idnits 2.17.00 (12 Aug 2021) /tmp/idnits33411/draft-ietf-lisp-type-iana-06.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 (February 2, 2017) is 1927 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Experimental ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 5226 (Obsoleted by RFC 8126) == Outdated reference: A later version (-07) exists of draft-boucadair-lisp-bulk-03 == Outdated reference: A later version (-05) exists of draft-boucadair-lisp-subscribe-03 == Outdated reference: A later version (-19) exists of draft-ermagan-lisp-nat-traversal-11 == Outdated reference: draft-ietf-lisp-ddt has been published as RFC 8111 Summary: 1 error (**), 0 flaws (~~), 5 warnings (==), 1 comment (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group M. Boucadair 3 Internet-Draft C. Jacquenet 4 Updates: 6830 (if approved) Orange 5 Intended status: Experimental February 2, 2017 6 Expires: August 6, 2017 8 LISP Shared Extension Message & IANA Registry for LISP Packet Type 9 Allocations 10 draft-ietf-lisp-type-iana-06 12 Abstract 14 This document defines a registry for Locator/ID Separation Protocol 15 (LISP) Packet Type allocations. It also specifies a LISP shared 16 message type for defining future extensions and conducting 17 experiments without consuming a LISP packet type codepoint for each 18 extension. 20 This document updates RFC6830 by defining a registry for LISP Packet 21 Types assignments. 23 Requirements Language 25 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 26 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 27 document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. 29 Status of This Memo 31 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 32 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 34 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 35 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 36 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 37 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 39 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 40 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 41 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 42 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 44 This Internet-Draft will expire on August 6, 2017. 46 Copyright Notice 48 Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 49 document authors. All rights reserved. 51 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 52 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 53 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 54 publication of this document. Please review these documents 55 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 56 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 57 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 58 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 59 described in the Simplified BSD License. 61 Table of Contents 63 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 64 2. LISP Shared Extension Message Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 65 3. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 66 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 67 4.1. LISP Packet Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 68 4.2. Sub-Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 69 5. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 70 6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 71 6.1. Normative references . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 72 6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 73 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 75 1. Introduction 77 The Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP, [RFC6830]) base 78 specification defines a set of primitives that are identified with a 79 packet type code. Several extensions have been proposed to add more 80 LISP functionalities. For example, new message types are proposed in 81 [I-D.ietf-lisp-ddt], [I-D.zhao-lisp-mn-extension], 82 [I-D.boucadair-lisp-bulk], [I-D.ermagan-lisp-nat-traversal], or 83 [I-D.boucadair-lisp-subscribe]. It is expected that additional LISP 84 extensions will be proposed in the future. 86 In order to ease the tracking of LISP message types, this document 87 proposes to create a "LISP Packet Types" IANA registry (see 88 Section 4). 90 Because of the limited type space [RFC6830] and the need to conduct 91 experiments to assess new LISP extensions, this document specifies a 92 shared LISP extension message type and proposes a procedure for 93 registering LISP shared extension sub-types (see Section 2). 95 Concretely, one single LISP message type code is dedicated to future 96 LISP extensions; sub-types are used to uniquely identify a given LISP 97 extension making use of the shared LISP extension message type. 98 These identifiers are selected by the author(s) of the corresponding 99 LISP specification that introduces a new LISP extension message type. 101 2. LISP Shared Extension Message Type 103 Figure 1 depicts the common format of the LISP shared extension 104 message. The type field MUST be set to 15 (see Section 4). 106 0 1 2 3 107 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 1 108 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 109 |Type=15| Sub-type | extension-specific | 110 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 111 // extension-specific // 112 // // 113 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 115 Figure 1: LISP Shared Extension Message Type 117 The "Sub-type" field conveys a unique identifier that MUST be 118 registered with IANA (see Section 4.2). 120 The exact structure of the 'extension-specific' portion of the 121 message is specified in the corresponding specification document. 123 3. Security Considerations 125 This document does not introduce any additional security issues other 126 than those discussed in [RFC6830]. 128 4. IANA Considerations 130 4.1. LISP Packet Types 132 IANA is requested to create a new protocol registry for LISP Packet 133 Types, numbered 0-15. The registry must be initially populated with 134 the following values: 136 Message Code Reference 137 ================================= ==== =============== 138 Reserved 0 [RFC6830] 139 LISP Map-Request 1 [RFC6830] 140 LISP Map-Reply 2 [RFC6830] 141 LISP Map-Register 3 [RFC6830] 142 LISP Map-Notify 4 [RFC6830] 143 LISP Encapsulated Control Message 8 [RFC6830] 144 LISP Shared Extension Message 15 [This document] 146 The values in the ranges 5-7 and 9-14 can be assigned via Standards 147 Action [RFC5226]. Documents that request for a new LISP packet type 148 may indicate a preferred value in the corresponding IANA sections. 150 4.2. Sub-Types 152 IANA is requested to create a "LISP Shared Extension Message type 153 Sub-types" registry. No initial values are assigned at the creation 154 of the registry; (0-4095) are available for future assignments. 156 The values in the range 0-1023 are assigned via Standards Action. 157 This range is provisioned to anticipate, in particular, the 158 exhaustion of the LISP Packet types. 160 The values in 1024-4095 are assigned on a First Come, First Served 161 (FCFS) basis. The registration procedure should provide IANA with 162 the desired codepoint and a point of contact. Providing a short 163 description (together with an acronym, if relevant) of the foreseen 164 usage of the extension message is also encouraged. 166 5. Acknowledgments 168 This work is partly funded by ANR LISP-Lab project #ANR-13-INFR- 169 009-X. 171 Many thanks to Luigi Iannone, Dino Farinacci, and Alvaro Retana for 172 the review. 174 Thanks to Geoff Huston for the RtgDir directorate review. 176 6. References 178 6.1. Normative references 180 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 181 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, 182 DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, 183 . 185 [RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an 186 IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226, 187 DOI 10.17487/RFC5226, May 2008, 188 . 190 [RFC6830] Farinacci, D., Fuller, V., Meyer, D., and D. Lewis, "The 191 Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP)", RFC 6830, 192 DOI 10.17487/RFC6830, January 2013, 193 . 195 6.2. Informative References 197 [I-D.boucadair-lisp-bulk] 198 Boucadair, M. and C. Jacquenet, "LISP Mapping Bulk 199 Retrieval", draft-boucadair-lisp-bulk-03 (work in 200 progress), July 2016. 202 [I-D.boucadair-lisp-subscribe] 203 Boucadair, M. and C. Jacquenet, "LISP Subscription", 204 draft-boucadair-lisp-subscribe-03 (work in progress), July 205 2016. 207 [I-D.ermagan-lisp-nat-traversal] 208 Ermagan, V., Farinacci, D., Lewis, D., Skriver, J., Maino, 209 F., and C. White, "NAT traversal for LISP", draft-ermagan- 210 lisp-nat-traversal-11 (work in progress), August 2016. 212 [I-D.ietf-lisp-ddt] 213 Fuller, V., Lewis, D., Ermagan, V., Jain, A., and A. 214 Smirnov, "LISP Delegated Database Tree", draft-ietf-lisp- 215 ddt-09 (work in progress), January 2017. 217 [I-D.zhao-lisp-mn-extension] 218 Wang, J., Meng, Y., and N. Zhao, "LISP Mobile Node 219 extension", draft-zhao-lisp-mn-extension-02 (work in 220 progress), October 2011. 222 Authors' Addresses 224 Mohamed Boucadair 225 Orange 226 Rennes 35000 227 France 229 EMail: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com 230 Christian Jacquenet 231 Orange 232 Rennes 35000 233 France 235 EMail: christian.jacquenet@orange.com