draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-15.txt   draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-16.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: March 23, 2017 Brocade Expires: April 4, 2017 Brocade
J. Snijders J. Snijders
NTT Communications NTT Communications
September 19, 2016 October 1, 2016
LISP Canonical Address Format (LCAF) LISP Canonical Address Format (LCAF)
draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-15 draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-16
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.
Requirements Language Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
skipping to change at page 1, line 41 skipping to change at page 1, line 41
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 March 23, 2017. This Internet-Draft will expire on April 4, 2017.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 2, line 47 skipping to change at page 2, line 47
5.4. Data Model Encoding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 5.4. Data Model Encoding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
5.5. Encoding Key/Value Address Pairs . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 5.5. Encoding Key/Value Address Pairs . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
5.6. Multiple Data-Planes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 5.6. Multiple Data-Planes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
Appendix A. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Appendix A. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Appendix B. Document Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Appendix B. Document Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
B.1. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-15.txt . . . . . . . . . 40 B.1. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-16.txt . . . . . . . . . 40
B.2. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-14.txt . . . . . . . . . 40 B.2. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-15.txt . . . . . . . . . 40
B.3. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-13.txt . . . . . . . . . 40 B.3. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-14.txt . . . . . . . . . 40
B.4. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-12.txt . . . . . . . . . 40 B.4. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-13.txt . . . . . . . . . 40
B.5. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-11.txt . . . . . . . . . 40 B.5. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-12.txt . . . . . . . . . 40
B.6. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-10.txt . . . . . . . . . 41 B.6. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-11.txt . . . . . . . . . 40
B.7. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-09.txt . . . . . . . . . 41 B.7. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-10.txt . . . . . . . . . 41
B.8. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-08.txt . . . . . . . . . 41 B.8. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-09.txt . . . . . . . . . 41
B.9. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-07.txt . . . . . . . . . 41 B.9. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-08.txt . . . . . . . . . 41
B.10. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-06.txt . . . . . . . . . 41 B.10. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-07.txt . . . . . . . . . 41
B.11. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-05.txt . . . . . . . . . 41 B.11. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-06.txt . . . . . . . . . 41
B.12. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-04.txt . . . . . . . . . 42 B.12. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-05.txt . . . . . . . . . 41
B.13. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-03.txt . . . . . . . . . 42 B.13. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-04.txt . . . . . . . . . 42
B.14. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-02.txt . . . . . . . . . 42 B.14. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-03.txt . . . . . . . . . 42
B.15. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-01.txt . . . . . . . . . 42 B.15. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-02.txt . . . . . . . . . 42
B.16. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-00.txt . . . . . . . . . 42 B.16. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-01.txt . . . . . . . . . 42
B.17. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-00.txt . . . . . . . . . 42
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
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). To provide flexibility for current and future applications, (RLOCs). To provide flexibility for current and future applications,
these values can be encoded in LISP control messages using a general these values can be encoded in LISP control messages using a general
syntax that includes Address Family Identifier (AFI), length, and syntax that includes Address Family Identifier (AFI), length, and
value fields. value fields.
skipping to change at page 8, line 22 skipping to change at page 8, line 22
| Type = 2 | IID mask-len | 4 + n | | Type = 2 | IID mask-len | 4 + n |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Instance ID | | Instance ID |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AFI = x | Address ... | | AFI = x | Address ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
IID mask-len: if the AFI is set to 0, then this format is not IID mask-len: if the AFI is set to 0, then this format is not
encoding an extended EID-prefix but rather an instance-ID range encoding an extended EID-prefix but rather an instance-ID range
where the 'IID mask-len' indicates the number of high-order bits where the 'IID mask-len' indicates the number of high-order bits
used in the Instance ID field for the range. used in the Instance ID field for the range. The low-order bits
of the Instance ID field must be 0.
Length value n: length in bytes of the AFI address that follows the Length value n: length in bytes of the AFI address that follows the
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. The header when the I-bit is set. See [RFC6830] for details. The
reason for the length difference is so that the maximum number of reason for the length difference is so that the maximum number of
instances supported per mapping system is 2^32 while conserving instances supported per mapping system is 2^32 while conserving
space in the LISP data header. This comes at the expense of space in the LISP data header. This comes at the expense of
limiting the maximum number of instances per xTR to 2^24. If an limiting the maximum number of instances per xTR to 2^24. If an
skipping to change at page 11, line 5 skipping to change at page 11, line 5
E: When set to 1 means East, otherwise West. E: When set to 1 means East, otherwise West.
Longitude Degrees: Value values are from 0 to 180 degrees right or Longitude Degrees: Value values are from 0 to 180 degrees right or
left of the Prime Meridian. left of the Prime Meridian.
Longitude Minutes: Valid values range from 0 to 59. Longitude Minutes: Valid values range from 0 to 59.
Longitude Seconds: Valid values range from 0 to 59. Longitude Seconds: Valid values range from 0 to 59.
Altitude: Height relative to sea level in meters. This is a signed Altitude: Height relative to sea level in meters. This is a two's
integer meaning that the altitude could be below sea level. A complement signed integer meaning that the altitude could be below
value of 0x7fffffff indicates no Altitude value is encoded. sea level. A 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.
Usage: This encoding can be used in EID or RLOC records in Map- Usage: This encoding can be used in EID or RLOC records in Map-
Requests, Map-Replies, Map-Registers, and Map-Notify messages. When Requests, Map-Replies, Map-Registers, and Map-Notify messages. When
skipping to change at page 18, line 27 skipping to change at page 18, line 27
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ... Key Material | | ... Key Material |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AFI = x | Locator Address ... | | AFI = x | Locator Address ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Length value n: length in bytes of fields that start with the Key Length value n: length in bytes of fields that start with the Key
Material field. Material field.
Key Count: the Key Count field declares the number of Key sections Key Count: the Key Count field declares the number of Key sections
included in this LCAF. included in this LCAF. A key section is made up the "Key Length"
and "Key Material" fields.
Rsvd3: this field is reserved for future use and MUST be transmitted Rsvd3: this field is reserved for future use and MUST be transmitted
as 0 and ignored on receipt. as 0 and ignored on receipt.
Key Algorithm: the Algorithm field identifies the key's Key Algorithm: the Algorithm field identifies the key's
cryptographic algorithm and specifies the format of the Public Key cryptographic algorithm and specifies the format of the Public Key
field. field. Refer to the [I-D.ietf-lisp-ddt] and
[I-D.ietf-lisp-crypto] use-cases for definitions of this field.
Rsvd4: this field is reserved for future use and MUST be transmitted Rsvd4: this field is reserved for future use and MUST be transmitted
as 0 and ignored on receipt. as 0 and ignored on receipt.
R bit: this is the revoke bit and, if set, it specifies that this R bit: this is the revoke bit and, if set, it specifies that this
Key is being Revoked. Key is being Revoked.
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.
skipping to change at page 36, line 14 skipping to change at page 36, line 14
6. Security Considerations 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. LISP Canonical Addressing.
The use of the Geo-Coordinates LCAF Type may raise physical privacy The use of the Geo-Coordinates LCAF Type may raise physical privacy
issues. Care should be taken when configuring the mapping system to issues. Care should be taken when configuring the mapping system to
use specific policy parameters so geo-location information is not use specific policy parameters so geo-location information is not
returned gratutiosly. returned gratuitously.
7. IANA Considerations 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
skipping to change at page 38, line 37 skipping to change at page 38, line 37
Gross, J., Sridhar, T., Garg, P., Wright, C., Ganga, I., 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), October 2014. gross-geneve-02 (work in progress), October 2014.
[I-D.herbert-gue] [I-D.herbert-gue]
Herbert, T., Yong, L., and O. Zia, "Generic UDP Herbert, T., Yong, L., and O. Zia, "Generic UDP
Encapsulation", draft-herbert-gue-03 (work in progress), Encapsulation", draft-herbert-gue-03 (work in progress),
March 2015. March 2015.
[I-D.ietf-lisp-crypto]
Farinacci, D. and B. Weis, "LISP Data-Plane
Confidentiality", draft-ietf-lisp-crypto-08 (work in
progress), September 2016.
[I-D.ietf-lisp-ddt] [I-D.ietf-lisp-ddt]
Fuller, V., Lewis, D., Ermagan, V., Jain, A., and A. Fuller, V., Lewis, D., Ermagan, V., Jain, A., and A.
Smirnov, "LISP Delegated Database Tree", draft-ietf-lisp- Smirnov, "LISP Delegated Database Tree", draft-ietf-lisp-
ddt-08 (work in progress), September 2016. ddt-08 (work in progress), September 2016.
[I-D.portoles-lisp-eid-mobility] [I-D.portoles-lisp-eid-mobility]
Portoles-Comeras, M., Ashtaputre, V., Moreno, V., Maino, Portoles-Comeras, M., Ashtaputre, V., Moreno, V., Maino,
F., and D. Farinacci, "LISP L2/L3 EID Mobility Using a F., and D. Farinacci, "LISP L2/L3 EID Mobility Using a
Unified Control Plane", draft-portoles-lisp-eid- Unified Control Plane", draft-portoles-lisp-eid-
mobility-00 (work in progress), April 2016. mobility-00 (work in progress), April 2016.
skipping to change at page 40, line 9 skipping to change at page 40, line 9
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
[RFC Editor: Please delete this section on publication as RFC.] [RFC Editor: Please delete this section on publication as RFC.]
B.1. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-15.txt B.1. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-16.txt
o Submitted October 2016.
o Addressed comments from Security Directorate reviewer David
Mandelberg.
B.2. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-15.txt
o Submitted September 2016. o Submitted September 2016.
o Addressed comments from Routing Directorate reviewer Stig Venass. o Addressed comments from Routing Directorate reviewer Stig Venass.
B.2. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-14.txt B.3. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-14.txt
o Submitted July 2016. o Submitted July 2016.
o Fix IDnits errors and comments from Luigi Iannone, document o Fix IDnits errors and comments from Luigi Iannone, document
shepherd. shepherd.
B.3. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-13.txt B.4. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-13.txt
o Submitted May 2016. o Submitted May 2016.
o Explain the Instance-ID LCAF Type is 32-bits in length and the o Explain the Instance-ID LCAF Type is 32-bits in length and the
Instance-ID field in the LISP encapsulation header is 24-bits. Instance-ID field in the LISP encapsulation header is 24-bits.
B.4. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-12.txt B.5. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-12.txt
o Submitted March 2016. o Submitted March 2016.
o Updated references and document timer. o Updated references and document timer.
o Removed the R, J, and L bits from the Multicast Info Type LCAF o Removed the R, J, and L bits from the Multicast Info Type LCAF
since working group decided to not go forward with draft- since working group decided to not go forward with draft-
farinacci-lisp-mr-signaling-03.txt in favor of draft- ietf-lisp- farinacci-lisp-mr-signaling-03.txt in favor of draft- ietf-lisp-
signal-free-00.txt. signal-free-00.txt.
B.5. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-11.txt B.6. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-11.txt
o Submitted September 2015. o Submitted September 2015.
o Reflecting comments from Prague LISP working group. o Reflecting comments from Prague LISP working group.
o Readying document for a LISP LCAF registry, RFC publication, and o Readying document for a LISP LCAF registry, RFC publication, and
for new use-cases that will be defined in the new charter. for new use-cases that will be defined in the new charter.
B.6. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-10.txt B.7. 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.7. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-09.txt B.8. 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.8. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-08.txt B.9. 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.9. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-07.txt B.10. 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.10. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-06.txt B.11. 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.11. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-05.txt B.12. 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.12. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-04.txt B.13. 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.13. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-03.txt B.14. 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.14. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-02.txt B.15. 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.15. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-01.txt B.16. 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.16. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-lcaf-00.txt B.17. 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. 27 change blocks. 
43 lines changed or deleted 60 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.45. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/