		skipping to change at page 10, line 44 ¶
	[RFC7020] Housley, R., Curran, J., Huston, G., and D. Conrad, "The		[RFC7020] Housley, R., Curran, J., Huston, G., and D. Conrad, "The
	Internet Numbers Registry System", RFC 7020, DOI 10.17487/		Internet Numbers Registry System", RFC 7020, DOI 10.17487/
	RFC7020, August 2013,		RFC7020, August 2013,
	<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7020>.		<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7020>.
	[RFC7481] Hollenbeck, S. and N. Kong, "Security Services for the		[RFC7481] Hollenbeck, S. and N. Kong, "Security Services for the
	Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)", RFC 7481,		Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)", RFC 7481,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC7481, March 2015,		DOI 10.17487/RFC7481, March 2015,
	<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7481>.		<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7481>.
	Appendix A. LISP Terms		Appendix A. Document Change Log
	LISP operates on two name spaces and introduces several new network
	elements. This section provides high-level definitions of the LISP
	name spaces and network elements and as such, it must not be
	considered as an authoritative source. The reference to the
	authoritative document for each term is included in every term
	description.
	Legacy Internet: The portion of the Internet that does not run LISP
	and does not participate in LISP+ALT or any other mapping system.
	LISP site: A LISP site is a set of routers in an edge network that
	are under a single technical administration. LISP routers that
	reside in the edge network are the demarcation points to separate
	the edge network from the core network. See [RFC6830] for more
	details.
	Endpoint ID (EID): An EID is a 32-bit (for IPv4) or 128-bit (for
	IPv6) value used in the source and destination address fields of
	the first (most inner) LISP header of a packet. A packet that is
	emitted by a system contains EIDs in its headers and LISP headers
	are prepended only when the packet reaches an Ingress Tunnel
	Router (ITR) on the data path to the destination EID. The source
	EID is obtained via existing mechanisms used to set a host's
	"local" IP address. An EID is allocated to a host from an EID-
	prefix block associated with the site where the host is located.
	See [RFC6830] for more details.
	EID-prefix: A power-of-two block of EIDs that are allocated to a
	site by an address allocation authority. See [RFC6830] for more
	details.
	EID-Prefix Aggregate: A set of EID-prefixes said to be aggregatable
	in the [RFC4632] sense. That is, an EID-Prefix aggregate is
	defined to be a single contiguous power-of-two EID-prefix block.
	A prefix and a length characterize such a block. See [RFC6830]
	for more details.
	Routing LOCator (RLOC): A RLOC is an IPv4 or IPv6 address of an
	egress tunnel router (ETR). A RLOC is the output of an EID-to-
	RLOC mapping lookup. An EID maps to one or more RLOCs.
	Typically, RLOCs are numbered from topologically aggregatable
	blocks that are assigned to a site at each point to which it
	attaches to the global Internet; where the topology is defined by
	the connectivity of provider networks, RLOCs can be thought of as
	Provider Aggregatable (PA) addresses. See [RFC6830] for more
	details.
	EID-to-RLOC Mapping: A binding between an EID-Prefix and the RLOC-
	set that can be used to reach the EID-Prefix. The general term
	"mapping" always refers to an EID-to-RLOC mapping. See [RFC6830]
	for more details.
	Ingress Tunnel Router (ITR): An Ingress Tunnel Router (ITR) is a
	router that accepts receives IP packets from site end-systems on
	one side and sends LISP-encapsulated IP packets toward the
	Internet on the other side. The router treats the "inner" IP
	destination address as an EID and performs an EID-to-RLOC mapping
	lookup. The router then prepends an "outer" IP header with one of
	its globally routable RLOCs in the source address field and the
	result of the mapping lookup in the destination address field.
	See [RFC6830] for more details.
	Egress Tunnel Router (ETR): An Egress Tunnel Router (ETR) receives
	LISP-encapsulated IP packets from the Internet on one side and
	sends decapsulated IP packets to site end-systems on the other
	side. An ETR router accepts an IP packet where the destination
	address in the "outer" IP header is one of its own RLOCs. The
	router strips the "outer" header and forwards the packet based on
	the next IP header found. See [RFC6830] for more details.
	Proxy ITR (PITR): A Proxy-ITR (PITR) acts like an ITR but does so on
	behalf of non-LISP sites which send packets to destinations at
	LISP sites. See [RFC6832] for more details.
	Proxy ETR (PETR): A Proxy-ETR (PETR) acts like an ETR but does so on		Version 07 Posted April 2016.
	behalf of LISP sites which send packets to destinations at non-
	LISP sites. See [RFC6832] for more details.
	Map Server (MS): A network infrastructure component that learns EID-		o Addressed editorial issues raised in Gen-Art review by Peter Yee.
	to-RLOC mapping entries from an authoritative source (typically an
	ETR). A Map Server publishes these mappings in the distributed
	mapping system. See [RFC6833] for more details.
	Map Resolver (MR): A network infrastructure component that accepts		o Removed "Definition of Terms" section as suggested by Peter Yee in
	LISP Encapsulated Map-Requests, typically from an ITR, quickly		the Gen-Art review.
	determines whether or not the destination IP address is part of
	the EID namespace; if it is not, a Negative Map-Reply is
	immediately returned. Otherwise, the Map Resolver finds the
	appropriate EID-to-RLOC mapping by consulting the distributed
	mapping database system. See [RFC6833] for more details.
	The LISP Alternative Logical Topology (ALT): The virtual overlay		o Section "IANA Considerations" has been re-written to fix issue
	network made up of tunnels between LISP+ALT Routers. The Border		raised by IESG, IANA, and P. Yee.
	Gateway Protocol (BGP) runs between ALT Routers and is used to
	carry reachability information for EID-prefixes. The ALT provides
	a way to forward Map-Requests toward the ETR that "owns" an EID-
	prefix. See [RFC6836] for more details.
	ALT Router: The device on which runs the ALT. The ALT is a static		o Deleted bullet allowing multiple operators in the requirements
	network built using tunnels between ALT Routers. These routers		section. Due to the limited duration of the experiment one single
	are deployed in a roughly-hierarchical mesh in which routers at		registration operator (RIPE) is sufficient.
	each level in the topology are responsible for aggregating EID-
	Prefixes learned from those logically "below" them and advertising
	summary prefixes to those logically "above" them. Prefix learning
	and propagation between ALT Routers is done using BGP. When an
	ALT Router receives an ALT Datagram, it looks up the destination
	EID in its forwarding table (composed of EID-Prefix routes it
	learned from neighboring ALT Routers) and forwards it to the
	logical next-hop on the overlay network. The primary function of
	LISP+ALT routers is to provide a lightweight forwarding
	infrastructure for LISP control-plane messages (Map-Request and
	Map-Reply), and to transport data packets when the packet has the
	same destination address in both the inner (encapsulating)
	destination and outer destination addresses ((i.e., a Data Probe
	packet). See [RFC6830] for more details.
	Appendix B. Document Change Log		o Modified the dates, introducing variables, so to allow RFC Editor
			to easily update dates by publication as RFC.
	Version 06 Posted August 2015.		Version 06 Posted August 2015.
	o Fixed Authors addresses and typo in section 10.		o Fixed Authors addresses and typo in section 10.
	Version 05 Posted July 2015.		Version 05 Posted July 2015.
	o Added explicit text about RIPE NCC providing the registration		o Added explicit text about RIPE NCC providing the registration
	service during the temporary experiment.		service during the temporary experiment.
End of changes. 45 change blocks.
	184 lines changed or deleted		116 lines changed or added
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.45. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/