draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-14.txt   draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-15.txt 
Network Working Group D. Farinacci Network Working Group D. Farinacci
Internet-Draft V. Fuller Internet-Draft V. Fuller
Obsoletes: 6830 (if approved) D. Meyer Obsoletes: 6830 (if approved) D. Meyer
Intended status: Standards Track D. Lewis Intended status: Standards Track D. Lewis
Expires: January 18, 2019 Cisco Systems Expires: February 25, 2019 Cisco Systems
A. Cabellos (Ed.) A. Cabellos (Ed.)
UPC/BarcelonaTech UPC/BarcelonaTech
July 17, 2018 August 24, 2018
The Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) The Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP)
draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-14 draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-15
Abstract Abstract
This document describes the Data-Plane protocol for the Locator/ID This document describes the Data-Plane protocol for the Locator/ID
Separation Protocol (LISP). LISP defines two namespaces, End-point Separation Protocol (LISP). LISP defines two namespaces, End-point
Identifiers (EIDs) that identify end-hosts and Routing Locators Identifiers (EIDs) that identify end-hosts and Routing Locators
(RLOCs) that identify network attachment points. With this, LISP (RLOCs) that identify network attachment points. With this, LISP
effectively separates control from data, and allows routers to create effectively separates control from data, and allows routers to create
overlay networks. LISP-capable routers exchange encapsulated packets overlay networks. LISP-capable routers exchange encapsulated packets
according to EID-to-RLOC mappings stored in a local Map-Cache. according to EID-to-RLOC mappings stored in a local Map-Cache.
skipping to change at page 1, line 46 skipping to change at page 1, line 46
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 https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at https://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 January 18, 2019. This Internet-Draft will expire on February 25, 2019.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2018 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
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (https://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
10. Routing Locator Reachability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 10. Routing Locator Reachability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
10.1. Echo Nonce Algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 10.1. Echo Nonce Algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
11. EID Reachability within a LISP Site . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 11. EID Reachability within a LISP Site . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
12. Routing Locator Hashing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 12. Routing Locator Hashing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
13. Changing the Contents of EID-to-RLOC Mappings . . . . . . . . 28 13. Changing the Contents of EID-to-RLOC Mappings . . . . . . . . 28
13.1. Database Map-Versioning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 13.1. Database Map-Versioning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
14. Multicast Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 14. Multicast Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
15. Router Performance Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 15. Router Performance Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
16. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 16. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
17. Network Management Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 17. Network Management Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
18. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 18. Changes since RFC 6830 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
18.1. LISP UDP Port Numbers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 19. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
19. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 19.1. LISP UDP Port Numbers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
19.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 20. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
19.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 20.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
20.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Appendix A. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Appendix A. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
Appendix B. Document Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 Appendix B. Document Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
B.1. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-14 . . . . . . . . 38 B.1. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-15 . . . . . . . . 38
B.2. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-13 . . . . . . . . 38 B.2. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-14 . . . . . . . . 38
B.3. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-12 . . . . . . . . 38 B.3. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-13 . . . . . . . . 38
B.4. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-11 . . . . . . . . 38 B.4. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-12 . . . . . . . . 38
B.5. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-10 . . . . . . . . 38 B.5. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-11 . . . . . . . . 38
B.6. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-09 . . . . . . . . 39 B.6. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-10 . . . . . . . . 38
B.7. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-08 . . . . . . . . 39 B.7. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-09 . . . . . . . . 39
B.8. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-07 . . . . . . . . 39 B.8. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-08 . . . . . . . . 39
B.9. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-06 . . . . . . . . 39 B.9. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-07 . . . . . . . . 39
B.10. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-05 . . . . . . . . 40 B.10. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-06 . . . . . . . . 39
B.11. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-04 . . . . . . . . 40 B.11. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-05 . . . . . . . . 40
B.12. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-03 . . . . . . . . 40 B.12. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-04 . . . . . . . . 40
B.13. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-02 . . . . . . . . 40 B.13. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-03 . . . . . . . . 40
B.14. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-01 . . . . . . . . 40 B.14. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-02 . . . . . . . . 40
B.15. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-00 . . . . . . . . 41 B.15. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-01 . . . . . . . . 41
B.16. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-00 . . . . . . . . 41
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
This document describes the Locator/Identifier Separation Protocol This document describes the Locator/Identifier Separation Protocol
(LISP). LISP is an encapsulation protocol built around the (LISP). LISP is an encapsulation protocol built around the
fundamental idea of separating the topological location of a network fundamental idea of separating the topological location of a network
attachment point from the node's identity [CHIAPPA]. As a result attachment point from the node's identity [CHIAPPA]. As a result
LISP creates two namespaces: Endpoint Identifiers (EIDs), that are LISP creates two namespaces: Endpoint Identifiers (EIDs), that are
used to identify end-hosts (e.g., nodes or Virtual Machines) and used to identify end-hosts (e.g., nodes or Virtual Machines) and
skipping to change at page 4, line 22 skipping to change at page 4, line 22
found in [RFC7215] and [RFC6835] describes considerations for network found in [RFC7215] and [RFC6835] describes considerations for network
operational management. Finally, [I-D.ietf-lisp-introduction] operational management. Finally, [I-D.ietf-lisp-introduction]
describes the LISP architecture. describes the LISP architecture.
This document obsoletes RFC 6830. This document obsoletes RFC 6830.
2. Requirements Notation 2. Requirements Notation
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119] and
[RFC8174].
3. Definition of Terms 3. Definition of Terms
Address Family Identifier (AFI): AFI is a term used to describe an Address Family Identifier (AFI): AFI is a term used to describe an
address encoding in a packet. An address family that pertains to address encoding in a packet. An address family that pertains to
the Data-Plane. See [AFN] and [RFC3232] for details. An AFI the Data-Plane. See [AFN] and [RFC3232] for details. An AFI
value of 0 used in this specification indicates an unspecified value of 0 used in this specification indicates an unspecified
encoded address where the length of the address is 0 octets encoded address where the length of the address is 0 octets
following the 16-bit AFI value of 0. following the 16-bit AFI value of 0.
skipping to change at page 29, line 5 skipping to change at page 29, line 5
well as setting the corresponding Locator-Status-Bit to 0. This well as setting the corresponding Locator-Status-Bit to 0. This
forces ITRs with old or new mappings to avoid using the removed forces ITRs with old or new mappings to avoid using the removed
Locator. Locator.
If many changes occur to a mapping over a long period of time, one If many changes occur to a mapping over a long period of time, one
will find empty record slots in the middle of the Locator-Set and new will find empty record slots in the middle of the Locator-Set and new
records appended to the Locator-Set. At some point, it would be records appended to the Locator-Set. At some point, it would be
useful to compact the Locator-Set so the Locator-Status-Bit settings useful to compact the Locator-Set so the Locator-Status-Bit settings
can be efficiently packed. can be efficiently packed.
We propose here a Data-Plane mechanism (Map-Versioning) to update the We propose here a Data-Plane mechanism (Map-Versioning specified in
contents of EID-to-RLOC mappings. Please note that in addition the [I-D.ietf-lisp-6834bis]) to update the contents of EID-to-RLOC
Solicit-Map Request (specified in [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis]) is a mappings. Please note that in addition the Solicit-Map Request
Control-Plane mechanisms that can be used to update EID-to-RLOC (specified in [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis]) is a Control-Plane
mappings. mechanisms that can be used to update EID-to-RLOC mappings.
13.1. Database Map-Versioning 13.1. Database Map-Versioning
When there is unidirectional packet flow between an ITR and ETR, and When there is unidirectional packet flow between an ITR and ETR, and
the EID-to-RLOC mappings change on the ETR, it needs to inform the the EID-to-RLOC mappings change on the ETR, it needs to inform the
ITR so encapsulation to a removed Locator can stop and can instead be ITR so encapsulation to a removed Locator can stop and can instead be
started to a new Locator in the Locator-Set. started to a new Locator in the Locator-Set.
An ETR, when it sends Map-Reply messages, conveys its own Map-Version An ETR, when it sends Map-Reply messages, conveys its own Map-Version
Number. This is known as the Destination Map-Version Number. ITRs Number. This is known as the Destination Map-Version Number. ITRs
skipping to change at page 32, line 14 skipping to change at page 32, line 14
or gleaning) SHOULD be verified with other reachability mechanisms. or gleaning) SHOULD be verified with other reachability mechanisms.
In addition, systematic rate-limitation and filtering is an effective In addition, systematic rate-limitation and filtering is an effective
technique to mitigate attacks that aim to overload the Control-Plane. technique to mitigate attacks that aim to overload the Control-Plane.
17. Network Management Considerations 17. Network Management Considerations
Considerations for network management tools exist so the LISP Considerations for network management tools exist so the LISP
protocol suite can be operationally managed. These mechanisms can be protocol suite can be operationally managed. These mechanisms can be
found in [RFC7052] and [RFC6835]. found in [RFC7052] and [RFC6835].
18. IANA Considerations 18. Changes since RFC 6830
For implementation considerations, the following changes have been
made to this document since RFC 6830 was published:
o It is no longer mandated that a maximum number of 2 LISP headers
be prepended to a packet. If there is a application need for more
than 2 LISP headers, an implementation can support more. However,
this document recommends a maximum of 2 LISP headers.
o The 3 reserved flag bits in the LISP header have been allocated
for [RFC8060]. The low-order 2 bits of the 3-bit field (now named
the KK bits) are used as a key identifier. The 1 remaining bit is
still documented as reserved.
o Data-Plane gleaning for creating map-cache entries has been made
optional. If any ITR implementations depend or assume the remote
ETR is gleaning should not do so. This does not create any
interoperability problems since the control-plane map-cache
population procedures are unilateral and are the typical method
for map-cache population.
19. IANA Considerations
This section provides guidance to the Internet Assigned Numbers This section provides guidance to the Internet Assigned Numbers
Authority (IANA) regarding registration of values related to this Authority (IANA) regarding registration of values related to this
Data-Plane LISP specification, in accordance with BCP 26 [RFC8126]. Data-Plane LISP specification, in accordance with BCP 26 [RFC8126].
18.1. LISP UDP Port Numbers 19.1. LISP UDP Port Numbers
The IANA registry has allocated UDP port number 4341 for the LISP The IANA registry has allocated UDP port number 4341 for the LISP
Data-Plane. IANA has updated the description for UDP port 4341 as Data-Plane. IANA has updated the description for UDP port 4341 as
follows: follows:
lisp-data 4341 udp LISP Data Packets lisp-data 4341 udp LISP Data Packets
19. References 20. References
19.1. Normative References 20.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-lisp-6834bis] [I-D.ietf-lisp-6834bis]
Iannone, L., Saucez, D., and O. Bonaventure, "Locator/ID Iannone, L., Saucez, D., and O. Bonaventure, "Locator/ID
Separation Protocol (LISP) Map-Versioning", draft-ietf- Separation Protocol (LISP) Map-Versioning", draft-ietf-
lisp-6834bis-00 (work in progress), July 2018. lisp-6834bis-00 (work in progress), July 2018.
[I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis] [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis]
Fuller, V., Farinacci, D., and A. Cabellos-Aparicio, Fuller, V., Farinacci, D., and A. Cabellos-Aparicio,
"Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) Control-Plane", "Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) Control-Plane",
draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis-10 (work in progress), March draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis-12 (work in progress), July
2018. 2018.
[RFC0768] Postel, J., "User Datagram Protocol", STD 6, RFC 768, [RFC0768] Postel, J., "User Datagram Protocol", STD 6, RFC 768,
DOI 10.17487/RFC0768, August 1980, DOI 10.17487/RFC0768, August 1980,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc768>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc768>.
[RFC0791] Postel, J., "Internet Protocol", STD 5, RFC 791, [RFC0791] Postel, J., "Internet Protocol", STD 5, RFC 791,
DOI 10.17487/RFC0791, September 1981, DOI 10.17487/RFC0791, September 1981,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc791>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc791>.
skipping to change at page 33, line 21 skipping to change at page 33, line 44
[RFC3168] Ramakrishnan, K., Floyd, S., and D. Black, "The Addition [RFC3168] Ramakrishnan, K., Floyd, S., and D. Black, "The Addition
of Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) to IP", of Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) to IP",
RFC 3168, DOI 10.17487/RFC3168, September 2001, RFC 3168, DOI 10.17487/RFC3168, September 2001,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3168>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3168>.
[RFC8200] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6 [RFC8200] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6
(IPv6) Specification", STD 86, RFC 8200, (IPv6) Specification", STD 86, RFC 8200,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8200, July 2017, DOI 10.17487/RFC8200, July 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8200>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8200>.
19.2. Informative References 20.2. Informative References
[AFN] IANA, "Address Family Numbers", August 2016, [AFN] IANA, "Address Family Numbers", August 2016,
<http://www.iana.org/assignments/address-family-numbers>. <http://www.iana.org/assignments/address-family-numbers>.
[CHIAPPA] Chiappa, J., "Endpoints and Endpoint names: A Proposed", [CHIAPPA] Chiappa, J., "Endpoints and Endpoint names: A Proposed",
1999, 1999,
<http://mercury.lcs.mit.edu/~jnc/tech/endpoints.txt>. <http://mercury.lcs.mit.edu/~jnc/tech/endpoints.txt>.
[I-D.ietf-lisp-introduction] [I-D.ietf-lisp-introduction]
Cabellos-Aparicio, A. and D. Saucez, "An Architectural Cabellos-Aparicio, A. and D. Saucez, "An Architectural
skipping to change at page 36, line 15 skipping to change at page 36, line 36
[RFC8111] Fuller, V., Lewis, D., Ermagan, V., Jain, A., and A. [RFC8111] Fuller, V., Lewis, D., Ermagan, V., Jain, A., and A.
Smirnov, "Locator/ID Separation Protocol Delegated Smirnov, "Locator/ID Separation Protocol Delegated
Database Tree (LISP-DDT)", RFC 8111, DOI 10.17487/RFC8111, Database Tree (LISP-DDT)", RFC 8111, DOI 10.17487/RFC8111,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8111>. May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8111>.
[RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for [RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for
Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26,
RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017, RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
[RFC8378] Moreno, V. and D. Farinacci, "Signal-Free Locator/ID [RFC8378] Moreno, V. and D. Farinacci, "Signal-Free Locator/ID
Separation Protocol (LISP) Multicast", RFC 8378, Separation Protocol (LISP) Multicast", RFC 8378,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8378, May 2018, DOI 10.17487/RFC8378, May 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8378>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8378>.
Appendix A. Acknowledgments Appendix A. Acknowledgments
An initial thank you goes to Dave Oran for planting the seeds for the An initial thank you goes to Dave Oran for planting the seeds for the
initial ideas for LISP. His consultation continues to provide value initial ideas for LISP. His consultation continues to provide value
to the LISP authors. to the LISP authors.
skipping to change at page 38, line 5 skipping to change at page 38, line 5
The LISP working group would like to give a special thanks to Jari The LISP working group would like to give a special thanks to Jari
Arkko, the Internet Area AD at the time that the set of LISP Arkko, the Internet Area AD at the time that the set of LISP
documents were being prepared for IESG last call, and for his documents were being prepared for IESG last call, and for his
meticulous reviews and detailed commentaries on the 7 working group meticulous reviews and detailed commentaries on the 7 working group
last call documents progressing toward standards-track RFCs. last call documents progressing toward standards-track RFCs.
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-rfc6830bis-14 B.1. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-15
o Posted July 2018 IETF week. o Posted August 2018.
o Put obsolete of RFC 6830 in Intro section in addition to abstract. o Final editorial changes before RFC submission for Proposed
Standard.
B.2. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-13 o Added section "Changes since RFC 6830" so implementators are
informed of any changes since the last RFC publication.
o Posted July 2018. B.2. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-14
o Fixed Luigi editorial comments to ready draft for RFC status. o Posted July 2018 IETF week.
B.3. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-12 o Put obsolete of RFC 6830 in Intro section in addition to abstract.
B.3. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-13
o Posted March IETF Week 2018. o Posted March IETF Week 2018.
o Clarified that a new nonce is required per RLOC. o Clarified that a new nonce is required per RLOC.
o Removed 'Clock Sweep' section. This text must be placed in a new o Removed 'Clock Sweep' section. This text must be placed in a new
OAM document. OAM document.
o Some references changed from normative to informative o Some references changed from normative to informative
B.4. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-11 B.4. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-12
o Posted July 2018.
o Fixed Luigi editorial comments to ready draft for RFC status.
B.5. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-11
o Posted March 2018. o Posted March 2018.
o Removed sections 16, 17 and 18 (Mobility, Deployment and o Removed sections 16, 17 and 18 (Mobility, Deployment and
Traceroute considerations). This text must be placed in a new OAM Traceroute considerations). This text must be placed in a new OAM
document. document.
B.5. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-10 B.6. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-10
o Posted March 2018. o Posted March 2018.
o Updated section 'Router Locator Selection' stating that the Data- o Updated section 'Router Locator Selection' stating that the Data-
Plane MUST follow what's stored in the Map-Cache (priorities and Plane MUST follow what's stored in the Map-Cache (priorities and
weights). weights).
o Section 'Routing Locator Reachability': Removed bullet point 2 o Section 'Routing Locator Reachability': Removed bullet point 2
(ICMP Network/Host Unreachable),3 (hints from BGP),4 (ICMP Port (ICMP Network/Host Unreachable),3 (hints from BGP),4 (ICMP Port
Unreachable),5 (receive a Map-Reply as a response) and RLOC Unreachable),5 (receive a Map-Reply as a response) and RLOC
probing probing
o Removed 'Solicit-Map Request'. o Removed 'Solicit-Map Request'.
B.6. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-09 B.7. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-09
o Posted January 2018. o Posted January 2018.
o Add more details in section 5.3 about DSCP processing during o Add more details in section 5.3 about DSCP processing during
encapsulation and decapsulation. encapsulation and decapsulation.
o Added clarity to definitions in the Definition of Terms section o Added clarity to definitions in the Definition of Terms section
from various commenters. from various commenters.
o Removed PA and PI definitions from Definition of Terms section. o Removed PA and PI definitions from Definition of Terms section.
o More editorial changes. o More editorial changes.
o Removed 4342 from IANA section and move to RFC6833 IANA section. o Removed 4342 from IANA section and move to RFC6833 IANA section.
B.7. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-08 B.8. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-08
o Posted January 2018. o Posted January 2018.
o Remove references to research work for any protocol mechanisms. o Remove references to research work for any protocol mechanisms.
o Document scanned to make sure it is RFC 2119 compliant. o Document scanned to make sure it is RFC 2119 compliant.
o Made changes to reflect comments from document WG shepherd Luigi o Made changes to reflect comments from document WG shepherd Luigi
Iannone. Iannone.
o Ran IDNITs on the document. o Ran IDNITs on the document.
B.8. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-07 B.9. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-07
o Posted November 2017. o Posted November 2017.
o Rephrase how Instance-IDs are used and don't refer to [RFC1918] o Rephrase how Instance-IDs are used and don't refer to [RFC1918]
addresses. addresses.
B.9. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-06 B.10. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-06
o Posted October 2017. o Posted October 2017.
o Put RTR definition before it is used. o Put RTR definition before it is used.
o Rename references that are now working group drafts. o Rename references that are now working group drafts.
o Remove "EIDs MUST NOT be used as used by a host to refer to other o Remove "EIDs MUST NOT be used as used by a host to refer to other
hosts. Note that EID blocks MAY LISP RLOCs". hosts. Note that EID blocks MAY LISP RLOCs".
skipping to change at page 40, line 15 skipping to change at page 40, line 22
o ETRs may, rather than will, be the ones to send Map-Replies. o ETRs may, rather than will, be the ones to send Map-Replies.
o Recommend, rather than mandate, max encapsulation headers to 2. o Recommend, rather than mandate, max encapsulation headers to 2.
o Reference VPN draft when introducing Instance-ID. o Reference VPN draft when introducing Instance-ID.
o Indicate that SMRs can be sent when ITR/ETR are in the same node. o Indicate that SMRs can be sent when ITR/ETR are in the same node.
o Clarify when private addreses can be used. o Clarify when private addreses can be used.
B.10. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-05 B.11. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-05
o Posted August 2017. o Posted August 2017.
o Make it clear that a Reencapsulating Tunnel Router is an RTR. o Make it clear that a Reencapsulating Tunnel Router is an RTR.
B.11. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-04 B.12. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-04
o Posted July 2017. o Posted July 2017.
o Changed reference of IPv6 RFC2460 to RFC8200. o Changed reference of IPv6 RFC2460 to RFC8200.
o Indicate that the applicability statement for UDP zero checksums o Indicate that the applicability statement for UDP zero checksums
over IPv6 adheres to RFC6936. over IPv6 adheres to RFC6936.
B.12. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-03 B.13. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-03
o Posted May 2017. o Posted May 2017.
o Move the control-plane related codepoints in the IANA o Move the control-plane related codepoints in the IANA
Considerations section to RFC6833bis. Considerations section to RFC6833bis.
B.13. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-02 B.14. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-02
o Posted April 2017. o Posted April 2017.
o Reflect some editorial comments from Damien Sausez. o Reflect some editorial comments from Damien Sausez.
B.14. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-01 B.15. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-01
o Posted March 2017. o Posted March 2017.
o Include references to new RFCs published. o Include references to new RFCs published.
o Change references from RFC6833 to RFC6833bis. o Change references from RFC6833 to RFC6833bis.
o Clarified LCAF text in the IANA section. o Clarified LCAF text in the IANA section.
o Remove references to "experimental". o Remove references to "experimental".
B.15. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-00 B.16. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-00
o Posted December 2016. o Posted December 2016.
o Created working group document from draft-farinacci-lisp o Created working group document from draft-farinacci-lisp
-rfc6830-00 individual submission. No other changes made. -rfc6830-00 individual submission. No other changes made.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Dino Farinacci Dino Farinacci
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
 End of changes. 34 change blocks. 
55 lines changed or deleted 95 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.47. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/