idnits 2.17.1 draft-farinacci-lisp-mobile-network-11.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** There are 21 instances of too long lines in the document, the longest one being 7 characters in excess of 72. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (March 30, 2021) is 1115 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Experimental ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == Unused Reference: 'RFC1700' is defined on line 772, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC8060' is defined on line 792, but no explicit reference was found in the text ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 1700 (Obsoleted by RFC 3232) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 6833 (Obsoleted by RFC 9301) == Outdated reference: A later version (-16) exists of draft-ietf-lisp-eid-anonymity-09 == Outdated reference: A later version (-13) exists of draft-ietf-lisp-eid-mobility-07 == Outdated reference: A later version (-15) exists of draft-ietf-lisp-introduction-13 == Outdated reference: A later version (-15) exists of draft-ietf-lisp-mn-08 == Outdated reference: A later version (-14) exists of draft-ietf-lisp-predictive-rlocs-07 == Outdated reference: A later version (-38) exists of draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-36 == Outdated reference: A later version (-31) exists of draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis-30 == Outdated reference: A later version (-29) exists of draft-ietf-lisp-sec-22 == Outdated reference: A later version (-14) exists of draft-ietf-lisp-te-07 Summary: 3 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 12 warnings (==), 1 comment (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group D. Farinacci 3 Internet-Draft lispers.net 4 Intended status: Experimental P. Pillay-Esnault 5 Expires: October 1, 2021 Independent 6 U. Chunduri 7 Futurewei Technologies 8 March 30, 2021 10 LISP for the Mobile Network 11 draft-farinacci-lisp-mobile-network-11 13 Abstract 15 This specification describes how the LISP architecture and protocols 16 can be used in a LTE/5G mobile network to support session survivable 17 EID mobility. A recommendation is provided to SDOs on how to 18 integrate LISP into the mobile network. 20 Status of This Memo 22 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 23 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 25 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 26 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 27 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 28 Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 30 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 31 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 32 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 33 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 35 This Internet-Draft will expire on October 1, 2021. 37 Copyright Notice 39 Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 40 document authors. All rights reserved. 42 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 43 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 44 (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 45 publication of this document. Please review these documents 46 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 47 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 48 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 49 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 50 described in the Simplified BSD License. 52 Table of Contents 54 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 55 2. Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 56 3. Design Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 57 4. Addressing and Routing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 58 5. gNB/eNodeB LISP Functionality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 59 6. UPF/pGW LISP Functionality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 60 7. Compatible Data-Plane using GTP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 61 8. Roaming and Packet Loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 62 9. Mobile Network LISP Mapping System . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 63 10. LISP Over the 5G N3/N6/N9 Interfaces . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 64 11. Multicast Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 65 12. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 66 13. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 67 14. SDO Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 68 15. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 69 15.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 70 15.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 71 Appendix A. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 72 Appendix B. Document Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 73 B.1. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-mobile-network-11 . . . . 24 74 B.2. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-mobile-network-10 . . . . 24 75 B.3. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-mobile-network-09 . . . . 24 76 B.4. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-mobile-network-08 . . . . 24 77 B.5. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-mobile-network-07 . . . . 24 78 B.6. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-mobile-network-06 . . . . 24 79 B.7. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-mobile-network-05 . . . . 25 80 B.8. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-mobile-network-04 . . . . 25 81 B.9. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-mobile-network-03 . . . . 25 82 B.10. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-mobile-network-02 . . . . 25 83 B.11. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-mobile-network-01 . . . . 25 84 B.12. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-mobile-network-00 . . . . 26 85 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 87 1. Introduction 89 The LISP architecture and protocols [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis] 90 introduces two new numbering spaces, Endpoint Identifiers (EIDs) and 91 Routing Locators (RLOCs) which provide an architecture to build 92 overlays on top of the underlying Internet. Mapping EIDs to RLOC- 93 sets is accomplished with a Mapping Database System. By using a 94 level of indirection for routing and addressing, separating an 95 address identifier from its location can allow flexible and scalable 96 mobility. By assigning EIDs to mobile devices and RLOCs to the 97 network nodes that support such mobile devices, LISP can provide 98 seamless mobility. 100 For a reading audience unfamiliar with LISP, a brief tutorial level 101 document is available at [I-D.ietf-lisp-introduction]. 103 This specification will describe how LISP can be used to provide 104 layer-3 mobility within and across an LTE [LTE401-3GPP] [LTE402-3GPP] 105 and 5G [ARCH5G-3GPP] [PROC5G-3GPP] mobile network. 107 The following are the design requirements: 109 1. Layer-3 address mobility is provided within a mobile network RAN 110 supported by a UPF/pGW region (intra-UPF/pGW) as well as across 111 UPF/pGW regions (inter-UPF/pGW). 113 2. UE nodes can get layer-3 address mobility when roaming off the 114 mobile network to support Fixed Mobile Convergence [FMC]. 116 3. Transport layer session survivability exists while roaming 117 within, across, and off of the mobile network. 119 4. No address management is required when UEs roam. EID addresses 120 are assigned to UEs at subscription time. EIDs can be reassigned 121 when UE ownership changes. 123 5. The design will make efficient use of radio resources thereby not 124 adding extra headers to packets that traverse the RAN. 126 6. The design can support IPv4 unicast and multicast packet delivery 127 and will support IPv6 unicast and multicast packet delivery. 129 7. The design will allow use of both the GTP [GTPv1-3GPP] 130 [GTPv2-3GPP] and LISP [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis] data-planes 131 while using the LISP control-plane and mapping system. 133 8. The design can be used for either 4G/LTE and 5G mobile networks 134 and may be able to support interworking between the different 135 mobile networks. 137 9. The LISP architecture provides a level of indirection for routing 138 and addressing. From a mobile operator's perspective, these 139 mechanisms provide advantages and efficiencies for the URLLC, 140 FMC, and mMTC use cases. See Section 2 for definitions and 141 references of these use cases. 143 The goal of this specification is take advantage of LISP's non- 144 disruptive incremental deployment benefits. This can be achieved by 145 changing the fewest number of components in the mobile network. The 146 proposal suggests adding LISP functionality only to gNB/eNodeB and 147 UPF/pGW nodes. There are no hardware or software changes to the UE 148 devices or the RF-based RAN to realize this architecture. The LISP 149 mapping database system is deployed as an addition to the mobile 150 network and does not require any coordination with existing 151 management and provisioning systems. 153 Similar ID Oriented Networking (ION) mechanisms for the 5G 154 [ARCH5G-3GPP] [PROC5G-3GPP] mobile network are also being considered 155 in other standards organizations such as ETSI [ETSI-NGP] and ITU 156 [ITU-IMT2020]. The NGMN Alliance describes Locator/ID separation as 157 an enabler to meet Key Performance Indicator Requirements [NGMN]. 159 2. Definition of Terms 161 xTR: Is a LISP node in the network that runs the LISP control-plane 162 and data-plane protocols according to [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis] 163 and [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis]. A formal definition of an xTR can 164 be found in [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis]. In this specification, a 165 LISP xTR is a node that runs the LISP control-plane with the GTP 166 data-plane. 168 EID: Is an Endpoint Identifier. EIDs are assigned to UEs and other 169 Internet nodes in LISP sites. A formal definition of an EID can 170 be found in [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis]. 172 UE EID: A UE can be assigned an IPv4 and/or an IPv6 address either 173 statically, or dynamically as is the procedure in the mobile 174 network today. These IP addresses are known as LISP EIDs and are 175 registered to the LISP mapping system. These EIDs are used as the 176 source address in packets that the UE originates. 178 RLOC: Is an Routing Locator. RLOCs are assigned to gNB/eNodeBs and 179 UPF/pGWs and other LISP xTRs in LISP sites. A formal definition 180 of an RLOC can be found in [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis]. 182 Mapping System: Is the LISP mapping database system that stores EID- 183 to-RLOC mappings. The mapping system is centralized for use and 184 distributed to scale and secure deployment. LISP Map-Register 185 messages are used to publish mappings and LISP Map-Requests 186 messages are used to lookup mappings. LISP Map-Reply messages are 187 used to return mappings. EID-records are used as lookup keys, and 188 RLOC-records are returned as a result of the lookup. Details can 189 be found in [RFC6833]. 191 LISP Control-Plane: In this specification, a LISP xTR runs the LISP 192 control-plane which originates, consumes, and processes Map- 193 Request, Map-Register, Map-Reply, and Map-Notify messages. 195 RAN: Radio Access Network where UE nodes connect to gNB/eNodeB nodes 196 via radios to get access to the Internet. 198 EPC: Evolved Packet Core [EPS-3GPP] system is the part of the mobile 199 network that allows the RAN to connect to a data packet network. 200 The EPC is a term used for the 4G/LTE mobile network. 202 NGC: Next Generation Core [EPS-3GPP] system is the part of the 5G 203 mobile network that allows the RAN to connect to a data packet 204 network. The NGC is roughly equivalent to the 4G EPC. 206 GTP: GTP [GTPv1-3GPP] [GTPv2-3GPP] is the UDP tunneling mechanism 207 used in the LTE/4G and 5G mobile network. 209 UE: User Equipment as defined by [GPRS-3GPP] which is typically a 210 mobile phone. The UE is connected to the network across the RAN 211 to gNB/eNodeB nodes. 213 eNodeB: Is the device defined by [GPRS-3GPP] which borders the RAN 214 and connects UEs to the EPC in a 4G/LTE mobile network. The 215 eNodeB nodes are termination point for a GTP tunnel and are LISP 216 xTRs. The equivalent term in the 5G mobile network is "(R)AN" and 217 "5G-NR", or simply "gNB". In this document, the two terms are 218 used interchangeably. 220 pGW: Is the PDN-Gateway as defined by [GPRS-3GPP] which connects the 221 EPC in a 4G/LTE mobile network to the Internet. The pGW nodes are 222 termination point for a GTP tunnel and is a LISP xTR. The 223 equivalent user/data-plane term in the 5G mobile network is the 224 "UPF", which also has the capability to chain network functions. 225 In this document, the two terms are used interchangeably to mean 226 the border point from the EPC/NGC to the Internet. 228 URLLC: Ultra-Reliable and Low-Latency provided by the 5G mobile 229 network for the shortest path between UEs [NGMN]. 231 FMC: Fixed Mobile Convergence [FMC] is a term used that allows a UE 232 device to move to and from the mobile network. By assigning a 233 fixed EID to a UE device, LISP supports transport layer continuity 234 between the mobile network and a fixed infrastructure such as a 235 WiFi network. 237 mMTC: Massive Machine-Type Services [mMTC] is a term used to refer 238 to using the mobile network for large-scale deployment of Internet 239 of Things (IoT) applications. 241 3. Design Overview 243 LISP will provide layer-3 address mobility based on the procedures in 244 [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-mobility] where the EID and RLOCs are not co- 245 located. In this design, the EID is assigned to the UE device and 246 the RLOC(s) are assigned to gNB/eNodeB nodes. So any packets going 247 to a UE are always encapsulated to the gNB/eNodeB that associates 248 with the UE. For data flow from the UE to any EIDs (or destinations 249 to non-LISP sites) that are outside of the NGC/EPC, use the RLOCs of 250 the UPF/pGW nodes so the UPF/pGW can send packets into the Internet 251 core (unencapsulated). 253 The following procedures are used to incorporate LISP in the NGC/EPC: 255 o UEs are assigned EIDs. They usually never change. They identify 256 the mobile device and are used for transport connections. If 257 privacy for EIDs is desired, refer to details in 258 [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-anonymity]. 260 o gNB/eNodeB nodes are LISP xTRs. They have GTP, and optionally 261 LISP, tunnels to the UPF/pGW nodes. The gNB/eNodeB is the RLOC 262 for all EIDs assigned to UE devices that are attached to the gNB/ 263 eNodeB. 265 o UPF/pGW nodes are LISP xTRs. They have GTP, and optionally LISP, 266 tunnels to the gNB/eNodeB nodes. The UPF/pGW is the RLOC for all 267 traffic destined for the Internet. 269 o The LISP mapping system runs in the NGC/EPC. It maps EIDs to 270 RLOC-sets. 272 o Traffic from a UE to UE within a UPF/pGW region can be 273 encapsulated from gNB/eNodeB to another gNB/eNodeB or via the UPF/ 274 pGW, acting as an RTR [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis], to provide data- 275 plane policy. 277 o Traffic from a UE to UE across a UPF/pGW region have these options 278 for data flow: 280 1. Encapsulation by a gNB/eNodeB in one region to a gNB/eNodeB in 281 another region. 283 2. Encapsulation by a gNB/eNodeB in one region to a UPF/pGW in 284 the same region and then the UPF/pGW reencapsulates to a gNB/ 285 eNodeB in another region. 287 3. Encapsulation by a gNB/eNodeB in one region to a UPF/pGW in 288 another region and then the UPF/pGW reencapsulates to a gNB/ 289 eNodeB in its same region 291 4. Encapsulation by the gNB/eNodeB to a LISP xTR outside of the 292 mobile network. An xTR outside of the mobile network could be 293 a router in a data-center, a router at the edge of a WAN at a 294 remote branch, or a WiFi access-point, and even a gNB/eNodeB 295 in another carrier's mobile network. All these deployment 296 options are to be considered for future architectures. 298 o Note when encapsulation happens between a gNB/eNodeB and a UPF/ 299 pGW, GTP is used as the data-plane and when encapsulation between 300 two gNB/eNodeBs occur, LISP can be used as the data-plane when 301 there is no X2 interface [X2-3GPP] between the gNB/eNodeB nodes. 303 o The UPF/pGW nodes register their RLOCs for a default EID-prefix to 304 the LISP mapping system. This is done so gNB/eNodeB nodes can 305 find UPF/pGW nodes to encapsulate to. 307 o The gNB/eNodeB nodes register EIDs to the mapping system for the 308 UE nodes. The registration occurs when gNB/eNodeB nodes discover 309 the layer-3 addresses of the UEs that connect to them. The gNB/ 310 eNodeB nodes register multiple RLOCs associated with the EIDs to 311 get multi-homing and path diversity benefits from the NGC/EPC 312 network. 314 o When a UE moves off a gNB/eNodeB, the gNB/eNodeB node deregisters 315 itself as an RLOC for the EID associated with the UE. 317 o Optionally, and for further study for future architectures, the 318 gNB/eNodeB or UPF/pGW could encapsulate to an xTR that is outside 319 of the NGC/EPC network. They could encapsulate to a LISP CPE 320 router at a branch office, a LISP top-of-rack router in a data 321 center, a LISP wifi access-point, LISP border routers at a hub 322 site, and even a LISP router running in a VM or container on a 323 server. 325 The following diagram illustrates the LTE mobile network topology and 326 structure [LTE401-3GPP] [LTE402-3GPP]: 328 (--------------------------------------------) 329 ( ) 330 ( Internet ) 331 ( ) 332 (--------------------------------------------) 333 | | 334 | | 335 (---------|---------) (---------|---------) 336 ( UPF-pGW ) ( UPF-pGW ) 337 ( ) ( ) 338 ( NGC/EPC ) ( NGC/EPC ) 339 ( ) ( ) 340 ( gNB-eNB gNB-eNB ) ( gNB-eNB gNB-eNB ) 341 (---/--\-----/--\---) (---/--\-----/--\---) 342 / \ / \ / \ / \ 343 / \ / \ / \ / \ 344 / \ / \ 345 / RAN \ / RAN \ 346 / \ / \ 347 ( UE UE UE ) ( UE UE UE ) 349 LTE/5G Mobile Network Architecture 351 The following diagram illustrates how LISP is used on the mobile 352 network: 354 (1) IPv6 EIDs are assigned to UEs. 355 (2) RLOCs assigned to gNB/eNodeB nodes are [a1,a2], [b1,b2], [c1,c2], [d1,d2] 356 on their uplink interfaces. 357 (3) RLOCs assigned to UPF/pGW nodes are [p1,p2], [p3,p4]. 358 (4) RLOCs can be IPv4 or IPv6 addresses or mixed RLOC-sets. 360 (--------------------------------------------) 361 ( ) 362 ( Internet ) 363 ( ) 364 (--------------------------------------------) 365 | | 366 | | 367 (---------|---------) (---------|---------) 368 ( UPF-pGW ) ( UPF-pGW ) 369 ( p1 p2 ) ( p3 p4 ) 370 ( ) ( ) 371 ( NGC/EPC ) ( NGC/EPC ) 372 ( ) ( ) 373 ( a1 a2 b1 b2 ) ( c1 c2 d1 d2 ) 374 ( gNB-eNB gNB-eNB ) ( gNB-eNB gNB-eNB ) 375 (---/--\-----/--\---) (---/--\-----/--\---) 376 / \ / \ / \ / \ 377 / \ / \ / \ / \ 378 / \ / \ 379 / RAN \ / RAN \ 380 / \ / \ 381 ( UE UE UE ) ( UE UE UE ) 382 EIDs: a::1 b::1 c::1 x::1 y::1 z::1 384 Mobile Network with EID/RLOC Assignment 386 The following table lists the EID-to-RLOC entries that reside in the LISP 387 Mapping System when the above UEs are are attached to the 4 gNB/eNodeBs: 389 EID-Record RLOC-Record Commentary Footnote 390 0::/0 [p1,p2,p3 p4] gNB/eNodeBs encap to p1-p4 for Internet (1) 391 destinations which are non-EIDs 393 a::1/128 [a1,a2] UPF/pGWs load-split traffic to [a1,a2] for (2) 394 UE a::1 and it can move to [b1,b2] 396 b::1/128 [a1,a2] gNB/eNodeB tracks both UEs a::1 and b::1, (3) 397 it can do local routing between the UEs 399 c::1/128 [b1,b2] UE c::1 can roam to [c1,c2] or [d1,d2], (4) 400 may use UPF/pGW [p1,p2] after move 402 x::1/128 [c1,c2] UE x::1 can talk directly to UE y::1, (5) 403 gNB/eNodeBs encap to each other 405 y::1/128 [d1,d2] UE can talk to Internet when [d1,d2], (6) 406 encap to UPF/pGW [p3,p4] or use backup [p1,p2] 408 z::1/128 [d1,d2] UE z::1 can talk to a::1 directly (7) 409 where [d1,d2] encaps to [a1,a2] 411 (1) For packets that flow from UE nodes to destinations that are not 412 in LISP sites, the gNB/eNodeB node uses one of the RLOCs p1, p2, p3, 413 or p4 as the destination address in the outer encapsulated header. 414 Encapsulated packets are then routed by the NGC/EPC core to the UPF/ 415 pGW nodes. In turn, the UPF/pGW nodes, then route packets into the 416 Internet core. 418 (2) Packets that arrive to UPF/pGW nodes from the Internet destined 419 to UE nodes are encapsulated to one of the gNB/eNodeB RLOCs a1, a2, 420 b1, b2. When UE, with EID a::1 is attached to the leftmost gNB/ 421 eNodeB, the EID a::1 is registered to the mapping system with RLOCs 422 a1 and a2. When UE with EID c::1 is attached to the rightmost gNB/ 423 eNodeB (in the left region), the EID c::1 is registered to the 424 mapping system with RLOCs b1 and b2. 426 (3) If UE with EID a::1 and UE with EID b::1 are attached to the same 427 gNB/eNodeB node, the gNB/eNodeB node tracks what radio interface to 428 use to route packets from one UE to the other. 430 (4) If UE with EID c::1 roams away from gNB/eNodeB with RLOCs b1 and 431 b2, to the gNB/eNodeB with RLOCs c1 and c2 (in the rightmost region), 432 packets destined toward the Internet, can use any UPF/pGW. Any 433 packets that flow back from the Internet can use any UPF/pGW. In 434 either case, the UPF/pGW is informed by the mapping system that the 435 UE with EID c::1 has new RLOCs and should now encapsulate to either 436 RLOC c1 or c2. 438 (5) When UE with EID x::1 is attached to gNB/eNodeB with RLOCs c1 and 439 c2 and UE with EID y::1 is attached to gNB/eNodeB with RLOCs d1 and 440 d2, they can talk directly, on the shortest path to each gNB/eNodeB, 441 when each encapsulates packets to each other's RLOCs. 443 (6) When packets from UE with EID y::1 are destined for the Internet, 444 the gNB/eNodeB with RLOCs d1 and d2 that the UE is attached to can 445 use any exit UPF/pGWs RLOCs p1, p2, p3, or p4. 447 (7) UE with EID z::1 can talk directory to UE with EID a::1 by each 448 gNB/eNodeB they are attached to encapsulsates to each other's RLOCs. 449 In case (5), the two gNB/eNodeB's were in the same region. In this 450 case, the gNB/eNodeBs are in different regions. 452 The following abbreviated diagram shows a topology that illustrates 453 how a UE roams with LISP across UPF/pGW regions: 455 (--------------------------------------------) 456 ( ) 457 ( Internet ) 458 ( ) 459 (--------------------------------------------) 460 | | 461 | | 462 (---------|---------) (---------|---------) 463 ( UPF-pGW ) ( UPF-pGW ) 464 ( p1 p2 ) ( p3 p4 ) 465 ( ) ( ) 466 ( NGC/EPC ) ( NGC/EPC ) 467 ( ) ( ) 468 ( a1 a2 b1 b2 ) ( c1 c2 d1 d2 ) 469 ( gNB-eNB gNB-eNB ) ( gNB-eNB gNB-eNB ) 470 (---/--\-----/--\---) (---/--\-----/--\---) 471 / \ / \ / \ / \ 472 / \ / \ / \ / \ 473 / \ / \ 474 / RAN \ / RAN \ 475 / \ / \ 476 ( UE ------------------------------> UE ) 477 a::1 a::1 479 UE EID Mobility 481 The contents of the LISP mapping database before UE moves: 483 EID-Record RLOC-Record Commentary 484 0::/0 [p1,p2,p3,p4] gNB/eNodeB [a1,a2] encaps to p1-p4 for Internet 485 destinations when a::1 on gNB/eNodeB [a1,a2] 487 a::1/128 [a1,a2] Before UE moves to other UPF/pGW region 489 The contents of the LISP mapping database after UE moves: 491 EID-Record RLOC-Record Commentary 492 0::/0 [p1,p2,p3,p4] gNB/eNodeB [d1,d2] encaps to p1-p4 for Internet 493 destinations when a::1 moves to gNB/eNodeB 494 [d1,d2] 496 a::1/128 [d1,d2] After UE moves to new UPF/pGW region 497 4. Addressing and Routing 499 UE based EID addresses will be IPv6 addresses. It will be determined 500 at a future time what length the IPv6 prefix will be to cover all UEs 501 in a mobile network. This coarse IPv6 prefix is called an EID-prefix 502 where more-specific EID-prefixes will be allocated out of it for each 503 UPF/pGW node. Each UPF/pGW node is responsible for advertising the 504 more-specific EID-prefix into the Internet routing system so they can 505 attract packets from non-EIDs nodes to UE EIDs. 507 An RLOC address will either be an IPv4 or IPv6 address depending on 508 the support for single or dual-stack address-family in the NGC/EPC 509 network. An RLOC-set in the mapping system can have a mixed address- 510 family locator set. There is no requirement for the NGC/EPC to 511 change to support one address-family or the other. And there is no 512 requirement for the NGC/EPC network to support IPv4 multicast or IPv6 513 multicast. The LISP overlay will support both. 515 The only requirement for RLOC addresses is that they are routable in 516 the NGC/EPC and the Internet. 518 The requirements of the LISP and GTP data-plane overlay is to support 519 a layer-3 overlay network only. There is no architectural 520 requirement to support layer-2 overlays. However, operators may want 521 to provide a layer-2 LAN service over their mobile network. Details 522 about how LISP supports layer-2 overlays can be found in 523 [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-mobility]. 525 5. gNB/eNodeB LISP Functionality 527 The gNB/eNodeB node runs as a LISP xTR for control-plane 528 functionality and runs GTP for data-plane functionality. Optionally, 529 the LISP data-plane can be used to establish dynamic tunnels from one 530 gNB/eNodeB node to another gNB/eNodeB node. 532 The gNB/eNodeB LISP xTR will follow the procedures of 533 [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-mobility] to discover UE based EIDs, track them by 534 monitoring liveness, registering them when appear, and deregistering 535 them when they move away. Since the gNB/eNodeB node is an xTR, it is 536 acting as a layer-3 router and the GTP tunnel from the gNB/eNodeB 537 node to the UPF/pGW node is realizing a layer-3 overlay. This will 538 provide scaling benefits since broadcast and link-local multicast 539 packets won't have to travel across the NGC/EPC to the UPF/pGW node. 541 A day in the life of a UE originated packet: 543 1. The UE node originates an IP packet over the RAN. 545 2. The gNB/eNodeB receives an IPv4/IPv6 packet, it extracts the 546 source address from the packet, learns the UE based EID, stores 547 its RAN location locally and registers the EID to the mapping 548 system. 550 3. The gNB/eNodeB extracts the destination address, looks up the 551 address in the mapping system. The lookup returns the RLOC of a 552 UPF/pGW node if the destination is not an EID or an RLOC gNB/ 553 eNodeB node if the destination is a UE based EID. 555 4. The gNB/eNodeB node encapsulates the packet to the RLOC using GTP 556 or optionally the LISP data-plane. 558 It is important to note that in [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-mobility], EID 559 discovery occurs when a LISP xTR receives an IP or ARP/ND packet. 560 However, if there are other methods to discover the EID of a device, 561 like in UE call setup, the learning and registration referenced in 562 Paragraph 2 can happen before any packet is sent. 564 6. UPF/pGW LISP Functionality 566 The UPF/pGW node runs as a LISP xTR for control-plane functionality 567 and runs GTP for data-plane functionality. Optionally, the LISP 568 data-plane can be used to establish dynamic tunnels from one UPF/pGW 569 node to another UPF/pGW or gNB/eNodeB node. 571 The UPF/pGW LISP xTR does not follow the EID mobility procedures of 572 [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-mobility] since it is not responsible for 573 discovering UE based EIDs. A UPF/pGW LISP xTR simply follows the 574 procedures of a PxTR in [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis] and for 575 interworking to non-EID sites in [RFC6832]. 577 A day in the life of a UPF/pGW received packet: 579 1. The UPF/pGW node receives a IP packet from the Internet core. 581 2. The UPF/pGW node extracts the destination address from the packet 582 and looks it up in the LISP mapping system. The lookup returns 583 an RLOC of a gNB/eNodeB node. Optionally, the RLOC could be 584 another UPF/pGW node. 586 3. The UPF/pGW node encapsulates the packet to the RLOC using GTP or 587 optionally the LISP data-plane. 589 7. Compatible Data-Plane using GTP 591 Since GTP is a UDP based encapsulating tunnel protocol, it has the 592 same benefits as LISP encapsulation. At this time, there appears to 593 be no urgent need to not continue to use GTP for tunnels between a 594 gNB/eNodeB nodes and between a gNB/eNodeB node and a UPF/pGW node. 596 There are differences between GTP tunneling and LISP tunneling. GTP 597 tunnels are setup at call initiation time. LISP tunnels are 598 dynamically encapsulating, used on demand, and don't need setup or 599 teardown. The two tunneling mechanisms are a hard state versus soft 600 state tradeoff. 602 This specification recommends for early phases of deployment, to use 603 GTP as the data-plane so a transition for it to use the LISP control- 604 plane can be achieved more easily. At later phases, the LISP data- 605 plane may be considered so a more dynamic way of using tunnels can be 606 achieved to support URLLC. 608 This specification recommends the use of procedures from 609 [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-mobility] and NOT the use of LISP-MN 610 [I-D.ietf-lisp-mn]. Using LISP-MN states that a LISP xTR resides on 611 the mobile UE. This is to be avoided so extra encapsulation header 612 overhead is NOT sent on the RAN. The LISP data-plane or control- 613 plane will not run on the UE. 615 8. Roaming and Packet Loss 617 Using LISP for the data-plane has some advantages in terms of 618 providing near-zero packet loss. In the current mobile network, 619 packets are queued on the gNB/eNodeB node the UE is roaming to or 620 rerouted on the gNB/eNodeB node the UE has left. In the LISP 621 architecture, packets can be sent to multiple "roamed-from" and 622 "roamed-to" nodes while the UE is moving or is off the RAN. See 623 mechanisms in [I-D.ietf-lisp-predictive-rlocs] for details. 625 9. Mobile Network LISP Mapping System 627 The LISP mapping system stores and maintains EID-to-RLOC mappings. 628 There are two mapping database transport systems that are available 629 for scale, LISP-ALT [RFC6836] and LISP-DDT [RFC8111]. The mapping 630 system will store EIDs assigned to UE nodes and the associated RLOCs 631 assigned to gNB/eNodeB nodes and UPF/pGW nodes. The RLOC addresses 632 are routable addresses by the NGC/EPC network. 634 This specification recommends the use of LISP-DDT. 636 10. LISP Over the 5G N3/N6/N9 Interfaces 638 So far in this specification we have described how LISP runs on the 639 gNB and UPF nodes in the mobile network. In the 5G architecture 640 [ARCH5G-3GPP] definition, some key components are Access and Mobility 641 Management Function (AMF) and the Session Management Function (SMF). 642 These two components provide control plane functionality to off-load 643 session anchoring by distributing state and packet flow among 644 multiple nodes in the NGC. These functions control the data-plane 645 anchors deployed in Branch Point Uplink Classifier (BP/ULCL) in UPF 646 data-plane nodes. 648 Here is an illustration where a BP/ULCL-UPF node would appear in the 649 mobile network: 651 (--------------------------------------------) 652 ( Internet ) 653 +-> (--------------------------------------------) 654 | | 655 N6 | 656 | (---------|---------) 657 +-> ( UPF ) <-+ 658 NGC ( [p1,p2] ) | 659 ( ) N9 660 +-> ( BP/ULCL ) | 661 | ( UPF [p3,p4] ) <-+ 662 N3 ( ) 663 | ( [a1] [a2] ) 664 +-> ( gNB gNB ) 665 (---/--\-----/--\---) 666 / \ / \ 667 / \ 668 / RAN \ 669 / \ 670 ( UE UE UE ) 671 a::1 a::2 a::3 673 The BP/ULCL-UPF node is configured as an LISP RTR and uses the 674 Traffic Engineering features of LISP specified in [I-D.ietf-lisp-te]. 675 In LISP-TE an Explicit Locator Path (ELP) can be stored in the RLOC- 676 record for any given EID thereby allowing packet flow from a UE to 677 the Internet to traverse through the BP/UCLC-UPF node. A UE 678 originated packet is encapsulated by the gNB to the BP/ULCL-UPF which 679 decapsulates and reencapsulates to the UPF at the Internet border. 680 This allows LISP to run over the 5G N3 and N9 interface with one 681 mapping entry. And if the ELP contained an xTR outside of the mobile 682 network, LISP could also run over the N6 interface. 684 The contents of the LISP mapping database: 686 EID-Record RLOC-Record Commentary 687 0::/0 [ELP{a1,p3,p1}, 4 RLOC-records, 2 with paths through the BP-UPF 688 ELP{a1,p4,p2}, and 2 directly to the border UPF from UEs 689 p1, p2] connected to gNB with RLOC a1 691 a::1/128 [a1,a2] The UPF or BP-UPF can encap directly for UE with 692 EID a::1 to either gNB with optimized latency 694 a::2/128 [ELP{p1,p3,a2}, The UPF can encap to either RLOC p3 or p4 to 695 ELP{p1,p4,a2}] forward traffic through the BP-UPF on its way 696 toward gNB with RLOC a1 698 a::3/128 [ELP{p1,p3,a2}, The UPF can encap to the BP-UPF or directly 699 a2] to gNB with RLOC a2 to reach UE with EID a::3 701 11. Multicast Considerations 703 Since the mobile network runs the LISP control-plane, and the mapping 704 system is available to support EIDs for unicast packet flow, it can 705 also support multicast packet flow. Support for multicast can be 706 provided by the LISP/GTP overlay with no changes to the NGC/EPC 707 network. 709 Multicast (S-EID,G) entries can be stored and maintained in the same 710 mapping database that is used to store UE based EIDs. Both Internet 711 connected nodes, as well as UE nodes, can source multicast packets. 712 The protocol procedures from [I-D.ietf-lisp-signal-free-multicast] 713 are followed to make multicast delivery available. Both multicast 714 packet flow and UE mobility can occur at the same time. 716 A day in the life of a 1-to-many multicast packet: 718 1. A UE node joins an (S,G) multicast flow by using IGMPv2 or 719 IGMPv3. 721 2. The gNB/eNodeB node records which UE on the RAN should get 722 packets sourced by S and destined for group G. 724 3. The gNB/eNodeB node registers the (S,G) entry to the mapping 725 system with its RLOC according to the receiver site procedures in 726 [I-D.ietf-lisp-signal-free-multicast]. The gNB/eNodeB does this 727 to show interest in joining the multicast flow. 729 4. When other UE nodes join the same (S,G), their associated gNB/ 730 eNodeB nodes will follow the procedures in steps 1 through 3. 732 5. The (S,G) entry stored in the mapping database has an RLOC-set 733 which contains a replication list of all the gNB/eNodeB RLOCs 734 that registered. 736 6. A multicast packet from source S to destination group G arrives 737 at the UPF/pGW. The UPF/pGW node looks up (S,G), gets returned 738 the replication list of all joined gNB/eNodeB nodes and 739 replicates the multicast packet by encapsulating the packet to 740 each of them. 742 7. Each gNB/eNodeB node decapsulates the packet and delivers the 743 multicast packet to one or more IGMP-joined UEs on the RAN. 745 12. Security Considerations 747 For control-plane authentication and authorization procedures, this 748 specification recommends the mechanisms in 749 [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis], LISP-SEC [I-D.ietf-lisp-sec] and LISP- 750 ECDSA [I-D.farinacci-lisp-ecdsa-auth]. 752 For data-plane privacy procedures, this specification recommends the 753 mechanisms in [RFC8061] When the LISP data-plane is used. Otherwise, 754 the NGC/EPC must provide data-plane encryption support. 756 13. IANA Considerations 758 There are no specific requests for IANA. 760 14. SDO Recommendations 762 The authors request other Standards Development Organizations to 763 consider LISP as a technology for device mobility. It is recommended 764 to start with this specification as a basis for design and develop 765 more deployment details in the appropriate Standards Organizations. 766 The authors are willing to facilitate this activity. 768 15. References 770 15.1. Normative References 772 [RFC1700] Reynolds, J. and J. Postel, "Assigned Numbers", RFC 1700, 773 DOI 10.17487/RFC1700, October 1994, 774 . 776 [RFC6832] Lewis, D., Meyer, D., Farinacci, D., and V. Fuller, 777 "Interworking between Locator/ID Separation Protocol 778 (LISP) and Non-LISP Sites", RFC 6832, 779 DOI 10.17487/RFC6832, January 2013, 780 . 782 [RFC6833] Fuller, V. and D. Farinacci, "Locator/ID Separation 783 Protocol (LISP) Map-Server Interface", RFC 6833, 784 DOI 10.17487/RFC6833, January 2013, 785 . 787 [RFC6836] Fuller, V., Farinacci, D., Meyer, D., and D. Lewis, 788 "Locator/ID Separation Protocol Alternative Logical 789 Topology (LISP+ALT)", RFC 6836, DOI 10.17487/RFC6836, 790 January 2013, . 792 [RFC8060] Farinacci, D., Meyer, D., and J. Snijders, "LISP Canonical 793 Address Format (LCAF)", RFC 8060, DOI 10.17487/RFC8060, 794 February 2017, . 796 [RFC8061] Farinacci, D. and B. Weis, "Locator/ID Separation Protocol 797 (LISP) Data-Plane Confidentiality", RFC 8061, 798 DOI 10.17487/RFC8061, February 2017, 799 . 801 [RFC8111] Fuller, V., Lewis, D., Ermagan, V., Jain, A., and A. 802 Smirnov, "Locator/ID Separation Protocol Delegated 803 Database Tree (LISP-DDT)", RFC 8111, DOI 10.17487/RFC8111, 804 May 2017, . 806 15.2. Informative References 808 [ARCH5G-3GPP] 809 "System Architecture for the 5G System", TS.23.501 810 https://portal.3gpp.org/desktopmodules/Specifications/ 811 SpecificationDetails.aspx?specificationId=3144, December 812 2016. 814 [EPS-3GPP] 815 "Non-Access-Stratum (NAS) Protocol for Evolved Packet 816 System (EPS); Stage 3", TS.23.501 817 https://portal.3gpp.org/desktopmodules/specifications/ 818 specificationdetails.aspx?specificationid=1072, December 819 2017. 821 [ETSI-NGP] 822 "NGP Evolved Architecture for mobility using Identity 823 Oriented Networks", NGP-004, version 1.1.1 824 https://portal.etsi.org/webapp/WorkProgram/ 825 Report_WorkItem.asp?WKI_ID=50531, January 2018. 827 [FMC] "[TS23316] 3rd Generation Partnership Project; Technical 828 Specification Group Services and System Aspects; Wireless 829 and wireline convergence access support for the 5G System 830 (5GS) (Release 16), 3GPP TS23.316", November 2018. 832 [GPRS-3GPP] 833 "General Packet Radio Service (GPRS) for Evolved Universal 834 Terrestrial Radio Access Network (E-UTRAN) Access", 835 TS23.401 Release 8 836 https://portal.3gpp.org/desktopmodules/specifications/ 837 specificationdetails.aspx?specificationid=849, January 838 2015. 840 [GTPv1-3GPP] 841 "General Packet Radio System (GPRS) Tunnelling Protocol 842 User Plane (GTPv1-U)", TS.29.281 843 https://portal.3gpp.org/desktopmodules/Specifications/ 844 SpecificationDetails.aspx?specificationId=1699, January 845 2015. 847 [GTPv2-3GPP] 848 "3GPP Evolved Packet System (EPS); Evolved General Packet 849 Radio Service (GPRS) Tunnelling Protocol for Control plane 850 (GTPv2-C); Stage 3", TS.29.274 851 https://portal.3gpp.org/desktopmodules/Specifications/ 852 SpecificationDetails.aspx?specificationId=1692, January 853 2015. 855 [I-D.farinacci-lisp-ecdsa-auth] 856 Farinacci, D. and E. Nordmark, "LISP Control-Plane ECDSA 857 Authentication and Authorization", draft-farinacci-lisp- 858 ecdsa-auth-03 (work in progress), September 2018. 860 [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-anonymity] 861 Farinacci, D., Pillay-Esnault, P., and W. Haddad, "LISP 862 EID Anonymity", draft-ietf-lisp-eid-anonymity-09 (work in 863 progress), October 2020. 865 [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-mobility] 866 Portoles-Comeras, M., Ashtaputre, V., Moreno, V., Maino, 867 F., and D. Farinacci, "LISP L2/L3 EID Mobility Using a 868 Unified Control Plane", draft-ietf-lisp-eid-mobility-07 869 (work in progress), January 2021. 871 [I-D.ietf-lisp-introduction] 872 Cabellos-Aparicio, A. and D. Saucez, "An Architectural 873 Introduction to the Locator/ID Separation Protocol 874 (LISP)", draft-ietf-lisp-introduction-13 (work in 875 progress), April 2015. 877 [I-D.ietf-lisp-mn] 878 Farinacci, D., Lewis, D., Meyer, D., and C. White, "LISP 879 Mobile Node", draft-ietf-lisp-mn-08 (work in progress), 880 August 2020. 882 [I-D.ietf-lisp-predictive-rlocs] 883 Farinacci, D. and P. Pillay-Esnault, "LISP Predictive 884 RLOCs", draft-ietf-lisp-predictive-rlocs-07 (work in 885 progress), November 2020. 887 [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis] 888 Farinacci, D., Fuller, V., Meyer, D., Lewis, D., and A. 889 Cabellos-Aparicio, "The Locator/ID Separation Protocol 890 (LISP)", draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-36 (work in progress), 891 November 2020. 893 [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis] 894 Farinacci, D., Maino, F., Fuller, V., and A. Cabellos- 895 Aparicio, "Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) Control- 896 Plane", draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis-30 (work in progress), 897 November 2020. 899 [I-D.ietf-lisp-sec] 900 Maino, F., Ermagan, V., Cabellos-Aparicio, A., and D. 901 Saucez, "LISP-Security (LISP-SEC)", draft-ietf-lisp-sec-22 902 (work in progress), January 2021. 904 [I-D.ietf-lisp-signal-free-multicast] 905 Moreno, V. and D. Farinacci, "Signal-Free LISP Multicast", 906 draft-ietf-lisp-signal-free-multicast-09 (work in 907 progress), March 2018. 909 [I-D.ietf-lisp-te] 910 Farinacci, D., Kowal, M., and P. Lahiri, "LISP Traffic 911 Engineering Use-Cases", draft-ietf-lisp-te-07 (work in 912 progress), October 2020. 914 [ITU-IMT2020] 915 "Focus Group on IMT-2020", 916 https://www.itu.int/dms_pubrec/itu-r/rec/m/R-REC- 917 M.687-2-199702-I!!PDF-E.pdf. 919 [LTE401-3GPP] 920 "General Packet Radio Service (GPRS) enhancements for 921 Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access Network 922 (E-UTRAN) access", TS.23.401 923 https://portal.3gpp.org/desktopmodules/Specifications/ 924 SpecificationDetails.aspx?specificationId=849, January 925 2015. 927 [LTE402-3GPP] 928 "Architecture enhancements for non-3GPP accesses", 929 TS.23.402 930 https://portal.3gpp.org/desktopmodules/Specifications/ 931 SpecificationDetails.aspx?specificationId=850, January 932 2015. 934 [mMTC] "NGMN KPIs and Deployment Scenarios for Consideration for 935 IMT2020", https://www.ngmn.org/uploads/media/151204_NGMN_ 936 KPIs_and_Deployment_Scenarios_for_Consideration_for_IMT_20 937 20_-_LS_Annex_V1_approved.pdf, December 2015. 939 [NGMN] "5G End-to-End Architecture Framework", NGMN 940 https://www.ngmn.org/uploads/ 941 media/201117-NGMN_E2EArchFramework_v4.31.pdf, November 942 2020. 944 [PROC5G-3GPP] 945 "Procedures for the 5G System", TS.23.502 946 https://portal.3gpp.org/desktopmodules/Specifications/ 947 SpecificationDetails.aspx?specificationId=3145, December 948 2016. 950 [X2-3GPP] "Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access Network 951 (E-UTRAN); X2 Application Protocol (X2AP)", TS.36.423 952 https://portal.3gpp.org/desktopmodules/Specifications/ 953 SpecificationDetails.aspx?specificationId=2452, June 2017. 955 Appendix A. Acknowledgments 957 The authors would like to thank Gerry Foster and Peter Ashwood Smith 958 for their expertise with 3GPP mobile networks and for their early 959 review and contributions. The authors would also like to thank Fabio 960 Maino, Malcolm Smith, and Marc Portoles for their expertise in both 961 5G and LISP as well as for their early review comments. 963 The authors would like to give a special thank you to Ryosuke 964 Kurebayashi from NTT Docomo and Kalyani Bogineni from Verizon for 965 their operational and practical commentary. 967 Appendix B. Document Change Log 969 B.1. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-mobile-network-11 971 o Posted March 2021. 973 o Changes to reflect editorial comments from Dirk von-Hugo. 975 o Updated ITU and 5G references (manually). 977 B.2. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-mobile-network-10 979 o Posted March 2021. 981 o Update references and document timer. 983 B.3. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-mobile-network-09 985 o Posted September 2020. 987 o Update references and document timer. 989 B.4. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-mobile-network-08 991 o Posted March 2020. 993 o Change author affliations. 995 B.5. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-mobile-network-07 997 o Posted March 2020. 999 o Update references and document timer. 1001 B.6. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-mobile-network-06 1003 o Posted September 2019. 1005 o Update references and document timer. 1007 B.7. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-mobile-network-05 1009 o Posted March 2019. 1011 o Update references and document timer. 1013 B.8. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-mobile-network-04 1015 o Posted September 2018. 1017 o Update document timer. 1019 B.9. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-mobile-network-03 1021 o Posted March 2018. 1023 o Make the spec more 5G user-friendly. That is, the design has 1024 always worked for either 4G or 5G but we make it more clear about 1025 5G by using some basic 5G node terminlogy. 1027 o Add a section how LISP can work on the N3, N6, and N9 5G spec 1028 interfaces. 1030 o Describe how LISP-TE can allow BP-UPF offload functionality. 1032 B.10. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-mobile-network-02 1034 o Posted mid September 2017. 1036 o Editorial fixes from draft -01. 1038 B.11. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-mobile-network-01 1040 o Posted September 2017. 1042 o Explain each EID case illustrated in the "Mobile Network with EID/ 1043 RLOC Assignment" diagram. 1045 o Make a reference to mMTC as a 3GPP use-case for 5G. 1047 o Add to the requirements section how mobile operators believe that 1048 using Locator/ID separation mechanisms provide for more efficient 1049 mobile netwowks. 1051 o Indicate that L2-overlays is not recommended by this specification 1052 as the LISP mobile network architeture but how operators may want 1053 to deploy a layer-2 overlay service. 1055 B.12. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-mobile-network-00 1057 o Initial draft posted August 2017. 1059 Authors' Addresses 1061 Dino Farinacci 1062 lispers.net 1063 San Jose, CA 1064 USA 1066 Email: farinacci@gmail.com 1068 Padma Pillay-Esnault 1069 Independent 1070 Santa Clara, CA 1071 USA 1073 Email: padma.ietf@gmail.com 1075 Uma Chunduri 1076 Futurewei Technologies 1077 Santa Clara, CA 1078 USA 1080 Email: umac.ietf@gmail.com