draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-10.txt   draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-11.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: December 14, 2015 Brocade Expires: March 21, 2016 Brocade
J. Snijders J. Snijders
NTT Communications NTT Communications
June 12, 2015 September 18, 2015
LISP Canonical Address Format (LCAF) LISP Canonical Address Format (LCAF)
draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-10 draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-11
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 December 14, 2015. This Internet-Draft will expire on March 21, 2016.
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 15 skipping to change at page 2, line 15
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. Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. LISP Canonical Address Format Encodings . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. LISP Canonical Address Format Encodings . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. LISP Canonical Address Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4. LISP Canonical Address Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.1. Segmentation using LISP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4.1. Segmentation using LISP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.2. Carrying AS Numbers in the Mapping Database . . . . . . . 8 4.2. Carrying AS Numbers in the Mapping Database . . . . . . . 8
4.3. Convey Application Specific Data . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 4.3. Assigning Geo Coordinates to Locator Addresses . . . . . 9
4.4. Assigning Geo Coordinates to Locator Addresses . . . . . 10 4.4. NAT Traversal Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
4.5. Generic Database Mapping Lookups . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 4.5. Multicast Group Membership Information . . . . . . . . . 14
4.6. NAT Traversal Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 4.6. Traffic Engineering using Re-encapsulating Tunnels . . . 16
4.7. PETR Admission Control Functionality . . . . . . . . . . 15 4.7. Storing Security Data in the Mapping Database . . . . . . 17
4.8. Multicast Group Membership Information . . . . . . . . . 16 4.8. Source/Destination 2-Tuple Lookups . . . . . . . . . . . 19
4.9. Traffic Engineering using Re-encapsulating Tunnels . . . 18 4.9. Replication List Entries for Multicast Forwarding . . . . 20
4.10. Storing Security Data in the Mapping Database . . . . . . 19 4.10. Applications for AFI List Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
4.11. Source/Destination 2-Tuple Lookups . . . . . . . . . . . 20 4.10.1. Binding IPv4 and IPv6 Addresses . . . . . . . . . . 21
4.12. Replication List Entries for Multicast Forwarding . . . . 21 4.10.2. Layer-2 VPNs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
4.13. Data Model Encoding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 4.10.3. ASCII Names in the Mapping Database . . . . . . . . 23
4.14. Encoding Key/Value Address Pairs . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 4.10.4. Using Recursive LISP Canonical Address Encodings . . 24
4.15. Multiple Data-Planes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 4.10.5. Compatibility Mode Use Case . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
4.16. Applications for AFI List Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 5. Experimental LISP Canonical Address Applications . . . . . . 26
4.16.1. Binding IPv4 and IPv6 Addresses . . . . . . . . . . 26 5.1. Convey Application Specific Data . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
4.16.2. Layer-2 VPNs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 5.2. Generic Database Mapping Lookups . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
4.16.3. ASCII Names in the Mapping Database . . . . . . . . 28 5.3. PETR Admission Control Functionality . . . . . . . . . . 29
4.16.4. Using Recursive LISP Canonical Address Encodings . . 29 5.4. Data Model Encoding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
4.16.5. Compatibility Mode Use Case . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 5.5. Encoding Key/Value Address Pairs . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 5.6. Multiple Data-Planes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
Appendix A. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
Appendix B. Document Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Appendix A. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
B.1. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-10.txt . . . . . . . . . 35 Appendix B. Document Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
B.2. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-09.txt . . . . . . . . . 35 B.1. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-11.txt . . . . . . . . . 38
B.3. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-08.txt . . . . . . . . . 35 B.2. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-10.txt . . . . . . . . . 38
B.4. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-07.txt . . . . . . . . . 36 B.3. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-09.txt . . . . . . . . . 38
B.5. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-06.txt . . . . . . . . . 36 B.4. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-08.txt . . . . . . . . . 38
B.6. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-05.txt . . . . . . . . . 36 B.5. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-07.txt . . . . . . . . . 39
B.7. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-04.txt . . . . . . . . . 36 B.6. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-06.txt . . . . . . . . . 39
B.8. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-03.txt . . . . . . . . . 36 B.7. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-05.txt . . . . . . . . . 39
B.9. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-02.txt . . . . . . . . . 37 B.8. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-04.txt . . . . . . . . . 39
B.10. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-01.txt . . . . . . . . . 37 B.9. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-03.txt . . . . . . . . . 39
B.11. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-00.txt . . . . . . . . . 37 B.10. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-02.txt . . . . . . . . . 40
B.11. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-01.txt . . . . . . . . . 40
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 B.12. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-00.txt . . . . . . . . . 40
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
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 4, line 46 skipping to change at page 4, line 46
to a site at each point to which it attaches to the global to a site at each point to which it attaches to the global
Internet; where the topology is defined by the connectivity of Internet; where the topology is defined by the connectivity of
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). This section defines both experimental
types as well as types that reside in the registry that have
corresponding working group drafts. See IANA Considerations section
for a list of types that will reside in the LISP-LCAF Registry.
The Address Family AFI definitions from [AFI] only allocate code- The Address Family AFI definitions from [AFI] only allocate code-
points for the AFI value itself. The length of the address or entity points for the AFI value itself. The length of the address or entity
that follows is not defined and is implied based on conventional that follows is not defined and is implied based on conventional
experience. Where the LISP protocol uses LISP Canonical Addresses experience. Where the LISP protocol uses LISP Canonical Addresses
specifically, the address length definitions will be in this specifically, the address length definitions will be in this
specification and take precedent over any other specification. specification and take precedent over any other specification.
The first 6 bytes of an LISP Canonical Address are followed by a The first 6 bytes of an LISP Canonical Address are followed by a
variable length of fields: variable length of fields:
skipping to change at page 8, line 5 skipping to change at page 7, line 49
Instance ID field including the AFI field itself. Instance ID field including the AFI field itself.
Instance ID: the low-order 24-bits that can go into a LISP data Instance ID: the low-order 24-bits that can go into a LISP data
header when the I-bit is set. See [RFC6830] for details. header when the I-bit is set. See [RFC6830] for details.
AFI = x: x can be any AFI value from [AFI]. AFI = x: x can be any AFI value from [AFI].
This LISP Canonical Address Type can be used to encode either EID or This LISP Canonical Address Type can be used to encode either EID or
RLOC addresses. RLOC addresses.
Usage: When used as a lookup key, the EID is regarded as a extended-
EID in the mapping system. And this encoding is used in EID records
in Map-Requests, Map-Replies, Map-Registers, and Map-Notify messages.
When LISP-DDT [LISP-DDT] is used as the mapping system mechanism,
extended EIDs are used in Map-Referral messages.
4.2. Carrying AS Numbers in the Mapping Database 4.2. Carrying AS Numbers in the Mapping Database
When an AS number is stored in the LISP Mapping Database System for When an AS number is stored in the LISP Mapping Database System for
either policy or documentation reasons, it can be encoded in a LISP either policy or documentation reasons, it can be encoded in a LISP
Canonical Address. Canonical Address.
AS Number LISP Canonical Address Format: AS Number LISP Canonical Address Format:
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
skipping to change at page 9, line 5 skipping to change at page 9, line 13
been assigned either the EID or RLOC that follows. been assigned either the EID or RLOC that follows.
AFI = x: x can be any AFI value from [AFI]. AFI = x: x can be any AFI value from [AFI].
The AS Number Canonical Address Type can be used to encode either EID The AS Number Canonical Address Type can be used to encode either EID
or RLOC addresses. The former is used to describe the LISP-ALT AS or RLOC addresses. The former is used to describe the LISP-ALT AS
number the EID-prefix for the site is being carried for. The latter number the EID-prefix for the site is being carried for. The latter
is used to describe the AS that is carrying RLOC based prefixes in is used to describe the AS that is carrying RLOC based prefixes in
the underlying routing system. the underlying routing system.
4.3. Convey Application Specific Data Usage: This encoding can be used in EID or RLOC records in Map-
Requests, Map-Replies, Map-Registers, and Map-Notify messages. When
When a locator-set needs to be conveyed based on the type of LISP-DDT [LISP-DDT] is used as the mapping system mechanism, extended
application or the Per-Hop Behavior (PHB) of a packet, the EIDs are used in Map-Referral messages.
Application Data Type can be used.
Application Data LISP Canonical Address Format:
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AFI = 16387 | Rsvd1 | Flags |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type = 4 | Rsvd2 | 12 + n |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| IP TOS, IPv6 TC, or Flow Label | Protocol |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Local Port (lower-range) | Local Port (upper-range) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Remote Port (lower-range) | Remote Port (upper-range) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AFI = x | Address ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Length value n: length in bytes of the AFI address that follows the
8-byte Application Data fields including the AFI field itself.
IP TOS, IPv6 TC, or Flow Label: this field stores the 8-bit IPv4 TOS
field used in an IPv4 header, the 8-bit IPv6 Traffic Class or Flow
Label used in an IPv6 header.
Local Port/Remote Port Ranges: these fields are from the TCP, UDP,
or SCTP transport header. A range can be specified by using a
lower value and an upper value. When a single port is encoded,
the lower and upper value fields are the same.
AFI = x: x can be any AFI value from [AFI].
The Application Data Canonical Address Type is used for an EID
encoding when an ITR wants a locator-set for a specific application.
When used for an RLOC encoding, the ETR is supplying a locator-set
for each specific application is has been configured to advertise.
4.4. Assigning Geo Coordinates to Locator Addresses 4.3. Assigning Geo Coordinates to Locator Addresses
If an ETR desires to send a Map-Reply describing the Geo Coordinates If an ETR desires to send a Map-Reply describing the Geo Coordinates
for each locator in its locator-set, it can use the Geo Coordinate for each locator in its locator-set, it can use the Geo Coordinate
Type to convey physical location information. Type to convey physical location information.
Coordinates are specified using the WGS-84 (World Geodetic System) Coordinates are specified using the WGS-84 (World Geodetic System)
reference coordinate system [WGS-84]. reference coordinate system [WGS-84].
Geo Coordinate LISP Canonical Address Format: Geo Coordinate LISP Canonical Address Format:
skipping to change at page 12, line 5 skipping to change at page 11, line 7
integer meaning that the altitude could be below sea level. A integer meaning that the altitude could be below sea level. A
value of 0x7fffffff indicates no Altitude value is encoded. value of 0x7fffffff indicates no Altitude value is encoded.
AFI = x: x can be any AFI value from [AFI]. AFI = x: x can be any AFI value from [AFI].
The Geo Coordinates Canonical Address Type can be used to encode The Geo Coordinates Canonical Address Type can be used to encode
either EID or RLOC addresses. When used for EID encodings, you can either EID or RLOC addresses. When used for EID encodings, you can
determine the physical location of an EID along with the topological determine the physical location of an EID along with the topological
location by observing the locator-set. location by observing the locator-set.
4.5. Generic Database Mapping Lookups Usage: This encoding can be used in EID or RLOC records in Map-
Requests, Map-Replies, Map-Registers, and Map-Notify messages. When
When the LISP Mapping Database system holds information accessed by a LISP-DDT [LISP-DDT] is used as the mapping system mechanism, extended
generic formatted key (where the key is not the usual IPv4 or IPv6 EIDs are used in Map-Referral messages.
address), an opaque key may be desirable.
Opaque Key LISP Canonical Address Format:
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AFI = 16387 | Rsvd1 | Flags |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type = 6 | Rsvd2 | 3 + n |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Key Field Num | Key Wildcard Fields | Key . . . |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| . . . Key |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Length value n: length in bytes of the type's payload. The value n
is the number of bytes that follow this Length field.
Key Field Num: the number of fields (minus 1) the key can be broken
up into. The width of the fields are fixed length. So for a key
size of 8 bytes, with a Key Field Num of 4 allows 4 fields of 2
bytes in length. Valid values for this field range from 0 to 15
supporting a maximum of 16 field separations.
Key Wildcard Fields: describes which fields in the key are not used
as part of the key lookup. This wildcard encoding is a bitfield.
Each bit is a don't-care bit for a corresponding field in the key.
Bit 0 (the low-order bit) in this bitfield corresponds the first
field, right-justified in the key, bit 1 the second field, and so
on. When a bit is set in the bitfield it is a don't-care bit and
should not be considered as part of the database lookup. When the
entire 16-bits is set to 0, then all bits of the key are used for
the database lookup.
Key: the variable length key used to do a LISP Database Mapping
lookup. The length of the key is the value n (shown above) minus
3.
4.6. NAT Traversal Scenarios 4.4. NAT Traversal Scenarios
When a LISP system is conveying global address and mapped port When a LISP system is conveying global address and mapped port
information when traversing through a NAT device, the NAT-Traversal information when traversing through a NAT device, the NAT-Traversal
LCAF Type is used. See [LISP-NATT] for details. LCAF Type is used. See [LISP-NATT] for details.
NAT-Traversal Canonical Address Format: NAT-Traversal Canonical Address Format:
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
skipping to change at page 15, line 5 skipping to change at page 13, line 19
RTR RLOC Address: this is an encapsulation address used by an ITR or RTR RLOC Address: this is an encapsulation address used by an ITR or
PITR which resides behind a NAT device. This address is known to PITR which resides behind a NAT device. This address is known to
have state in a NAT device so packets can flow from it to the LISP have state in a NAT device so packets can flow from it to the LISP
ETR behind the NAT. There can be one or more NTR addresses ETR behind the NAT. There can be one or more NTR addresses
supplied in these set of fields. The number of NTRs encoded is supplied in these set of fields. The number of NTRs encoded is
determined by the LCAF length field. When there are no NTRs determined by the LCAF length field. When there are no NTRs
supplied, the NTR fields can be omitted and reflected by the LCAF supplied, the NTR fields can be omitted and reflected by the LCAF
length field or an AFI of 0 can be used to indicate zero NTRs length field or an AFI of 0 can be used to indicate zero NTRs
encoded. encoded.
4.7. PETR Admission Control Functionality Usage: This encoding can be used in Info-Request and Info-Reply
messages. The mapping system does not store this information. The
When a public PETR device wants to verify who is encapsulating to it, information is used by an xTR and Map-Server to convey private and
it can check for a specific nonce value in the LISP encapsulated public address information when traversing NAT and firewall devices.
packet. To convey the nonce to admitted ITRs or PITRs, this LCAF
format is used in a Map-Register or Map-Reply locator-record.
Nonce Locator Canonical Address Format:
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AFI = 16387 | Rsvd1 | Flags |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type = 8 | Rsvd2 | 4 + n |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Reserved | Nonce |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AFI = x | Address ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Length value n: length in bytes of the AFI address that follows the
Nonce field including the AFI field itself.
Reserved: must be set to zero and ignore on receipt.
Nonce: this is a nonce value returned by an ETR in a Map-Reply
locator-record to be used by an ITR or PITR when encapsulating to
the locator address encoded in the AFI field of this LCAF type.
AFI = x: x can be any AFI value from [AFI].
4.8. Multicast Group Membership Information 4.5. Multicast Group Membership Information
Multicast group information can be published in the mapping database Multicast group information can be published in the mapping database
so a lookup on an EID based group address can return a replication so a lookup on an EID based group address can return a replication
list of group addresses or a unicast addresses for single replication list of group addresses or a unicast addresses for single replication
or multiple head-end replications. The intent of this type of or multiple head-end replications. The intent of this type of
unicast replication is to deliver packets to multiple ETRs at unicast replication is to deliver packets to multiple ETRs at
receiver LISP multicast sites. The locator-set encoding for this EID receiver LISP multicast sites. The locator-set encoding for this EID
record type can be a list of ETRs when they each register with "Merge record type can be a list of ETRs when they each register with "Merge
Semantics". The encoding can be a typical AFI encoded locator Semantics". The encoding can be a typical AFI encoded locator
address. When an RTR list is being registered (with multiple levels address. When an RTR list is being registered (with multiple levels
skipping to change at page 18, line 5 skipping to change at page 15, line 26
of (Instance-ID, S-prefix, G-prefix). of (Instance-ID, S-prefix, G-prefix).
Source MaskLen: the mask length of the source prefix that follows. Source MaskLen: the mask length of the source prefix that follows.
Group MaskLen: the mask length of the group prefix that follows. Group MaskLen: the mask length of the group prefix that follows.
AFI = x: x can be any AFI value from [AFI]. When a specific AFI has AFI = x: x can be any AFI value from [AFI]. When a specific AFI has
its own encoding of a multicast address, this field must be either its own encoding of a multicast address, this field must be either
a group address or a broadcast address. a group address or a broadcast address.
4.9. Traffic Engineering using Re-encapsulating Tunnels Usage: This encoding can be used in EID records in Map-Requests, Map-
Replies, Map-Registers, and Map-Notify messages. When LISP-DDT
[LISP-DDT] is used as the mapping system mechanism, extended EIDs are
used in Map-Referral messages.
4.6. Traffic Engineering using Re-encapsulating Tunnels
For a given EID lookup into the mapping database, this LCAF format For a given EID lookup into the mapping database, this LCAF format
can be returned to provide a list of locators in an explicit re- can be returned to provide a list of locators in an explicit re-
encapsulation path. See [LISP-TE] for details. encapsulation path. See [LISP-TE] for details.
Explicit Locator Path (ELP) Canonical Address Format: Explicit Locator Path (ELP) Canonical Address Format:
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
skipping to change at page 19, line 5 skipping to change at page 17, line 5
Strict bit (S): this the strict bit which means the associated Strict bit (S): this the strict bit which means the associated
Rencap Hop is required to be used. If this bit is 0, the Rencap Hop is required to be used. If this bit is 0, the
reencapsulator can skip this Reencap Hop and go to the next one in reencapsulator can skip this Reencap Hop and go to the next one in
the list. the list.
AFI = x: x can be any AFI value from [AFI]. When a specific AFI has AFI = x: x can be any AFI value from [AFI]. When a specific AFI has
its own encoding of a multicast address, this field must be either its own encoding of a multicast address, this field must be either
a group address or a broadcast address. a group address or a broadcast address.
4.10. Storing Security Data in the Mapping Database Usage: This encoding can be used in RLOC records in Map-Requests,
Map-Replies, Map-Registers, and Map-Notify messages. This encoding
not need to be understood by the mapping system for mapping database
lookups since this LCAF type is not a lookup key.
4.7. Storing Security Data in the Mapping Database
When a locator in a locator-set has a security key associated with When a locator in a locator-set has a security key associated with
it, this LCAF format will be used to encode key material. See it, this LCAF format will be used to encode key material. See
[LISP-DDT] for details. [LISP-DDT] for details.
Security Key Canonical Address Format: Security Key Canonical Address Format:
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
skipping to change at page 20, line 5 skipping to change at page 18, line 28
Key Length: this field determines the length in bytes of the Key Key Length: this field determines the length in bytes of the Key
Material field. Material field.
Key Material: the Key Material field stores the key material. The Key Material: the Key Material field stores the key material. The
format of the key material stored depends on the Key Algorithm format of the key material stored depends on the Key Algorithm
field. field.
AFI = x: x can be any AFI value from [AFI].This is the locator AFI = x: x can be any AFI value from [AFI].This is the locator
address that owns the encoded security key. address that owns the encoded security key.
4.11. Source/Destination 2-Tuple Lookups Usage: This encoding can be used in EID or RLOC records in Map-
Requests, Map-Replies, Map-Registers, and Map-Notify messages. When
LISP-DDT [LISP-DDT] is used as the mapping system mechanism, extended
EIDs are used in Map-Referral messages.
4.8. Source/Destination 2-Tuple Lookups
When both a source and destination address of a flow needs When both a source and destination address of a flow needs
consideration for different locator-sets, this 2-tuple key is used in consideration for different locator-sets, this 2-tuple key is used in
EID fields in LISP control messages. When the Source/Dest key is EID fields in LISP control messages. When the Source/Dest key is
registered to the mapping database, it can be encoded as a source- registered to the mapping database, it can be encoded as a source-
prefix and destination-prefix. When the Source/Dest is used as a key prefix and destination-prefix. When the Source/Dest is used as a key
for a mapping database lookup the source and destination come from a for a mapping database lookup the source and destination come from a
data packet. data packet.
Source/Dest Key Canonical Address Format: Source/Dest Key Canonical Address Format:
skipping to change at page 21, line 5 skipping to change at page 19, line 45
Source-ML: the mask length of the source prefix that follows. Source-ML: the mask length of the source prefix that follows.
Dest-ML: the mask length of the destination prefix that follows. Dest-ML: the mask length of the destination prefix that follows.
AFI = x: x can be any AFI value from [AFI]. When a specific AFI has AFI = x: x can be any AFI value from [AFI]. When a specific AFI has
its own encoding of a multicast address, this field must be either its own encoding of a multicast address, this field must be either
a group address or a broadcast address. a group address or a broadcast address.
Refer to [LISP-TE] for usage details. Refer to [LISP-TE] for usage details.
4.12. Replication List Entries for Multicast Forwarding Usage: This encoding can be used in EID records in Map-Requests, Map-
Replies, Map-Registers, and Map-Notify messages. When LISP-DDT
[LISP-DDT] is used as the mapping system mechanism, extended EIDs are
used in Map-Referral messages.
4.9. Replication List Entries for Multicast Forwarding
The Replication List Entry LCAF type is an encoding for a locator The Replication List Entry LCAF type is an encoding for a locator
being used for unicast replication according to the specification in being used for unicast replication according to the specification in
[LISP-RE]. This locator encoding is pointed to by a Multicast Info [LISP-RE]. This locator encoding is pointed to by a Multicast Info
LCAF Type and is registered by Re-encapsulating Tunnel Routers (RTRs) LCAF Type and is registered by Re-encapsulating Tunnel Routers (RTRs)
that are participating in an overlay distribution tree. Each RTR that are participating in an overlay distribution tree. Each RTR
will register its locator address and its configured level in the will register its locator address and its configured level in the
distribution tree. distribution tree.
Replication List Entry Address Format: Replication List Entry Address Format:
skipping to change at page 22, line 5 skipping to change at page 20, line 50
(meaning that ITRs replicate to level-0 RTRs) and higher levels (meaning that ITRs replicate to level-0 RTRs) and higher levels
are further downstream on the distribution tree closer to ETRs of are further downstream on the distribution tree closer to ETRs of
multicast receiver sites. multicast receiver sites.
AFI = x: x can be any AFI value from [AFI]. A specific AFI has its AFI = x: x can be any AFI value from [AFI]. A specific AFI has its
own encoding of either a unicast or multicast locator address. own encoding of either a unicast or multicast locator address.
All RTR/ETR entries for the same level should be combined together All RTR/ETR entries for the same level should be combined together
by a Map-Server to avoid searching through the entire multi-level by a Map-Server to avoid searching through the entire multi-level
list of locator entries in a Map-Reply message. list of locator entries in a Map-Reply message.
4.13. Data Model Encoding Usage: This encoding can be used in RLOC records in Map-Requests,
Map-Replies, Map-Registers, and Map-Notify messages.
This type allows a JSON data model to be encoded either as an EID or
RLOC.
JSON Data Model Type Address Format:
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AFI = 16387 | Rsvd1 | Flags |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type = 14 | Rsvd2 |B| 2 + n |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| JSON length | JSON binary/text encoding ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AFI = x | Optional Address ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Length value n: length in bytes of fields that follow.
Rsvd{1,2}: must be set to zero and ignore on receipt.
B bit: indicates that the JSON field is binary encoded according to
[JSON-BINARY] when the bit is set to 1. Otherwise the encoding is
based on text encoding according to [RFC4627].
JSON length: length in octets of the following 'JSON binary/text
encoding' field.
JSON binary/text encoding field: a variable length field that
contains either binary or text encodings.
AFI = x: x can be any AFI value from [AFI]. A specific AFI has its
own encoding of either a unicast or multicast locator address.
All RTR/ETR entries for the same level should be combined together
by a Map-Server to avoid searching through the entire multi-level
list of locator entries in a Map-Reply message.
4.14. Encoding Key/Value Address Pairs
The Key/Value pair is for example useful for attaching attributes to
other elements of LISP packets, such as EIDs or RLOCs. When
attaching attributes to EIDs or RLOCs, it's necessary to distinguish
between the element that should be used as EID or RLOC, and hence as
key for lookups, and additional attributes. This is especially the
case when the difference cannot be determined from the types of the
elements, such as when two IP addresses are being used.
Key/Value Pair Address Format:
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AFI = 16387 | Rsvd1 | Flags |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type = 15 | Rsvd2 | n |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AFI = x | Address as Key ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AFI = x | Address as Value ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Length value n: length in bytes of fields that follow.
Rsvd{1,2}: must be set to zero and ignore on receipt.
AFI = x: x can be any AFI value from [AFI]. A specific AFI has its
own encoding of either a unicast or multicast locator address.
All RTR/ETR entries for the same level should be combined together
by a Map-Server to avoid searching through the entire multi-level
list of locator entries in a Map-Reply message.
Address as Key: this AFI encoded address will be attached with the
attributes encoded in "Address as Value" which follows this field.
Address as Value: this AFI encoded address will be the attribute
address that goes along with "Address as Key" which precedes this
field.
4.15. Multiple Data-Planes
Overlays are becoming popular in many parts of the network which have
created an explosion of data-plane encapsulation headers. Since the
LISP mapping system can hold many types of address formats, it can
represent the encapsulation format supported by an RLOC as well.
When an encapsulator receives a Map-Reply with an Encapsulation
Format LCAF Type encoded in an RLOC-record, it can select an
encapsulation format, that it can support, from any of the
encapsulation protocols which have the bit set to 1 in this LCAF
type.
Encapsulation Format Address Format:
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AFI = 16387 | Rsvd1 | Flags |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type = 16 | Rsvd2 | 4 + n |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Reserved-for-Future-Encapsulations |U|G|N|v|V|l|L|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AFI = x | Address ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Rsvd1/Rsvd2: must be set to zero and ignored on receipt.
Length value n: length in bytes of the AFI address that follows the
next 32-bits including the AFI field itself.
Reserved-for-Future-Encapsulations: must be set to zero and ignored
on receipt. This field will get bits allocated to future
encapsulations, as they are created.
L: The RLOCs listed in the AFI encoded addresses in the next longword
can accept layer3 LISP encapsulation using destination UDP port
4341 [RFC6830].
l: The RLOCs listed in the AFI encoded addresses in the next longword
can accept layer2 LISP encapsulation using destination UDP port
8472 [L2-LISP].
V: The RLOCs listed in the AFI encoded addresses in the next longword
can accept VXLAN encapsulation using destination UDP port 4789
[RFC7348].
v: The RLOCs listed in the AFI encoded addresses in the next longword
can accept VXLAN-GPE encapsulation using destination UDP port 4790
[GPE].
N: The RLOCs listed in the AFI encoded addresses in the next longword
can accept NV-GRE encapsulation using IPv4/ IPv6 protocol number
47 [NVGRE].
G: The RLOCs listed in the AFI encoded addresses in the next longword
can accept GENEVE encapsulation using destination UDP port 6081
[GENEVE].
U: The RLOCs listed in the AFI encoded addresses in the next longword
can accept GUE encapsulation using destination UDP port TBD [GUE].
4.16. Applications for AFI List Type 4.10. Applications for AFI List Type
4.16.1. Binding IPv4 and IPv6 Addresses 4.10.1. Binding IPv4 and IPv6 Addresses
When header translation between IPv4 and IPv6 is desirable a LISP When header translation between IPv4 and IPv6 is desirable a LISP
Canonical Address can use the AFI List Type to carry multiple AFIs in Canonical Address can use the AFI List Type to carry multiple AFIs in
one LCAF AFI. one LCAF AFI.
Address Binding LISP Canonical Address Format: Address Binding LISP Canonical Address Format:
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
skipping to change at page 27, line 5 skipping to change at page 21, line 45
Length: length in bytes is fixed at 24 when IPv4 and IPv6 AFI Length: length in bytes is fixed at 24 when IPv4 and IPv6 AFI
encoded addresses are used. encoded addresses are used.
This type of address format can be included in a Map-Request when the This type of address format can be included in a Map-Request when the
address is being used as an EID, but the Mapping Database System address is being used as an EID, but the Mapping Database System
lookup destination can use only the IPv4 address. This is so a lookup destination can use only the IPv4 address. This is so a
Mapping Database Service Transport System, such as LISP-ALT Mapping Database Service Transport System, such as LISP-ALT
[RFC6836], can use the Map-Request destination address to route the [RFC6836], can use the Map-Request destination address to route the
control message to the desired LISP site. control message to the desired LISP site.
4.16.2. Layer-2 VPNs Usage: This encoding can be used in EID or RLOC records in Map-
Requests, Map-Replies, Map-Registers, and Map-Notify messages. See
subsections in this section for specific use cases.
4.10.2. Layer-2 VPNs
When MAC addresses are stored in the LISP Mapping Database System, When MAC addresses are stored in the LISP Mapping Database System,
the AFI List Type can be used to carry AFI 6. the AFI List Type can be used to carry AFI 6.
MAC Address LISP Canonical Address Format: MAC Address LISP Canonical Address Format:
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 |
skipping to change at page 28, line 5 skipping to change at page 23, line 5
Length: length in bytes is fixed at 8 when MAC address AFI encoded Length: length in bytes is fixed at 8 when MAC address AFI encoded
addresses are used. addresses are used.
This address format can be used to connect layer-2 domains together This address format can be used to connect layer-2 domains together
using LISP over an IPv4 or IPv6 core network to create a layer-2 VPN. using LISP over an IPv4 or IPv6 core network to create a layer-2 VPN.
In this use-case, a MAC address is being used as an EID, and the In this use-case, a MAC address is being used as an EID, and the
locator-set that this EID maps to can be an IPv4 or IPv6 RLOCs, or locator-set that this EID maps to can be an IPv4 or IPv6 RLOCs, or
even another MAC address being used as an RLOC. even another MAC address being used as an RLOC.
4.16.3. ASCII Names in the Mapping Database 4.10.3. ASCII Names in the Mapping Database
If DNS names or URIs are stored in the LISP Mapping Database System, If DNS names or URIs are stored in the LISP Mapping Database System,
the AFI List Type can be used to carry an ASCII string where it is the AFI List Type can be used to carry an ASCII string where it is
delimited by length 'n' of the LCAF Length encoding. delimited by length 'n' of the LCAF Length encoding.
ASCII LISP Canonical Address Format: ASCII LISP Canonical Address Format:
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 = 1 | Rsvd2 | 2 + n | | Type = 1 | Rsvd2 | 2 + n |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AFI = 17 | DNS Name or URI ... | | AFI = 17 | DNS Name or URI ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Length value n: length in bytes AFI=17 field and the null-terminated Length value n: length in bytes AFI=17 field and the null-terminated
ASCII string (the last byte of 0 is included). ASCII string (the last byte of 0 is included).
4.16.4. Using Recursive LISP Canonical Address Encodings 4.10.4. Using Recursive LISP Canonical Address Encodings
When any combination of above is desirable, the AFI List Type value When any combination of above is desirable, the AFI List Type value
can be used to carry within the LCAF AFI another LCAF AFI. can be used to carry within the LCAF AFI another LCAF AFI.
Recursive LISP Canonical Address Format: Recursive LISP Canonical Address Format:
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 |
skipping to change at page 30, line 5 skipping to change at page 25, line 5
This format could be used by a Mapping Database Transport System, This format could be used by a Mapping Database Transport System,
such as LISP-ALT [RFC6836], where the AFI=1 IPv4 address is used as such as LISP-ALT [RFC6836], where the AFI=1 IPv4 address is used as
an EID and placed in the Map-Request destination address by the an EID and placed in the Map-Request destination address by the
sending LISP system. The ALT system can deliver the Map-Request to sending LISP system. The ALT system can deliver the Map-Request to
the LISP destination site independent of the Application Data Type the LISP destination site independent of the Application Data Type
AFI payload values. When this AFI is processed by the destination AFI payload values. When this AFI is processed by the destination
LISP site, it can return different locator-sets based on the type of LISP site, it can return different locator-sets based on the type of
application or level of service that is being requested. application or level of service that is being requested.
4.16.5. Compatibility Mode Use Case 4.10.5. Compatibility Mode Use Case
A LISP system should use the AFI List Type format when sending to A LISP system should use the AFI List Type format when sending to
LISP systems that do not support a particular LCAF Type used to LISP systems that do not support a particular LCAF Type used to
encode locators. This allows the receiving system to be able to encode locators. This allows the receiving system to be able to
parse a locator address for encapsulation purposes. The list of AFIs parse a locator address for encapsulation purposes. The list of AFIs
in an AFI List LCAF Type has no semantic ordering and a receiver in an AFI List LCAF Type has no semantic ordering and a receiver
should parse each AFI element no matter what the ordering. should parse each AFI element no matter what the ordering.
Compatibility Mode Address Format: Compatibility Mode Address Format:
skipping to change at page 31, line 5 skipping to change at page 26, line 5
address. address.
A LISP system is required to support the AFI List LCAF Type to use A LISP system is required to support the AFI List LCAF Type to use
this procedure. It would skip over 10 bytes of the Geo Coordinate this procedure. It would skip over 10 bytes of the Geo Coordinate
LCAF Type to get to the locator address encoding (an IPv4 locator LCAF Type to get to the locator address encoding (an IPv4 locator
address). A LISP system that does support the Geo Coordinate LCAF address). A LISP system that does support the Geo Coordinate LCAF
Type can support parsing the locator address within the Geo Type can support parsing the locator address within the Geo
Coordinate LCAF encoding or in the locator encoding that follows in Coordinate LCAF encoding or in the locator encoding that follows in
the AFI List LCAF. the AFI List LCAF.
5. Security Considerations 5. Experimental LISP Canonical Address Applications
5.1. Convey Application Specific Data
When a locator-set needs to be conveyed based on the type of
application or the Per-Hop Behavior (PHB) of a packet, the
Application Data Type can be used.
Application Data LISP Canonical Address Format:
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AFI = 16387 | Rsvd1 | Flags |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type = 4 | Rsvd2 | 12 + n |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| IP TOS, IPv6 TC, or Flow Label | Protocol |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Local Port (lower-range) | Local Port (upper-range) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Remote Port (lower-range) | Remote Port (upper-range) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AFI = x | Address ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Length value n: length in bytes of the AFI address that follows the
8-byte Application Data fields including the AFI field itself.
IP TOS, IPv6 TC, or Flow Label: this field stores the 8-bit IPv4 TOS
field used in an IPv4 header, the 8-bit IPv6 Traffic Class or Flow
Label used in an IPv6 header.
Local Port/Remote Port Ranges: these fields are from the TCP, UDP,
or SCTP transport header. A range can be specified by using a
lower value and an upper value. When a single port is encoded,
the lower and upper value fields are the same.
AFI = x: x can be any AFI value from [AFI].
The Application Data Canonical Address Type is used for an EID
encoding when an ITR wants a locator-set for a specific application.
When used for an RLOC encoding, the ETR is supplying a locator-set
for each specific application is has been configured to advertise.
Usage: This encoding can be used in EID records in Map-Requests, Map-
Replies, Map-Registers, and Map-Notify messages. When LISP-DDT
[LISP-DDT] is used as the mapping system mechanism, extended EIDs are
used in Map-Referral messages. This LCAF type is used as a lookup
key to the mapping system that can return a longest-match or exact-
match entry.
5.2. Generic Database Mapping Lookups
When the LISP Mapping Database system holds information accessed by a
generic formatted key (where the key is not the usual IPv4 or IPv6
address), an opaque key may be desirable.
Opaque Key LISP Canonical Address Format:
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AFI = 16387 | Rsvd1 | Flags |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type = 6 | Rsvd2 | 3 + n |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Key Field Num | Key Wildcard Fields | Key . . . |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| . . . Key |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Length value n: length in bytes of the type's payload. The value n
is the number of bytes that follow this Length field.
Key Field Num: the number of fields (minus 1) the key can be broken
up into. The width of the fields are fixed length. So for a key
size of 8 bytes, with a Key Field Num of 4 allows 4 fields of 2
bytes in length. Valid values for this field range from 0 to 15
supporting a maximum of 16 field separations.
Key Wildcard Fields: describes which fields in the key are not used
as part of the key lookup. This wildcard encoding is a bitfield.
Each bit is a don't-care bit for a corresponding field in the key.
Bit 0 (the low-order bit) in this bitfield corresponds the first
field, right-justified in the key, bit 1 the second field, and so
on. When a bit is set in the bitfield it is a don't-care bit and
should not be considered as part of the database lookup. When the
entire 16-bits is set to 0, then all bits of the key are used for
the database lookup.
Key: the variable length key used to do a LISP Database Mapping
lookup. The length of the key is the value n (shown above) minus
3.
Usage: This is an experimental type where the usage has not been
defined yet.
5.3. PETR Admission Control Functionality
When a public PETR device wants to verify who is encapsulating to it,
it can check for a specific nonce value in the LISP encapsulated
packet. To convey the nonce to admitted ITRs or PITRs, this LCAF
format is used in a Map-Register or Map-Reply locator-record.
Nonce Locator Canonical Address Format:
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AFI = 16387 | Rsvd1 | Flags |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type = 8 | Rsvd2 | 4 + n |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Reserved | Nonce |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AFI = x | Address ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Length value n: length in bytes of the AFI address that follows the
Nonce field including the AFI field itself.
Reserved: must be set to zero and ignore on receipt.
Nonce: this is a nonce value returned by an ETR in a Map-Reply
locator-record to be used by an ITR or PITR when encapsulating to
the locator address encoded in the AFI field of this LCAF type.
AFI = x: x can be any AFI value from [AFI].
Usage: This is an experimental type where the usage has not been
defined yet.
5.4. Data Model Encoding
This type allows a JSON data model to be encoded either as an EID or
RLOC.
JSON Data Model Type Address Format:
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AFI = 16387 | Rsvd1 | Flags |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type = 14 | Rsvd2 |B| 2 + n |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| JSON length | JSON binary/text encoding ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AFI = x | Optional Address ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Length value n: length in bytes of fields that follow.
Rsvd{1,2}: must be set to zero and ignore on receipt.
B bit: indicates that the JSON field is binary encoded according to
[JSON-BINARY] when the bit is set to 1. Otherwise the encoding is
based on text encoding according to [RFC4627].
JSON length: length in octets of the following 'JSON binary/text
encoding' field.
JSON binary/text encoding field: a variable length field that
contains either binary or text encodings.
AFI = x: x can be any AFI value from [AFI]. A specific AFI has its
own encoding of either a unicast or multicast locator address.
All RTR/ETR entries for the same level should be combined together
by a Map-Server to avoid searching through the entire multi-level
list of locator entries in a Map-Reply message.
Usage: This is an experimental type where the usage has not been
defined yet.
5.5. Encoding Key/Value Address Pairs
The Key/Value pair is for example useful for attaching attributes to
other elements of LISP packets, such as EIDs or RLOCs. When
attaching attributes to EIDs or RLOCs, it's necessary to distinguish
between the element that should be used as EID or RLOC, and hence as
key for lookups, and additional attributes. This is especially the
case when the difference cannot be determined from the types of the
elements, such as when two IP addresses are being used.
Key/Value Pair Address Format:
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AFI = 16387 | Rsvd1 | Flags |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type = 15 | Rsvd2 | n |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AFI = x | Address as Key ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AFI = x | Address as Value ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Length value n: length in bytes of fields that follow.
Rsvd{1,2}: must be set to zero and ignore on receipt.
AFI = x: x can be any AFI value from [AFI]. A specific AFI has its
own encoding of either a unicast or multicast locator address.
All RTR/ETR entries for the same level should be combined together
by a Map-Server to avoid searching through the entire multi-level
list of locator entries in a Map-Reply message.
Address as Key: this AFI encoded address will be attached with the
attributes encoded in "Address as Value" which follows this field.
Address as Value: this AFI encoded address will be the attribute
address that goes along with "Address as Key" which precedes this
field.
Usage: This is an experimental type where the usage has not been
defined yet.
5.6. Multiple Data-Planes
Overlays are becoming popular in many parts of the network which have
created an explosion of data-plane encapsulation headers. Since the
LISP mapping system can hold many types of address formats, it can
represent the encapsulation format supported by an RLOC as well.
When an encapsulator receives a Map-Reply with an Encapsulation
Format LCAF Type encoded in an RLOC-record, it can select an
encapsulation format, that it can support, from any of the
encapsulation protocols which have the bit set to 1 in this LCAF
type.
Encapsulation Format Address Format:
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AFI = 16387 | Rsvd1 | Flags |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type = 16 | Rsvd2 | 4 + n |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Reserved-for-Future-Encapsulations |U|G|N|v|V|l|L|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AFI = x | Address ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Rsvd1/Rsvd2: must be set to zero and ignored on receipt.
Length value n: length in bytes of the AFI address that follows the
next 32-bits including the AFI field itself.
Reserved-for-Future-Encapsulations: must be set to zero and ignored
on receipt. This field will get bits allocated to future
encapsulations, as they are created.
L: The RLOCs listed in the AFI encoded addresses in the next longword
can accept layer3 LISP encapsulation using destination UDP port
4341 [RFC6830].
l: The RLOCs listed in the AFI encoded addresses in the next longword
can accept layer2 LISP encapsulation using destination UDP port
8472 [L2-LISP].
V: The RLOCs listed in the AFI encoded addresses in the next longword
can accept VXLAN encapsulation using destination UDP port 4789
[RFC7348].
v: The RLOCs listed in the AFI encoded addresses in the next longword
can accept VXLAN-GPE encapsulation using destination UDP port 4790
[GPE].
N: The RLOCs listed in the AFI encoded addresses in the next longword
can accept NV-GRE encapsulation using IPv4/ IPv6 protocol number
47 [NVGRE].
G: The RLOCs listed in the AFI encoded addresses in the next longword
can accept GENEVE encapsulation using destination UDP port 6081
[GENEVE].
U: The RLOCs listed in the AFI encoded addresses in the next longword
can accept GUE encapsulation using destination UDP port TBD [GUE].
Usage: This encoding can be used in RLOC records in Map-Requests,
Map-Replies, Map-Registers, and Map-Notify messages.
6. 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 The use of the Geo-Coordinates LCAF Type may raise physical privacy
issues. It can be up to the mapping system, based on policy
parameters, when this LCAF type is returned to a Map-Requester.
7. IANA Considerations
This document defines a canonical address format encoding used in This document defines a canonical address format encoding used in
LISP control messages and in the encoding of lookup keys for the LISP LISP control messages and in the encoding of lookup keys for the LISP
Mapping Database System. Such address format is based on a fixed AFI Mapping Database System. Such address format is based on a fixed AFI
(16387) and a LISP LCAF Type field. (16387) and a LISP LCAF Type field.
The LISP LCAF Type field is an 8-bit field specific to the LISP The LISP LCAF Type field is an 8-bit field specific to the LISP
Canonical Address formatted encodings, for which IANA is to create Canonical Address formatted encodings, for which IANA is to create
and maintain a new registry (as outlined in [RFC5226]) entitled "LISP and maintain a new registry (as outlined in [RFC5226]) entitled "LISP
LCAF Type". Initial values for the LISP LCAF Type registry are given LCAF Type". Initial values for the LISP LCAF Type registry are given
below. Future assignments are to be made through RFC Publication. below. Future assignments are to be made through expert review with
Assignments consist of a LISP LCAF Type name and its associated a specification required publication. Assignments consist of a LISP
value: LCAF Type name and its associated value:
+-------+------------------------------+------------+ +-------+------------------------------+------------+
| Value | LISP LCAF Type Name | Definition | | Value | LISP LCAF Type Name | Definition |
+-------+------------------------------+------------+ +-------+------------------------------+------------+
| 0 | Null Body Type | Section 3 | | 0 | Null Body Type | Section 3 |
| | | | | | | |
| 1 | AFI List Type | Section 3 | | 1 | AFI List Type | Section 3 |
| | | | | | | |
| 2 | Instance ID Type | Section 3 | | 2 | Instance ID Type | Section 3 |
| | | | | | | |
| 3 | AS Number Type | Section 3 | | 3 | AS Number Type | Section 3 |
| | | | | | | |
| 4 | Application Data Type | Section 3 |
| | | |
| 5 | Geo Coordinates Type | Section 3 | | 5 | Geo Coordinates Type | Section 3 |
| | | | | | | |
| 6 | Opaque Key Type | Section 3 |
| | | |
| 7 | NAT-Traversal Type | Section 3 | | 7 | NAT-Traversal Type | Section 3 |
| | | | | | | |
| 8 | Nonce Locator Type | Section 3 |
| | | |
| 9 | Multicast Info Type | Section 3 | | 9 | Multicast Info Type | Section 3 |
| | | | | | | |
| 10 | Explicit Locator Path Type | Section 3 | | 10 | Explicit Locator Path Type | Section 3 |
| | | | | | | |
| 11 | Security Key Type | Section 3 | | 11 | Security Key Type | Section 3 |
| | | | | | | |
| 12 | Source/Dest Key Type | Section 3 | | 12 | Source/Dest Key Type | Section 3 |
| | | | | | | |
| 13 | Replication List Entry 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 Table 1: LISP LCAF Type Initial Values
7. References 8. References
7.1. Normative References 8.1. Normative References
[RFC1700] Reynolds, J. and J. Postel, "Assigned Numbers", RFC 1700, [RFC1700] Reynolds, J. and J. Postel, "Assigned Numbers", RFC 1700,
October 1994. DOI 10.17487/RFC1700, October 1994,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1700>.
[RFC1918] Rekhter, Y., Moskowitz, R., Karrenberg, D., Groot, G., and [RFC1918] Rekhter, Y., Moskowitz, B., Karrenberg, D., de Groot, G.,
E. Lear, "Address Allocation for Private Internets", BCP and E. Lear, "Address Allocation for Private Internets",
5, RFC 1918, February 1996. BCP 5, RFC 1918, DOI 10.17487/RFC1918, February 1996,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1918>.
[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,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4627, July 2006,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4627>.
[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,
May 2008. DOI 10.17487/RFC5226, May 2008,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5226>.
[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,
2013. DOI 10.17487/RFC6830, January 2013,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6830>.
[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, DOI 10.17487/RFC6836,
January 2013, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6836>.
[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
eXtensible Local Area Network (VXLAN): A Framework for eXtensible Local Area Network (VXLAN): A Framework for
Overlaying Virtualized Layer 2 Networks over Layer 3 Overlaying Virtualized Layer 2 Networks over Layer 3
Networks", RFC 7348, August 2014. Networks", RFC 7348, DOI 10.17487/RFC7348, August 2014,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7348>.
7.2. Informative References 8.2. Informative References
[AFI] IANA, , "Address Family Identifier (AFIs)", ADDRESS FAMILY [AFI] IANA, , "Address Family Identifier (AFIs)", ADDRESS FAMILY
NUMBERS http://www.iana.org/numbers.html, Febuary 2007. NUMBERS http://www.iana.org/numbers.html, Febuary 2007.
[GENEVE] Gross, J., Sridhar, T., Garg, P., Wright, C., Ganga, I., [GENEVE] Gross, J., Sridhar, T., Garg, P., Wright, C., Ganga, I.,
Agarwal, P., Duda, K., Dutt, D., and J. Hudson, "Geneve: Agarwal, P., Duda, K., Dutt, D., and J. Hudson, "Geneve:
Generic Network Virtualization Encapsulation", draft- Generic Network Virtualization Encapsulation", draft-
gross-geneve-02 (work in progress). gross-geneve-02 (work in progress).
[GPE] Quinn, P., Agarwal, P., Fernando, R., Kreeger, L., [GPE] Quinn, P., Agarwal, P., Fernando, R., Kreeger, L.,
Kreeger, L., Lewis, D., Maino, F., Smith, M., Yadav, N., Kreeger, L., Lewis, D., Maino, F., Smith, M., Yadav, N.,
Yong, L., Xu, X., Elzur, U., and P. Garg, "Generic Yong, L., Xu, X., Elzur, U., and P. Garg, "Generic
Protocol Extension for VXLAN", draft-quinn-vxlan-gpe- Protocol Extension for VXLAN", draft-quinn-vxlan-gpe-
03.txt (work in progress). 03.txt (work in progress).
[GUE] Herbert, T. and L. Yong, "Generic UDP Encapsulation", [GUE] Herbert, T. and L. Yong, "Generic UDP Encapsulation",
draft-herbert-gue-02.txt (work in progress). draft-herbert-gue-02.txt (work in progress).
[JSON-BINARY] [JSON-BINARY]
"Universal Binary JSON Specification", URL "Universal Binary JSON Specification",
http://ubjson.org. URL http://ubjson.org.
[L2-LISP] Smith, M., Dutt, D., Farinacci, D., and F. Maino, "Layer 2 [L2-LISP] Smith, M., Dutt, D., Farinacci, D., and F. Maino, "Layer 2
(L2) LISP Encapsulation Format", draft-smith-lisp- (L2) LISP Encapsulation Format", draft-smith-lisp-
layer2-03.txt (work in progress). layer2-03.txt (work in progress).
[LISP-DDT] [LISP-DDT]
Fuller, V., Lewis, D., and V. Ermagan, "LISP Delegated Fuller, V., Lewis, D., and V. Ermagan, "LISP Delegated
Database Tree", draft-ietf-lisp-ddt-01.txt (work in Database Tree", draft-ietf-lisp-ddt-01.txt (work in
progress). progress).
skipping to change at page 35, line 25 skipping to change at page 38, line 21
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-10.txt B.1. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-11.txt
o Submitted September 2015.
o Reflecting comments from Prague LISP working group.
o Readying document for a LISP LCAF registry, RFC publication, and
for new use-cases that will be defined in the new charter.
B.2. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-10.txt
o Submitted June 2015. o Submitted June 2015.
o Fix coauthor Job's contact information. o Fix coauthor Job's contact information.
B.2. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-09.txt B.3. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-09.txt
o Submitted June 2015. o Submitted June 2015.
o Fix IANA Considerations section to request a registry to allocate o Fix IANA Considerations section to request a registry to allocate
and track LCAF Type values. and track LCAF Type values.
B.3. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-08.txt B.4. 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.4. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-07.txt B.5. 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.5. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-06.txt B.6. 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.6. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-05.txt B.7. 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.7. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-04.txt B.8. 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.8. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-03.txt B.9. 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.9. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-02.txt B.10. 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.10. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-01.txt B.11. 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.11. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-00.txt B.12. 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. 53 change blocks. 
356 lines changed or deleted 442 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/