[AAA-DOCTORS] FW: Internal WG Review: Locator/ID Separation Protocol (lisp)

["Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <[e-mail]>]

 

-----Original Message-----
From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of
IESG Secretary
Sent: Thursday, March 05, 2009 7:44 PM
To: [e-mail]; [e-mail]
Subject: Internal WG Review: Locator/ID Separation Protocol (lisp) 

A new IETF working group is being considered in the Internet Area.  The
draft charter for this working group is provided below for your review
and comment.

Review time is one week.

The IETF Secretariat

Locator/ID Separation Protocol (lisp)
--------------------------------------------------
Last Modified: 2009-03-05

Current status: Proposed Working Group

Chair(s):
TBD

Internet Area Director(s):
TBD

Routing Area Advisor:
TBD

Secretary:
TBD

Mailing Lists:
General Discussion: [e-mail]

Description of Working Group:

The IAB's October 2006 workshop on Routing and Addressing Workshop (RFC
4984) rekindled interest in scalable routing and addressing
architectures for the Internet. Among the many issues driving this
renewed interest are concerns about the scalability of the routing
system and the impending exhaustion of the IPv4 address space. Since the
IAB workshop, several proposals have emerged which attempt to address
the concerns expressed there and elsewhere. In general, these proposals
are based on the "Locator/Identifier separation" (frequently referred to
as Loc/ID split).

The basic idea behind the Loc/ID split that the Internet architecture
combines two functions, Routing Locators, or RLOCs (where you are
attached to the network) and Endpoint Identifiers, or EIDs (who you
are) in one number space: The IP address. Proponents of the Loc/ID split
postulate that splitting these functions apart with yield several
advantages, including improved scalability for the routing system. The
Loc/ID split aims to decouple location and identity, thus allowing for
efficient aggregation of the RLOC space and providing persistent
identity in the EID space.

The LISP protocol is an instantiation of the separation of Internet
address space into Endpoint Identifiers and Routing Locators designed by
means of a network-based map-and-encap scheme. A number of other
instantiations of the same general concept are being looked at in
parallel in the IRTF and IETF. At this time, these proposals are at an
early stage. All proposals (including LISP) have potentially harmful
side-effects to Internet traffic carried by the involved routers, have
parts where deployment incentives may be lacking, and are generally NOT
RECOMMENDED for deployment beyond experimental situations at this stage.
Many of the proposals have components (such as the EID-to-RLOC mapping
system) where it is not yet known what kind of design alternative is the
best one among many.

However, despite these issues it would be valuable to be able to develop
concrete protocol specifications and build equipment that can be used to
understand the characteristics of these designs. The LISP WG is
chartered to work on the design on the LISP base protocol [1], the
LISP+ALT mapping system [2], LISP Interworking [4], LISP Map Server [8],
and LISP multicast [6] for these purposes, with the given references a
starting point. The working group will encourage and support
interoperable LISP implementations as well as defining requirements for
alternate mapping systems. The Working Group will also develop security
profiles for the ALT and/or other mapping systems.

It is expected that the results of specifying, implementing, and testing
LISP will be fed to the general efforts at the IETF and IRTF (e.g., the
Routing Research Group) that attempts to understand which type of a
solution is optimal. The LISP WG is NOT chartered to develop the final
or standard solution for solving the routing scalability problem. Its
documents are Experimental and labeled with the suitable disclaimers
about their limitations and not fully understood implications for
Internet traffic.

Goals and Milestones:

Mar 2010 Submit base LISP specification to the IESG for Experimental.

Mar 2010 Submit base ALT specification to the IESG for Experimental.

Mar 2010 Submit the LISP Interworking specification to the IESG for
Experimental.

June 2010 Submit the LISP Map Server specification to the IESG for
Experimental.

June 2010 Submit Recommendations for Securing the LISP Mapping System to
the IESG for Experimental.

Jul 2010 Submit LISP for Multicast Environments to the IESG for
Experimental.

Jul 2010 Submit a preliminary analysis of how the LISP protocols (LISP
base protocol, LISP+ALT mapping system, and LISP
multicast) address the Design Goals for Scalable Internet Routing [7].

Aug 2010 Re-charter or close.

Internet-Drafts:
draft-farinacci-lisp-12.txt
draft-farinacci-lisp-multicast-01.txt
draft-fuller-lisp-alt-05.txt
draft-fuller-lisp-ms-00.txt
draft-lewis-lisp-interworking-02.txt

Request For Comments:
None


References
----------

[1] Farinacci, D. et. al., "Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP)",
draft-farinacci-lisp-12.txt.

[2] Fuller, V., et. al., "LISP Alternative Topology (LISP-ALT)",
draft-fuller-lisp-alt-05.txt

[3] Iannone, L., and O. Bonaventure, "OpenLISP Implementation Report",
draft-iannone-openlisp-implementation-01.txt.

[4] Lewis, D., et. al., "Interworking LISP with IPv4 and IPv6",
draft-lewis-lisp-interworking-02.txt.

[5] Mathy, L., et. al., "LISP-DHT: Towards a DHT to map identifiers onto
locators", draft-mathy-lisp-dht-00.txt.

[6] Farinacci, D., Meyer, D., Zwiebel, J., and S. Venaas, "LISP for
Multicast Environments", draft-farinacci-lisp-multicast-01.txt.

[7] T. Li, Ed., "Design Goals for Scalable Internet Routing",
draft-irtf-rrg-design-goals-01, IRTF, July 2007.

[8] Farinacci, D. and V. Fuller, "LISP Map Server",
draft-fuller-lisp-ms-00.txt.