[Docs] [txt|pdf|xml|html] [Tracker] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: 00 01 02 03

Network Working Group                                       M. Boucadair
Internet-Draft                                              C. Jacquenet
Intended status: Standards Track                                  Orange
Expires: May 28, 2017                                  November 24, 2016


      LISP Mapping Service Functions Discovery (LMSFD) using OSPF
               draft-boucadair-lisp-function-discovery-03

Abstract

   This document specifies extensions to the Open Shortest Path First
   (OSPF) protocol for the discovery of Locator/ID Separation Protocol
   (LISP) Mapping Service functions, especially the Map-Resolver (MR)
   and Map-Server (MS) LISP components.

Requirements Language

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on May 28, 2017.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents



Boucadair & Jacquenet     Expires May 28, 2017                  [Page 1]


Internet-Draft         Service Function Discovery          November 2016


   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Overview  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   3.  Mapping Service Function Discovery (MSFD) TLV . . . . . . . .   5
     3.1.  MSF-TYPE sub-TLV  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     3.2.  MSF-LOCATOR sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     3.3.  MSF-DESCRIPTION sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     3.4.  MSF-EPOCH sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     3.5.  MSF-UNAVAILABILITY-TIMER sub-TLV  . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     3.6.  MSF-REBOOT-TIMER sub-TLV  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     3.7.  MSF-DIAGNOSIS sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     3.8.  MS-STATUS sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     3.9.  MSF-STATUS sub-TLV  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   4.  Mapping Service Reachability Information  . . . . . . . . . .  10
   5.  OSPF Operation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   7.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   8.  Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   9.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     9.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     9.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13

1.  Introduction

   Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP, [RFC6830] ) operation relies
   upon a mapping mechanism that is used by ingress/egress Tunnel
   Routers (xTR) to forward traffic over the LISP network.  The ability
   of dynamically discovering the Map-Resolver (MR) and Map-Server (MS)
   entities that provide such mapping services is meant to facilitate
   global LISP operation (automatic discovery of Map-Resolvers and Map-
   Servers).

   The dynamically-acquired information will not only be used by xTR
   routers but also by management platforms (e.g., a service controller,
   a network manager, etc.) to forward traffic over the LISP network or
   to get an up-to-date view of the global LISP network topology,
   including the location of the resolvers and servers.  For example,
   ETRs will register in all instances that are reachable in a given
   domain.




Boucadair & Jacquenet     Expires May 28, 2017                  [Page 2]


Internet-Draft         Service Function Discovery          November 2016


   The ability to dynamically discover LISP mapping component
   information and update such information as appropriate is also useful
   to ease state synchronization among the various Mapping Service
   Functions that can be solicited in the LISP network, especially
   whenever a new MS joins the LISP Mapping System.  This specification
   allows the following:

   1.  Ease the introduction of new MS servers: Additional MS instances
       may be added to a Mapping Service domain.  New MSes need to build
       an updated mapping database to avoid service disruption.  Owing
       to the mechanism defined in this document,

       *  Peer MSes can be discovered by a new MS, thereby triggering a
          state synchronisation procedure.  How state synchronisation is
          achieved is out of scope of this document.

       *  xTRs can immediately send registration messages to the new MS.

       [RFC7215] indicates that, "for some LISP sites, there is a need
       for mechanisms to dynamically obtain the address of the Map-
       Server in the ETR of the AS".

   2.  Minimize service disruption when multiple MS/MRs are available:
       this specification allows to disseminate information that will
       drive the selection process undertaken by an xTR to select an MS/
       MR and solicit it.  For example, MRs with empty databases will be
       avoided; "ready-to-serve" MRs will be solicited instead.  Map-
       Register requests can thus be sent to multiple MSes whenever
       needed.  When a Mapping Service function loses its state, an
       explicit message can be generated accordingly so that xTRs (and
       also management platforms) can trigger appropriate actions.

   This document specifies a means to dynamically discover Map-Resolver
   and Map-Server instances of a LISP network within a domain.  Also, it
   introduces some features to enhance the serviceability of LISP (e.g.,
   detect that a MS lost its state so that a registration procedure is
   triggered immediately, inform an xTR that a MS/MR instance is about
   to be unavailable for some reason, indicate the synchronisation
   status of the mapping database, etc.).

   The document exclusively focuses on the dynamic information
   discovery; how this information is actually used by an xTR to infer
   its MS/MR selection procedures is out of the scope.

   The reader should be familiar with the terms defined in [RFC6833].






Boucadair & Jacquenet     Expires May 28, 2017                  [Page 3]


Internet-Draft         Service Function Discovery          November 2016


2.  Overview

   This document defines extensions to OSPFv2 [RFC2328] and OSPFv3
   [RFC5340] so that routers of the OSPF routing domain (a single area
   or the entire routing domain) can advertise a Mapping Service
   Function within the domain, along with some other useful information.
   To do so, a new TLV (named the LISP Mapping Service Function
   Discovery TLV (LMSFD TLV)) is used to announce LISP MR and MS
   information.  This TLV is carried by the OSPF Router Information LSA
   [RFC7770].

   The location of each Mapping Service Function is then flooded into an
   OSPF area or the whole OSPF routing domain (in the case the LSA is
   AS-scoped).  The xTR routers deployed within the OSPF domain must
   listen to the flooding messages sent by active Mapping Service
   Function instances.  Such messages are referred to "Mapping Service
   Discovery" messages in this document.

   The information to be announced by means of the LMSFD TLV carried in
   the Router Information LSA during the LISP Mapping Service Function
   Discovery procedure includes (but is not necessarily limited to):

   o  Mapping Service Function type: Indicates whether the MSF acts as
      Map-Resolver (MR), Map-Server (MS), or both.

   o  Mapping Service Function Service locator(s): Includes one or
      several IPv4 addresses, one or several IPv6 addresses or a
      combination thereof.  This information lists the set of locators
      that unambiguously indicate where the Mapping Service Function can
      be reached.  The locator information must be included in the
      Mapping Service Function Discovery messages.

   o  Mapping Service Function unavailability timer: Indicates the time
      when the Mapping Service Function will be unavailable.  This
      parameter can be used for planned maintenance operations, for
      instance.  This parameter does not provide any indication about
      when the Mapping Service Function instance will be available
      again.  This information is optional and may therefore be included
      in the Mapping Service Function Discovery messages.

   o  Mapping Service Function reboot timer: Operational teams often
      proceed with a reboot of the devices deployed in the network,
      within the context of major software upgrade campaigns, for
      example.  This timer is used to indicate that a Mapping Service
      Function will be unavailable during the reboot of the device that
      supports the function.  Unlike the previous timer, this timer is
      used to indicate that the Mapping Service Function will be
      available immediately after the reboot of the device that supports



Boucadair & Jacquenet     Expires May 28, 2017                  [Page 4]


Internet-Draft         Service Function Discovery          November 2016


      this function is completed.  This information is optional and may
      therefore be included in the Mapping Service Function Discovery
      messages.

   o  Mapping Service Function Diagnosis: Indicates whether this Mapping
      Service Function instance supports a diagnostic mechanism.  This
      information is optional and may therefore be included in the
      Mapping Service Function Discovery messages.

   o  Mapping Service Status: Provides information about the status of
      the mapping database.  In particular, it indicates whether the
      database is empty, synchronized with other MS servers located in
      the same OSPF domain, etc.  This information is optional and may
      therefore be included in the Mapping Service Function Discovery
      messages.

   o  Mapping Service Function Status: Indicates the status of the
      Mapping Service Function Instance (enabled, disabled).  This
      information is optional and may therefore be included in the LMSFD
      messages.

   o  Additional capabilities such as the support of mapping bulk
      retrieval [I-D.boucadair-lisp-bulk] or notifications
      [I-D.boucadair-lisp-subscribe] may be advertised.

3.  Mapping Service Function Discovery (MSFD) TLV

   The format of the OSPF Mapping Service Function Discovery TLV (LMSFD
   TLV, Figure 1) and its sub-TLVs use the same TLV format as in the
   Traffic Engineering Extensions to OSPF [RFC3630].

                           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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |              Type             |             Length            |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                                                               |
      :                            sub-TLVs                           :
      |                                                               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                                 Figure 1

   The description of the fields is as follows:

   o  Type: To be assigned by IANA (see Section 7).

   o  Length: Variable (octets).



Boucadair & Jacquenet     Expires May 28, 2017                  [Page 5]


Internet-Draft         Service Function Discovery          November 2016


   o  sub-TLVs: Includes the list of sub-TLVs.  The following sub-TLVs
      are defined in this document:

   Sub-TLV type  Length               Name
         1         1      MSF-TYPE sub-TLV
         2      variable  MSF-LOCATOR sub-TLV
         3      variable  MSF-DESCRIPTION sub-TLV
         4        4       MSF-EPOCH sub-TLV
         5        4       MSF-UNAVAILABILITY-TIMER sub-TLV
         6        4       MSF-REBOOT-TIMER sub-TLV
         7        1       MSF-DIAGNOSIS sub-TLV
         8        4       MS-STATUS sub-TLV
         9        4       MSF-STATUS sub-TLV

   The MSF-TYPE and MSF-LOCATOR sub-TLVs MUST always be present within
   the LMSFD TLV.  Additional optional sub-TLVs MAY be included.

3.1.  MSF-TYPE sub-TLV

   The format of MSF-TYPE sub-TLV is shown in Figure 2.

                           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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |              Type = 1         |        Length=4               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |           Type                |        Reserved               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

      The current type values are defined:
      0: Map-Server
      1: Map-Resolver
      2: Both

                        Figure 2: MSF-TYPE sub-TLV

3.2.  MSF-LOCATOR sub-TLV

   The format of MSF-LOCATOR sub-TLV is shown in Figure 3.












Boucadair & Jacquenet     Expires May 28, 2017                  [Page 6]


Internet-Draft         Service Function Discovery          November 2016


                           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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |              Type = 2         |        Length=Variable        |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      :                         IPv4 or IPv6 address                  :
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                       Figure 3: MSF-LOCATOR sub-TLV

   The MSF-LOCATOR sub-TLV MAY appear twice, especially when the SF can
   be reached via either an IPv4 or an IPv6 address or both.  It MAY
   also appear more than once for the same address family if the Service
   Function is assigned several addresses of the same family.

3.3.  MSF-DESCRIPTION sub-TLV

   The format of MSF-DESCRIPTION sub-TLV is shown in Figure 4.

                           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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |              Type = 3         |        Length=Variable        |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      :                         Description                           :
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                     Figure 4: MSF-DESCRIPTION sub-TLV

   When present, the MSF-DESCRIPTION sub-TLV MUST carry UTF-8 encoded
   [RFC3629] description text.  The description text SHOULD NOT be null
   terminated.

3.4.  MSF-EPOCH sub-TLV

   The format of MSF-EPOCH sub-TLV is shown in Figure 5.

                           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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |              Type = 4         |             Length=4          |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                             Value (seconds)                   |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                        Figure 5: MSF-EPOCH sub-TLV





Boucadair & Jacquenet     Expires May 28, 2017                  [Page 7]


Internet-Draft         Service Function Discovery          November 2016


   When a Mapping Service Function loses its state (e.g., power failure,
   bug, reset by an administrator, etc.), it may use this sub-TLV with a
   value set to 0.  This value is then incremented by one.

   If the value field of the MSF-EPOCH sub-TLV is set to 0, it indicates
   that the Mapping Service Function instance has been reset or lost its
   state.  This information is particularly important for ETRs so that
   they can send their registration request immediately.

   Receivers may maintain a record of transmitted values to detect
   anomalies in the Mapping Service Function.

3.5.  MSF-UNAVAILABILITY-TIMER sub-TLV

   The format of MSF-UNAVAILABILITY-TIMER sub-TLV is shown in Figure 6.

                           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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |              Type = 5         |             Length=4          |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                             Timer (seconds)                   |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                Figure 6: MSF-UNAVAILABILITY-TIMER sub-TLV

   The MSF-UNAVAILABILITY-TIMER sub-TLV indicates, in seconds, when the
   Mapping Service Function instance will be unavailable.

   If the value field of the MSF-UNAVAILABILITY-TIMER sub-TLV is set to
   0, it indicates the Mapping Service Function instance will be
   unavailable immediately.

3.6.  MSF-REBOOT-TIMER sub-TLV

   The format of MSF-REBOOT-TIMER sub-TLV is shown in Figure 7.

                           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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |              Type = 6         |             Length=4          |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                             Timer (seconds)                   |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                    Figure 7: MSF-REBOOT-TIMER sub-TLV





Boucadair & Jacquenet     Expires May 28, 2017                  [Page 8]


Internet-Draft         Service Function Discovery          November 2016


   The MSF-REBOOT-TIMER sub-TLV indicates, in seconds, when the Mapping
   Service Function instance will start to reboot.  The function will be
   operational right after the reboot is completed.

3.7.  MSF-DIAGNOSIS sub-TLV

   The format of MSF-DIAGNOSIS sub-TLV is shown in Figure 8.

                           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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |              Type = 7         |             Length=0          |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                      Figure 8: MSF-DIAGNOSIS sub-TLV

   The presence of this sub-TLV indicates that the Mapping Service
   Function supports diagnostic functions.

3.8.  MS-STATUS sub-TLV

   The format of MS-STATUS sub-TLV is shown in Figure 9

                       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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |              Type = 8         |        Length=4               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |           Status              |        Reserved               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

      The current Status values are defined:
         0: Reset
         1: Partial
         2: Synchronized

                        Figure 9: MS-STATUS sub-TLV

   The presence of this sub-TLV indicates the status of the Mapping
   Service database.  This is important for influencing the selection
   process of Map-Resolvers, in particular.

3.9.  MSF-STATUS sub-TLV

   The format of MSF-STATUS sub-TLV is shown in Figure 10






Boucadair & Jacquenet     Expires May 28, 2017                  [Page 9]


Internet-Draft         Service Function Discovery          November 2016


                       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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |              Type = 9         |        Length=4               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |           Status              |        Reserved               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

      The current Status values are defined:
          0: Enabled
          1: Disabled

                       Figure 10: MSF-STATUS sub-TLV

   The presence of this sub-TLV indicates the status of Mapping Service
   Function.

   The presence of this sub-TLV is particularly useful to indicate that
   a given instance is disabled.

4.  Mapping Service Reachability Information

   This document assumes that Mapping Service Reachability information
   can be injected into OSPF by a router that embeds a Mapping Service
   Function instance, or which has been instructed (by means of specific
   configuration tasks, for example) to advertise such information on
   behalf of a third party Mapping Service Function.

   The mechanism defined in this document may be used to advertise and
   learn Mapping Service Functions that are available in the same
   administrative domain than xTRs.  Also, it can be used to dynamically
   advertise related reachability information that is learned using
   other means when the Mapping Service Functions and xTRs do not belong
   to the same administrative entity.

   Some of the information carried in the LMSFD TLV may be automatically
   set by an OSPF speaker while other may be explicitly configured.

5.  OSPF Operation

   The LMSFD TLV is advertised within OSPFv2 or OSPFv3 Router
   Information LSAs [RFC7770].

   A change in the operational status of a Mapping Service Function
   instance (e.g., enabled, disabled) MUST trigger the generation of a
   Router Information LSA that carries the LMSFD TLV with the updated
   information.




Boucadair & Jacquenet     Expires May 28, 2017                 [Page 10]


Internet-Draft         Service Function Discovery          November 2016


   The flooding scope is defined by the Opaque LSA type for OSPFv2
   [RFC5250], and by the S1/S2 bits for OSPFv3 [RFC5340].

6.  Security Considerations

   The extensions defined in this document do not introduce any
   additional security threats than those already documented in the
   current OSPF protocol specifications.

   OSPF does not support any encryption mechanism for protecting the
   integrity of Mapping Service Function discovery information.  Means
   such as [RFC2154] may be enabled.

7.  IANA Considerations

   This document requests IANA to assign a Router Information TLV type
   for the LISP Mapping Service Discovery Function (LMSFD) TLV.

8.  Acknowledgments

   This work is partly funded by ANR LISP-Lab project #ANR-13-INFR-
   009-X.

   Thanks to Liu Xiang for the comments.

9.  References

9.1.  Normative References

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

   [RFC2328]  Moy, J., "OSPF Version 2", STD 54, RFC 2328,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2328, April 1998,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2328>.

   [RFC3629]  Yergeau, F., "UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO
              10646", STD 63, RFC 3629, DOI 10.17487/RFC3629, November
              2003, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3629>.

   [RFC3630]  Katz, D., Kompella, K., and D. Yeung, "Traffic Engineering
              (TE) Extensions to OSPF Version 2", RFC 3630,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC3630, September 2003,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3630>.





Boucadair & Jacquenet     Expires May 28, 2017                 [Page 11]


Internet-Draft         Service Function Discovery          November 2016


   [RFC5250]  Berger, L., Bryskin, I., Zinin, A., and R. Coltun, "The
              OSPF Opaque LSA Option", RFC 5250, DOI 10.17487/RFC5250,
              July 2008, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5250>.

   [RFC5340]  Coltun, R., Ferguson, D., Moy, J., and A. Lindem, "OSPF
              for IPv6", RFC 5340, DOI 10.17487/RFC5340, July 2008,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5340>.

   [RFC6830]  Farinacci, D., Fuller, V., Meyer, D., and D. Lewis, "The
              Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP)", RFC 6830,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC6830, January 2013,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6830>.

   [RFC6833]  Fuller, V. and D. Farinacci, "Locator/ID Separation
              Protocol (LISP) Map-Server Interface", RFC 6833,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC6833, January 2013,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6833>.

   [RFC7770]  Lindem, A., Ed., Shen, N., Vasseur, JP., Aggarwal, R., and
              S. Shaffer, "Extensions to OSPF for Advertising Optional
              Router Capabilities", RFC 7770, DOI 10.17487/RFC7770,
              February 2016, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7770>.

9.2.  Informative References

   [I-D.boucadair-lisp-bulk]
              Boucadair, M. and C. Jacquenet, "LISP Mapping Bulk
              Retrieval", draft-boucadair-lisp-bulk-03 (work in
              progress), July 2016.

   [I-D.boucadair-lisp-subscribe]
              Boucadair, M. and C. Jacquenet, "LISP Subscription",
              draft-boucadair-lisp-subscribe-03 (work in progress), July
              2016.

   [RFC2154]  Murphy, S., Badger, M., and B. Wellington, "OSPF with
              Digital Signatures", RFC 2154, DOI 10.17487/RFC2154, June
              1997, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2154>.

   [RFC7215]  Jakab, L., Cabellos-Aparicio, A., Coras, F., Domingo-
              Pascual, J., and D. Lewis, "Locator/Identifier Separation
              Protocol (LISP) Network Element Deployment
              Considerations", RFC 7215, DOI 10.17487/RFC7215, April
              2014, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7215>.







Boucadair & Jacquenet     Expires May 28, 2017                 [Page 12]


Internet-Draft         Service Function Discovery          November 2016


Authors' Addresses

   Mohamed Boucadair
   Orange
   Rennes  35000
   France

   Email: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com


   Christian Jacquenet
   Orange
   Rennes  35000
   France

   Email: christian.jacquenet@orange.com



































Boucadair & Jacquenet     Expires May 28, 2017                 [Page 13]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.123, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/