Network Working Group D. Lewis
Internet-Draft Cisco Systems, Inc.
Intended status: Informational P. Agarwal
Expires: January 5, 2015 Broadcom
L. Kreeger
F. Maino
P. Quinn
M. Smith
N. Yadav
Cisco Systems, Inc.
July 4, 2014
LISP Generic Protocol Extension
draft-lewis-lisp-gpe-02.txt
Abstract
This draft describes extending the Locator/ID Separation Protocol
(LISP) [RFC6830], via changes to the LISP header, with three new
capabilities: support for multi-protocol encapsulation, operations,
administration and management (OAM) signaling, and explicit
versioning.
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 5, 2015.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2014 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
Lewis, et al. Expires January 5, 2015 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft LISP Generic Protocol Extension July 2014
(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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. LISP Header Without Protocol Extensions . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Generic Protocol Extension for LISP (LISP-gpe) . . . . . . . . 5
3.1. Multi Protocol Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.2. OAM Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.3. Version Bits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4. Backward Compatibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.1. LISP-gpe Routers to (legacy) LISP Routers . . . . . . . . 8
4.2. (legacy) LISP Routers to LISP-gpe Routers . . . . . . . . 8
4.3. Type of Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.4. VLAN Identifier (VID) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5. LISP-gpe Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
7. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Lewis, et al. Expires January 5, 2015 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft LISP Generic Protocol Extension July 2014
1. Introduction
LISP [RFC6830] defines an encapsulation format that carries IPv4 or
IPv6 (henceforth referred to as IP) packets in a LISP header and
outer UDP/IP transport.
The LISP header does not specify the protocol being encapsulated and
therefore is currently limited to encapsulating only IP packet
payloads. Other protocols, most notably VXLAN [VXLAN] (which defines
a similar header format to LISP), are used to encapsulate L2
protocols such as Ethernet. LISP [RFC6830] can be extended to
indicate the inner protocol, enabling the encapsulation of Ethernet,
IP or any other desired protocol all the while ensuring compatibility
with existing LISP [RFC6830] deployments.
As LISP is deployed, there's also the need to provide increased
visibility and diagnostic capabilities within the overlay.
This document describes extending LISP ([RFC6830]) via the following
changes:
Next Protocol Bit (P bit): A reserved flag bit is allocated, and set
in the LISP-gpe header to indicate that a next protocol field is
present.
OAM Flag Bit (O bit): A reserved flag bit is allocated, and set in
the LISP-gpe header, to indicate that the packet is an OAM packet.
Version: Two reserved bits are allocated, and set in the LISP-gpe
header, to indicate LISP-gpe protocol version.
Next protocol: An 8 bit next protocol field is present in the LISP-
gpe header.
Lewis, et al. Expires January 5, 2015 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft LISP Generic Protocol Extension July 2014
2. LISP Header Without Protocol Extensions
As described in the introduction, the LISP header has no protocol
identifier that indicates the type of payload being carried by LISP.
Because of this, LISP is limited to an IP payload. Furthermore, the
LISP header has no mechanism to signal OAM packets.
The LISP header contains flags (some defined, some reserved), a
Nonce/Map-version field and an instance ID/Locator-status-bit field.
The flags provide flexibility to define how the reserved bits can be
used to change the definition of the LISP header.
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|N|L|E|V|I|flags| Nonce/Map-Version |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Instance ID/Locator-Status-Bits |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 1: LISP Header
Lewis, et al. Expires January 5, 2015 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft LISP Generic Protocol Extension July 2014
3. Generic Protocol Extension for LISP (LISP-gpe)
3.1. Multi Protocol Support
This draft defines the following changes to the LISP header in order
to support multi-protocol encapsulation.
P Bit: Flag bit 5 is defined as the Next Protocol bit. The P bit
MUST be set to 1 to indicate the presence of the 8 bit next
protocol field.
P = 0 indicates that the payload MUST conform to LISP as defined
in [RFC6830].
Flag bit 5 was chosen as the P bit because this flag bit is
currently unallocated in LISP [RFC6830].
Next Protocol Field: The lower 8 bits of the first word are used to
carry a next protocol. This next protocol field contains the
protocol of the encapsulated payload packet.
LISP [RFC6830] uses the lower 16 bits of the first word for either
a nonce, an echo-nonce ([RFC6830]) or to support map-versioning
([RFC6834]). These are all optional capabilities that are
indicated by setting the N, E, and the V bit respectively.
To maintain the desired data plane compatibility, when the P bit
is set, the N, E, and V bits MUST be set to zero.
A new protocol registry will be requested from IANA for the Next
Protocol field. This draft defines the following Next Protocol
values:
0x1 : IPv4
0x2 : IPv6
0x3 : Ethernet
0x4: Network Service Header
Lewis, et al. Expires January 5, 2015 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft LISP Generic Protocol Extension July 2014
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|N|L|E|V|I|P|R|R| Reserved | Next Protocol |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Instance ID/Locator-Status-Bits |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 2: LISP-gpe Next Protocol (P=1)
3.2. OAM Support
Flag bit 7 is defined as the O bit. When the O bit is set to 1, the
packet is an OAM packet and OAM processing MUST occur. The OAM
protocol details are out of scope for this document. As with the
P-bit, bit 7 is currently a reserved flag in [RFC6830].
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|N|L|E|V|I|P|R|O| Reserved | Next Protocol |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Instance ID/Locator-Status-Bits |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 3: LISP-gpe OAM bit (P=1)
3.3. Version Bits
LISP-gpe bits8 and 9 are defined as version bits. The version field
is used to ensure backward compatibility going forward with future
LISP-gpe updates.
The initial version for LISP-gpe is 0.
Lewis, et al. Expires January 5, 2015 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft LISP Generic Protocol Extension July 2014
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|N|L|E|V|I|P|R|O|Ver| Reserved | Next Protocol |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Instance ID/Locator-Status-Bits |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 4: LISP-gpe Version bits (P=1)
Lewis, et al. Expires January 5, 2015 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft LISP Generic Protocol Extension July 2014
4. Backward Compatibility
Undefined (in RFC6830) flag bits 5 and 7, LISP-gpe P and O bits, were
selected to ensure compatibility with existing LISP [RFC6830]
deployments.
Similarly, using P = 0 to indicate that the format of the header and
payload conforms to [RFC6830] ensures compatibility with existing
LISP hardware forwarding platforms.
4.1. LISP-gpe Routers to (legacy) LISP Routers
A LISP-gpe router MUST not encapsulate non-IP packet nor OAM packets
to a LISP router. A method for determining the capabilities of a
LISP router (gpe or "legacy") is out of the scope of this draft.
When encapsulating IP packets to a LISP router the P bit SHOULD be
set to 1 and the UDP port MUST be set to 4341. OAM bit MUST be set
to 0. The Next Protocol field SHOULD be 0x1 (IPv4) or 0x2 (IPv6).
The (legacy) LISP router will ignore the P bit and the protocol type
field. The (legacy) LISP router will treat the packet as a LISP
packet and inspect the first nibble of the payload to determine the
IP version.
When the P bit is set, the N, E, and V bits MUST be set to zero. The
receiving (legacy) LISP router will ignore N, E and V bits, when the
P bit is set.
4.2. (legacy) LISP Routers to LISP-gpe Routers
When a LISP-gpe router receives a packet from a (legacy) LISP router,
the P bit MUST not be set and the UDP port MUST be 4341. The payload
MUST be IP, and the LISP-gpe router will inspect the first nibble of
the payload to determine IP version.
4.3. Type of Service
When a LISP-gpe router performs Ethernet encapsulation, the inner
802.1Q [IEEE8021Q] priority code point (PCP) field MAY be mapped from
the encapsulated frame to the Type of Service field in the outer IPv4
header, or in the case of IPv6 the 'Traffic Class' field.
4.4. VLAN Identifier (VID)
When a LISP-gpe router performs Ethernet encapsulation, the inner
header 802.1Q [IEEE8021Q] VLAN Identifier (VID) MAY be mapped to, or
used to determine the LISP Instance ID field.
Lewis, et al. Expires January 5, 2015 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft LISP Generic Protocol Extension July 2014
5. LISP-gpe Examples
This section provides two examples of IP protocols, and one example
of Ethernet encapsulated LISP-gpe using the generic extension
described in this document.
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|N|L|E|V|I|1|0|0|0| Reserved | NP = IPv4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Instance ID/Locator-Status-Bits |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Original IPv4 Packet |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 5: IPv4 and LISP-gpe
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|N|L|E|V|I|1|0|0|0| Reserved | NP = IPv6 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Instance ID/Locator-Status-Bits |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Original IPv6 Packet |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 6: IPv6 and LISP-gpe
Lewis, et al. Expires January 5, 2015 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft LISP Generic Protocol Extension July 2014
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|N|L|E|V|I|1|0|0|0| Reserved | NP = Ethernet |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Instance ID/Locator-Status-Bits |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Original Ethernet Frame |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 7: Ethernet and LISP-gpe
Lewis, et al. Expires January 5, 2015 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft LISP Generic Protocol Extension July 2014
6. Security Considerations
LISP-gpe security considerations are similar to the LISP security
considerations documented at length in LISP [RFC6830]. With LISP-
gpe, issues such as dataplane spoofing, flooding, and traffic
redirection are dependent on the particular protocol payload
encapsulated.
Lewis, et al. Expires January 5, 2015 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft LISP Generic Protocol Extension July 2014
7. Acknowledgments
A special thank you goes to Dino Farinacci for his guidance and
detailed review.
Lewis, et al. Expires January 5, 2015 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft LISP Generic Protocol Extension July 2014
8. IANA Considerations
IANA is requested to set up a registry of "Next Protocol". These are
8-bit values. Next Protocol values 0, 1, 2, 3 and 4 are defined in
this draft. New values are assigned via Standards Action [RFC5226].
+---------------+-------------+---------------+
| Next Protocol | Description | Reference |
+---------------+-------------+---------------+
| 0 | Reserved | This document |
| | | |
| 1 | IPv4 | This document |
| | | |
| 2 | IPv6 | This document |
| | | |
| 3 | Ethernet | This document |
| | | |
| 4 | NSH | This document |
| | | |
| 5..253 | Unassigned | |
+---------------+-------------+---------------+
Table 1
There are ten bits at the beginning of the LISP-gpe header. New
bits are assigned via Standards Action [RFC5226].
Bits 0-3 - Assigned by LISP [RFC6830]
Bit 4 - Instance ID (I bit)
Bit 5 - Next Protocol (P bit)
Bit 6 - Reserved
Bit 7 - OAM (O bit)
Bits 8-9 - Version
Lewis, et al. Expires January 5, 2015 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft LISP Generic Protocol Extension July 2014
9. References
9.1. Normative References
[RFC0768] Postel, J., "User Datagram Protocol", STD 6, RFC 768,
August 1980.
[RFC0791] Postel, J., "Internet Protocol", STD 5, RFC 791,
September 1981.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
May 2008.
9.2. Informative References
[ETYPES] The IEEE Registration Authority, "IEEE 802 Numbers", 2012,
<http://www.iana.org/assignments/ieee-802-numbers/
ieee-802-numbers.xml>.
[IEEE8021Q]
The IEEE Computer Society, "Media Access Control (MAC)
Bridges and Virtual Bridge Local Area Networks", August
2012, <http://standards.ieee.org/getieee802/download/
802.1Q-2011.pdf>.
[RFC1700] Reynolds, J. and J. Postel, "Assigned Numbers", RFC 1700,
October 1994.
[RFC6830] Farinacci, D., Fuller, V., Meyer, D., and D. Lewis, "The
Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP)", RFC 6830,
January 2013.
[RFC6834] Iannone, L., Saucez, D., and O. Bonaventure, "Locator/ID
Separation Protocol (LISP) Map-Versioning", RFC 6834,
January 2013.
[VXLAN] Dutt, D., Mahalingam, M., Duda, K., Agarwal, P., Kreeger,
L., Sridhar, T., Bursell, M., and C. Wright, "VXLAN: A
Framework for Overlaying Virtualized Layer 2 Networks over
Layer 3 Networks", 2013.
Lewis, et al. Expires January 5, 2015 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft LISP Generic Protocol Extension July 2014
Authors' Addresses
Darrel Lewis
Cisco Systems, Inc.
Email: darlewis@cisco.com
Puneet Agarwal
Broadcom
Email: pagarwal@broadcom.com
Larry Kreeger
Cisco Systems, Inc.
Email: kreeger@cisco.com
Fabio Maino
Cisco Systems, Inc.
Email: fmaino@cisco.com
Paul Quinn
Cisco Systems, Inc.
Email: paulq@cisco.com
Michael Smith
Cisco Systems, Inc.
Email: michsmit@cisco.com
Navindra Yadav
Cisco Systems, Inc.
Email: nyadav@cisco.com
Lewis, et al. Expires January 5, 2015 [Page 15]