wdiff rfc7955.original rfc7955.txt

Network Working Group
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) L. Iannone
Internet-Draft
Request for Comments: 7955 Telecom ParisTech
Intended status:
Category: Informational R. Jorgensen
Expires: October 8, 2016
ISSN: 2070-1721 Bredbandsfylket Troms
D. Conrad
Virtualized, LLC
G. Huston
APNIC - Asia Pacific Network
Information Center
April 6,
September 2016

LISP EID Block

Management Guidelines
draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt-07.txt for the Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP)
Endpoint Identifier (EID) Block

Abstract

This document proposes a framework for the management of the LISP EID
Address Block. Locator/
ID Separation Protocol (LISP) Endpoint Identifier (EID) address
block. The framework described relies on hierarchical distribution
of the address space, granting temporary usage of prefixes of such
space to requesting organizations.

Status of this This Memo

This Internet-Draft document is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

Internet-Drafts are working documents not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is
published for informational purposes.

This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
(IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list It represents the consensus of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid the IETF community. It has
received public review and has been approved for publication by the
Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Not all documents
approved by the IESG are a maximum candidate for any level of six months Internet
Standard; see Section 2 of RFC 7841.

Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
and how to provide feedback on it may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents obtained 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 October 8, 2016.
http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7955.

This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://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
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

1. Requirements Notation . Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Introduction . . . . . 2
2. Requirements Notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. EID Prefix Registration Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
5. EID Prefixes Registration Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6. EID Prefix Request Template . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4
7. Policy Validity Period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 6
9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
10. Procedures to be followed Followed by RIPE NCC . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 7
11. Acknowledgments . . . . . . References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
12. References . . . . . . . . 8
11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
12.1. Normative 8
11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . 8
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . 9
Appendix A. Document Change Log . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 10

1. Requirements Notation

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].

2. Introduction

The Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP - [RFC6830]) and related
mechanisms ([RFC6831], [RFC6832], [RFC6833], [RFC6834], [RFC6835],
[RFC6836], [RFC6837]) separate the IP addressing space into two
logical spaces, the End-point IDentifier Endpoint Identifier (EID) space and the Routing
LOCator
Locator (RLOC) space. The first space is used to identify
communication end-points, endpoints, while the second is used to locate EIDs in
the Internet routing infrastructure topology.

The document [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block] requested

[RFC7954] requests an IPv6 address block reservation exclusively for
use as EID prefixes in the LISP experiment. The rationale, intent,
size, and usage of the EID address block are described in [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block]. [RFC7954].

This document proposes a management framework for the registration of
EID prefixes from that block, allowing the requesting organization
exclusive use of those EID prefixes limited to the duration of the
LISP experiment.

2. Requirements Notation

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. Definition of Terms

This document does not introduce any new terms related to the set of
LISP Specifications ([RFC6830], [RFC6831], [RFC6832], [RFC6833],
[RFC6834], [RFC6835], [RFC6836], [RFC6837]), but assumes that the
reader is familiar with the LISP terminology.
[I-D.ietf-lisp-introduction] [INTRO] provides an
introduction to the LISP technology, including its terminology. .

4. EID Prefix Registration Policy

The request for registration of EID prefixes MUST be done under the
following policies:

1. EID prefixes are made available in the reserved space on a
temporary basis and for experimental uses. The requester of an
experimental prefix MUST provide a short description of the
intended use or experiment that will be carried out (see
Section 6). If the prefix will be used for activities not
documented in the original description, the renewal of the
registration may be denied.

2. EID prefix registrations MUST be renewed on a regular basis to
ensure their use by active participants in the experiment. The
registration period is 12 months. A renewal SHOULD NOT cause a
change in the EID prefix registered in the previous request. The
conditions of registration renewal are to be the same as the
conditions of the first EID prefix registration request.

3. It is preferable not to reuse that EID prefixes whose registration is
expired. registrations have
expired not be reused. When an EID prefix registration is
removed from the registry, then the reuse of the EID prefix in a
subsequent registration on behalf of a different end user should
be avoided where possible. If the considerations of overall
usage of the EID block prefix requires reuse of a previously
registered EID prefix, then a minimum delay of at least one week
between removal and subsequent registration SHOULD be applied by
the registry operator.

4. All registrations of EID prefixes cease at the time of the
expiration of When the reserved experimental LISP EID Block. block expires, all EID
prefix registrations expire as well. The further disposition of
these prefixes and the associated registry entries is are to be
specified in the announcement of the cessation of this
experiment.

5. EID Prefixes Registration Requirements

All EID prefix registrations MUST respect satisfy the following requirements:

1. All EID prefix registrations MUST use a globally unique EID
prefix.

2. The EID Prefix prefix registration information, as specified in
Section 6, MUST be collected upon initial registration and
renewal, and made publicly available through interfaces allowing
both the retrieval of specific registration details (search) and
the enumeration of the entire registry contents (e.g., [RFC7481], RDAP
([RFC7481]), WHOIS, HTTP, or similar access methods).

3. The registry operator MUST permit the delegation of EID prefixes
in the reverse DNS space to holders of registered EID prefixes.

4. Anyone can obtain an entry in the EID prefix registry, on the
understanding that the prefix so registered is for the exclusive
use in the LISP experimental network, and that their registration
details (as specified in Section 6) are openly published in the
EID prefix registry.

6. EID Prefix Request Template

The following is a basic request template for prefix registration so to
ensure a uniform process. Such a This template is inspired by the IANA
Private IANA's online
"Private Enterprise Number online request (PEN) Request" form
(http://pen.iana.org/pen/PenApplication.page).
<http://pen.iana.org/pen/PenApplication.page>.

Note that all details in this registration become part of the
registry and will be published in the LISP EID Prefix Registry. Registry
managed by RIPE NCC.

The EID Prefix Request template MUST at a minimum contain:

1. Organization (In the case of individuals requesting an EID prefix
prefix, this section can be left empty)

(a) Organization Name

(b) Organization Address
(c) Organization Phone

(d) Organization WebSite Website

2. Contact Person (Mandatory)

(a) Name

(b) Address

(d) Fax (optional)

(e) Email

3. EID Prefix Request (Mandatory)

(a) Prefix Size

+ Expressed as an address prefix length.

(b) Prefix Size Rationale

+ Note Well: well: All EID Prefix registrations will be valid until
the earlier date of 12 months from the date of registration
or MMMM/YYYY3. August 2019.

+ All registrations may be renewed by the applicant for
further 12 month 12-month periods, ending on MMMM/YYYY3. August 2019.

+ According to the 3+3 year experimentation plan, defined in [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block],
[RFC7954], all registrations MUST end by MMMM/YYYY3, August 2019, unless
the IETF community decides to grant a permanent LISP EID
address block. In the latter case, registrations following
the present document policy MUST end by MMMM/YYYY6 August 2022 and a
new policy (to be decided - -- see Section 7) will apply afterwards.
thereafter.

4. Experiment Description

(a) Experiment and Deployment Description

(b) Interoperability with existing Existing LISP deployments Deployments

(a) Name server name: Server Name

(b) Name server address: Server Address

(d) Name server address: Server Address

(Repeat if necessary)

7. Policy Validity Period

Policy

The policy outlined in the present document is tied to the existence
of the experimental LISP EID block requested in
[I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block] [RFC7954] and is
valid until MMMM/YYYY3. August 2019.

If the IETF decides to transform the block in into a permanent
allocation, the usage period reserved for the LISP EID block reserved usage period will be
extended for three years (until MMMM/YYYY6) so as August 2022) to give allow time to for the
IETF to define, following the policies outlined in [RFC5226], the
final size of the EID block and create a transition plan, while the
policy in the present document will still apply.

Note that, as stated in [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block], [RFC7954], the transition of the EID block
into a permanent allocation has the potential to pose policy issues
(as recognized in [RFC2860], section 4.3) and hence Section 4.3); hence, discussion with the
IANA, the RIR Regional Internet Registry (RIR) communities, and the IETF
community will be necessary to determine the appropriate policy for
permanent EID prefix management, which will be effective after MMMM/YYYY6.

[RFC Editor: please replace MMMM and all its occurrences in the
document with the month of publication of [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block]
as RFC.]

[RFC Editor: please replace YYYY0 and all its occurrences in the
document with the year of publication of [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block] as
RFC.]

[RFC Editor: please replace YYYY3 and all its occurrences in the
document with the year of publication of [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block] as
RFC plus 3 years, e.g., if published in 2016 then put 2019.]

[RFC Editor: please replace YYYY6 and all its occurrences in the
document with the year of publication of [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block] as
RFC plus 6 years, e.g., if published in 2016 then put 2022.] August
2022.

8. Security Considerations

This document does not introduce new security threats in the LISP
architecture nor in the Legacy Internet architecture.

For accountability reasons and in line with the security
considerations in [RFC7020], each registration request MUST contain
accurate information on about the requesting entity (company,
institution, individual, etc.) and valid and accurate contact
information of a referral person (see Section 6).

9. IANA Considerations

IANA allocated the following IPv6 address block for experimental use
as the LISP EID prefix [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block]: [RFC7954]:

o Address Block: 2001:5::/32

o Name: EID Space for LISP

o RFC: [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block] [RFC7954]

o Further Details details are at: http://www.iana.org/assignments/
iana-ipv6-special-registry/iana-ipv6-special-registry.xhtml

In order to www.iana.org/assignments/iana-ipv6-
special-registry

To grant requesting organisations organizations and individuals exclusive use of
EID prefixes out of such this reserved block (limited to the duration of
the LISP experiment as outlined in Section 7) 7), there is an
operational requirement for an EID registration service.

Provided that the policies and requirements outlined in Section Sections 4,
Section
5, and Section 6 are respected, satisfied, EID prefix registration is accorded based on
a "First Come First Served" basis.

There is no hard limit in to the number of registrations an organization
or individual can submit submit, as long as the information described in
Section 6 is provided, in particular point 4: "Experiment
Description".

For the duration defined in [I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block] [RFC7954], RIPE NCC will manage the the LISP
EID prefix as described herein. Therefore, this document has no IANA
actions.

10. Procedures to be followed Followed by RIPE NCC

RIPE NCC will provide the registration service following the EID
Prefix Registration Policy (Section 4) and the EID Prefix
Registration Requirements (Section 5) provided in this document. The
request form provided by RIPE NCC will include at least the
information from the template in Section 6. RIPE NCC will make
publicly available all
received requests. requests publicly available. While this document does not suggests
suggest any minimum allocation size, size; RIPE NCC is allowed to introduce
such a minimum size for management purposes.

11. Acknowledgments

Thanks to A. Retana, J. Arko, P. Yee, A. de la Haye, A. Cima, A
Pawlik, J. Curran, A. Severin, B. Haberman, T. Manderson, D. Lewis,
D. Farinacci, M. Binderberger, D. Saucez, E. Lear, for their helpful
comments.

The work of Luigi Iannone has been partially supported by the ANR-13-
INFR-0009 LISP-Lab Project (www.lisp-lab.org) and the EIT KIC ICT-
Labs SOFNETS Project.

12. References

12.1.

11.1. Normative References

[I-D.ietf-lisp-eid-block]
Iannone, L., Lewis, D., Meyer, D., and V. Fuller, "LISP
EID Block", draft-ietf-lisp-eid-block-13 (work in
progress), February 2016.

[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/
RFC2119, 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5226, May 2008,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5226>.

12.2.

[RFC7954] Iannone, L., Lewis, D., Meyer, D., and V. Fuller,
"Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) Endpoint Identifier
(EID) Block", RFC 7954, DOI 10.17487/RFC7954, September
2016, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7954>.

11.2. Informative References

[I-D.ietf-lisp-introduction]

[INTRO] Cabellos-Aparicio, A. and D. Saucez, "An Architectural
Introduction to the Locator/ID Separation Protocol
(LISP)", draft-ietf-lisp-introduction-13 (work Work in
progress), Progress, draft-ietf-lisp-introduction-
13, April 2015.

[RFC2860] Carpenter, B., Baker, F., and M. Roberts, "Memorandum of
Understanding Concerning the Technical Work of the
Internet Assigned Numbers Authority", RFC 2860,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2860, June 2000,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2860>.

[RFC6830] Farinacci, D., Fuller, V., Meyer, D., and D. Lewis, "The
Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP)", RFC 6830,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6830, January 2013,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6830>.

[RFC6831] Farinacci, D., Meyer, D., Zwiebel, J., and S. Venaas, "The
Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) for Multicast
Environments", RFC 6831, DOI 10.17487/RFC6831, January
2013, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6831>.

[RFC6832] Lewis, D., Meyer, D., Farinacci, D., and V. Fuller,
"Interworking between Locator/ID Separation Protocol
(LISP) and Non-LISP Sites", RFC 6832,
DOI 10.17487/
RFC6832, 10.17487/RFC6832, January 2013,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6832>.

[RFC6833] Fuller, V. and D. Farinacci, "Locator/ID Separation
Protocol (LISP) Map-Server Interface", RFC 6833,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6833, January 2013,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6833>.

[RFC6834] Iannone, L., Saucez, D., and O. Bonaventure, "Locator/ID
Separation Protocol (LISP) Map-Versioning", RFC 6834,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6834, January 2013,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6834>.

[RFC6835] Farinacci, D. and D. Meyer, "The Locator/ID Separation
Protocol Internet Groper (LIG)", RFC 6835,
DOI 10.17487/
RFC6835, 10.17487/RFC6835, January 2013,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6835>.

[RFC6836] Fuller, V., Farinacci, D., Meyer, D., and D. Lewis,
"Locator/ID Separation Protocol Alternative Logical
Topology (LISP+ALT)", RFC 6836, DOI 10.17487/RFC6836,
January 2013, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6836>.

[RFC6837] Lear, E., "NERD: A Not-so-novel Endpoint ID (EID) to
Routing Locator (RLOC) Database", RFC 6837,
DOI 10.17487/
RFC6837, 10.17487/RFC6837, January 2013,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6837>.

[RFC7020] Housley, R., Curran, J., Huston, G., and D. Conrad, "The
Internet Numbers Registry System", RFC 7020,
DOI 10.17487/
RFC7020, 10.17487/RFC7020, August 2013,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7020>.

[RFC7481] Hollenbeck, S. and N. Kong, "Security Services for the
Registration Data Access Protocol (RDAP)", RFC 7481,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7481, March 2015,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7481>.

Appendix A. Document Change Log

Version 07 Posted April 2016.

o Addressed editorial issues raised in Gen-Art review by Peter Yee.

o Removed "Definition of Terms" section as suggested by Peter Yee in
the Gen-Art review.

o Section "IANA Considerations" has been re-written

Acknowledgments

Thanks to fix issue
raised by IESG, IANA, and A. Retana, J. Arkko, P. Yee.

o Deleted bullet allowing multiple operators in the requirements
section. Due to the limited duration of the experiment one single
registration operator (RIPE) is sufficient.

o Modified the dates, introducing variables, so to allow RFC Editor
to easily update dates by publication as RFC.

Version 06 Posted August 2015.

o Fixed Authors addresses and typo in section 10.

Version 05 Posted July 2015.

o Added explicit text about RIPE NCC providing the registration
service during the temporary experiment.

Version 04 Posted December 2014.

o Added two clarification sentences to address the comments of E.
Lear and Yee, A. de la Haye, A. Cima,
A. Pawlik, J. Curran, A. Severin, B. Haberman, T. Manderson,
D. Saucez during WG LC.

Version 03 Posted October 2014.

o Re-worded the document so to avoid confusion on "allocation" and
"assignement". The document now reffers to "registration". As
for comments by G. Huston and Lewis, D. Farinacci, M. Binderberger.

Version 02 Posted July 2014.

o Deleted the trailing paragraph of Section 4, as for discussion in
the mailing list.

o Deleted the fees policy as of suggestion of G. Huston and
discussion during 89th IETF.

o Re-phrased the availability of the registration information
requirement avoiding putting specific numbers (previously
requiring 99% up time), as of suggestion of G. Huston and
discussion during 89th IETF.

Version 01 Posted February 2014.

o Dropped the reverse DNS requirement as for discussion during the
88th IETF meeting.

o Dropped the minimum allocation requirement as Binderberger, D. Saucez, E. Lear, for discussion
during the 88th IETF meeting.

o Changed Section 7 from "General Consideration" to "Policy Validity
Period", according to J. Curran feedback.
their helpful comments.

The purpose work of Luigi Iannone has been partially supported by the
section is just to clearly state the period during which
ANR-13-INFR-0009 LISP-Lab Project <www.lisp-lab.org> and the
policy applies.

Version 00 Posted December 2013.

o Rename of draft-iannone-lisp-eid-block-mgmnt-03.txt. EIT KIC
ICT-Labs SOFNETS Project.

Authors' Addresses

Luigi Iannone
Telecom ParisTech
France

Email: ggx@gigix.net

Roger Jorgensen
Bredbandsfylket Troms
Norway

Email: rogerj@gmail.com

David Conrad
Virtualized, LLC
USA
United States

Email: drc@virtualized.org

Geoff Huston
APNIC -
Asia Pacific Network Information Center Centre (APNIC)
Australia

Email: gih@apnic.net