idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-lisp-mn-04.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 11 instances of lines with non-RFC6890-compliant IPv4 addresses in the document. If these are example addresses, they should be changed. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (October 3, 2018) is 2025 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Experimental ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == Unused Reference: 'RFC5226' is defined on line 978, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Outdated reference: A later version (-38) exists of draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-23 == Outdated reference: A later version (-31) exists of draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis-17 ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 3344 (Obsoleted by RFC 5944) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 3775 (Obsoleted by RFC 6275) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 5226 (Obsoleted by RFC 8126) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 6834 (Obsoleted by RFC 9302) == Outdated reference: A later version (-19) exists of draft-ermagan-lisp-nat-traversal-15 Summary: 4 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 6 warnings (==), 1 comment (--).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 D. Lewis 5 Expires: April 6, 2019 cisco Systems 6 D. Meyer 7 1-4-5.net 8 C. White 9 Logical Elegance, LLC. 10 October 3, 2018 12 LISP Mobile Node 13 draft-ietf-lisp-mn-04 15 Abstract 17 This document describes how a lightweight version of LISP's ITR/ETR 18 functionality can be used to provide seamless mobility to a mobile 19 node. The LISP Mobile Node design described in this document uses 20 standard LISP functionality to provide scalable mobility for LISP 21 mobile nodes. 23 Status of This Memo 25 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 26 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 28 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 29 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 30 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 31 Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 33 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 34 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 35 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 36 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 38 This Internet-Draft will expire on April 6, 2019. 40 Copyright Notice 42 Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 43 document authors. All rights reserved. 45 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 46 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 47 (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 48 publication of this document. Please review these documents 49 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 50 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 51 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 52 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 53 described in the Simplified BSD License. 55 Table of Contents 57 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 58 2. Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 59 3. Design Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 60 4. Design Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 61 4.1. User Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 62 4.2. Network Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 63 5. LISP Mobile Node Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 64 5.1. Addressing Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 65 5.2. Control Plane Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 66 5.3. Data Plane Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 67 6. Updating Remote Caches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 68 7. Protocol Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 69 7.1. LISP Mobile Node to a Stationary Node in a LISP Site . . 11 70 7.1.1. Handling Unidirectional Traffic . . . . . . . . . . . 11 71 7.2. LISP Mobile Node to a Non-LISP Stationary Node . . . . . 12 72 7.3. LISP Mobile Node to LISP Mobile Node . . . . . . . . . . 12 73 7.3.1. One Mobile Node is Roaming . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 74 7.4. Non-LISP Site to a LISP Mobile Node . . . . . . . . . . . 13 75 7.5. LISP Site to LISP Mobile Node . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 76 8. Multicast and Mobility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 77 9. RLOC Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 78 9.1. Mobile Node's RLOC is an EID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 79 10. LISP Mobile Nodes behind NAT Devices . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 80 11. Mobility Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 81 11.1. Provisioning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 82 11.2. Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 83 12. LISP Implementation in a Mobile Node . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 84 13. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 85 13.1. Proxy ETR Hijacking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 86 13.2. LISP Mobile Node using an EID as its RLOC . . . . . . . 20 87 14. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 88 15. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 89 15.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 90 15.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 91 Appendix A. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 92 Appendix B. Document Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 93 B.1. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-mn-04 . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 94 B.2. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-mn-03 . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 95 B.3. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-mn-02 . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 96 B.4. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-mn-01 . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 97 B.5. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-mn-00 . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 98 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 100 1. Introduction 102 The Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis] 103 specifies a design and mechanism for replacing the addresses 104 currently used in the Internet with two separate name spaces: 105 Endpoint Identifiers (EIDs), used within sites, and Routing Locators 106 (RLOCs), used by the transit networks that make up the Internet 107 infrastructure. To achieve this separation, LISP defines protocol 108 mechanisms for mapping from EIDs to RLOCs. The mapping 109 infrastructure is comprised of LISP Map-Servers and Map-Resolvers 110 [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis] and is tied together with LISP+ALT 111 [RFC6836]. 113 This document specifies the behavior of a new LISP network element: 114 the LISP Mobile Node. The LISP Mobile Node implements a subset of 115 the standard Ingress Tunnel Router and Egress Tunnel Router 116 functionality [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis]. Design goals for the LISP 117 mobility design include: 119 o Allowing TCP connections to stay alive while roaming. 121 o Allowing the mobile node to communicate with other mobile nodes 122 while either or both are roaming. 124 o Allowing the mobile node to multi-home (i.e., use multiple 125 interfaces concurrently). 127 o Allowing the mobile node to be a server. That is, any mobile node 128 or stationary node can find and connect to a mobile node as a 129 server. 131 o Providing shortest path bidirectional data paths between a mobile 132 node and any other stationary or mobile node. 134 o Not requiring fine-grained routes in the core network to support 135 mobility. 137 o Not requiring a home-agent, foreign agent or other data plane 138 network elements to support mobility. Note since the LISP mobile 139 node design does not require these data plane elements, there is 140 no triangle routing of data packets as is found in Mobile IP 141 [RFC3344]. 143 o Not requiring new IPv6 extension headers to avoid triangle routing 144 [RFC3775]. 146 The LISP Mobile Node design requires the use of the LISP Map-Server 147 [RFC6836] and LISP Interworking [RFC6832] technology to allow a LISP 148 mobile node to roam and to be discovered in an efficient and scalable 149 manner. The use of Map-Server technology is discussed further in 150 Section 5. 152 The protocol mechanisms described in this document apply those cases 153 in which a node's IP address changes frequently. For example, when a 154 mobile node roams, it is typically assigned a new IP address. 155 Similarly, a broadband subscriber may have its address change 156 frequently; as such, a broadband subscriber can use the LISP Mobile 157 Node mechanisms defined in this specification. 159 The remainder of this document is organized as follows: Section 2 160 defines the terms used in this document. Section 3 provides a 161 overview of salient features of the LISP Mobile Node design, and 162 Section 4 describes design requirements for a LISP Mobile Node. 163 Section 5 provides the detail of LISP Mobile Node data and control 164 plane operation, and Section 6 discusses options for updating remote 165 caches in the presence of unidirectional traffic flows. Section 7 166 specifies how the LISP Mobile Node protocol operates. Section 8 167 specifies multicast operation for LISP mobile nodes. Section 9 and 168 Section 12 outline other considerations for the LISP-MN design and 169 implementation. Finally, Section 13 outlines the security 170 considerations for a LISP mobile node. 172 2. Definition of Terms 174 This section defines the terms used in this document. 176 Stationary Node (SN): A non-mobile node who's IP address changes 177 infrequently. That is, its IP address does not change as 178 frequently as a fast roaming mobile hand-set or a broadband 179 connection and therefore the EID to RLOC mapping is relatively 180 static. 182 Endpoint ID (EID): This is the traditional LISP EID 183 [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis], and is the address that a LISP mobile 184 node uses as its address for transport connections. A LISP mobile 185 node never changes its EID, which is typically a /32 or /128 186 prefix and is assigned to a loopback interface. Note that the 187 mobile node can have multiple EIDs, and these EIDs can be from 188 different address families. 190 Routing Locator (RLOC): This is the traditional LISP RLOC, and is in 191 general a routable address that can be used to reach a mobile 192 node. Note that there are cases in which an mobile node may 193 receive an address that it thinks is an RLOC (perhaps via DHCP) 194 which is either an EID or an RFC 1918 address [RFC1918]. This 195 could happen if, for example, if the mobile node roams into a LISP 196 domain or a domain behind a Network Address Translator (NAT)) See 197 Section 10 for more details. 199 Ingress Tunnel Router (ITR): An ITR is a router that accepts an IP 200 packet with a single IP header (more precisely, an IP packet that 201 does not contain a LISP header). The router treats this "inner" 202 IP destination address as an EID and performs an EID-to-RLOC 203 mapping lookup. The router then prepends an "outer" IP header 204 with one of its globally routable RLOCs in the source address 205 field and the result of the mapping lookup in the destination 206 address field. Note that this destination RLOC may be an 207 intermediate, proxy device that has better knowledge of the EID- 208 to-RLOC mapping closer to the destination EID. In general, an ITR 209 receives IP packets from site end-systems on one side and sends 210 LISP-encapsulated IP packets toward the Internet on the other 211 side. A LISP mobile node, however, when acting as an ITR LISP 212 encapsulates all packet that it originates. 214 Egress Tunnel Router (ETR): An ETR is a router that accepts an IP 215 packet where the destination address in the "outer" IP header is 216 one of its own RLOCs. The router strips the "outer" header and 217 forwards the packet based on the next IP header found. In 218 general, an ETR receives LISP-encapsulated IP packets from the 219 Internet on one side and sends decapsulated IP packets to site 220 end-systems on the other side. A LISP mobile node, when acting as 221 an ETR, decapsulates packets that are then typically processed by 222 the mobile node. 224 Proxy Ingress Tunnel Router (PITR): PITRs are used to provide 225 interconnectivity between sites that use LISP EIDs and those that 226 do not. They act as a gateway between the Legacy Internet and the 227 LISP enabled Network. A given PITR advertises one or more highly 228 aggregated EID prefixes into the public Internet and acts as the 229 ITR for traffic received from the public Internet. Proxy Ingress 230 Tunnel Routers are described in [RFC6832]. 232 Proxy Egress Tunnel Router (PETR): An infrastructure element used to 233 decapsulate packets sent from mobile nodes to non-LISP sites. 234 Proxy Egress Tunnel Routers are described in [RFC6832]. 236 LISP Mobile Node (LISP-MN): A LISP capable fast roaming mobile hand- 237 set. 239 Map-cache: A data structure which contains an EID-prefix, its 240 associated RLOCs, and the associated policy. Map-caches are 241 typically found in ITRs and PITRs. 243 Negative Map-Reply: A Negative Map-Reply is a Map-Reply that 244 contains a coarsely aggregated non-LISP prefix. Negative Map- 245 Replies are typically generated by Map-Resolvers, and are used to 246 inform an ITR (mobile or stationary) that a site is not a LISP 247 site. A LISP mobile node encapsulate packets to destinations 248 covered by the negative Map-Reply are encapsulated to a PETR. 250 Roaming Event: A Roaming Event occurs when there is a change in a 251 LISP mobile node's RLOC set. 253 3. Design Overview 255 The LISP-MN design described in this document uses the Map-Server/ 256 Map-Resolver service interface in conjunction with a light-weight 257 ITR/ETR implementation in the LISP-MN to provide scalable fast 258 mobility. The LISP-MN control-plane uses a Map-Server as an anchor 259 point, which provides control-plane scalability. In addition, the 260 LISP-MN data-plane takes advantage of shortest path routing and 261 therefore does not increase packet delivery latency. 263 4. Design Requirements 265 This section outlines the design requirements for a LISP-MN, and is 266 divided into User Requirements (Section 4.1) and Network Requirements 267 (Section 4.2). 269 4.1. User Requirements 271 This section describes the user-level functionality provided by a 272 LISP-MN. 274 Transport Connection Survivability: The LISP-MN design must allow a 275 LISP-MN to roam while keeping transport connections alive. 277 Simultaneous Roaming: The LISP-MN design must allow a LISP-MN to 278 talk to another LISP-MN while both are roaming. 280 Multihoming: The LISP-MN design must allow for simultaneous use of 281 multiple Internet connections by a LISP-MN. In addition, the 282 design must allow for the LISP mobile node to specify ingress 283 traffic engineering policies as documented in 284 [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis]. That is, the LISP-MN must be able to 285 specify both active/active and active/passive policies for ingress 286 traffic. 288 Shortest Path Data Plane: The LISP-MN design must allow for shortest 289 path bidirectional traffic between a LISP-MN and a stationary 290 node, and between a LISP-MN and another LISP-MN (i.e., without 291 triangle routing in the data path). This provides a low-latency 292 data path between the LISP-MN and the nodes that it is 293 communicating with. 295 4.2. Network Requirements 297 This section describes the network functionality that the LISP-MN 298 design provides to a LISP-MN. 300 Routing System Scalability: The LISP-MN design must not require 301 injection of fine-grained routes into the core network. 303 Mapping System Scalability: The LISP-MN design must not require 304 additional state in the mapping system. In particular, any 305 mapping state required to support LISP mobility must BE confined 306 to the LISP-MN's Map-Server and the ITRs which are talking to the 307 LISP-MN. 309 Component Reuse: The LISP-MN design must use existing LISP 310 infrastructure components. These include map server, map 311 resolver, and interworking infrastructure components. 313 Home Agent/Foreign Agent: The LISP-MN design must not require the 314 use of home-agent or foreign-agent infrastructure components 315 [RFC3344]. 317 Readdressing: The LISP-MN design must not require TCP connections to 318 be reset when the mobile node roams. In particular, since the IP 319 address associated with a transport connection will not change as 320 the mobile node roams, TCP connections will not reset. 322 5. LISP Mobile Node Operation 324 The LISP-MN design is built from three existing LISP components: A 325 lightweight LISP implementation that runs in an LISP-MN, and the 326 existing Map-Server [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis] and Interworking 327 [RFC6832] infrastructures. A LISP mobile node typically sends and 328 receives LISP encapsulated packets (exceptions include management 329 protocols such as DHCP). 331 The LISP-MN design makes a single mobile node look like a LISP site 332 as described in in [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis] by implementing ITR and 333 ETR functionality. Note that one subtle difference between standard 334 ITR behavior and LISP-MN is that the LISP-MN encapsulates all non- 335 local, non-LISP site destined outgoing packets to a PETR. 337 When a LISP-MN roams onto a new network, it receives a new RLOC. 338 Since the LISP-MN is the authoritative ETR for its EID-prefix, it 339 must Map-Register it's updated RLOC set. New sessions can be 340 established as soon as the registration process completes. Sessions 341 that are encapsulating to RLOCs that did not change during the 342 roaming event are not affected by the roaming event (or subsequent 343 mapping update). However, the LISP-MN must update the ITRs and PITRs 344 that have cached a previous mapping. It does this using the 345 techniques described in Section 6. 347 5.1. Addressing Architecture 349 A LISP-MN is typically provisioned with one or more EIDs that it uses 350 for all transport connections. LISP-MN EIDs are provisioned from 351 blocks reserved from mobile nodes much the way mobile phone numbers 352 are provisioned today (such that they do not overlap with the EID 353 space of any enterprise). These EIDs can be either IPv4 or IPv6 354 addresses. For example, one EID might be for a public network while 355 another might be for a private network; in this case the "public" EID 356 will be associated with RLOCs from the public Internet, while the 357 "private" EID will be associated with private RLOCs. It is 358 anticipated that these EIDs will change infrequently if at all, since 359 the assignment of a LISP-MN's EID is envisioned to be a subscription 360 time event. The key point here is that the relatively fixed EID 361 allows the LISP-MN's transport connections to survive roaming events. 362 In particular, while the LISP-MN's EIDs are fixed during roaming 363 events, the LISP-MN's RLOC set will change. The RLOC set may be 364 comprised of both IPv4 or IPv6 addresses. 366 A LISP-MN is also provisioned with the address of a Map-Server and a 367 corresponding authentication key. Like the LISP-MN's EID, both the 368 Map-Server address and authentication key change very infrequently 369 (again, these are anticipated to be subscription time parameters). 370 Since the LISP LISP-MN's Map-Server is configured to advertise an 371 aggregated EID-prefix that covers the LISP-MN's EID, changes to the 372 LISP-MN's mapping are not propagated further into the mapping system 373 [RFC6836]. It is this property that provides for scalable fast 374 mobility. 376 A LISP-MN is also be provisioned with the address of a Map-Resolver. 377 A LISP-MN may also learn the address of a Map-Resolver though a 378 dynamic protocol such as DHCP [RFC2131]. 380 Finally, note that if, for some reason, a LISP-MN's EID is re- 381 provisioned, the LISP-MN's Map-Server address may also have to change 382 in order to keep LISP-MN's EID within the aggregate advertised by the 383 Map-Server (this is discussed in greater detail in Section 5.2). 385 5.2. Control Plane Operation 387 A roaming event occurs when the LISP-MN receives a new RLOC. Because 388 the new address is a new RLOC from the LISP-MN's perspective, it must 389 update its EID-to-RLOC mapping with its Map-Server; it does this 390 using the Map-Register mechanism described in 391 [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis]. 393 A LISP-MN may want the Map-Server to respond on its behalf for a 394 variety of reasons, including minimizing control traffic on radio 395 links and minimizing battery utilization. A LISP-MN may instruct its 396 Map-Server to proxy respond to Map-Requests by setting the Proxy-Map- 397 Reply bit in the Map-Register message [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis]. In 398 this case the Map-Server responds with a non-authoritative Map-Reply 399 so that an ITR or PITR will know that the ETR didn't directly 400 respond. A Map-Server will proxy reply only for "registered" EID- 401 prefixes using the registered EID-prefix mask-length in proxy 402 replies. 404 Because the LISP-MN's Map-Server is pre-configured to advertise an 405 aggregate covering the LISP-MN's EID prefix, the database mapping 406 change associated with the roaming event is confined to the Map- 407 Server and those ITRs and PITRs that may have cached the previous 408 mapping. 410 5.3. Data Plane Operation 412 A key feature of LISP-MN control-plane design is the use of the Map- 413 Server as an anchor point; this allows control of the scope to which 414 changes to the mapping system must be propagated during roaming 415 events. 417 On the other hand, the LISP-MN data-plane design does not rely on 418 additional LISP infrastructure for communication between LISP nodes 419 (mobile or stationary). Data packets take the shortest path to and 420 from the LISP-MN to other LISP nodes; as noted above, low latency 421 shortest paths in the data-plane is an important goal for the LISP-MN 422 design (and is important for delay-sensitive applications like gaming 423 and voice-over-IP). Note that a LISP-MN will need additional 424 interworking infrastructure when talking to non-LISP sites [RFC6832]; 425 this is consistent with the design of any host at a LISP site which 426 talks to a host at a non-LISP site. 428 In general, the LISP-MN data-plane operates in the same manner as the 429 standard LISP data-plane with one exception: packets generated by a 430 LISP-MN which are not destined for the mapping system (i.e., those 431 sent to destination UDP port 4342) or the local network are LISP 432 encapsulated. Because data packets are always encapsulated to a 433 RLOC, packets travel on the shortest path from LISP-MN to another 434 LISP stationary or LISP-MN. When the LISP mobile node is sending 435 packets to a stationary or LISP-MN in a non-LISP site, it sends LISP- 436 encapsulated packets to a PETR which then decapsulates the packet and 437 forwards it to its destination. 439 6. Updating Remote Caches 441 A LISP-MN has five mechanisms it can use to cause the mappings cached 442 in remote ITRs and PITRs to be refreshed: 444 Map Versioning: If Map Versioning [RFC6834] is used, an ETR can 445 detect if an ITR is using the most recent database mapping. In 446 particular, when mobile node's ETR decapsulates a packet and 447 detects the Destination Map-Version Number is less than the 448 current version for its mapping, in invokes the SMR procedure 449 described in [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis]. In general, SMRs are 450 used to fix the out of sync mapping while Map-Versioning is used 451 to detect they are out of sync. [RFC6834] provides additional 452 details of the Map Versioning process. 454 Data Driven SMRs: An ETR may elect to send SMRs to those sites it 455 has been receiving encapsulated packets from. This will occur 456 when an ITR is sending to an old RLOC (for which there is one-to- 457 one mapping between EID-to-RLOC) and the ETR may not have had a 458 chance to send an SMR the ITR. 460 Setting Small TTL on Map Replies: The ETR (or Map Server) may set a 461 small Time to Live (TTL) on its mappings when responding to Map 462 Requests. The TTL value should be chosen such that changes in 463 mappings can be detected while minimizing control traffic. In 464 this case the ITR is a SN and the ETR is the MN. 466 Piggybacking Mapping Data: If an ITR and ETR are co-located, an ITR 467 may elect to send Map-Requests with piggybacked mapping data to 468 those sites in its map cache or to which it has recently 469 encapsulated data in order to inform the remote ITRs and PITRs of 470 the change. 472 Temporary PITR Caching: The ETR can keep a cache of PITRs that have 473 sent Map-Requests to it. The cache contains the RLOCs of the 474 PITRs so later when the locator-set of a LISP-MN changes, SMR 475 messages can be sent to all RLOCs in the PITR cache. This is an 476 example of a control-plane driven SMR procedure. 478 7. Protocol Operation 480 There are five distinct connectivity cases considered by the LISP-MN 481 design. The five mobility cases are: 483 LISP Mobile Node to a Stationary Node in a LISP Site. 485 LISP Mobile Node to a Non-LISP Site. 487 LISP Mobile Node to a LISP Mobile Node. 489 Non-LISP Site to a LISP Mobile Node. 491 LISP Site to a LISP Mobile Node. 493 The remainder of this section covers these cases in detail. 495 7.1. LISP Mobile Node to a Stationary Node in a LISP Site 497 After a roaming event, a LISP-MN must immediately register its new 498 EID-to-RLOC mapping with its configured Map-Server(s). This allows 499 LISP sites sending Map-Requests to the LISP-MN to receive the current 500 mapping. In addition, remote ITRs and PITRs may have cached mappings 501 that are no longer valid. These ITRs and PITRs must be informed that 502 the mapping has changed. See Section 6 for a discussion of methods 503 for updating remote caches. 505 7.1.1. Handling Unidirectional Traffic 507 A problem may arise when traffic is flowing unidirectionally between 508 LISP sites. This can arise in communication flows between PITRs and 509 LISP sites or when a site's ITRs and ETRs are not co-located. In 510 these cases, data-plane techniques such as Map-Versioning and Data- 511 Driven SMRs can't be used to update the remote caches. 513 For example, consider the unidirectional packet flow case depicted in 514 Figure 1. In this case X is a non-LISP enabled SN (i.e., connected 515 to the Internet) and Y is a LISP MN. Data traffic from X to Y will 516 flow through a PITR. When Y changes its mapping (for example, during 517 a mobility event), the PITR must update its mapping for Y. However, 518 since data traffic from Y to X is unidirectional and does not flow 519 though the PITR, it can not rely data traffic from Y to X to signal a 520 mapping change at Y. In this case, the Y must use one or more of the 521 techniques described in Section 6 to update the PITR's cache. Note 522 that if Y has only one RLOC, then the PITR has to know when to send a 523 Map-Request based on its existing state; thus it can only rely on the 524 TTL on the existing mapping. 526 +-------------------------------------------+ 527 | | 528 | | DP 529 v DP DP MQ | 530 X -----> Internet -----> PITR ------------> Y 531 ^ LEDP | 532 | | 533 +-----------------+ 534 MR 536 DP: Data Packet 537 LEDP: LISP Encapsulated Data Packet 538 MQ: Map Request 539 MR: Map Reply 541 Figure 1: Unidirectional Packet Flow 543 7.2. LISP Mobile Node to a Non-LISP Stationary Node 545 LISP-MNs use the LISP Interworking infrastructure (specifically a 546 PETR) to reach non-LISP sites. In general, the PETR will be co- 547 located with the LISP-MN's Map-Server. This ensures that the LISP 548 packets being decapsulated are from sources that have Map-Registered 549 to the Map-Server. Note that when a LISP-MN roams it continues to 550 uses its configured PETR and Map-Server which can have the effect of 551 adding stretch to packets sent from a LISP-MN to a non-LISP 552 destination. 554 7.3. LISP Mobile Node to LISP Mobile Node 556 LISP-MN to LISP-MN communication is an instance of LISP-to-LISP 557 communication with three sub-cases: 559 o Both LISP-MNs are stationary (Section 7.1). 561 o Only one LISP-MN is roaming (Section 7.3.1). 563 o Both LISP-MNs are roaming. The case is analogous to the case 564 described in Section 7.3.1. 566 7.3.1. One Mobile Node is Roaming 568 In this case, the roaming LISP-MN can find the stationary LISP-MN by 569 sending Map-Request for its EID-prefix. After receiving a Map-Reply, 570 the roaming LISP-MN can encapsulate data packets directly to the non- 571 roaming LISP-MN node. 573 The roaming LISP-MN, on the other hand, must update its Map-Server 574 with the new mapping data as described in Section 7.1. It should 575 also use the cache management techniques described in Section 6 to 576 provide for timely updates of remote caches. Once the roaming LISP- 577 MN has updated its Map-Server, the non-roaming LISP-MN can retrieve 578 the new mapping data (if it hasn't already received an updated 579 mapping via one of the mechanisms described in Section 6) and the 580 stationary LISP-MN can encapsulate data directly to the roaming LISP- 581 MN. 583 7.4. Non-LISP Site to a LISP Mobile Node 585 When a stationary ITR is talking to a non-LISP site, it may forward 586 packets natively (unencapsulated) to the non-LISP site. This will 587 occur when the ITR has received a negative Map Reply for a prefix 588 covering the non-LISP site's address with the Natively-Forward action 589 bit set [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis]. As a result, packets may be 590 natively forwarded to non-LISP sites by an ITR (the return path will 591 through a PITR, however, since the packet flow will be non-LISP site 592 to LISP site). 594 A LISP-MN behaves differently when talking to non-LISP sites. In 595 particular, the LISP-MN always encapsulates packets to a PETR. The 596 PETR then decapsulates the packet and forwards it natively to its 597 destination. As in the stationary case, packets from the non-LISP 598 site host return to the LISP-MN through a PITR. Since traffic 599 forwarded through a PITR is unidirectional, a LISP-MN should use the 600 cache management techniques described in Section 7.1.1. 602 7.5. LISP Site to LISP Mobile Node 604 When a LISP-MN roams onto a new network, it needs to update the 605 caches in any ITRs that might have stale mappings. This is analogous 606 to the case in that a stationary LISP site is renumbered; in that 607 case ITRs that have cached the old mapping must be updated. This is 608 done using the techniques described in Section 6. 610 When a LISP router in a stationary site is performing both ITR and 611 ETR functions, a LISP-MN can update the stationary site's map-caches 612 using techniques described in Section 6. However, when the LISP 613 router in the stationary site is performing is only ITR 614 functionality, these techniques can not be used because the ITR is 615 not receiving data traffic from the LISP-MN. In this case, the LISP- 616 MN should use the technique described in Section 7.1.1. In 617 particular, a LISP-MN should set the TTL on the mappings in its Map- 618 Replies to be in 1-2 minute range. 620 8. Multicast and Mobility 622 Since a LISP-MN performs both ITR and ETR functionality, it should 623 also perform a lightweight version of multicast ITR/ETR functionality 624 described in [RFC6831]. When a LISP-MN originates a multicast 625 packet, it will encapsulate the packet with a multicast header, where 626 the source address in the outer header is one of it's RLOC addresses 627 and the destination address in the outer header is the group address 628 from the inner header. The interfaces in which the encapsulated 629 packet is sent on is discussed below. 631 To not require PIM functionality in the LISP-MN as documented in 632 [RFC6831], the LISP-MN resorts to using encapsulated IGMP for joining 633 groups and for determining which interfaces are used for packet 634 origination. When a LISP-MN joins a group, it obtains the map-cache 635 entry for the (S-EID,G) it is joining. It then builds a IGMP report 636 encoding (S-EID,G) and then LISP encapsulates it with UDP port 4341. 637 It selects an RLOC from the map-cache entry to send the encapsulated 638 IGMP Report. 640 When other LISP-MNs are joining an (S-EID,G) entry where the S-EID is 641 for a LISP-MN, the encapsulated IGMP Report will be received by the 642 LISP-MN multicast source. The LISP-MN multicast source will remember 643 the interfaces the encapsulated IGMP Report is received on and build 644 an outgoing interface list for it's own (S-EID,G) entry. If the list 645 is greater than one, then the LISP-MN is doing replication on the 646 source-based tree for which it is the root. 648 When other LISP routers are joining (S-EID,G), they are instructed to 649 send PIM encapsulated Join-Prune messages. However, to keep the 650 LISP-MN as simple as possible, the LISP-MN will not be able to 651 process encapsulated PIM Join-Prune messages. Because the map-cache 652 entry will have a MN-bit indicating the entry is for a LISP-MN, the 653 LISP router will send IGMP encapsulated IGMP Reports instead. 655 When the LISP-MN is sending a multicast packet, it can operate in two 656 modes, multicast-origination-mode or unicast-origination-mode. When 657 in multicast-origination-mode, the LISP-MN multicast-source can 658 encapsulate a multicast packet in another multicast packet, as 659 described above. When in unicast-origination-mode, the LISP-MN 660 multicast source encapsulates the multicast packet into a unicast 661 packet and sends a packet to each encapsulated IGMP Report sender. 663 These modes are provided depending on whether or not the mobile 664 node's network it is currently connected can support IP multicast. 666 9. RLOC Considerations 668 This section documents cases where the expected operation of the 669 LISP-MN design may require special treatment. 671 9.1. Mobile Node's RLOC is an EID 673 When a LISP-MN roams into a LISP site, the "RLOC" it is assigned may 674 be an address taken from the site's EID-prefix. In this case, the 675 LISP-MN will Map-Register a mapping from its statically assigned EID 676 to the "RLOC" it received from the site. This scenario creates 677 another level of indirection: the mapping from the LISP-MN's EID to a 678 site assigned EID. The mapping from the LISP-MN's EID to the site 679 assigned EID allow the LISP-MN to be reached by sending packets using 680 the mapping for the EID; packets are delivered to site's EIDs use the 681 same LISP infrastructure that all LISP hosts use to reach the site. 683 A packet egressing a LISP site destined for a LISP-MN that resides in 684 a LISP site will have three headers: an inner header that is built by 685 the host and is used by transport connections, a middle header that 686 is built by the site's ITR and is used by the destination's ETR to 687 find the current topological location of the LISP-MN, and an outer 688 header (also built by the site's ITR) that is used to forward packets 689 between the sites. 691 Consider a site A with EID-prefix 1.0.0.0/8 and RLOC A and a site B 692 with EID-prefix 2.0.0.0/8 and RLOC B. Suppose that a host S in site 693 A with EID 1.0.0.1 wants to talk to a LISP LISP-MN MN that has 694 registered a mapping from EID 240.0.0.1 to "RLOC" 2.0.0.2 (where 695 2.0.0.2 allocated from site B's EID prefix, 2.0.0.0/8 in this case). 696 This situation is depicted in Figure 2. 698 EID-prefix 1.0.0.0/8 EID-prefix 2.0.0.0/8 699 S has EID 1.0.0.1 MN has EID 240.0.0.1 700 MN has RLOC 2.0.0.2 701 -------------- -------------- 702 / \ --------------- / \ 703 | ITR-A' | / \ | ETR-B' | 704 | | | | | | 705 | S | | Internet | | MN | 706 | \ | | | | ^ | 707 | \ | | | | / | 708 | --> ITR-A | \ / | ETR-B ---- | 709 \ / --------------- \ / 710 -------------- -------------- 711 | | | ^ ^ ^ 712 | | | | | | 713 | | | outer-header: A -> B | | | 714 | | +---------------------------------------+ | | 715 | | RLOCs used to find which site MN resides | | 716 | | | | 717 | | | | 718 | | middle-header: A -> 2.0.0.2 | | 719 | +------------------------------------------------+ | 720 | RLOCs used to find topological location of MN | 721 | | 722 | | 723 | inner-header: 1.0.0.1 -> 240.0.0.1 | 724 +-----------------------------------------------------------+ 725 EIDs used for TCP connection 727 Figure 2: Mobile Node Roaming into a LISP Site 729 In this case, the inner header is used for transport connections, the 730 middle header is used to find topological location of the LISP-MN 731 (the LISP-MN Map-Registers the mapping 240.0.0.1 -> 2.0.0.2 when it 732 roams into site B), and the outer header is used to move packets 733 between sites (A and B in Figure 2). 735 In summary, when a LISP-MN roams into a LISP site and receives a new 736 address (e.g., via DHCP) that is part of the site's EID space, the 737 following sequence occurs: 739 1. The LISP-MN in the LISP site (call it Inside) registers its new 740 RLOC (which is actually part of the sites EID prefix) to its map- 741 server. Call its permanent EID E and the EID it DHCPs D. So it 742 registers a mapping that looks like E->D. 744 2. The MN which is outside (call it Outside) sends a map request for 745 inside's EID (E) and receives D (plus its policy). Outside 746 realizes that D is an EID and sends a map request for D. This 747 will return the site's RLOCs (by its ETR). Call this R. 749 3. Outside then double encapsulates the outbound packet with the 750 inner destination being D and the outer destination being R. 752 4. The packet then finds its way to R, which strips the outer header 753 and the packet is routed to D in the domain to Inside. Inside 754 decapsulates the packet to serve the inner header to the 755 application. 757 Note that both D and R could be returned to Inside in one query, so 758 as not to incur the additional RTT. 760 10. LISP Mobile Nodes behind NAT Devices 762 When a LISP-MN resides behind a NAT device, it will be allocated a 763 private RLOC address. The private RLOC address is used as the source 764 address in the outer header for LISP encapsulated packets. The NAT 765 device will translate the source address and source UDP port in the 766 LISP encapsulated packet. The NAT device will keep this translated 767 state so when packets arrive from the public side of the NAT, they 768 can be translated back to the stored state. For remote LISP ITRs, 769 PITRs, and RTRs, will need to know the translated RLOC address and 770 port so they can encapsulate to the LISP-MN traversing the NAT 771 device. 773 Procedures a LISP-MN should follow when it resides behind a NAT, will 774 follow the LISP xTRs procedures in specification 775 [I-D.ermagan-lisp-nat-traversal]. 777 11. Mobility Example 779 This section provides an example of how the LISP-MN is integrated 780 into the base LISP Design [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis]. 782 11.1. Provisioning 784 The LISP-MN needs to be configured with the following information: 786 An EID, assigned to its loopback address 788 A key for map-registration 790 An IP address of a Map-Resolver (this could be learned 791 dynamically) 792 An IP address of its Map-Server and Proxy ETR 794 11.2. Registration 796 After a LISP roams to a new network, it must immediately register its 797 new mapping this new RLOC (and associated priority/weight data) with 798 its Map-Server. 800 The LISP-MN may chose to set the 'proxy' bit in the map-register to 801 indicate that it desires its Map-Server to answer map-requests on its 802 behalf. 804 12. LISP Implementation in a Mobile Node 806 This section will describe a possible approach for developing a 807 lightweight LISP-MN implementation. A LISP-MN will implement a LISP 808 sub-layer inside of the IP layer of the protocol stack. The sub- 809 layer resides between the IP layer and the link-layer. 811 For outgoing unicast packets, once the header that contains EIDs is 812 built and right before an outgoing interface is chosen, a LISP header 813 is prepended to the outgoing packet. The source address is set to 814 the local RLOC address (obtained by DHCP perhaps) and the destination 815 address is set to the RLOC associated with the destination EID from 816 the IP layer. To obtain the RLOC for the EID, the LISP-MN maintains 817 a map-cache for destination sites or destination LISP-MNs to which it 818 is currently talking. The map-cache lookup is performed by doing a 819 longest match lookup on the destination address the IP layer put in 820 the first IP header. Once the new header is prepended, a route table 821 lookup is performed to find the interface in which to send the packet 822 or the default router interface is used to send the packet. 824 When the map-cache does not exist for a destination, the mobile node 825 may queue or drop the packet while it sends a Map-Request to it's 826 configured Map-Resolver. Once a Map-Reply is returned, the map-cache 827 entry stores the EID-to-RLOC state. If the RLOC state is empty in 828 the Map-Reply, the Map-Reply is known as a Negative Map-Reply in 829 which case the map-cache entry is created with a single RLOC, the 830 RLOC of the configured Map-Server for the LISP-MN. The Map-Server 831 that serves the LISP-MN also acts as a Proxy ETR (PETR) so packets 832 can get delivered to hosts in non-LISP sites to which the LISP-MN is 833 sending. 835 For incoming unicast packets, the LISP sub-layer simply decapsulates 836 the packets and delivers to the IP layer. The loc-reach-bits can be 837 processed by the LISP sub-layer. Specifically, the source EID from 838 the packet is looked up in the map-cache and if the loc-reach-bits 839 settings have changed, store the loc-reach-bits from the packet and 840 note which RLOCs for the map-cache entry should not be used. 842 In terms of the LISP-MN detecting which RLOCs from each stored map- 843 cache entry is reachable, it can use any of the Locator Reachability 844 Algorithms from [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis]. 846 A background task that runs off a timer should be run so the LISP-MN 847 can send periodic Map-Register messages to the Map-Server. The Map- 848 Register message should also be triggered when the LISP-MN detects a 849 change in IP address for a given interface. The LISP-MN should send 850 Map-Registers to the same Map-Register out each of it's operational 851 links. This will provide for robustness on radio links with which 852 the mobile node is associated. 854 A LISP-MN receives a Map-Request when it has Map-Registered to a Map- 855 Server with the Proxy-bit set to 0. This means that the LISP-MN 856 wishes to send authoritative Map-Replies for Map-Requests that are 857 targeted at the LISP-MN. If the Proxy-bit is set when the LISP-MN 858 registers, then the Map-Server will send non-authoritative Map- 859 Replies on behalf of the LISP-MN. In this case, the Map-Server never 860 encapsulates Map-Requests to the LISP-MN. The LISP-MN can save 861 resources by not receiving Map-Requests (note that the LISP-MN will 862 receive SMRs which have the same format as Map-Requests). 864 To summarize, a LISP sub-layer should implement: 866 o Encapsulating and decapsulating data packets. 868 o Sending and receiving of Map-Request control messages. 870 o Receiving and optionally sending Map-Replies. 872 o Sending Map-Register messages periodically. 874 The key point about the LISP sub-layer is that no other components in 875 the protocol stack need changing; just the insertion of this sub- 876 layer between the IP layer and the interface layer-2 encapsulation/ 877 decapsulation layer. 879 13. Security Considerations 881 Security for the LISP-MN design builds upon the security fundamentals 882 found in LISP [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis] for data-plane security and 883 the LISP Map Server [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis] registration security. 884 Security issues unique to the LISP-MN design are considered below. 886 13.1. Proxy ETR Hijacking 888 The Proxy ETR (or PETR) that a LISP-MN uses as its destination for 889 non-LISP traffic must use the security association used by the 890 registration process outlined in Section 5.2 and explained in detail 891 in the LISP-MS specification [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis]. These 892 measures prevent third party injection of LISP encapsulated traffic 893 into a Proxy ETR. Importantly, a PETR must not decapsulate packets 894 from non-registered RLOCs. 896 13.2. LISP Mobile Node using an EID as its RLOC 898 For LISP packets to be sent to a LISP-MN which has an EID assigned to 899 it as an RLOC as described in Section 9.1), the LISP site must allow 900 for incoming and outgoing LISP data packets. Firewalls and stateless 901 packet filtering mechanisms must be configured to allow UDP port 4341 902 and UDP port 4342 packets. 904 14. IANA Considerations 906 This document is requesting bit allocations in the Map-Request and 907 Map-Register messages. The registry is introduced in 908 [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis] and named "LISP Bit Flags". This document 909 is adding bits to the sub-registry "Map-Request Header Bits' and 910 "Map-Register Header Bits". A LISP mobile-node will set the m-bit to 911 1 when it sends Map-Request and Map-Register messages. 913 Sub-Registry: Map-Request Header Bits: 915 0 1 2 3 916 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 917 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 918 |Type=1 |A|M|P|S|p|s|m|R| Rsvd |L|D| IRC | Record Count | 919 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 921 +-----------+---------------+--------------+-----------------+ 922 | Spec Name | IANA Name | Bit Position | Description | 923 +-----------+---------------+--------------+-----------------+ 924 | m | map-request-m | 10 | Mobile Node Bit | 925 +-----------+---------------+--------------+-----------------+ 927 LISP Map-Request Header Bits 929 Sub-Registry: Map-Register Header Bits: 931 0 1 2 3 932 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 933 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 934 |Type=3 |P|S|R| Reserved |E|T|a|m|M| Record Count | 935 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 937 +-----------+----------------+--------------+----------------------+ 938 | Spec Name | IANA Name | Bit Position | Description | 939 +-----------+----------------+--------------+----------------------+ 940 | m | map-register-m | 22 | LISP Mobile Node Bit | 941 +-----------+----------------+--------------+----------------------+ 943 LISP Map-Register Header Bits 945 15. References 947 15.1. Normative References 949 [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis] 950 Farinacci, D., Fuller, V., Meyer, D., Lewis, D., and A. 951 Cabellos-Aparicio, "The Locator/ID Separation Protocol 952 (LISP)", draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-23 (work in progress), 953 October 2018. 955 [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis] 956 Fuller, V., Farinacci, D., and A. Cabellos-Aparicio, 957 "Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) Control-Plane", 958 draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis-17 (work in progress), October 959 2018. 961 [RFC1918] Rekhter, Y., Moskowitz, B., Karrenberg, D., de Groot, G., 962 and E. Lear, "Address Allocation for Private Internets", 963 BCP 5, RFC 1918, DOI 10.17487/RFC1918, February 1996, 964 . 966 [RFC2131] Droms, R., "Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol", 967 RFC 2131, DOI 10.17487/RFC2131, March 1997, 968 . 970 [RFC3344] Perkins, C., Ed., "IP Mobility Support for IPv4", 971 RFC 3344, DOI 10.17487/RFC3344, August 2002, 972 . 974 [RFC3775] Johnson, D., Perkins, C., and J. Arkko, "Mobility Support 975 in IPv6", RFC 3775, DOI 10.17487/RFC3775, June 2004, 976 . 978 [RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an 979 IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", RFC 5226, 980 DOI 10.17487/RFC5226, May 2008, 981 . 983 [RFC6831] Farinacci, D., Meyer, D., Zwiebel, J., and S. Venaas, "The 984 Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) for Multicast 985 Environments", RFC 6831, DOI 10.17487/RFC6831, January 986 2013, . 988 [RFC6832] Lewis, D., Meyer, D., Farinacci, D., and V. Fuller, 989 "Interworking between Locator/ID Separation Protocol 990 (LISP) and Non-LISP Sites", RFC 6832, 991 DOI 10.17487/RFC6832, January 2013, 992 . 994 [RFC6834] Iannone, L., Saucez, D., and O. Bonaventure, "Locator/ID 995 Separation Protocol (LISP) Map-Versioning", RFC 6834, 996 DOI 10.17487/RFC6834, January 2013, 997 . 999 [RFC6836] Fuller, V., Farinacci, D., Meyer, D., and D. Lewis, 1000 "Locator/ID Separation Protocol Alternative Logical 1001 Topology (LISP+ALT)", RFC 6836, DOI 10.17487/RFC6836, 1002 January 2013, . 1004 15.2. Informative References 1006 [I-D.ermagan-lisp-nat-traversal] 1007 Ermagan, V., Farinacci, D., Lewis, D., Skriver, J., Maino, 1008 F., and C. White, "NAT traversal for LISP", draft-ermagan- 1009 lisp-nat-traversal-15 (work in progress), October 2018. 1011 Appendix A. Acknowledgments 1013 Albert Cabellos, Noel Chiappa, Pierre Francois, Michael Menth, Andrew 1014 Partan, Chris White and John Zwiebel provided insightful comments on 1015 the mobile node concept and on this document. A special thanks goes 1016 to Mary Nickum for her attention to detail and effort in editing 1017 early versions of this document. 1019 Appendix B. Document Change Log 1021 B.1. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-mn-04 1023 o Posted October 2018. 1025 o Make IANA Considerations section formatted like 1026 [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis]. 1028 o Change all references for RFC6830 to [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis] 1029 and for RFC6833 to [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis]. 1031 B.2. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-mn-03 1033 o Posted October 2018. 1035 o Request m-bit allocation in Map-Register message in IANA 1036 Considerations section. 1038 B.3. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-mn-02 1040 o Posted April 2018. 1042 o Update document timer and references. 1044 B.4. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-mn-01 1046 o Posted October 2017. 1048 o Update document timer and references. 1050 B.5. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-mn-00 1052 o Posted April 2017. 1054 o Changed draft-meyer-lisp-mn-16 to working group document. 1056 Authors' Addresses 1058 Dino Farinacci 1059 lispers.net 1060 San Jose, CA 95134 1061 USA 1063 Email: farinacci@gmail.com 1065 Darrel Lewis 1066 cisco Systems 1067 Tasman Drive 1068 San Jose, CA 95134 1069 USA 1071 Email: darlewis@cisco.com 1072 David Meyer 1073 1-4-5.net 1074 USA 1076 Email: dmm@1-4-5.net 1078 Chris White 1079 Logical Elegance, LLC. 1080 San Jose, CA 95134 1081 USA 1083 Email: chris@logicalelegance.com