[MIB-DOCTORS] FW: [New-work] 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: Wednesday, March 18, 2009 2:38 AM
To: [e-mail]
Subject: [New-work] WG Review: Locator/ID Separation Protocol (lisp)

A new IETF working group has been proposed in the Routing Area.  The
IESG has not made any determination as yet.  The following draft charter
was submitted, and is provided for informational purposes only.  Please
send your comments to the IESG mailing list ([e-mail]) by Tuesday,
March 24, 2009.

Locator/ID Separation Protocol (lisp)
--------------------------------------------------
Last Modified: 2009-03-12

Current status: Proposed Working Group

Chair(s):
TBD

Internet Area Director(s):
TBD

Routing Area Advisor:
TBD

Mailing Lists:
General Discussion: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp

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".

The basic idea behind the separation 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 separation
architecture postulate that splitting these functions apart will yield
several advantages, including improved scalability for the routing
system.
The separation aims to decouple location and identity, thus allowing for
efficient aggregation of the RLOC space and providing persistent
identity in the EID space.

LISP supports the separation of the Internet address space into Endpoint
Identifiers and Routing Locators following a network-based map-and-encap
scheme (RFC 1955). It employs EIDs that represent a mixture of locators
and identifiers; it could also be classified as a multi-level locator
scheme.  A number of other approaches 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 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 write concrete
protocol specifications and develop implementations that can be used to
understand the characteristics of these designs. The LISP WG is
chartered to work on the LISP base protocol
(draft-farinacci-lisp-12.txt), the LISP+ALT mapping system
(draft-fuller-lisp-alt-05.txt), LISP Interworking
(draft-lewis-lisp-interworking-02.txt), LISP Map Server
(draft-fuller-lisp-ms-00.txt), and LISP multicast
(draft-farinacci-lisp-multicast-01.txt) for these purposes, with the
given drafts as 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
specifications are Experimental and labeled with accurate disclaimers
about their limitations and not fully understood implications for
Internet traffic. In addition, as these issues are understood, the
working group will analyze and document the implications of LISP on
Internet traffic, applications, routers, and security. This analysis
will explain what role LISP can play in scalable routing. The analysis
should also look at scalability and levels of state required for
encapsulation, decapsulation, liveness, and so on
(draft-meyer-loc-id-implications).

Goals and Milestones:

Mar 2010 Submit base LISP specification to the IESG as Experimental

Mar 2010 Submit base ALT specification to the IESG as Experimental

Mar 2010 Submit the LISP Interworking specification to the IESG as
Experimental

June 2010 Submit the LISP Map Server specification to the IESG as
Experimental

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

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

Dec 2010 Submit a preliminary analysis as Informational

Dec 2010 Re-charter or close.

_______________________________________________
New-work mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/new-work