[Search] [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: January 21, 2017                                         Orange
                                                               I. Farrer
                                                     Deutsche Telekom AG
                                                          M. Abrahamsson
                                                               T-Systems
                                                             L. Ginsberg
                                                           Cisco Systems
                                                           July 20, 2016


                        ISIS Auto-Configuration
                      draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf-02

Abstract

   This document specifies IS-IS auto-configuration mechanisms.  The key
   components are IS-IS System ID self-generation, duplication detection
   and duplication resolution.  These mechanisms provide limited IS-IS
   functions, thus they are fit for the networks where plug-and-play
   configuration 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 January 21, 2017.

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



Liu, Ed., et al.        Expires January 21, 2017                [Page 1]


Internet-Draft        draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf-02             July 2016


   (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.  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.  Duplicate System ID Detection and Resolution
               Procedures  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
       3.3.3.  System ID and Router-Fingerprint Generation
               Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
       3.3.4.  Double-Duplication of both System ID and Router-
               Fingerprint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
     3.5.  Routing Behavior Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
       3.5.1.  Adjacency Formation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   4.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   5.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   6.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   7.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
     7.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
     7.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14

1.  Introduction

   This document specifies mechanisms for IS-IS [RFC1195]
   [ISO_IEC10589][RFC5308] to be auto-configuring.  Such mechanisms
   could reduce the management burden for configuring a network,
   especially where plug-and-play device configuration is required.

   IS-IS auto-configuration is comprised of the following functions:

   1.  IS-IS default configurations.




Liu, Ed., et al.        Expires January 21, 2017                [Page 2]


Internet-Draft        draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf-02             July 2016


   2.  IS-IS System ID self-generation.

   3.  System ID duplication detection and resolution.

   4.  ISIS TLV utilization (Authentication TLV, Wide Metric TLV, and
       Dynamic Host Name TLV).

   This document also defines mechanisms to prevent the unintentional
   interoperation of auto-configured routers with non-autoconfigured
   routers.  See Section 3.3.1.

2.  Scope

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

   These auto-configuration mechanisms aim to cover simple deployment
   cases.  The following important features are not supported:

   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 as level-1,
      so that the interfaces operate as level-1 only.

3.2.  IS-IS NET Generation

   In IS-IS, a router (known as an Intermediate System) is identified by
   a 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.

   The auto-configuration mechanism generates the IS-IS NET as the
   following:



Liu, Ed., et al.        Expires January 21, 2017                [Page 3]


Internet-Draft        draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf-02             July 2016


   o  Area address

         In IS-IS auto-configuration, this field MUST be 13 octets long
         and set to 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 by the IS-IS protocol, this field must be
            unique among all routers in the same area.

         -  After its initial generation, the System ID SHOULD remain
            stable to improve the stability of the routing system.  It
            SHOULD not be changed due to device status change (such as
            interface enable/disable, interface connect/disconnect,
            device reboot, firmware update etc.) or configuration change
            (such as changing system configuration or IS-IS
            configuration); but MUST support change as part of the
            System ID collision resolution process and SHOULD allow
            being cleared by a user initiated 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 (e.g.
   MAC address) which are generally expected to be unique.  However,
   since there may be limitations to the available entropies, there is
   still the possibility of System ID duplication.  This section defines
   how IS-IS detects and resolves System ID duplication.

3.3.1.  Router-Fingerprint TLV

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









Liu, Ed., et al.        Expires January 21, 2017                [Page 4]


Internet-Draft        draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf-02             July 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)          .
      .                                                               .
      .                                                               .
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                       Router Fingerprint TLV Format

   The length of the Router-Fingerprint is variable but MUST be 32
   octets or greater.  For correct operation, the Router-Fingerprint
   MUST be unique among all the routers participating in the IS-IS area.

   o  Type: to be assigned by IANA.

   o  Length: the length of the value field.  As the Router Fingerprint
      length is variable, the field length is also variable.

   o  S flag: when set, indicates the router is in "start-up" mode.

   o  A flag: when set, indicates that the router is operating in auto-
      configuration mode.  The purpose of the flag is so that two
      routers can identify if they are both using auto-configuration.
      If the 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 by
      the receiver.

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

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

3.3.2.  Duplicate System ID Detection and Resolution Procedures

   This section describes the duplicate System ID detection and
   resolution process between two neighbors and two non-neighbors
   respectively.  This is due to difference in the the routing messages
   between neighbors and non-neighbors.







Liu, Ed., et al.        Expires January 21, 2017                [Page 5]


Internet-Draft        draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf-02             July 2016


3.3.2.1.  Start-up Mode

   While in Start-up 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 has elapsed - whichever is longer.  If a duplicate
   System ID is detected while in Start-up Mode stage, the Start-up Mode
   router MUST clear all adjacencies, select a new System ID (subject to
   rules defined in Section 3.3.2.2 ), and re-enter Start-up Mode.

   The purpose of 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 Start-up Mode
   node is not yet being used for forwarding traffic.  Once duplicate
   System IDs have been resolved the router begins normal operation.  If
   two routers are both in Start-up Mode and duplicate System ID is
   detected, they follow the duplication resolution as specified in
   Section 3.3.2.2 and Section 3.3.2.3.

   When an IS-IS auto-configuration router boots up, it MUST operate in
   Startup-Mode until duplicate System ID detection has successfully
   completed.

3.3.2.2.  Duplication Between Neighbors

   In the case of duplicate System IDs being detected between neighbors,
   an IS-IS auto-configuration router MUST include the Router-
   Fingerprint TLV in the Hello messages, so that the duplication can be
   detected before an adjacency is formed.

   Start-up Mode procedures:

   1.  Boot up and advertisement of the Router-Fingerprint TLV in Hello
       messages

          The router sends Hello messages which include the Router-
          Fingerprint TLV.  Adjacencies are formed as normal but MUST
          NOT be advertised in LSPs until the router exits Start-up
          Mode.

   2.  Receiving Hello message(s), and System ID duplication detection

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





Liu, Ed., et al.        Expires January 21, 2017                [Page 6]


Internet-Draft        draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf-02             July 2016


          +  If the S flag is NOT set (which means the Hello message was
             NOT generated by a Start-up Mode neighbor), then the router
             MUST re-generate the System ID and re-enter Start-up Mode.

          +  If the S flag is set (meaning the neighbor is also in
             Start-up Mode),

             -  The router which has a numerically smaller Router-
                Fingerprint MUST re-generate its System ID and re-enter
                Start-up Mode.  Fingerprint comparison MUST be performed
                octet by octet starts from the left until a difference
                is found.  Then, the numeric smaller fingerprint is the
                one with the lowest value.  If the fingerprints have
                different lengths, then the shorter length fingerprint
                MUST be padding with zero at the left side for
                comparison.

             -  If the Router Fingerprints are identical, both routers
                MUST re-generate the System ID and the Router
                Fingerprint, and re-enter Start-up Mode.

   3.  Normal operation

          After the System ID duplication procedure is successfully
          completed, the router begins normal operation.  The router
          MUST re-advertise the Router-Fingerprint TLV with the S flag
          disabled.

   Non Start-up Mode procedures:

   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 that System ID duplication has occurred.

          If there is no Router-Fingerprint TLV in the received Hello
          message, this is interpreted as the attached router either
          does not support auto-configuration, or does not have it
          enabled.  In this case, the auto-configuration router MUST NOT
          form adjacency with the non-autoconfiguration router.

   2.  Duplication resolution

          When duplicate System IDs are detected, the non-startup mode
          router MUST check the S flag of the duplicated Router-
          Fingerprint TLV:




Liu, Ed., et al.        Expires January 21, 2017                [Page 7]


Internet-Draft        draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf-02             July 2016


          +  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 octet by octet until
             difference is found.

          +  If the S flag is set, no further action is necessary in the
             Duplication resolution process.

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

          The router that has changed its System ID advertises new
          Hellos containing the newly generated System ID to re-join the
          IS-IS auto-configuration network.  The conflicting SysID-
          duplicated router also MUST increase the sequence number and
          re-advertise its own Hellos.

          The Duplication Detection process SHOULD be repeated with the
          newly generated System.

3.3.2.3.  Duplication Between Non-neighbors

   System ID duplication may also occur between non-neighbors, therefore
   an IS-IS auto-configuration router MUST also include the Router-
   Fingerprint TLV in its LSP messages.  The specific procedures are as
   follows:

   Start-up Mode procedures:

   1.  Boot up, adjacency formation

   2.  Acquiring LSPDB and checking System ID duplication

          The router generates only an LSP #0 which contains only the
          Fingerprint TLV; and that Fingerprint is only sent in LSP #0.
          A router remains in Start-up 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 generated by
             a Non Start-up Mode node, then the router itself MUST clear
             all adjacencies, re-generate a new system-id and reenter
             Start-up Mode.



Liu, Ed., et al.        Expires January 21, 2017                [Page 8]


Internet-Draft        draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf-02             July 2016


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

   3.  Running 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.

   Non Start-up Mode procedures:

   1.  Checking 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 octet by octet until difference is
             found.

          +  If the S flag is set, then router does nothing.

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

          The router changing its System ID advertises new LSPs based on
          the newly generated System ID to re-join the IS-IS auto-
          configuration network.  The other SysID-duplicated router also
          MUST re-advertise its own LSP (after increasing the sequence
          number).

          The newly generated System ID SHOULD perform duplication
          detection as well.








Liu, Ed., et al.        Expires January 21, 2017                [Page 9]


Internet-Draft        draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf-02             July 2016


3.3.3.  System ID and Router-Fingerprint Generation Considerations

   As specified in this document, there are two distinguishing items
   that need to be self-generated: the System ID and Router-Fingerprint.
   In a network device, normally there are some resources which can
   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)

   o  Hardware IDs (e.g.  CPU ID)

   o  Device serial number(s)

   o  System clock at a certain specific time

   o  Arbitrary received packet(s) on an interface(s)

   This document recommends the use of 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 hardware/software limitations and the
   lack of sufficient communication packets at the initial stage in home
   routers when doing ISIS auto-configuration.  In this case, this
   document suggests using the MAC address as System ID and generating a
   pseudo-random number based on another seed (such as the memory
   address of a certain variable in the program) as the Router-
   Fingerprint.  The pseudo-random number might not have a very high
   probability of uniqueness in this solution, but should be sufficient
   in home networks scenarios.

   The considerations surrounding System ID stability described in
   section Section 3.2 also need to be applied.






Liu, Ed., et al.        Expires January 21, 2017               [Page 10]


Internet-Draft        draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf-02             July 2016


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 during the initial stages.  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 whereby a router
   receives a LSP originated with its System ID, but it doesn't find it
   in the database, or it does not match the one the router has (e.g.
   it advertises IP prefixes that the router does not own, or IS
   neighbors that the router does not see), then per the 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 repeat the above behavior.  After
   multiples iterations, the program should be able to deduce that
   double-duplication is occurring.

   When this condition is detected, routers should have much more
   entropies available.  Thus, the router is able 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).

3.4.  IS-IS TLVs Usage

   This section describes the TLVs that are necessary for 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 metrics
   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
   manually configured adjacencies over auto-configuringed.






Liu, Ed., et al.        Expires January 21, 2017               [Page 11]


Internet-Draft        draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf-02             July 2016


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.

   To guarantee the uniqueness of the host names, the System ID SHOULD
   be appended as a suffix in the names.

3.5.  Routing Behavior Considerations

3.5.1.  Adjacency Formation

   Since IS-IS does not require strict hold timer 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 connection itself could be considered
   as an implicit authentication in that unwanted routers are usually
   not able to connect (i.e. there is some kind of physical security in
   place preventing the connection of rogue devices); for wireless
   deployment, the authentication could be achieved at the lower
   wireless link layer.

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

5.  IANA Considerations

   IANA is kindly requested to assign a new TLV for the Router-
   Fingerprint from the IS-IS TLV Codepoint registry.








Liu, Ed., et al.        Expires January 21, 2017               [Page 12]


Internet-Draft        draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf-02             July 2016


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 Thomann,
   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.  )

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>.






Liu, Ed., et al.        Expires January 21, 2017               [Page 13]


Internet-Draft        draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf-02             July 2016


   [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

   [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
   Q10, Huawei Campus, No.156 Beiqing Road
   Hai-Dian District, Beijing, 100095
   P.R. China

   Email: leo.liubing@huawei.com


   Bruno Decraene
   Orange
   France

   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




Liu, Ed., et al.        Expires January 21, 2017               [Page 14]


Internet-Draft        draft-ietf-isis-auto-conf-02             July 2016


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

   Email: ginsberg@cisco.com












































Liu, Ed., et al.        Expires January 21, 2017               [Page 15]