draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt-06.txt   draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt-07.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: February 25, 2016 Bredbandsfylket Troms Expires: October 8, 2016 Bredbandsfylket Troms
D. Conrad D. Conrad
Virtualized, LLC Virtualized, LLC
G. Huston G. Huston
APNIC - Asia Pacific Network APNIC - Asia Pacific Network
Information Center Information Center
August 24, 2015 April 6, 2016
LISP EID Block Management Guidelines LISP EID Block Management Guidelines
draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt-06.txt draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt-07.txt
Abstract Abstract
This document proposes a framework for the management of the LISP EID This document proposes a framework for the management of the LISP EID
Prefix. The framework described relies on hierarchical distribution Address Block. The framework described relies on hierarchical
of the address space, granting temporary usage of sub-prefixes of distribution of the address space, granting temporary usage of
such space to requesting organizations. prefixes of such space to requesting organizations.
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
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 February 25, 2016. This Internet-Draft will expire on October 8, 2016.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2015 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
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
skipping to change at page 2, line 21 skipping to change at page 2, line 21
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 Registration Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4. EID Prefix Registration Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
5. EID Prefixes Registration Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 5. EID Prefixes Registration Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6. EID Prefix Request Template . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 6. EID Prefix Request Template . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7. Policy Validity Period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 7. Policy Validity Period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
10. Procedures to be followed by RIPE NCC . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 10. Procedures to be followed by RIPE NCC . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
11. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 11. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
12.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 12.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Appendix A. LISP Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Appendix A. Document Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Appendix B. Document Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
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]) separate 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 reservation exclusively for use as EID prefixes in the LISP block reservation exclusively for use as EID prefixes in the LISP
experiment. The rationale, intent, size, and usage of the EID experiment. 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 a management framework for the registration of This document proposes a management framework for the registration of
EID prefixes from that block, allowing the requesting organisation EID prefixes from that block, allowing the requesting organization
exclusive use of those EID prefixes limited to the duration of the exclusive use of those EID prefixes limited to the duration of the
LISP experiment. LISP experiment.
3. Definition of Terms 3. Definition of Terms
This document does not introduce any new terms related to the set of This document does not introduce any new terms related to the set of
LISP Specifications ( [RFC6830], [RFC6831], [RFC6832], [RFC6833], LISP Specifications ([RFC6830], [RFC6831], [RFC6832], [RFC6833],
[RFC6834], [RFC6835], [RFC6836], [RFC6837]). To help the reading of [RFC6834], [RFC6835], [RFC6836], [RFC6837]), but assumes that the
this document the terminology introduced by LISP is summarized in reader is familiar with the LISP terminology.
Appendix A. [I-D.ietf-lisp-introduction] provides an introduction to the LISP
technology, including its terminology. .
4. EID Prefix Registration Policy 4. EID Prefix Registration Policy
The request registration of EID prefixes MUST be done under the The request for registration of EID prefixes MUST be done under the
following policies: following policies:
1. EID prefixes are made available in the reserved space on a 1. EID prefixes are made available in the reserved space on a
temporary basis and for experimental uses. The requester of an temporary basis and for experimental uses. The requester of an
experimental prefix MUST provide a short description of the 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
registration may be denied. registration may be denied.
2. EID prefix registrations SHOULD be renewed on a regular basis to 2. EID prefix registrations MUST be renewed on a regular basis to
ensure their use by active participants in the experiment. The ensure their use by active participants in the experiment. The
registration period is proposed to be 12 months. Registration registration period is 12 months. A renewal SHOULD NOT cause a
renewal SHOULD NOT cause a change in the registered EID prefix. change in the EID prefix registered in the previous request. The
The conditions of registration renewal should no different to the conditions of registration renewal are the same as the conditions
conditions of registration. of first EID prefix registration request.
3. It is preferable not to reuse EID prefixes whose registration is 3. It is preferable not to reuse EID prefixes whose registration is
expired. When an EID prefix registration is removed from the expired. When an EID prefix registration is removed from the
registry, then the reuse of the EID prefix in a subsequent registry, then the reuse of the EID prefix in a subsequent
registration on behalf of a different end user should be avoided registration on behalf of a different end user should be avoided
where possible. If the considerations of overall usage of the where possible. If the considerations of overall usage of the
EID block prefix requires reuse of a previously registered EID EID block prefix requires reuse of a previously registered EID
prefix, then a minimum delay of at least one week between removal prefix, then a minimum delay of at least one week between removal
and subsequent registration SHOULD be applied by the registry and subsequent registration SHOULD be applied by the registry
operator. operator.
skipping to change at page 4, line 36 skipping to change at page 4, line 37
entries is to be specified in the announcement of the cessation entries is to be specified in the announcement of the cessation
of this experiment. of this experiment.
5. EID Prefixes Registration Requirements 5. EID Prefixes Registration Requirements
All EID prefix registrations MUST respect the following requirements: All EID prefix registrations MUST respect the following requirements:
1. All EID prefix registrations MUST use a globally unique EID 1. All EID prefix registrations MUST use a globally unique EID
prefix. prefix.
2. If there is more than one registry operator, all operators MUST 2. The EID Prefix registration information, as specified in
use the same registry management policies and practices.
3. The EID Prefix registration information as specified in
Section 6, MUST be collected upon initial registration and Section 6, MUST be collected upon initial registration and
renewal, and made publicly available though interfaces allowing renewal, and made publicly available through interfaces allowing
both retrieval of specific registration details (search) and both retrieval of specific registration details (search) and
enumeration of the entire registry contents (e.g., [RFC7481], enumeration of the entire registry contents (e.g., [RFC7481],
whois, http, or similar access methods). WHOIS, HTTP, or similar access methods).
4. The registry operator MUST permit the delegation of EID prefixes 3. The registry operator MUST permit the delegation of EID prefixes
in the reverse DNS space to holders of registered EID prefixes. in the reverse DNS space to holders of registered EID prefixes.
5. Anyone can obtain an entry in the EID prefix registry, on the 4. Anyone can obtain an entry in the EID prefix registry, on the
understanding that the prefix so registered is for the exclusive understanding that the prefix so registered is for the exclusive
use in the LISP experimental network, and that their registration use in the LISP experimental network, and that their registration
details (as specified in Section 6) are openly published in the details (as specified in Section 6) are openly published in the
EID prefix registry. EID prefix registry.
6. EID Prefix Request Template 6. EID Prefix Request Template
The following is a basic request template for prefix registration so The following is a basic request template for prefix registration so
to ensure a uniform process. Such a template is inspired by the IANA to ensure a uniform process. Such a template is inspired by the IANA
Private Enterprise Number online request form Private Enterprise Number online request form
(http://pen.iana.org/pen/PenApplication.page). (http://pen.iana.org/pen/PenApplication.page).
Note that all details in this registration become part of the Note that all details in this registration become part of the
registry, and will be published in the LISP EID Prefix Registry. registry and will be published in the LISP EID Prefix Registry.
The EID Prefix Request template MUST at minimum contain: The EID Prefix Request template MUST at minimum contain:
1. Organization (In case of individuals requesting an EID prefix 1. Organization (In the case of individuals requesting an EID prefix
this section can be left empty) this section can be left empty)
(a) Organization Name (a) Organization Name
(b) Organization Address (b) Organization Address
(c) Organization Phone (c) Organization Phone
(d) Organization WebSite
2. Contact Person (Mandatory) 2. Contact Person (Mandatory)
(a) Name (a) Name
(b) Address (b) Address
(c) Phone (c) Phone
(d) Fax (optional) (d) Fax (optional)
skipping to change at page 6, line 11 skipping to change at page 6, line 11
(a) Prefix Size (a) Prefix Size
+ Expressed as an address prefix length. + Expressed as an address prefix length.
(b) Prefix Size Rationale (b) Prefix Size Rationale
(c) Lease Period (c) Lease Period
+ Note Well: All EID Prefix registrations will be valid + Note Well: All EID Prefix registrations will be valid
until the earlier date of 12 months from the date of until the earlier date of 12 months from the date of
registration or 31 December 2017. registration or MMMM/YYYY3.
+ All registrations may be renewed by the applicant for + All registrations may be renewed by the applicant for
further 12 month periods, ending on 31 December 2017. further 12 month periods, ending on MMMM/YYYY3.
+ According to the 3+3 year experimentation plan, defined + According to the 3+3 year experimentation plan, defined
in [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block], all registrations MUST end in [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block], all registrations MUST end
by 31 December 2017, unless the IETF community decides to by MMMM/YYYY3, unless the IETF community decides to grant
grant a permanent LISP EID address block. In the latter a permanent LISP EID address block. In the latter case,
case, registrations following the present document policy registrations following the present document policy MUST
MUST end by 31 December 2020 and a new policy (to be end by MMMM/YYYY6 and a new policy (to be decided - see
decided - see Section 7) will apply starting 1 January Section 7) will apply afterwards.
2021.
4. Experiment Description 4. Experiment Description
(a) Experiment and Deployment Description (a) Experiment and Deployment Description
(b) Interoperability with existing LISP deployments (b) Interoperability with existing LISP deployments
(c) Interoperability with Legacy Internet (c) Interoperability with Legacy Internet
5. Reverse DNS Servers (Optional) 5. Reverse DNS Servers (Optional)
skipping to change at page 6, line 49 skipping to change at page 6, line 48
(c) Name server name: (c) Name server name:
(d) Name server address: (d) Name server address:
(Repeat if necessary) (Repeat if necessary)
7. Policy Validity Period 7. Policy Validity Period
Policy outlined in the present document is tied to the existence of Policy outlined in the present document is tied to the existence of
the experimental LISP EID block requested in the experimental LISP EID block requested in
[I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block] and valid until 31 December 2017. [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block] and valid until MMMM/YYYY3.
If the IETF decides to transform the block in a permanent allocation, If the IETF decides to transform the block in a permanent allocation,
the LISP EID block reserved usage period will be extended for three the LISP EID block reserved usage period will be extended for three
years (until 31 December 2020) so to give time to the IETF to define, years (until MMMM/YYYY6) so as to give time to the IETF to define,
following the policies outlined in [RFC5226], the final size of the following the policies outlined in [RFC5226], the final size of the
EID block and create a transition plan, while the policy in the EID block and create a transition plan, while the policy in the
present document will still apply. present document will still apply.
Note that, as stated in [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block], the transition of 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 the EID block into a permanent allocation has the potential to pose
policy issues (as recognized in [RFC2860], section 4.3) and hence policy issues (as recognized in [RFC2860], section 4.3) and hence
discussion with the IANA, the RIR communities, and the IETF community discussion with the IANA, the RIR communities, and the IETF community
will be necessary to determine appropriate policy for permanent EID will be necessary to determine appropriate policy for permanent EID
prefix management, which will be effective starting 1 January 2021. prefix management, which will be effective after MMMM/YYYY6.
[RFC Editor: please replace MMMM and all its occurrences in the
document with the month of publication of [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block]
as RFC.]
[RFC Editor: please replace YYYY0 and all its occurrences in the
document with the year of publication of [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block] as
RFC.]
[RFC Editor: please replace YYYY3 and all its occurrences in the
document with the year of publication of [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block] as
RFC plus 3 years, e.g., if published in 2016 then put 2019.]
[RFC Editor: please replace YYYY6 and all its occurrences in the
document with the year of publication of [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block] as
RFC plus 6 years, e.g., if published in 2016 then put 2022.]
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 registration request MUST contain considerations in [RFC7020], each registration 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
referral person (see Section 6). referral person (see Section 6).
9. IANA Considerations 9. IANA Considerations
This document provides only management guidelines for the reserved IANA allocated the following IPv6 address block for experimental use
LISP EID prefix requested in [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block]. as LISP EID prefix [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block]:
There is an operational requirement for an EID registration service o Address Block: 2001:5::/32
that ensures uniqueness of EIDs according to the requirements
described in Section 5. Furthermore, there is an operational
requirement for EID registration service that allows a lookup of the
contact information of the entity that registered the EID.
IANA and RIPE NCC agreed for the latter to run such service on behalf o Name: EID Space for LISP
of the former, for the duration of the experiment and following the
procedures outlined in Section 10. o RFC: [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block]
o Further Details at: http://www.iana.org/assignments/
iana-ipv6-special-registry/iana-ipv6-special-registry.xhtml
In order to grant requesting organisations and individuals exclusive
use of EID prefixes out of such reserved block (limited to the
duration of the LISP experiment as outlined in Section 7) there is an
operational requirement for an EID registration service.
Provided that the policies and requirements outlined in Section 4,
Section 5, and Section 6 are respected, EID prefix registration is
accorded based on a "First Come First Served" basis.
There is no hard limit in the number of registrations an organization
or individual can submit as long as information described in
Section 6 is provided, in particular point 4: "Experiment
Description".
For the duration defined in [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block] RIPE NCC will
manage the the LISP EID prefix as described herein. Therefore, this
document has no IANA actions.
10. Procedures to be followed by RIPE NCC 10. Procedures to be followed by RIPE NCC
RIPE NCC will provide the registration service following the EID RIPE NCC will provide the registration service following the EID
Prefix Registration Policy (Section 4) and the EID Prefix Prefix Registration Policy (Section 4) and the EID Prefix
Registration Requirements (Section 5) provided in this document. The Registration Requirements (Section 5) provided in this document. The
request form provided by RIPE NCC will include at least the request form provided by RIPE NCC will include at least the
information from the template in Section 6. RIPE NCC will make information from the template in Section 6. RIPE NCC will make
publicly available all received requests. While this document does publicly available all received requests. While this document does
not suggests any minimum allocation size, RIPE NCC is allowed to not suggests any minimum allocation size, RIPE NCC is allowed to
introduce such minimum size for menagement purposes. introduce such minimum size for management purposes.
11. Acknowledgments 11. Acknowledgments
Thanks to A. de la Haye, A. Cima, A Pawlik, J. Curran, A. Severin, B. Thanks to A. Retana, J. Arko, P. Yee, A. de la Haye, A. Cima, A
Haberman, T. Manderson, D. Lewis, D. Farinacci, M. Binderberger, D. Pawlik, J. Curran, A. Severin, B. Haberman, T. Manderson, D. Lewis,
Saucez, E. Lear, for their helpful comments. D. Farinacci, M. Binderberger, D. Saucez, E. Lear, for their helpful
comments.
The work of Luigi Iannone has been partially supported by the ANR-13- The work of Luigi Iannone has been partially supported by the ANR-13-
INFR-0009 LISP-Lab Project (www.lisp-lab.org) and the EIT KIC ICT- INFR-0009 LISP-Lab Project (www.lisp-lab.org) and the EIT KIC ICT-
Labs SOFNETS Project. Labs SOFNETS Project.
12. References 12. References
12.1. Normative References 12.1. 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-12 (work in EID Block", draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-13 (work in
progress), May 2015. progress), February 2016.
[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, DOI 10.17487/ Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/
RFC2119, March 1997, RFC2119, March 1997,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC4632] Fuller, V. and T. Li, "Classless Inter-domain Routing
(CIDR): The Internet Address Assignment and Aggregation
Plan", BCP 122, RFC 4632, DOI 10.17487/RFC4632,
August 2006, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4632>.
[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,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5226, May 2008, DOI 10.17487/RFC5226, May 2008,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5226>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5226>.
12.2. Informative References 12.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-lisp-introduction]
Cabellos-Aparicio, A. and D. Saucez, "An Architectural
Introduction to the Locator/ID Separation Protocol
(LISP)", draft-ietf-lisp-introduction-13 (work in
progress), April 2015.
[RFC2860] Carpenter, B., Baker, F., and M. Roberts, "Memorandum of [RFC2860] Carpenter, B., Baker, F., and M. Roberts, "Memorandum of
Understanding Concerning the Technical Work of the Understanding Concerning the Technical Work of the
Internet Assigned Numbers Authority", RFC 2860, Internet Assigned Numbers Authority", RFC 2860,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2860, June 2000, DOI 10.17487/RFC2860, June 2000,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2860>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2860>.
[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,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6830, January 2013, DOI 10.17487/RFC6830, January 2013,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6830>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6830>.
skipping to change at page 10, line 7 skipping to change at page 10, line 44
[RFC7020] Housley, R., Curran, J., Huston, G., and D. Conrad, "The [RFC7020] Housley, R., Curran, J., Huston, G., and D. Conrad, "The
Internet Numbers Registry System", RFC 7020, DOI 10.17487/ Internet Numbers Registry System", RFC 7020, DOI 10.17487/
RFC7020, August 2013, RFC7020, August 2013,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7020>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7020>.
[RFC7481] Hollenbeck, S. and N. Kong, "Security Services for the [RFC7481] Hollenbeck, S. and N. Kong, "Security Services for the
Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)", RFC 7481, Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)", RFC 7481,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7481, March 2015, DOI 10.17487/RFC7481, March 2015,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7481>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7481>.
Appendix A. LISP Terms Appendix A. Document Change Log
LISP operates on two name spaces and introduces several new network
elements. This section provides high-level definitions of the LISP
name spaces and network elements and as such, it must not be
considered as an authoritative source. The reference to the
authoritative document for each term is included in every term
description.
Legacy Internet: The portion of the Internet that does not run LISP
and does not participate in LISP+ALT or any other mapping system.
LISP site: A LISP site is a set of routers in an edge network that
are under a single technical administration. LISP routers that
reside in the edge network are the demarcation points to separate
the edge network from the core network. See [RFC6830] for more
details.
Endpoint ID (EID): An EID is a 32-bit (for IPv4) or 128-bit (for
IPv6) value used in the source and destination address fields of
the first (most inner) LISP header of a packet. A packet that is
emitted by a system contains EIDs in its headers and LISP headers
are prepended only when the packet reaches an Ingress Tunnel
Router (ITR) on the data path to the destination EID. The source
EID is obtained via existing mechanisms used to set a host's
"local" IP address. An EID is allocated to a host from an EID-
prefix block associated with the site where the host is located.
See [RFC6830] for more details.
EID-prefix: A power-of-two block of EIDs that are allocated to a
site by an address allocation authority. See [RFC6830] for more
details.
EID-Prefix Aggregate: A set of EID-prefixes said to be aggregatable
in the [RFC4632] sense. That is, an EID-Prefix aggregate is
defined to be a single contiguous power-of-two EID-prefix block.
A prefix and a length characterize such a block. See [RFC6830]
for more details.
Routing LOCator (RLOC): A RLOC is an IPv4 or IPv6 address of an
egress tunnel router (ETR). A RLOC is the output of an EID-to-
RLOC mapping lookup. An EID maps to one or more RLOCs.
Typically, RLOCs are numbered from topologically aggregatable
blocks that are assigned to a site at each point to which it
attaches to the global Internet; where the topology is defined by
the connectivity of provider networks, RLOCs can be thought of as
Provider Aggregatable (PA) addresses. See [RFC6830] for more
details.
EID-to-RLOC Mapping: A binding between an EID-Prefix and the RLOC-
set that can be used to reach the EID-Prefix. The general term
"mapping" always refers to an EID-to-RLOC mapping. See [RFC6830]
for more details.
Ingress Tunnel Router (ITR): An Ingress Tunnel Router (ITR) is a
router that accepts receives IP packets from site end-systems on
one side and sends LISP-encapsulated IP packets toward the
Internet on the other side. The router treats the "inner" IP
destination address as an EID and performs an EID-to-RLOC mapping
lookup. The router then prepends an "outer" IP header with one of
its globally routable RLOCs in the source address field and the
result of the mapping lookup in the destination address field.
See [RFC6830] for more details.
Egress Tunnel Router (ETR): An Egress Tunnel Router (ETR) receives
LISP-encapsulated IP packets from the Internet on one side and
sends decapsulated IP packets to site end-systems on the other
side. An ETR router accepts an IP packet where the destination
address in the "outer" IP header is one of its own RLOCs. The
router strips the "outer" header and forwards the packet based on
the next IP header found. See [RFC6830] for more details.
Proxy ITR (PITR): A Proxy-ITR (PITR) acts like an ITR but does so on
behalf of non-LISP sites which send packets to destinations at
LISP sites. See [RFC6832] for more details.
Proxy ETR (PETR): A Proxy-ETR (PETR) acts like an ETR but does so on Version 07 Posted April 2016.
behalf of LISP sites which send packets to destinations at non-
LISP sites. See [RFC6832] for more details.
Map Server (MS): A network infrastructure component that learns EID- o Addressed editorial issues raised in Gen-Art review by Peter Yee.
to-RLOC mapping entries from an authoritative source (typically an
ETR). A Map Server publishes these mappings in the distributed
mapping system. See [RFC6833] for more details.
Map Resolver (MR): A network infrastructure component that accepts o Removed "Definition of Terms" section as suggested by Peter Yee in
LISP Encapsulated Map-Requests, typically from an ITR, quickly the Gen-Art review.
determines whether or not the destination IP address is part of
the EID namespace; if it is not, a Negative Map-Reply is
immediately returned. Otherwise, the Map Resolver finds the
appropriate EID-to-RLOC mapping by consulting the distributed
mapping database system. See [RFC6833] for more details.
The LISP Alternative Logical Topology (ALT): The virtual overlay o Section "IANA Considerations" has been re-written to fix issue
network made up of tunnels between LISP+ALT Routers. The Border raised by IESG, IANA, and P. Yee.
Gateway Protocol (BGP) runs between ALT Routers and is used to
carry reachability information for EID-prefixes. The ALT provides
a way to forward Map-Requests toward the ETR that "owns" an EID-
prefix. See [RFC6836] for more details.
ALT Router: The device on which runs the ALT. The ALT is a static o Deleted bullet allowing multiple operators in the requirements
network built using tunnels between ALT Routers. These routers section. Due to the limited duration of the experiment one single
are deployed in a roughly-hierarchical mesh in which routers at registration operator (RIPE) is sufficient.
each level in the topology are responsible for aggregating EID-
Prefixes learned from those logically "below" them and advertising
summary prefixes to those logically "above" them. Prefix learning
and propagation between ALT Routers is done using BGP. When an
ALT Router receives an ALT Datagram, it looks up the destination
EID in its forwarding table (composed of EID-Prefix routes it
learned from neighboring ALT Routers) and forwards it to the
logical next-hop on the overlay network. The primary function of
LISP+ALT routers is to provide a lightweight forwarding
infrastructure for LISP control-plane messages (Map-Request and
Map-Reply), and to transport data packets when the packet has the
same destination address in both the inner (encapsulating)
destination and outer destination addresses ((i.e., a Data Probe
packet). See [RFC6830] for more details.
Appendix B. Document Change Log o Modified the dates, introducing variables, so to allow RFC Editor
to easily update dates by publication as RFC.
Version 06 Posted August 2015. Version 06 Posted August 2015.
o Fixed Authors addresses and typo in section 10. o Fixed Authors addresses and typo in section 10.
Version 05 Posted July 2015. Version 05 Posted July 2015.
o Added explicit text about RIPE NCC providing the registration o Added explicit text about RIPE NCC providing the registration
service during the temporary experiment. service during the temporary experiment.
 End of changes. 45 change blocks. 
184 lines changed or deleted 116 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/