IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [lisp] Unknown LCAF Types (?) (draft-ietf-lisp-vendor-lcaf)

Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com> Wed, 13 April 2022 17:50 UTC

Return-Path: <farinacci@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 7C00C3A1CA3; Wed, 13 Apr 2022 10:50:36 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.109
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.109 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01] 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 39zGqvOGjn7p; Wed, 13 Apr 2022 10:50:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pj1-x102e.google.com (mail-pj1-x102e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::102e]) (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 73F673A1CA6; Wed, 13 Apr 2022 10:50:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pj1-x102e.google.com with SMTP id 2so2760258pjw.2; Wed, 13 Apr 2022 10:50:34 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=GTV/dHFcgGWI6an4URR8tNxl0rx11yhyi+EE7K8keh8=; b=aIOXlPdFCmAI6Yi7Rnu6M729w5XSnPS7hqeZjsTy8pohUUoTf8TJdK0afnCTWbzgP8 klvVGTBZ0DS29aXcWdM7F4cUv/4cUQmnY58MRpS6wCGDKCvVfkcP6U8BOdi63k1mYCul z20NCTWU8DVkg+vsKzP373wn/WfZ+NdoYuDBryoaHtT7dRl9oNR9q1NzZFfGvX3wfoyC 2fjPZs6TUP5aJckCFZ1h89Ma/I+KLrQrIsIdpsBma6/VUFpktRO31OUJL9pFbVNeApP7 E8Juxy8Njxf3Y2SWSuQ4VuLzMka4Yn5PV5T9oCHVbLwLz6vPavu1uHzc+UGvyK1ARNOO 4W/A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=GTV/dHFcgGWI6an4URR8tNxl0rx11yhyi+EE7K8keh8=; b=Rw0DE5NURwE5lzUWtxnprKlR0oO9FQ0s5cv5zsr6MYcH7pB+72twpBQ7sdccv45JUH i4pmtldwvw+ncAPkyNd7xL+u82GWwGkr4G0wJDPlS2/rZLSanJqPqlN1gGlCkGtdag1Y nFJ2t6ic4zU/96IjoLUK99wmBIZnViZMEXNdI+ofbOkI/VCvimtS8Re9x2L3iKkuazUr xED8quBM/uEMmKihGa2Wj4a32J4XVd671UdWqZLoU6qgM+lZigjDHYDh2AG1jtxvDYmy 0tND49Ac1v4wzPTcgOR8rt1JULckcwolxDV6PnLoaAca6p1/KgpIjVcd5Ds76a6+Ruc/ rgTA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5321bXNCDmGdlcHc96XT9G8ZGPScaaKviE5URxA6fcu1jP0TkBTx 2kVfm+cOcOwFn1Soi/GsyMaDdKLY7oU=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwUQyE/AiTC+uX4QpF7pwXdi3aTT9vao2vMfVfPCFi7amAEqlB9Vb3AsGA8WwcvccAnNwxD6Q==
X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:8c09:b0:1cb:97a2:3d5f with SMTP id a9-20020a17090a8c0900b001cb97a23d5fmr6047pjo.108.1649872233024; Wed, 13 Apr 2022 10:50:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (c-98-234-33-188.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [98.234.33.188]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v26-20020aa7809a000000b00505bf88a17bsm11497383pff.214.2022.04.13.10.50.32 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 13 Apr 2022 10:50:32 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 15.0 \(3693.60.0.1.1\))
From: Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAMMESswV6p7WiyZnaKwn=wH-ZwF9wZOUEgzOygjBZ9NQckhj7g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2022 10:50:31 -0700
Cc: lisp@ietf.org, "draft-ietf-lisp-vendor-lcaf@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-lisp-vendor-lcaf@ietf.org>, Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net>, lisp-chairs@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <D87F979E-D790-4FE4-9E8D-3EC3BB9D83B3@gmail.com>
References: <CAMMESswV6p7WiyZnaKwn=wH-ZwF9wZOUEgzOygjBZ9NQckhj7g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alvaro Retana <aretana.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3693.60.0.1.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lisp/JLoSvP3f4J2e3l5NJFvqS56KR0Y>
Subject: Re: [lisp] Unknown LCAF Types (?) (draft-ietf-lisp-vendor-lcaf)
X-BeenThere: lisp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Wed, 13 Apr 2022 17:50:37 -0000

> I assume that the message containing an unknown Type MUST be dropped.
> Or should it just be the specific TLV?

It should be ignored. The term "dropped" implies the packet with an unknown LCAF should be dropped. But there can be other LCAFs encoded that are knownn that should be processed.

Here is an example:

An EID-record with an rloc-count of 3, one RLOC-record is an IPv4 address, another one an IPv6 address, and the final one is a "foobar" address (or unknown). The EID should be processed with an RLOC-set of 2.

Dino

v2.37.1 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status