Re: [lisp] multi-protocol support in RFC6830bis [ Was: RFC6830bis and multiprotocol support]

I’ll try to get an update to you before then so it can be easier. Thanks Luigi.

Dino

> On Dec 14, 2017, at 2:58 AM, Luigi Iannone <ggx@gigix.net> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On 14 Dec 2017, at 00:02, Dino Farinacci <farinacci@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> After I go through Alberto’s response for RFC6833bis and one comment from Albert regarding RFC6830bis, I’ll document the P-bit and reference this spec in RFC6830bis. I plan to send email this week with both updates at one time.
>> 
>> This should be the final updates to both specs. I’d like to request last call and possibly complete it before year-end. Is that possible chairs?
>> 
> 
> I will send out my review of 6830bis this weekend at latest. 
> If we converge we can certainly last call the 6830bis while I’ll review the 6833bis and move it forward right after. 
> 
> L.
> 
> 
>> Dino
>> 
>>> On Dec 13, 2017, at 2:57 PM, Fabio Maino <fmaino@cisco.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I have refreshed the LISP-GPE draft (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-lewis-lisp-gpe) to be bit-to-bit compatible with the data plane encoding in RFC6830bis, as discussed in the thread started on Nov. 29 (https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/lisp/Dq18xxxQoDUkLX1Z_MCKaHZC1I4/?qid=a7da0673ad7ed2a161aa5f4334f96f19) 
>>> As a summary of the long thread: 
>>> - bit 5 is allocated as P-bit to indicate the presence of an 8-bit Next Protocol field
>>> 
>>> - the Next Protocol field shares 8 bits with the Nonce/Map-Version field
>>> 
>>> - when the P-bit is set, the Nonce/Map-Version features are still available with shorter (16-bit vs 24-bit) Nonce/Map-Version fields
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> 
>>> Fabio
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -------- Forwarded Message --------
>>> 
>>> Subject:	[lisp] RFC6830bis and multiprotocol support
>>> Date:	Wed, 29 Nov 2017 14:32:40 -0800
>>> From:	Fabio Maino <fmaino@cisco.com>
>>> To:	lisp@ietf.org <lisp@ietf.org>
>>> 
>>> I would like to suggest a way to address mutiprotocol support in RFC6830bis, that may address what was discussed in Singapore. 
>>> This is based on using the last reserved bit in the LISP header as P bit to indicate support for multiprotocol encapsulation, as specified in the LISP-GPE draft (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-lewis-lisp-gpe) 
>>> The header, as specified in section 5.1, would look like: 
>>> 
>>>      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>>>  L   |N|L|E|V|I|P|K|K|            Nonce/Map-Version/Next-Protocol    |
>>>  I \ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>>>  S / |                 Instance ID/Locator-Status-Bits               |
>>>  P   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>>> 
>>> 
>>> and the text in section 5.3 that reserves the 6th bit would be replaced by: 
>>> 
>>>  P: The P-bit is the Next Protocol bit. When this bit is set to
>>>     1, the V-bit MUST be set to 0 and the Nonce length, when used, is 
>>>     limited to 16 bits. Refer to [draft-lewis-lisp-gpe] for more details. 
>>>     The P-bit is set to 1 to indicate the presence of the 8 bit Next 
>>>     Protocol field encoded as:
>>> 
>>>    x x x 0 x 1 x x
>>>   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>>>   |N|L|E|V|I|P|K|K|           Nonce               | Next-Protocol |
>>>   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>>>   |                 Instance ID/Locator-Status-Bits               |
>>>   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I will have to refresh the LISP-GPE draft, and reflect the allocations of the KK bits according to RFC8061 and Nonce. One of the K bits was used by LISP-GPE to indicate OAM packets, but that same functionality can be done using the Next-Protocol field. 
>>> 
>>> The use of the P-bit is not compatible with the Map-Versioning feature, but an equivalent function can be specified (if needed) with a Next-Protocol shim header. I can add text to the LISP-GPE draft to reflect that. 
>>> 
>>> This would address the multiprotocol working item included in the current charter. 
>>> 
>>> I can very quickly update the LISP-GPE draft to reflect this, but I wanted to hear what the group thinks first. 
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Fabio
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> lisp mailing list
>> lisp@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp
> 