draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt-00.txt   draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt-01.txt 
Network Working Group L. Iannone Network Working Group L. Iannone
Internet-Draft Telecom ParisTech Internet-Draft Telecom ParisTech
Intended status: Informational R. Jorgensen Intended status: Informational R. Jorgensen
Expires: June 12, 2014 Bredbandsfylket Troms Expires: August 18, 2014 Bredbandsfylket Troms
D. Conrad D. Conrad
Virtualized, LLC Virtualized, LLC
December 9, 2013 February 14, 2014
LISP EID Block Management Guidelines LISP EID Block Management Guidelines
draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt-00.txt draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt-01.txt
Abstract Abstract
This document proposes an allocation framework for the management of This document proposes an allocation framework for the management of
the LISP EID address prefix (requested in [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block]). the LISP EID address prefix (requested in [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block]).
The framework described relies on hierarchical distribution of the The framework described relies on hierarchical distribution of the
address space with sub-prefixes allocated on a temporary basis to address space with sub-prefixes allocated on a temporary basis to
requesting organizations. requesting organizations.
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
skipping to change at page 1, line 37 skipping to change at page 1, line 37
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 June 12, 2014. This Internet-Draft will expire on August 18, 2014.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2014 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
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Requirements Notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1. Requirements Notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. EID Prefix Allocation Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4. EID Prefix Allocation Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
5. EID Prefixes Allocation Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5. EID Prefixes Allocation Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6. EID Prefix Request Template . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 6. EID Prefix Request Template . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7. General Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 7. Policy Validity Period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
9. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 9. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Appendix A. LISP Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Appendix A. LISP Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Appendix B. Document Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Appendix B. Document Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
1. Requirements Notation 1. 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].
2. Introduction 2. Introduction
The Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP - [RFC6830]) and related The Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP - [RFC6830]) and related
mechanisms ([RFC6831], [RFC6832], [RFC6833], [RFC6834], [RFC6835], mechanisms ([RFC6831], [RFC6832], [RFC6833], [RFC6834], [RFC6835],
[RFC6836], [RFC6837]) separates the IP addressing space into two [RFC6836], [RFC6837]) separates the IP addressing space into two
logical spaces, the End-point IDentifier (EID) space and the Routing logical spaces, the End-point IDentifier (EID) space and the Routing
LOCator (RLOC) space. The first space is used to identify LOCator (RLOC) space. The first space is used to identify
communication end-points, while the second is used to locate EIDs in communication end-points, while the second is used to locate EIDs in
the Internet routing infrastructure topology. the Internet routing infrastructure topology.
The document [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block] requested an IPv6 address The document [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block] requested an IPv6 address
block to be reserved for exclusive use for EID prefix allocation and block reservation exclusively for the allocation and assignment of
assignment. The rationale, intent, size, and usage of the EID EID prefixes. The rationale, intent, size, and usage of the EID
address block are described in [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block]. address block are described in [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block].
This document proposes an allocation framework for the EID address This document proposes a management framework for the allocation and
block based on temporary allocation of portions of the block to assignment of EID addresses from that block based on temporary
different requesting organizations. allocation of portions of the block to different requesting
organizations.
3. Definition of Terms 3. Definition of Terms
The present document does not introduce any new term with respect to This document does not introduce any new terms related to the set of
the set of LISP Specifications ( [RFC6830], [RFC6831], [RFC6832], LISP Specifications ( [RFC6830], [RFC6831], [RFC6832], [RFC6833],
[RFC6833], [RFC6834], [RFC6835], [RFC6836], [RFC6837]). To help the [RFC6834], [RFC6835], [RFC6836], [RFC6837]). To help the reading of
reading of the present document the terminology introduced by LISP is this document the terminology introduced by LISP is summarized in
summarized in Appendix A. Appendix A.
4. EID Prefix Allocation Policy 4. EID Prefix Allocation Policy
The allocation of EID prefixes MUST respect the following policies: The allocation of EID prefixes MUST be done under the following
policies:
1. EID addressing prefixes are made available in the reserved space 1. EID addressing prefixes are made available in the reserved space
on a temporary basis and for experimental uses. The requester of on a temporary basis and for experimental uses. The requester of
an experimental prefix MUST provide a short description of the an experimental prefix MUST provide a short description of the
intended use or experiment that will be carried out (see intended use or experiment that will be carried out (see
Section 6). If the prefix will be used for activities not Section 6). If the prefix will be used for activities not
documented in the original description, the renewal of the documented in the original description, the renewal of the
allocation may be denied or withdrawn (see Section 5). allocation may be denied or withdrawn (see Section 5).
2. EID prefixes are allocated on a lease/license basis for a limited 2. EID prefixes are allocated on a lease/license basis for a limited
period of time (which can be renewed). The lease/license period period of time (which can be renewed). The lease/license period
SHOULD NOT be longer than one year. SHOULD NOT be longer than one year in order to ensure the leases
and registration information about those leases is kept
reasonably up to date.
3. Exception to the previous rule may be granted in cases in which 3. Exception to the previous rule may be granted in cases in which
the prefix has been delegated to an organization that will act as the prefix has been delegated to an organization that will act as
a registry for further sub-allocations. Sub-allocations MUST a registry for further sub-allocations. Sub-allocations MUST
respect this present list of policies as well as the allocation abide by these policies as well as the allocation requirements
requirements outlined in Section 5. Requests for a prefix outlined in Section 5. Requests for a prefix delegation that
delegation that will be used for further sub-allocations MUST will be used for further sub-allocations MUST clearly state such
clearly state such intent in the short description of the intent in the short description of the intended use document.
intended use document.
4. All of the allocations (renewed or not, including delegations and 4. All of the allocations (renewed or not, including delegations and
sub-allocations) MUST end by 31 December 2017, in accordance to sub-allocations) MUST be returned by 31 December 2017, in
the 3+3 years experimental allocation plan outlined in accordance with the 3+3 years experimental allocation plan
[I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block]. outlined in [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block].
5. Upon IETF review before 31 December 2017, the EID prefix space 5. Upon IETF review before 31 December 2017, the EID prefix space
may become a permanent allocation. In this case existing may become a permanent allocation. In this case existing
allocations CAN be renewed and new allocations granted (still on allocations CAN be renewed and new allocations granted (still on
a yearly temporary basis). All allocations (renewed or not, a yearly temporary basis). All allocations (renewed or not,
including delegations and sub-allocations) MUST end by 31 including delegations and sub-allocations) MUST be returned by 31
December 2020, in accordance to the 3+3 years plan outlined in December 2020, in accordance to the 3+3 years plan outlined in
[I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block]. During the second 3 years phase of [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block]. During the second 3 years phase of
the experiment, the IETF will decide the final EID prefix block the experiment, the IETF will decide the final EID prefix block
size and elaborate the allocation and management policies that size and elaborate the allocation and management policies that
will be applied starting 1 January 2021. will be applied starting 1 January 2021.
6. When an allocation is freed because of non-renewal or the 6. When an allocation is freed because of non-renewal or the
termination of an experiment, the address space is returned to termination of an experiment, the address space is returned to
the global pool of free EID prefixes. This freed allocation MUST the global pool of free EID prefixes. This freed allocation MUST
NOT be announced through registration on Map Servers in the LISP NOT be announced through registration on Map Servers in the LISP
skipping to change at page 5, line 12 skipping to change at page 5, line 15
orders, etc. Withdrawal can be enforced by filtering on Map orders, etc. Withdrawal can be enforced by filtering on Map
Servers so to prevent map registration. Servers so to prevent map registration.
If/When the EID block experiment changes status (e.g., to not being If/When the EID block experiment changes status (e.g., to not being
"experimental"), and following the policies outlined in [RFC5226], "experimental"), and following the policies outlined in [RFC5226],
the EID block will change status as well and will be converted to a the EID block will change status as well and will be converted to a
permanent allocation. The IETF will define the transition process permanent allocation. The IETF will define the transition process
from the policies and requirements outlined in this document to a new from the policies and requirements outlined in this document to a new
set of policies and requirements. This transition process will set of policies and requirements. This transition process will
include mechanisms that will allow for requests to convert existing include mechanisms that will allow for requests to convert existing
temporary allocations (without renumbering) to permanent allocations. temporary allocations (with or without renumbering) to permanent
allocations.
5. EID Prefixes Allocation Requirements 5. EID Prefixes Allocation Requirements
All EID prefix allocations (and delegations) MUST respect the All EID prefix allocations (and delegations) MUST respect the
following requirements: following requirements:
1. Allocations MUST be globally unique. 1. Allocations MUST be globally unique.
2. Requirements for allocation MUST be the same globally. No 2. Requirements for allocation MUST be the same globally. No
regional/national/local variations are permitted. regional/national/local variations are permitted.
3. The minimum allocated prefix size MUST be a /48. An allocation 3. The registration information MUST be maintained and made publicly
may be larger (i.e., shorter prefix) provided that the requester
is able to justify the intended size in their request
description.
4. Registration information MUST be maintained and made publicly
available through a searchable interface, preferably RDAP available through a searchable interface, preferably RDAP
([I-D.ietf-weirds-rdap-sec]) and optionally whois, http, or ([I-D.ietf-weirds-rdap-sec]) and optionally whois, http, or
similar. similar access methods.
5. If fees are charged for EID allocation and registration services,
those fees MUST be no more than the cost of providing those
services.
6. Requesters obtaining an allocation SHOULD provide Reverse DNS 4. The registration information service MUST be available 99% of the
service. time. The allocation service SHOULD be provided during regular
business hours in venue in which the allocation service is
housed.
7. Requesters obtaining a delegation, hence acting as registries, 5. Facilities SHOULD exist to allow for the delegation of the
MUST provide Reverse DNS service. reverse DNS for EID address prefixes. Reverse DNS delegation is
not required, and may not be provided from the beginning of the
use of the EID Block. However it may be made available on a
later stage if operational requirements necessitate it or IETF
decides it should be available.
8. The service SHOULD be available 99% of the time. 6. If fees are charged for EID allocation and registration services,
those fees MUST be no more than the cost of providing those
services.
9. Anyone, private persons, companies, or other entities can request 7. Anyone, private persons, companies, or other entities can request
EID space and those requests MUST be granted, provided that they EID space and those requests MUST be granted, provided that they
can show a clear intent in carrying out LISP experimentation. can show a clear intent in carrying out LISP experimentation.
6. EID Prefix Request Template 6. EID Prefix Request Template
Future versions of this document will include a detailed allocation The following is a basic request template for prefix allocation (and
(and delegation) request template to ensure a uniform process. An delegation) so to ensure a uniform process. Such a template is
example of a similar template/process is the IANA Private Enterprise inspired by the IANA Private Enterprise Number online request form
Number online request form (http://pen.iana.org/pen/PenApplication.page).
(http://pen.iana.org/pen/PenApplication.page). The EID Prefix
Request template MUST at minimum contain:
o Requester Information (e.g., company name) The EID Prefix Request template MUST at minimum contain:
o Requester Referral Person (and Contact Information) 1. Organization (In case of individuals requesting an EID prefix
this section can be left empty)
o Requested EID prefix size (a) Organization Name
o Request Rationale (b) Organization Address
7. General Considerations (c) Organization Phone
This document is a starting point for discussion aiming to address 2. Contact Person (Mandatory)
the concerns raised during the IETF Review of
[I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block], more specifically the lack of guidelines
concerning the EID Block allocation and management.
Discussion with IANA, the RIR communities, and the IETF community (a) Name
should be carried out in order to verify compatibility of the
proposed policy and agree upon the process for EID prefix allocation (b) Address
and management.
(c) Phone
(d) Fax (optional)
(e) Email
3. EID Prefix Request (Mandatory)
(a) Prefix Size
(b) Prefix Size Rationale
(c) Lease Period
+ Start Date
+ End Date
Note that according to the 3+3 year allocation plan, defined
in [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block], all allocations (and
delegations) MUST end by 31 December 2017, unless the IETF
community decides to grant a permanent LISP EID address
block. In the latter case, allocations (and delegations)
following the present document policy MUST end by 31
December 2020 and a new policy (to be decided see Section 7)
will apply starting 1 January 2021.
4. Experiment Description
(a) Experiment and Deployment Description
(b) Interoperability with existing LISP deployments
(c) Interoperability with Legacy Internet
5. Reverse DNS Servers (Optional)
(a) Name server name:
(b) Name server address:
(c) Name server name:
(d) Name server address:
(Repeat if necessary)
7. Policy Validity Period
Policy outlined in the present document is tight to the existence of
the experimental LISP EID block requested in
[I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block] and valid until 31 December 2017.
If the IETF decides to transform the block in a permanent allocation,
the LISP EID block allocation period will be extended for three years
(until 31 December 2020) so to give time to the IETF to define the
final size of the EID block and create a transition plan, while the
policy in the present document will still apply.
Note that, as stated in [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block], the transition of
the EID block into a permanent allocation has the potential to pose
policy issues (as recognized in [RFC2860], section 4.3) and hence
discussion with the IANA, the RIR communities, and the IETF community
will be necessary to determine appropriate policy for permanent EID
prefix allocation and management, which will be effective starting 1
January 2021.
8. Security Considerations 8. Security Considerations
This document does not introduce new security threats in the LISP This document does not introduce new security threats in the LISP
architecture nor in the Legacy Internet architecture. architecture nor in the Legacy Internet architecture.
For accountability reasons, and in line with the security For accountability reasons, and in line with the security
considerations in [RFC7020], each allocation request MUST contain considerations in [RFC7020], each allocation request MUST contain
accurate information on the requesting entity (company, institution, accurate information on the requesting entity (company, institution,
individual, etc.) and valid and accurate contact information of a individual, etc.) and valid and accurate contact information of a
skipping to change at page 7, line 31 skipping to change at page 8, line 47
IANA must ensure both of these services are provided, for the space IANA must ensure both of these services are provided, for the space
directly allocated by IANA, in a globally uniform fashion for the directly allocated by IANA, in a globally uniform fashion for the
duration of the experiment. duration of the experiment.
11. References 11. References
11.1. Normative References 11.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block] [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block]
Iannone, L., Lewis, D., Meyer, D., and V. Fuller, "LISP Iannone, L., Lewis, D., Meyer, D., and V. Fuller, "LISP
EID Block", draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-06 (work in EID Block", draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-08 (work in
progress), October 2013. progress), January 2014.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC4632] Fuller, V. and T. Li, "Classless Inter-domain Routing [RFC4632] Fuller, V. and T. Li, "Classless Inter-domain Routing
(CIDR): The Internet Address Assignment and Aggregation (CIDR): The Internet Address Assignment and Aggregation
Plan", BCP 122, RFC 4632, August 2006. Plan", BCP 122, RFC 4632, August 2006.
[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. May 2008.
11.2. Informative References 11.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-weirds-rdap-sec] [I-D.ietf-weirds-rdap-sec]
Hollenbeck, S. and N. Kong, "Security Services for the Hollenbeck, S. and N. Kong, "Security Services for the
Registration Data Access Protocol", Registration Data Access Protocol",
draft-ietf-weirds-rdap-sec-05 (work in progress), draft-ietf-weirds-rdap-sec-05 (work in progress),
August 2013. August 2013.
[RFC2860] Carpenter, B., Baker, F., and M. Roberts, "Memorandum of
Understanding Concerning the Technical Work of the
Internet Assigned Numbers Authority", RFC 2860, June 2000.
[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, Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP)", RFC 6830,
January 2013. January 2013.
[RFC6831] Farinacci, D., Meyer, D., Zwiebel, J., and S. Venaas, "The [RFC6831] Farinacci, D., Meyer, D., Zwiebel, J., and S. Venaas, "The
Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) for Multicast Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) for Multicast
Environments", RFC 6831, January 2013. Environments", RFC 6831, January 2013.
[RFC6832] Lewis, D., Meyer, D., Farinacci, D., and V. Fuller, [RFC6832] Lewis, D., Meyer, D., Farinacci, D., and V. Fuller,
"Interworking between Locator/ID Separation Protocol "Interworking between Locator/ID Separation Protocol
skipping to change at page 11, line 25 skipping to change at page 12, line 40
logical next-hop on the overlay network. The primary function of logical next-hop on the overlay network. The primary function of
LISP+ALT routers is to provide a lightweight forwarding LISP+ALT routers is to provide a lightweight forwarding
infrastructure for LISP control-plane messages (Map-Request and infrastructure for LISP control-plane messages (Map-Request and
Map-Reply), and to transport data packets when the packet has the Map-Reply), and to transport data packets when the packet has the
same destination address in both the inner (encapsulating) same destination address in both the inner (encapsulating)
destination and outer destination addresses ((i.e., a Data Probe destination and outer destination addresses ((i.e., a Data Probe
packet). See [RFC6830] for more details. packet). See [RFC6830] for more details.
Appendix B. Document Change Log Appendix B. Document Change Log
Version 01 Posted February 2014.
o Dropped the reverse DNS requirement as for discussion during the
88th IETF meeting.
o Dropped the minimum allocation requirement as for discussion
during the 88th IETF meeting.
o Changed Section 7 from "General Consideration" to "Policy Validity
Period", according to J. Curran feedback. The purpose of the
section is just to clearly state the period during which the
policy applies.
Version 00 Posted December 2013. Version 00 Posted December 2013.
o Rename of draft-iannone-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt-03.txt. o Rename of draft-iannone-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt-03.txt.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Luigi Iannone Luigi Iannone
Telecom ParisTech Telecom ParisTech
Email: luigi.iannone@telecom-paristech.fr Email: luigi.iannone@telecom-paristech.fr
 End of changes. 32 change blocks. 
75 lines changed or deleted 157 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.41. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/