[Search] [txt|xml|pdf|bibtex] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: (draft-liu-isis-auto-conf) 00 01 02 03         Standards Track
          04 05 rfc8196                                                 
isis                                                         B. Liu, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                       Huawei Technologies
Intended status: Standards Track                             B. Decraene
Expires: December 3, 2016                                         Orange
                                                               I. Farrer
                                                     Deutsche Telekom AG
                                                          M. Abrahamsson
                                                               T-Systems
                                                             L. Ginsberg
                                                           Cisco Systems
                                                            June 1, 2016


                        ISIS Auto-Configuration
                      draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf-01

Abstract

   This document specifies an IS-IS auto-configuration technology.  The
   key mechanisms of this technology are IS-IS System ID self-
   generation, duplication detection and duplication resolution.  This
   technology fits the environment where plug-and-play is expected.

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 http://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 December 3, 2016.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2016 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
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of



Liu, Ed., et al.        Expires December 3, 2016                [Page 1]


Internet-Draft        draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf-01             June 2016


   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.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Protocol Specification  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.1.  IS-IS Default Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.2.  IS-IS NET Generation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.3.  IS-IS System ID Duplication Detection and Resolution  . .   4
       3.3.1.  Router-Fingerprint TLV  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
       3.3.2.  System ID Duplication Detection and Resolution
               Procedures  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
       3.3.3.  System ID and Router-Fingerprint Generation
               Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
       3.3.4.  Double-Duplication of both System ID and Router-
               Fingerprint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     3.4.  IS-IS TLVs Usage  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
       3.4.1.  Authentication TLV  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
       3.4.2.  Wide Metric TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
       3.4.3.  Dynamic Host Name TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     3.5.  Routing Behavior Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
       3.5.1.  Adjacency Formation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   4.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   5.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   6.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   7.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
     7.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
     7.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14

1.  Introduction

   This document describes mechanisms for IS-IS [RFC1195]
   [ISO_IEC10589][RFC5308] to be auto-configuring.  Such mechanisms
   could reduce the management burden to configure a network.  Home
   networks and small or medium size enterprise networks where plug-and-
   play is expected can benefit from these mechanisms.

   This document also defines mechanisms which prevent unintentional
   interoperation of autoconfigured routers with non-autoconfigured
   routers.  See Section 3.3.1 .




Liu, Ed., et al.        Expires December 3, 2016                [Page 2]


Internet-Draft        draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf-01             June 2016


   IS-IS auto-configuration contains the following aspects:

   1.  IS-IS default configurations

   2.  IS-IS System ID self-generation

   3.  System ID duplication detection and resolution

   4.  ISIS TLVs utilization such as Authentication TLV, Wide Metric TLV
       etc.

2.  Scope

   The auto-configuring mechanisms support both IPv4 and IPv6
   deployments.

   This auto-configuration mechanism aims at simple case.  The following
   advanced features are out of scope:

   o  Multiple IS-IS instances

   o  Multi-area and level-2 routing

   o  Interworking with other routing protocols

3.  Protocol Specification

3.1.  IS-IS Default Configuration

   o  IS-IS interfaces MUST be auto-configured to an interface type
      corresponding to their layer-2 capability.  For example, Ethernet
      interfaces will be auto-configured as broadcast networks and
      Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP) interfaces will be auto-configured
      as Point-to-Point interfaces.

   o  IS-IS auto-configuration instance MUST be configured with level-1,
      so that the interfaces operate at level-1 only.

   o  IS-IS auto-configuration SHOULD allow P2P mode on Ethernet
      interfaces.

3.2.  IS-IS NET Generation

   In IS-IS, a router (known as an Intermediate System) is identified by
   an NET which is the address of a Network Service Access Point (NSAP)
   and represented with an IS-IS specific address format.  The NSAP is a
   logical entity which represents an instance of the IS-IS protocol
   running on an Intermediate System.



Liu, Ed., et al.        Expires December 3, 2016                [Page 3]


Internet-Draft        draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf-01             June 2016


   The autoconfiguration mechanism generates the IS-IS NET as the
   following:

   o  Area address

         This field is 1 to 13 octets in length.  In IS-IS auto-
         configuration, this field MUST be 13 octets of all 0.

   o  System ID

         This field follows the area address field, and is 6 octets in
         length.  There are two basic requirements for the System ID
         generation:

         -  As specified in IS-IS protocol, this field must be unique
            among all routers in the same area.

         -  In order to make the routing system stable, the System ID
            SHOULD remain the same after it is firstly generated.  It
            SHOULD not be changed due to device status change (such as
            interface enable/disable, interface plug in/off, device
            reboot, firmware update etc.) or configuration change (such
            as changing system configurations or IS-IS configurations
            etc.); but it MUST allow be changed by collision resolution
            and SHOULD allow be cleared by user enforced system reset.

         More specific considerations for System ID generation are
         described in Section 3.3.3 .

3.3.  IS-IS System ID Duplication Detection and Resolution

   The System ID of each node MUST be unique.  As described in
   Section 3.3.3, the System ID is generated based on entropies such as
   MAC address which are supposed to be unique, but in theory there is
   still possibility of duplication.  This section defines how IS-IS
   detects and resolves System ID duplication.

3.3.1.  Router-Fingerprint TLV

   The Router-Fingerprint TLV basically re-uses the design of Router-
   Hardware-Fingerprint TLV defined in [RFC7503].  However, there is one
   difference that one flag is added to indicate the node is in "start-
   up mode" which is defined in Section 3.3.2 .








Liu, Ed., et al.        Expires December 3, 2016                [Page 4]


Internet-Draft        draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf-01             June 2016


      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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |     Type      |    Length     |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |S|A| Reserved  |                                               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+        Router Fingerprint (Variable)          .
      .                                                               .
      .                                                               .
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   The length of the Router-Fingerprint is variable but must be 32
   octets or greater; and the content is also supposed to be unique
   among all the routers.

   o  Type: to be assigned by IANA.

   o  Length: the length of the value field.

   o  S flag: indicates the router is in "start-up" mode as described
      below.

   o  A flag: indicates the router is operating in autoconfiguration
      mode.  This flag is in case the TLV gets used outside of
      autoconfiguration.  If A flag setting does not match in hellos
      then no adjacency should be formed.

   o  Reserved: these bits MUST be set to zero and MUST be ignored when
      received.

   o  Router Fingerprint: uniquely identifies a router, variable length.

   More specific considerations for Router-Fingerprint is described in
   Section 3.3.3 .

3.3.2.  System ID Duplication Detection and Resolution Procedures

   This section describes the System ID duplication detection and
   resolution between two neighbors and two non-neighbors respectively.
   This is because the routing messages between neighbors and non-
   neighbors are a bit different.

3.3.2.1.  Start-up Mode

   While in startup-mode, an auto-configuration router forms adjacencies
   but generates only LSP #0 which contains only the Router-Fingerprint
   TLV.  A router remains in startup-mode until it has successfully
   completed LSPDB synchronization with all neighbors or until 1 minute



Liu, Ed., et al.        Expires December 3, 2016                [Page 5]


Internet-Draft        draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf-01             June 2016


   has elapsed - whichever is longer.  If duplicate system-ID is
   detected while in startup-mode the router MUST clear all adjacencies,
   select a new system-id (subject to rules defined in Section 3.3.2.2
   ), and reenter Startup-mode.

   The start-up mode is to minimize the occurrence of System ID changes
   for a router once it has become fully operational.  It has minimal
   impact on a running network because the startup node is not yet being
   used for forwarding traffic.  Once duplicate System ID has been
   resolved the router begins normal operation.  If two routers are both
   in startup mode (or both NOT in startup mode) and duplicate system-id
   is detected then they determine which one changes its system-id based
   on fingerprint.

   When an IS-IS auto-configuration router boots up, it MUST operate in
   start-up mode until duplicate system-id detection has successfully
   completed.

3.3.2.2.  Duplication Between Neighbors

   In case of System ID duplication occurs between neighbors, an IS-IS
   auto-configuration router MUST include the Router-Fingerprint TLV in
   the Hello messages, so that the duplication could be detected before
   adjacency forming.

   Procedures of the nodes in Start-up Mode:

   1.  Boot up, advertise the Router-Fingerprint TLV in Hello message

          The router sends Hellos which include the Router-Fingerprint
          TLV.  Adjacencies are formed as normal but MUST NOT be
          advertised in LSPs until the router exits startup-mode.

   2.  Receive Hello message(s), and verifies System ID duplication

          Received hellos are inspected for possible duplicate System
          ID.  If duplication is detected, the router MUST check the S
          flag of the Router-Fingerprint TLV.



          +  If the S flag is NOT set (which means the Hello was NOT
             generated by a neighbor also in Start-up mode), then the
             router MUST re-generate the System ID and reenter Startup-
             mode.

          +  If the S flag is set (which means the neighbor is also in
             Startup-mode),



Liu, Ed., et al.        Expires December 3, 2016                [Page 6]


Internet-Draft        draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf-01             June 2016


             -  the router which has a numerically smaller Router-
                Fingerprint MUST re-generate the System ID and reenter
                Startup-mode.  Fingerprint comparison is performed octet
                by octet until octets are different.  Then the smaller
                fingerprint is the one with the smaller octet (unsigned
                integer).  If the fingerprints have different lengths,
                then the shorter length fingerprint MUST be padding with
                zero for comparison.

             -  If Router Fingerprints are identical, both routers MUST
                re-generate the System ID and the Router Fingerprint,
                and reenter Startup-mode.

   3.  Run in normal operation

          After the System ID duplication procedure is done, the router
          begins to run in normal operation.  The router MUST re-
          advertise the Router-Fingerprint TLV with the S flag off.

   Procedures of the nodes NOT in Start-up Mode:

   1.  Compare the System ID in received Hello messages

          When receiving a Hello message, the router MUST check the
          System ID of the Hello.  If the System ID is the same as its
          own, it indicates a System ID duplication occurs.

          If there is no Router-Fingerprint TLV in the Hello message, it
          means a non-autoconfiguration router by accident connected to
          the auto-configuration domain or other unexpected bad
          behaviors.  In this case, the auto-configuration router MUST
          NOT form adjacency with the non-autoconfiguration router.

   2.  Duplication resolution

          When System ID duplication occurs, the non-startup mode router
          MUST check the S flag of the duplicated Router-Fingerprint
          TLV:

          +  If the S flag is NOT set, then the router with the
             numerically smaller or equal Router-Fingerprint MUST
             generate a new System ID.  Note that, the router MUST
             compare the two Router-Fingerprint in terms of two numeric
             numbers.

          +  If the S flag is set, then router does nothing, because it
             MUST be the node which is in start-up mode re-generates the
             System ID.



Liu, Ed., et al.        Expires December 3, 2016                [Page 7]


Internet-Draft        draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf-01             June 2016


   3.  Re-join the network with the new System ID (if required)

          The router with the smaller Router-Fingerprint advertise new
          Hellos based on the newly generated NET to re-join the IS-IS
          auto-configuration network.  The router with the highest
          Router-Fingerprint MUST re-advertise its own LSP (after
          increasing the sequence number).

          The newly generated System ID SHOULD take a duplication
          detection as well.

3.3.2.3.  Duplication Between Non-neighbors

   System ID duplication may also occur between non-neighbors, so an IS-
   IS auto-configuration router MUST also include the Router-Fingerprint
   TLV in the LSP messages.  Specific procedures are as the following.

   Procedures of the nodes in Start-up Mode:

   1.  Boot up, form adjacency

   2.  Acquire LSPDB and verifies System ID duplication

          The router generates only LSP #0 which contains only the
          Fingerprint TLV; and that Fingerprint is only sent in LSP #0.
          A router remains in startup-mode until it has successfully
          completed LSPDB synchronization with all neighbors or until 1
          minute has elapsed - whichever is longer.  If duplicate
          system-ID is detected, the router MUST check the S flag of the
          Router-Fingerprint TLV of the LSP that contains the duplicated
          System ID.



          +  If the S flag is not set, it means the LSP was not
             generated at the Start-up Mode, then the router itself MUST
             clear all adjacencies, re-generate a new system-id and
             reenter Startup-mode.

          +  If the S flag is set, then the router which has a
             numerically smaller Router-Fingerprint MUST generate a new
             System ID and reenter Startup-mode.

   3.  Run in normal operation

          After the System ID duplication procedure is done, the router
          begins to run in normal operation.  The router MUST re-
          advertise the Router-Fingerprint TLV with the S flag off.



Liu, Ed., et al.        Expires December 3, 2016                [Page 8]


Internet-Draft        draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf-01             June 2016


   Procedures of the nodes not in Start-up Mode:

   1.  Compare the received Router-Fingerprint TLVs

          When receiving a LSP containing its own System ID, the router
          MUST check the Router-Fingerprint TLV.  If the Router-
          Fingerprint TLV is different from its own, it indicates a
          System ID duplication occurs.

   2.  Duplication resolution

          When System ID duplication occurs, the non-startup mode router
          MUST check the S flag of the duplicated Router-Fingerprint
          TLV:

          +  If the S flag is NOT set, then the router with the
             numerically smaller Router-Fingerprint MUST generate a new
             System ID.  Note that, the router MUST compare the two
             Router-Fingerprint in terms of two numeric numbers.

          +  If the S flag is set, then router does nothing, because
             according to the start-up mode procedure, the start-up node
             MUST re-generate the System ID.

   3.  Re-join the network with the new System ID

          The router changing its system ID advertise new LSPs based on
          the newly generated System ID to re-join the IS-IS auto-
          configuration network.  The router with the highest Router-
          Fingerprint MUST re-advertise its own LSP (after increasing
          the sequence number).

          The newly generated System SHOULD take a duplication detection
          as well.

3.3.3.  System ID and Router-Fingerprint Generation Considerations

   As specified in this document, there are two distinguisher need to be
   self-generated, which is System ID and Router-Fingerprint.  In a
   network device, normally there are resources which provide an
   extremely high probability of uniqueness thus could be used as seeds
   to derive distinguisher (e.g. hashing or generating pseudo-random
   numbers), such as:

   o  MAC address(es)

   o  Configured IP address(es)




Liu, Ed., et al.        Expires December 3, 2016                [Page 9]


Internet-Draft        draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf-01             June 2016


   o  Hardware IDs (e.g.  CPU ID)

   o  Device serial number(s)

   o  System clock at a certain specific time

   o  Arbitrary received packet

   This document recommends to use an IEEE 802 48-bit MAC address
   associated with the router as the initial System ID.  This document
   does not specify a specific method to re-generate the System ID when
   duplication happens.

   This document also does not specify a specific method to generate the
   Router-Fingerprint.  However, the generation of System ID and Router-
   Fingerprint MUST be based on different seeds so that the two
   distinguisher would not collide.

   There is an important concern that the seeds listed above (except MAC
   address) might not be available in some small devices such as home
   routers.  This is because of the hardware/software limitation and the
   lack of sufficient communication packets at the initial stage in the
   home routers when doing ISIS-autoconfiguration.  In this case, this
   document suggests to use MAC address as System ID and generate a
   pseudo-random number based on another seed (such as the memory
   address of a certain variable in the program) as Router-Fingerprint.
   The pseudo-random number might not have a very high quality in this
   solution, but should be sufficient in home networks scenarios.

   Note that, the Router-Fingerprint SHOULD also remain the same after
   it is firstly generated.  It SHOULD not be changed due to device
   status change (such as interface enable/disable, interface plug in/
   off, device reboot, firmware update etc.) or configuration change
   (such as changing system configurations or IS-IS configurations
   etc.); but it MUST allow be changed by double-duplication resolution
   Section 3.3.4 and SHOULD allow be cleared by user enforced system
   reset.

3.3.4.  Double-Duplication of both System ID and Router-Fingerprint

   As described above, the resources for generating the distinguisher
   might be very constrained at the initial stage.  Hence, the double-
   duplication of both System ID and Router-Fingerprint needs to be
   considered.

   ISIS-autoconfiguring routers SHOULD support detecting System ID
   duplication by LSP war.  LSP war is a phenomenon that if a router
   receives a LSP originated with its System ID, but it doesn't find it



Liu, Ed., et al.        Expires December 3, 2016               [Page 10]


Internet-Draft        draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf-01             June 2016


   in the database, or it does not match the one the router has (e.g.
   It advertises IP prefixes that the router doesn't own, or IS
   neighbors that the router doesn't see), then per ISIS specification,
   the router must re-originate its LSP with an increased sequence
   number.  If double-duplication happens, the duplicated two routers
   will both continuously have the above behavior.  After multiples
   iterations, the program should be able to deduce that double-
   duplication happens.

   At the point when double-duplication happens, routers should have
   much more entropies available.  Thus, the router is to extend or re-
   generate its Router-Fingerprint (one simple way is just adding the
   LSP sequence number of the next LSP it will send to the Router-
   Fingerprint).  (Optimized solution TBD.)

3.4.  IS-IS TLVs Usage

   This section describes several TLVs that are utilized by IS-IS auto-
   configuration.

3.4.1.  Authentication TLV

   It is RECOMMENDED that IS-IS routers supporting this specification
   minimally offer an option to explicitly configure a single password
   for HMAC-MD5 authentication, which is Type 54 authentication mode of
   [RFC5304].  In this case, the Authentication TLV (TLV 10) is needed.

3.4.2.  Wide Metric TLV

   IS-IS auto-configuration routers MUST support TLVs using wide metric
   as defined in [RFC5305]).

   It is recommended that IS-IS auto-configuration routers use a high
   metric value (e.g. 1000000) as default in order to typically prefer
   the manually configured adjacencies rather than the auto-configuring
   ones.

3.4.3.  Dynamic Host Name TLV

   IS-IS auto-configuration routers MAY advertise their Dynamic Host
   Names TLV (TLV 137, [RFC5301]).  The host names could be provisioned
   by an IT system, or just use the name of vendor, device type or
   serial number etc.  Note that, the hostname needs to be unique so
   that it could be useful.







Liu, Ed., et al.        Expires December 3, 2016               [Page 11]


Internet-Draft        draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf-01             June 2016


3.5.  Routing Behavior Considerations

3.5.1.  Adjacency Formation

   Since ISIS does not require strict hold timers matching to form
   adjacency, this document does not specify specific hold timers.
   However, the timers should be within a reasonable range based on
   current practise in the industry.  (For example, the defaults defined
   in [ISO_IEC10589] .)

4.  Security Considerations

   In general, auto-configuration is mutually incompatible with
   authentication.  This is a common problem that IS-IS auto-
   configuration can not avoid.

   For wired deployment, the wired line itself could be considered as an
   implicit authentication that normally unwanted routers are not able
   to connect to the wire line; for wireless deployment, the
   authentication could be achieve at the lower wireless link layer.

   Malicious router could modify the System ID field to keep causing
   System ID duplication detection and resolution thus cause the routing
   system oscillate.  However, this is not a new attack vector as
   without this document the consequences would be higher as other
   routers would not try to adapt.

5.  IANA Considerations

   The Router-Fingerprint TLV type code needs an assignment by IANA.

6.  Acknowledgements

   This document was heavily inspired by [RFC7503].

   Martin Winter, Christian Franke and David Lamparter gave essential
   feedback to improve the technical design based on their
   implementation experience.

   Many useful comments were made by Acee Lindem, Karsten Thomannby,
   Hannes Gredler, Peter Lothberg, Uma Chundury, Qin Wu, Sheng Jiang and
   Nan Wu, etc.

   This document was produced using the xml2rfc tool [RFC2629].
   (initially prepared using 2-Word-v2.0.template.dot.  )






Liu, Ed., et al.        Expires December 3, 2016               [Page 12]


Internet-Draft        draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf-01             June 2016


7.  References

7.1.  Normative References

   [ISO_IEC10589]
              ""Intermediate System to Intermediate System intra-domain
              routeing information exchange protocol for use in
              conjunction with the protocol for providing the
              connectionless-mode network service (ISO 8473)", ISO/IEC
              10589", November 2002.

   [RFC1195]  Callon, R., "Use of OSI IS-IS for routing in TCP/IP and
              dual environments", RFC 1195, DOI 10.17487/RFC1195,
              December 1990, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1195>.

   [RFC2629]  Rose, M., "Writing I-Ds and RFCs using XML", RFC 2629,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2629, June 1999,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2629>.

   [RFC5301]  McPherson, D. and N. Shen, "Dynamic Hostname Exchange
              Mechanism for IS-IS", RFC 5301, DOI 10.17487/RFC5301,
              October 2008, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5301>.

   [RFC5304]  Li, T. and R. Atkinson, "IS-IS Cryptographic
              Authentication", RFC 5304, DOI 10.17487/RFC5304, October
              2008, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5304>.

   [RFC5305]  Li, T. and H. Smit, "IS-IS Extensions for Traffic
              Engineering", RFC 5305, DOI 10.17487/RFC5305, October
              2008, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5305>.

   [RFC5308]  Hopps, C., "Routing IPv6 with IS-IS", RFC 5308,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC5308, October 2008,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5308>.

   [RFC6232]  Wei, F., Qin, Y., Li, Z., Li, T., and J. Dong, "Purge
              Originator Identification TLV for IS-IS", RFC 6232,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC6232, May 2011,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6232>.

7.2.  Informative References

   [I-D.ietf-homenet-hncp]
              Stenberg, M., Barth, S., and P. Pfister, "Home Networking
              Control Protocol", draft-ietf-homenet-hncp-10 (work in
              progress), November 2015.





Liu, Ed., et al.        Expires December 3, 2016               [Page 13]


Internet-Draft        draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf-01             June 2016


   [RFC7503]  Lindem, A. and J. Arkko, "OSPFv3 Autoconfiguration",
              RFC 7503, DOI 10.17487/RFC7503, April 2015,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7503>.

Authors' Addresses

   Bing Liu
   Huawei Technologies
   Q14, Huawei Campus, No.156 Beiqing Road
   Hai-Dian District, Beijing, 100095
   P.R. China

   Email: leo.liubing@huawei.com


   Bruno Decraene
   Orange
   38 rue du General Leclerc
   Issy-les-Moulineaux FR
   FR

   Email: bruno.decraene@orange.com


   Ian Farrer
   Deutsche Telekom AG
   Bonn
   Germany

   Email: ian.farrer@telekom.de


   Mikael Abrahamsson
   T-Systems
   Stockholm
   Sweden

   Email: mikael.abrahamsson@t-systems.se


   Les Ginsberg
   Cisco Systems
   510 McCarthy Blvd.
   Milpitas  CA 95035
   USA

   Email: ginsberg@cisco.com




Liu, Ed., et al.        Expires December 3, 2016               [Page 14]