< draft-kowal-lisp-policy-distribution-01.txt   draft-kowal-lisp-policy-distribution-02.txt >
Network Working Group M. Kowal Network Working Group M. Kowal
Internet-Draft M. Portoles Internet-Draft M. Portoles
Intended status: Experimental Cisco Systems Intended status: Experimental Cisco Systems
Expires: 19 March 2022 A. Jain Expires: 21 September 2022 A. Jain
Juniper Networks Juniper Networks
D. Farinacci D. Farinacci
lispers.net lispers.net
15 September 2021 20 March 2022
LISP Transport for Policy Distribution LISP Transport for Policy Distribution
draft-kowal-lisp-policy-distribution-01 draft-kowal-lisp-policy-distribution-02
Abstract Abstract
This document describes the use of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol This document describes the use of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol
(LISP) to encode and transport data models for the configuration of (LISP) to encode and transport data models for the configuration of
LISP ITRs. LISP ITRs.
Requirements Language Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
skipping to change at page 1, line 42 skipping to change at page 1, line 42
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 19 March 2022. This Internet-Draft will expire on 21 September 2022.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2022 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 (https://trustee.ietf.org/ Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components
extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as
as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2. Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. Policy Distribution Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. Policy Distribution Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. Policy Distribution: Packet Flow Description . . . . . . . . 3 4. Policy Distribution: Packet Flow Description . . . . . . . . 3
4.1. Policy Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4.1. Policy Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.2. Policy Updates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4.2. Policy Updates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5. Mapping System Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5. Mapping System Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
skipping to change at page 7, line 7 skipping to change at page 7, line 7
When the ITR is configured to receive a policy using a distinguished When the ITR is configured to receive a policy using a distinguished
name, the ITR sends a subscription for the EID record encoded as this name, the ITR sends a subscription for the EID record encoded as this
Distinguished Name. When a policy has been registered with the Distinguished Name. When a policy has been registered with the
Mapping System for this Distinguished Name, the ITR receives a Mapping System for this Distinguished Name, the ITR receives a
publication with a list of policies as RLOC records and encoded as publication with a list of policies as RLOC records and encoded as
JSON strings (as defined in section 5.4 of [RFC8060]. JSON strings (as defined in section 5.4 of [RFC8060].
Example encoding for QoS policy that shapes traffic to 50 percent of Example encoding for QoS policy that shapes traffic to 50 percent of
the line-rate: EID-Record encoded as distinguished name "policy-ce- the line-rate: EID-Record encoded as distinguished name "policy-ce-
router1" RLOC-Record record encoded as JSON string "{ "shape":{ router1" RLOC-Record record encoded as JSON string
"interface":"ethernet1", "direction":"outbound", "unit":"percent", "{"shape":{"interface":"ethernet1","direction":"outbound",
"value":50 }}" "unit":"percent","value":50}}"
Example encoding for setting the ITR's NTP server to 1.1.1.1: EID- Example encoding for setting the ITR's NTP server to 10.10.10.10:
Record encoded as distinguished name "policy-ce-router" RLOC-Record EID-Record encoded as distinguished name "policy-ce-router" RLOC-
record encoded as JSON string "{ "NTP-address" : "1.1.1.1" }" Record record encoded as JSON string "{"NTP-address": "10.10.10.10"}"
Multiple ITRs can be configured to use multiple distinguished names Multiple ITRs can be configured to use multiple distinguished names
for receiving multiple sets policies. This allows for an ITR to for receiving multiple sets policies. This allows for an ITR to
receive specific policies and many ITRs to receive policies that can receive specific policies and many ITRs to receive policies that can
be broadly applied. Referring to the two examples above, an ITR can be broadly applied. Referring to the two examples above, an ITR can
be configured to use a distinguished name of "policy-ce-router1" to be configured to use a distinguished name of "policy-ce-router1" to
receive a QoS configuration that is specific to that node while also receive a QoS configuration that is specific to that node while also
using a distinguished name of "policy-ce-router" to receive using a distinguished name of "policy-ce-router" to receive
configurations that are common to each ITR in the LISP network (e.g., configurations that are common to each ITR in the LISP network (e.g.,
NTP configuration). The use of multiple distinguished names per ITR NTP configuration). The use of multiple distinguished names per ITR
 End of changes. 8 change blocks. 
14 lines changed or deleted 14 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/