Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                A. Rodriguez-Natal
Request for Comments: 9306                                         Cisco
Updates: 8060                                                 V. Ermagan
Category: Experimental                                      Google, Inc.
ISSN: 2070-1721                                               A. Smirnov
                                                          V. Ashtaputre
                                                                  Cisco
                                                           D. Farinacci
                                                            lispers.net
                                                           October 2022


         Vendor-Specific LISP Canonical Address Format (LCAF)

Abstract

  This document describes a new Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP)
  Canonical Address Format (LCAF), the Vendor-Specific LCAF.  This LCAF
  enables organizations to have implementation-specific encodings for
  LCAF addresses.  This document updates RFC 8060.

Status of This Memo

  This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is
  published for examination, experimental implementation, and
  evaluation.

  This document defines an Experimental Protocol for the Internet
  community.  This document is a product of the Internet Engineering
  Task Force (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF
  community.  It has received public review and has been approved for
  publication by the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Not
  all documents approved by the IESG are candidates for any level of
  Internet Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 7841.

  Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
  and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
  https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9306.

Copyright Notice

  Copyright (c) 2022 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
  document authors.  All rights reserved.

  This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
  Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
  (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
  publication of this document.  Please review these documents
  carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
  to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
  include Revised BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the
  Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described
  in the Revised BSD License.

Table of Contents

  1.  Introduction
  2.  Requirements Notation
  3.  Unrecognized LCAF Types
  4.  Vendor-Specific LCAF
  5.  Security Considerations
  6.  IANA Considerations
  7.  Normative References
  Acknowledgments
  Authors' Addresses

1.  Introduction

  The LISP Canonical Address Format (LCAF) [RFC8060] defines the format
  and encoding for different address types that can be used on
  deployments of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) [RFC9300]
  [RFC9301].  However, certain deployments require specific format
  encodings that may not be applicable outside of the use case for
  which they are defined.  This document extends [RFC8060] to introduce
  a Vendor-Specific LCAF that defines how organizations can create LCAF
  addresses to be used only on particular LISP implementations.  This
  document also updates [RFC8060] to specify the behavior when
  receiving unrecognized LCAF types.

2.  Requirements Notation

  The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
  "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
  "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
  BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
  capitals, as shown here.

3.  Unrecognized LCAF Types

  [RFC8060] does not explain how an implementation should handle an
  unrecognized LCAF type.  This document updates [RFC8060] to specify
  that any unrecognized LCAF type received in a LISP control plane
  message MUST be ignored.  If all Locators are ignored, this is
  equivalent to a LISP control message with Locator Count = 0, as
  described in [RFC9301].  If an EID-Prefix only contains unrecognized
  LCAF types, the LISP control message MUST be dropped and the event
  MUST be logged.  (Here, "EID" refers to Endpoint Identifier.)

4.  Vendor-Specific LCAF

  The Vendor-Specific LCAF relies on using the IEEE Organizationally
  Unique Identifier (OUI) [IEEE.802] to prevent collisions across
  vendors or organizations using the LCAF.  The format of the Vendor-
  Specific LCAF is provided below.


     0                   1                   2                   3
     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
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |           AFI = 16387         |     Rsvd1     |     Flags     |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |   Type = 255  |     Rsvd2     |            Length             |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |      Rsvd3    |    Organizationally Unique Identifier (OUI)   |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |                        Internal format...                     |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                      Figure 1: Vendor-Specific LCAF

  The fields in the first 8 octets of the above Vendor-Specific LCAF
  are actually the fields defined in the general LCAF format specified
  in [RFC8060].  The Type field MUST be set 255, the value assigned by
  IANA to indicate that this is a Vendor-Specific LCAF; see Section 6.
  The Length field has to be set accordingly to the length of the
  internal format, plus the OUI, plus the Rsvd3 fields, as for
  [RFC8060].  The fields defined by the Vendor-Specific LCAF are as
  follows:

  Rsvd3:  This 8-bit field is reserved for future use.  It MUST be set
     to 0 on transmit and MUST be ignored on receipt.

  Organizationally Unique Identifier (OUI):  This is a 24-bit field
     that carries an OUI or Company ID (CID) assigned by the IEEE
     Registration Authority (RA) as defined by the IEEE Std 802
     [IEEE.802]

  Internal format:  This is a variable-length field that is left
     undefined on purpose.  Each vendor or organization can define its
     own internal format(s) to use with the Vendor-Specific LCAF.

  The Vendor-Specific LCAF type SHOULD NOT be used in deployments where
  different organizations interoperate.  However, there may be cases
  where two (or more) organizations share a common deployment on which
  they explicitly and mutually agree to use a particular Vendor-
  Specific LCAF.  In that case, the organizations involved need to
  carefully assess the interoperability concerns for that particular
  deployment.  It is NOT RECOMMENDED to use an OUI not assigned to an
  organization.

  If a LISP device receives a LISP message containing a Vendor-Specific
  LCAF with an OUI that it does not understand, it MUST drop the
  message and it SHOULD create a log message.

5.  Security Considerations

  This document enables organizations to define new LCAFs for their
  internal use.  It is the responsibility of these organizations to
  properly assess the security implications of the formats they define.
  Security considerations from [RFC8060] apply to this document.

6.  IANA Considerations

  Following the guidelines of [RFC8126], IANA has assigned the
  following value for the Vendor-Specific LCAF from the "LISP Canonical
  Address Format (LCAF) Types" registry (defined in [RFC8060]):

          +=======+=====================+=====================+
          | Value | LISP LCAF Type Name |      Reference      |
          +=======+=====================+=====================+
          |  255  |   Vendor Specific   | RFC 9306, Section 4 |
          +-------+---------------------+---------------------+

                 Table 1: Vendor-Specific LCAF Assignment

7.  Normative References

  [IEEE.802] IEEE, "IEEE Standard for Local and Metropolitan Area
             Networks: Overview and Architecture",
             DOI 10.1109/IEEESTD.2014.6847097, IEEE Std 802, July 2014,
             <https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6847097>.

  [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
             Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
             DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
             <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

  [RFC8060]  Farinacci, D., Meyer, D., and J. Snijders, "LISP Canonical
             Address Format (LCAF)", RFC 8060, DOI 10.17487/RFC8060,
             February 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8060>.

  [RFC8126]  Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for
             Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26,
             RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017,
             <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126>.

  [RFC8174]  Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
             2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
             May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.

  [RFC9300]  Farinacci, D., Fuller, V., Meyer, D., Lewis, D., and A.
             Cabellos, Ed., "The Locator/ID Separation Protocol
             (LISP)", RFC 9300, DOI 10.17487/RFC9300, October 2022,
             <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9300>.

  [RFC9301]  Farinacci, D., Maino, F., Fuller, V., and A. Cabellos,
             Ed., "Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) Control
             Plane", RFC 9301, DOI 10.17487/RFC9301, October 2022,
             <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9301>.

Acknowledgments

  The authors would like to thank Joel Halpern, Luigi Iannone, and
  Alvaro Retana for their suggestions and guidance regarding this
  document.

Authors' Addresses

  Alberto Rodriguez-Natal
  Cisco
  Spain
  Email: [email protected]


  Vina Ermagan
  Google, Inc.
  1600 Amphitheatre Parkway
  Mountain View, CA 94043
  United States of America
  Email: [email protected]


  Anton Smirnov
  Cisco
  Diegem
  Belgium
  Email: [email protected]


  Vrushali Ashtaputre
  Cisco
  San Jose, CA
  United States of America
  Email: [email protected]


  Dino Farinacci
  lispers.net
  San Jose, CA
  United States of America
  Email: [email protected]

You are viewing proxied material from gopher.fnord.one. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.