draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-08.txt   draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-09.txt 
Network Working Group D. Farinacci Network Working Group D. Farinacci
Internet-Draft lispers.net Internet-Draft lispers.net
Intended status: Experimental D. Meyer Intended status: Experimental D. Meyer
Expires: October 5, 2015 Brocade Expires: December 14, 2015 Brocade
J. Snijders J. Snijders
NTT NTT
April 3, 2015 June 12, 2015
LISP Canonical Address Format (LCAF) LISP Canonical Address Format (LCAF)
draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-08 draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-09
Abstract Abstract
This draft defines a canonical address format encoding used in LISP This draft defines a canonical address format encoding used in LISP
control messages and in the encoding of lookup keys for the LISP control messages and in the encoding of lookup keys for the LISP
Mapping Database System. Mapping Database System.
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
skipping to change at page 1, line 35 skipping to change at page 1, line 35
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 October 5, 2015. This Internet-Draft will expire on December 14, 2015.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2015 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
skipping to change at page 2, line 36 skipping to change at page 2, line 36
4.14. Encoding Key/Value Address Pairs . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 4.14. Encoding Key/Value Address Pairs . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
4.15. Multiple Data-Planes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 4.15. Multiple Data-Planes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
4.16. Applications for AFI List Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 4.16. Applications for AFI List Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
4.16.1. Binding IPv4 and IPv6 Addresses . . . . . . . . . . 26 4.16.1. Binding IPv4 and IPv6 Addresses . . . . . . . . . . 26
4.16.2. Layer-2 VPNs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 4.16.2. Layer-2 VPNs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
4.16.3. ASCII Names in the Mapping Database . . . . . . . . 28 4.16.3. ASCII Names in the Mapping Database . . . . . . . . 28
4.16.4. Using Recursive LISP Canonical Address Encodings . . 29 4.16.4. Using Recursive LISP Canonical Address Encodings . . 29
4.16.5. Compatibility Mode Use Case . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 4.16.5. Compatibility Mode Use Case . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Appendix A. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Appendix A. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Appendix B. Document Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Appendix B. Document Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
B.1. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-08.txt . . . . . . . . . 34 B.1. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-09.txt . . . . . . . . . 35
B.2. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-07.txt . . . . . . . . . 34 B.2. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-08.txt . . . . . . . . . 35
B.3. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-06.txt . . . . . . . . . 34 B.3. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-07.txt . . . . . . . . . 35
B.4. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-05.txt . . . . . . . . . 34 B.4. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-06.txt . . . . . . . . . 36
B.5. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-04.txt . . . . . . . . . 34 B.5. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-05.txt . . . . . . . . . 36
B.6. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-03.txt . . . . . . . . . 34 B.6. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-04.txt . . . . . . . . . 36
B.7. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-02.txt . . . . . . . . . 35 B.7. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-03.txt . . . . . . . . . 36
B.8. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-01.txt . . . . . . . . . 35 B.8. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-02.txt . . . . . . . . . 36
B.9. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-00.txt . . . . . . . . . 35 B.9. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-01.txt . . . . . . . . . 37
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 B.10. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-00.txt . . . . . . . . . 37
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
The LISP architecture and protocols [RFC6830] introduces two new The LISP architecture and protocols [RFC6830] introduces two new
numbering spaces, Endpoint Identifiers (EIDs) and Routing Locators numbering spaces, Endpoint Identifiers (EIDs) and Routing Locators
(RLOCs) which are intended to replace most use of IP addresses on the (RLOCs) which are intended to replace most use of IP addresses on the
Internet. To provide flexibility for current and future Internet. To provide flexibility for current and future
applications, these values can be encoded in LISP control messages applications, these values can be encoded in LISP control messages
using a general syntax that includes Address Family Identifier (AFI), using a general syntax that includes Address Family Identifier (AFI),
length, and value fields. length, and value fields.
skipping to change at page 5, line 5 skipping to change at page 4, line 48
provider networks, RLOCs can be thought of as PA addresses. provider networks, RLOCs can be thought of as PA addresses.
Multiple RLOCs can be assigned to the same ETR device or to Multiple RLOCs can be assigned to the same ETR device or to
multiple ETR devices at a site. multiple ETR devices at a site.
3. LISP Canonical Address Format Encodings 3. LISP Canonical Address Format Encodings
IANA has assigned AFI value 16387 (0x4003) to the LISP architecture IANA has assigned AFI value 16387 (0x4003) to the LISP architecture
and protocols. This specification defines the encoding format of the and protocols. This specification defines the encoding format of the
LISP Canonical Address (LCA). LISP Canonical Address (LCA).
The first 4 bytes of an LISP Canonical Address are followed by a The Address Family AFI definitions from [AFI] only allocate code-
points for the AFI value itself. The length of the address or entity
that follows is not defined and is implied based on conventional
experience. Where the LISP protocol uses LISP Canonical Addresses
specifically, the address length definitions will be in this
specification and take precedent over any other specification.
The first 6 bytes of an LISP Canonical Address are followed by a
variable length of fields: variable length of fields:
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AFI = 16387 | Rsvd1 | Flags | | AFI = 16387 | Rsvd1 | Flags |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Rsvd2 | Length | | Type | Rsvd2 | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
skipping to change at page 31, line 14 skipping to change at page 31, line 14
5. Security Considerations 5. Security Considerations
There are no security considerations for this specification. The There are no security considerations for this specification. The
security considerations are documented for the protocols that use security considerations are documented for the protocols that use
LISP Canonical Addressing. Refer to the those relevant LISP Canonical Addressing. Refer to the those relevant
specifications. specifications.
6. IANA Considerations 6. IANA Considerations
The Address Family AFI definitions from [AFI] only allocate code- This document defines a canonical address format encoding used in
points for the AFI value itself. The length of the address or entity LISP control messages and in the encoding of lookup keys for the LISP
that follows is not defined and is implied based on conventional Mapping Database System. Such address format is based on a fixed AFI
experience. Where the LISP protocol uses LISP Canonical Addresses (16387) and a LISP LCAF Type field.
specifically, the address length definitions will be in this
specification and take precedent over any other specification.
An IANA Registry for LCAF Type values will be created. The values The LISP LCAF Type field is an 8-bit field specific to the LISP
that are considered for use by the main LISP specification [RFC6830] Canonical Address formatted encodings, for which IANA is to create
will be in the IANA Registry. Other Type values used for and maintain a new registry (as outlined in [RFC5226]) entitled "LISP
experimentation will be defined and described in this document. LCAF Type". Initial values for the LISP LCAF Type registry are given
below. Future assignments are to be made through RFC Publication.
Assignments consist of a LISP LCAF Type name and its associated
value:
+-------+------------------------------+------------+
| Value | LISP LCAF Type Name | Definition |
+-------+------------------------------+------------+
| 0 | Null Body Type | Section 3 |
| | | |
| 1 | AFI List Type | Section 3 |
| | | |
| 2 | Instance ID Type | Section 3 |
| | | |
| 3 | AS Number Type | Section 3 |
| | | |
| 4 | Application Data Type | Section 3 |
| | | |
| 5 | Geo Coordinates Type | Section 3 |
| | | |
| 6 | Opaque Key Type | Section 3 |
| | | |
| 7 | NAT-Traversal Type | Section 3 |
| | | |
| 8 | Nonce Locator Type | Section 3 |
| | | |
| 9 | Multicast Info Type | Section 3 |
| | | |
| 10 | Explicit Locator Path Type | Section 3 |
| | | |
| 11 | Security Key Type | Section 3 |
| | | |
| 12 | Source/Dest Key Type | Section 3 |
| | | |
| 13 | Replication List Entry Type | Section 3 |
| | | |
| 14 | JSON Data Model Type | Section 3 |
| | | |
| 15 | Key/Value Address Pair Type | Section 3 |
| | | |
| 16 | Encapsulation Format Type | Section 3 |
+-------+------------------------------+------------+
Table 1: LISP LCAF Type Initial Values
7. References 7. References
7.1. Normative References 7.1. Normative References
[RFC1700] Reynolds, J. and J. Postel, "Assigned Numbers", RFC 1700, [RFC1700] Reynolds, J. and J. Postel, "Assigned Numbers", RFC 1700,
October 1994. October 1994.
[RFC1918] Rekhter, Y., Moskowitz, R., Karrenberg, D., Groot, G., and [RFC1918] Rekhter, Y., Moskowitz, R., Karrenberg, D., Groot, G., and
E. Lear, "Address Allocation for Private Internets", BCP E. Lear, "Address Allocation for Private Internets", BCP
5, RFC 1918, February 1996. 5, RFC 1918, February 1996.
[RFC4627] Crockford, D., "The application/json Media Type for [RFC4627] Crockford, D., "The application/json Media Type for
JavaScript Object Notation (JSON)", RFC 4627, July 2006. JavaScript Object Notation (JSON)", RFC 4627, July 2006.
[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
May 2008.
[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, January Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP)", RFC 6830, January
2013. 2013.
[RFC6836] Fuller, V., Farinacci, D., Meyer, D., and D. Lewis, [RFC6836] Fuller, V., Farinacci, D., Meyer, D., and D. Lewis,
"Locator/ID Separation Protocol Alternative Logical "Locator/ID Separation Protocol Alternative Logical
Topology (LISP+ALT)", RFC 6836, January 2013. Topology (LISP+ALT)", RFC 6836, January 2013.
[RFC7348] Mahalingam, M., Dutt, D., Duda, K., Agarwal, P., Kreeger, [RFC7348] Mahalingam, M., Dutt, D., Duda, K., Agarwal, P., Kreeger,
L., Sridhar, T., Bursell, M., and C. Wright, "Virtual L., Sridhar, T., Bursell, M., and C. Wright, "Virtual
skipping to change at page 34, line 4 skipping to change at page 35, line 24
Coras for discussions that lead to the definition of the Replication Coras for discussions that lead to the definition of the Replication
List Entry LCAF type. List Entry LCAF type.
Thanks goes to Michiel Blokzijl and Alberto Rodriguez-Natal for Thanks goes to Michiel Blokzijl and Alberto Rodriguez-Natal for
suggesting new LCAF types. suggesting new LCAF types.
Thanks also goes to Terry Manderson for assistance obtaining a LISP Thanks also goes to Terry Manderson for assistance obtaining a LISP
AFI value from IANA. AFI value from IANA.
Appendix B. Document Change Log Appendix B. Document Change Log
B.1. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-08.txt
B.1. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-09.txt
o Submitted June 2015.
o Fix IANA Considerations section to request a registry to allocate
and track LCAF Type values.
B.2. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-08.txt
o Submitted April 2015. o Submitted April 2015.
o Comment from Florin. The Application Data Type length field has a o Comment from Florin. The Application Data Type length field has a
typo. The field should be labeled "12 + n" and not "8 + n". typo. The field should be labeled "12 + n" and not "8 + n".
o Fix length fields in the sections titled "Using Recursive LISP o Fix length fields in the sections titled "Using Recursive LISP
Canonical Address Encodings", "Generic Database Mapping Lookups", Canonical Address Encodings", "Generic Database Mapping Lookups",
and "Data Model Encoding". and "Data Model Encoding".
B.2. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-07.txt B.3. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-07.txt
o Submitted December 2014. o Submitted December 2014.
o Add a new LCAF Type called "Encapsulation Format" so decapsulating o Add a new LCAF Type called "Encapsulation Format" so decapsulating
xTRs can inform encapsulating xTRs what data-plane encapsulations xTRs can inform encapsulating xTRs what data-plane encapsulations
they support. they support.
B.3. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-06.txt B.4. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-06.txt
o Submitted October 2014. o Submitted October 2014.
o Make it clear how sorted RLOC records are done when LCAFs are used o Make it clear how sorted RLOC records are done when LCAFs are used
as the RLOC record. as the RLOC record.
B.4. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-05.txt B.5. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-05.txt
o Submitted May 2014. o Submitted May 2014.
o Add a length field of the JSON payload that can be used for either o Add a length field of the JSON payload that can be used for either
binary or text encoding of JSON data. binary or text encoding of JSON data.
B.5. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-04.txt B.6. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-04.txt
o Submitted January 2014. o Submitted January 2014.
o Agreement among ELP implementors to have the AFI 16-bit field o Agreement among ELP implementors to have the AFI 16-bit field
adjacent to the address. This will make the encoding consistent adjacent to the address. This will make the encoding consistent
with all other LCAF type address encodings. with all other LCAF type address encodings.
B.6. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-03.txt B.7. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-03.txt
o Submitted September 2013. o Submitted September 2013.
o Updated references and author's affilations. o Updated references and author's affilations.
o Added Instance-ID to the Multicast Info Type so there is relative o Added Instance-ID to the Multicast Info Type so there is relative
ease in parsing (S,G) entries within a VPN. ease in parsing (S,G) entries within a VPN.
o Add port range encodings to the Application Data LCAF Type. o Add port range encodings to the Application Data LCAF Type.
o Add a new JSON LCAF Type. o Add a new JSON LCAF Type.
o Add Address Key/Value LCAF Type to allow attributes to be attached o Add Address Key/Value LCAF Type to allow attributes to be attached
to an address. to an address.
B.7. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-02.txt B.8. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-02.txt
o Submitted March 2013. o Submitted March 2013.
o Added new LCAF Type "Replication List Entry" to support LISP o Added new LCAF Type "Replication List Entry" to support LISP
replication engineering use-cases. replication engineering use-cases.
o Changed references to new LISP RFCs. o Changed references to new LISP RFCs.
B.8. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-01.txt B.9. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-01.txt
o Submitted January 2013. o Submitted January 2013.
o Change longitude range from 0-90 to 0-180 in section 4.4. o Change longitude range from 0-90 to 0-180 in section 4.4.
o Added reference to WGS-84 in section 4.4. o Added reference to WGS-84 in section 4.4.
B.9. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-00.txt B.10. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-00.txt
o Posted first working group draft August 2012. o Posted first working group draft August 2012.
o This draft was renamed from draft-farinacci-lisp-lcaf-10.txt. o This draft was renamed from draft-farinacci-lisp-lcaf-10.txt.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Dino Farinacci Dino Farinacci
lispers.net lispers.net
San Jose, CA San Jose, CA
 End of changes. 18 change blocks. 
39 lines changed or deleted 100 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.42. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/