Re: [lisp] Review draft-ietf-lisp-vendor-lcaf
Alberto Rodriguez-Natal <rodrigueznatal@gmail.com> Sun, 18 March 2018 18:39 UTC
Return-Path: <rodrigueznatal@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: lisp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 705F8126BF3 for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 18 Mar 2018 11:39:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VIPtsKhx1zud for <lisp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 18 Mar 2018 11:39:20 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-it0-x22b.google.com (mail-it0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c0b::22b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F1419124B0A for <lisp@ietf.org>; Sun, 18 Mar 2018 11:39:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-it0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id z143-v6so7045891itc.0 for <lisp@ietf.org>; Sun, 18 Mar 2018 11:39:19 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=IpkXBqo6IRwycFykXwU8VYLaf08GsXddzS20poRBpwI=; b=YfkdK9bfM/Ci7dfGrLo5Gg50GD3ivz3FtoyQRJTVGundEt9Na9cmOqSPP8q/1UEAoz o0qXrZ1Z/rQ1fDTvq62MFD4Sc6RxdL1lZh2Rg0Gi89XREVjM7vz4r3J4tY480Wh+YIwx 5Iz4EadafZgFCV8Bmi3iNiNUkwJFmRU6MmG3YQKeYprglIOIBOMGxVQwc0maCZLd0DPB NnJ7bCBgJT5aVRXeQyuB7QtEepQjgHMKa04bNRRpIBG95+iMfBV6T1HOSNDiiUr2xMIR xnUFdSp872UtmCYNxCWxB+eRigt2ORPmzEM9FVvCHrZUPKPxKJ0DuF44hcoobmAyPHA+ YkTA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=IpkXBqo6IRwycFykXwU8VYLaf08GsXddzS20poRBpwI=; b=Cj64XuA7/SQjoJ6YaxlYbCor1w/Md73CWs5apYgLUMCa5qY0YfadsMZljeb59UsnDG QhRG/rgOfmCM9+dLGvehiCZtCIttFcqD3wmd2B+oeVIRff9iKPD2SPm/stwUDGPhGAoW x3/8zXWQQsfIsxXF6LJpK4PpZ8Wmb9u8Qz0WZn2PYdQNs6trXxDY0+myHQXbkb+eUyMW JN9DLAkGaMiLTJzcshdbbgdZfj85mrBwiBj94R7FT/vBhzBpri14QDEe9p0F9I70ICl9 QOgPERaVr3b7IbGhgNuorTYMJYTfupZxSvcbkRXUdV0Z6o6EbvoAGKMullWsA7gYomgo tCqQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7EMEzQvzYRb3N13UVGt1T9iUi5F/zRIdRjLRxNiRetnJo17J5Ty qy3iXZEpNRrPgVEUYH0sgRFKeAfhmyyowvrRfepP4Q==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELtrxLtOi9GBR5Q3S1HNkP+DrRH+SxvsWsV75iMpYEUNR6EUB/EDPIllins7zPbCwSeEW5g0qzGga0ikAqdWWu0=
X-Received: by 2002:a24:74d6:: with SMTP id o205-v6mr7489648itc.93.1521398359041; Sun, 18 Mar 2018 11:39:19 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.107.29.72 with HTTP; Sun, 18 Mar 2018 11:38:58 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <650BB047-3B72-4C20-9FE1-9C11BC54FCDA@gigix.net>
References: <650BB047-3B72-4C20-9FE1-9C11BC54FCDA@gigix.net>
From: Alberto Rodriguez-Natal <rodrigueznatal@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2018 18:38:58 +0000
Message-ID: <CA+YHcKG8fo-7dLjM9BMPpsB__yjFXmfGgfHG_FXajSojEBR+Cw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net>
Cc: "lisp@ietf.org list" <lisp@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lisp/CjD7NRu1RM3bVjl8QBYzpdvlghA>
Subject: Re: [lisp] Review draft-ietf-lisp-vendor-lcaf
X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: List for the discussion of the Locator/ID Separation Protocol <lisp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/lisp>, <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/lisp/>
List-Post: <mailto:lisp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp>, <mailto:lisp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2018 18:39:22 -0000
Thanks for the review Luigi. All the proposed changes look good. We'll update the draft to reflect them. Thanks! Alberto On Sun, Mar 18, 2018 at 4:35 PM, Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net> wrote: > > Hi All, > I did a quick review of the short vendor LCAF document. > My few comment are inline. > > Ciao > > L. > > > > > > > > > LISP Working Group A. Rodriguez-Natal > Internet-Draft V. Ermagan > Intended status: Experimental A. Smirnov > Expires: August 20, 2018 V. Ashtaputre > Cisco Systems > D. Farinacci > lispers.net > 2 16, 2018 > > > Vendor Specific LCAF > draft-ietf-lisp-vendor-lcaf-01 > > Abstract > > This document describes a new LCAF for LISP, the Vendor Specific > > I would but in both the title and the first sentence of the abstract the > long version of the LCAF acronym: > “LISP Canonical Address Format (LCAF)" > > > LCAF. This LCAF enables organizations to have internal encodings for > LCAF addresses. > > Status of This Memo > > This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the > provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. > > Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering > Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute > working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- > Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. > > Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months > and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any > time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference > material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." > > This Internet-Draft will expire on August 20, 2018. > > Copyright Notice > > Copyright (c) 2018 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 Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of > > > > Rodriguez-Natal, et al. Expires August 20, 2018 [Page 1] > > Internet-Draft LISP-Vendor-LCAF 2 2018 > > > the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as > described in the Simplified BSD License. > > Table of Contents > > 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 > 2. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 > 3. Vendor Specific LCAF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 > 4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 > 5. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 > 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 > 7. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 > Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 > > 1. Introduction > > The LISP Canonical Address Format > > add: “(LCAF)" > > [RFC8060] defines the format and > encoding for different address types that can be used on LISP > [RFC6830] > > I would put 6830bis and 6833bis as reference since they are standard track. > > deployments. However, certain deployments require specific > format encodings that may not be applicable outside of the use-case > for which they are defined. The Vendor Specific LCAF allows > organizations to create LCAF addresses to be used only internally on > particular LISP deployments. > > 2. Requirements Language > > The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", > "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this > document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119] > > 3. Vendor Specific LCAF > > The Vendor Specific LCAF relies on using the IEEE Organizationally > Unique Identifier (OUI) [IEEE.802_2001] to prevent collisions across > vendors or organizations using the LCAF. The format of the Vendor > Specific LCAF is provided below. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Rodriguez-Natal, et al. Expires August 20, 2018 [Page 2] > > Internet-Draft LISP-Vendor-LCAF 2 2018 > > > 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... | > +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ > > Vendor Specific LCAF > > The Vendor Specific LCAF has the following fields. > > 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 the IEEE OUI [IEEE.802_2001] of the organization. > > 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 definition for the rest of the fields can be found in [RFC8060]. > > The Vendor Specific LCAF type SHOULD not be used in deployments where > different organizations interoperate. If a LISP device receives a > LISP message containing a Vendor Specific LCAF with an OUI that it > does not understand, it SHOULD drop the message and a log action MUST > be taken. > > 4. 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. > > 5. Acknowledgments > > The authors would like to thank Joel Halpern for his suggestions and > comments regarding this document. > > > > > > > > Rodriguez-Natal, et al. Expires August 20, 2018 [Page 3] > > Internet-Draft LISP-Vendor-LCAF 2 2018 > > > 6. IANA Considerations > > Following the guidelines of [RFC5226], > > RFC5226 is obsoleted by RFC 8126, this should be updated > > that’s all :-) > > L. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > lisp mailing list > lisp@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp >
- Re: [lisp] Review draft-ietf-lisp-vendor-lcaf Alberto Rodriguez-Natal
- [lisp] Review draft-ietf-lisp-vendor-lcaf Luigi Iannone
- Re: [lisp] Review draft-ietf-lisp-vendor-lcaf Alberto Rodriguez-Natal