idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-lisp-vendor-lcaf-03.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 : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (October 8, 2018) is 2027 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Experimental ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == Outdated reference: A later version (-38) exists of draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-23 == Outdated reference: A later version (-31) exists of draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis-17 Summary: 0 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 3 warnings (==), 1 comment (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 LISP Working Group A. Rodriguez-Natal 3 Internet-Draft V. Ermagan 4 Intended status: Experimental A. Smirnov 5 Expires: April 11, 2019 V. Ashtaputre 6 Cisco Systems 7 D. Farinacci 8 lispers.net 9 October 8, 2018 11 Vendor Specific LISP Canonical Address Format (LCAF) 12 draft-ietf-lisp-vendor-lcaf-03 14 Abstract 16 This document describes a new LISP Canonical Address Format (LCAF), 17 the Vendor Specific LCAF. This LCAF enables organizations to have 18 internal encodings for LCAF addresses. 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 April 11, 2019. 37 Copyright Notice 39 Copyright (c) 2018 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. Requirements Notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 56 3. Vendor Specific LCAF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 57 4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 58 5. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 59 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 60 7. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 61 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 63 1. Introduction 65 The LISP Canonical Address Format (LCAF) [RFC8060] defines the format 66 and encoding for different address types that can be used on LISP 67 [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis] [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis] deployments. 68 However, certain deployments require specific format encodings that 69 may not be applicable outside of the use-case for which they are 70 defined. The Vendor Specific LCAF allows organizations to create 71 LCAF addresses to be used only internally on particular LISP 72 deployments. 74 2. Requirements Notation 76 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 77 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and 78 "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 79 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all 80 capitals, as shown here. 82 3. Vendor Specific LCAF 84 The Vendor Specific LCAF relies on using the IEEE Organizationally 85 Unique Identifier (OUI) [IEEE.802_2001] to prevent collisions across 86 vendors or organizations using the LCAF. The format of the Vendor 87 Specific LCAF is provided below. 89 0 1 2 3 90 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 91 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 92 | AFI = 16387 | Rsvd1 | Flags | 93 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 94 | Type = 255 | Rsvd2 | Length | 95 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 96 | Rsvd3 | Organizationally Unique Identifier (OUI) | 97 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 98 | Internal format... | 99 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 101 Vendor Specific LCAF 103 The fields in the first 8 octets of the above Vendor Specific LCAF 104 are actually the fields defined in the general LCAF format specified 105 in [RFC8060]. The "Type" field MUST be set to the value 255 to 106 indicate that this is a Vendor Specific LCAF. The fields defined by 107 the Vendor Specific LCAF are: 109 Rsvd3: This 8-bit field is reserved for future use. It MUST be 110 set to 0 on transmit and MUST be ignored on receipt. 112 Organizationally Unique Identifier (OUI): This is a 24-bit field 113 that carries the IEEE OUI [IEEE.802_2001] of the organization. 115 Internal format: This is a variable length field that is left 116 undefined on purpose. Each vendor or organization can define its 117 own internal format(s) to use with the Vendor Specific LCAF. 119 The Vendor Specific LCAF type SHOULD NOT be used in deployments where 120 different organizations interoperate. However, there may be cases 121 where two (or more) organizations share a common deployment on which 122 they explicitly and mutually agree to use a particular Vendor 123 Specific LCAF. In that case, the organizations involved need to 124 carefully assess the interoperability concerns for that particular 125 deployment. 127 If a LISP device receives a LISP message containing a Vendor Specific 128 LCAF with an OUI that it does not understand, it MUST drop the 129 message. 131 4. Security Considerations 133 This document enables organizations to define new LCAFs for their 134 internal use. It is the responsibility of these organizations to 135 properly assess the security implications of the formats they define. 137 5. Acknowledgments 139 The authors would like to thank Joel Halpern and Luigi Iannone for 140 their suggestions and guidance regarding this document. 142 6. IANA Considerations 144 Following the guidelines of [RFC8126], this document requests IANA to 145 update the "LISP Canonical Address Format (LCAF) Types" Registry 146 defined in [RFC8060] to allocate the following assignment: 148 +---------+---------------------+------------+ 149 | Value # | LISP LCAF Type Name | Reference | 150 +---------+---------------------+------------+ 151 | 255 | Vendor Specific | Section 3 | 152 +---------+---------------------+------------+ 154 Table 1: Vendor Specific LCAF assignment 156 7. Normative References 158 [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis] 159 Farinacci, D., Fuller, V., Meyer, D., Lewis, D., and A. 160 Cabellos-Aparicio, "The Locator/ID Separation Protocol 161 (LISP)", draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis-23 (work in progress), 162 October 2018. 164 [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis] 165 Fuller, V., Farinacci, D., and A. Cabellos-Aparicio, 166 "Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) Control-Plane", 167 draft-ietf-lisp-rfc6833bis-17 (work in progress), October 168 2018. 170 [IEEE.802_2001] 171 IEEE, "IEEE Standard for Local and Metropolitan Area 172 Networks: Overview and Architecture", IEEE 802-2001, 173 DOI 10.1109/ieeestd.2002.93395, July 2002, 174 . 176 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 177 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, 178 DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, 179 . 181 [RFC8060] Farinacci, D., Meyer, D., and J. Snijders, "LISP Canonical 182 Address Format (LCAF)", RFC 8060, DOI 10.17487/RFC8060, 183 February 2017, . 185 [RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for 186 Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, 187 RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017, 188 . 190 [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 191 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, 192 May 2017, . 194 Authors' Addresses 196 Alberto Rodriguez-Natal 197 Cisco Systems 198 San Jose, CA 199 USA 201 Email: natal@cisco.com 203 Vina Ermagan 204 Cisco Systems 205 San Jose, CA 206 USA 208 Email: vermagan@cisco.com 210 Anton Smirnov 211 Cisco Systems 212 Diegem 213 Belgium 215 Email: asmirnov@cisco.com 217 Vrushali Ashtaputre 218 Cisco Systems 219 San Jose, CA 220 USA 222 Email: vrushali@cisco.com 223 Dino Farinacci 224 lispers.net 225 San Jose, CA 226 USA 228 Email: farinacci@gmail.com