Locator/ID Separation Protocol (lisp)
|WG||Name||Locator/ID Separation Protocol|
|Area||Routing Area (rtg)|
|Status update||Show Changed 2019-03-25|
|Additional resources||Issue tracker, Wiki, Zulip Stream|
|Personnel||Chairs||Luigi Iannone, Padma Pillay-Esnault|
|Area Director||Jim Guichard|
Charter for Working Group
The LISP WG has completed the first set of Experimental RFCs describing
the Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP). LISP supports a routing
architecture which decouples the routing locators and identifiers, thus
allowing for efficient aggregation of the routing locator space and
providing persistent identifiers in the identifier space. LISP requires
no changes to end-systems or to routers that do not directly participate
in the LISP deployment. LISP aims for an incrementally deployable
protocol. The scope of the LISP technology is potentially applicable to
have a large span, including unicast and multicast overlays at Layer 2
as well as at Layer 3, encompassing NAT traversal, VPNs, and supporting
mobility as a general feature, independently of whether it is a mobile
user or a migrating Virtual Machine (VM). Hence, the LISP technology is
applicable in both Data Centers and public Internet environments.
The LISP WG is chartered to continue work on the LISP base protocol and
produce standard-track documents. In order to produce a coherent set of
documents, the first (and high priority) work item of the LISP Working
Group is to develop a standard-track solution based on the completed
Experimental RFCs and the experience gained from early deployments.
This work will include reviewing the existing set of Experimental RFCs
and doing the necessary enhancements to support a base set of standards
track RFCs. The group will review the current set of Working Group
documents to identify potential standards-track documents and do
the necessary enhancements to support standards-track.
In parallel with the previous main work item, the LISP WG will work on
the items listed below:
Multi-protocol support: Specifying the required extensions to
support multi-protocol encapsulation (e.g., L2 or NSH (Network
Service Headers). Rather than developing new encapsulations the
work will aim at using existing well-established encapsulations or
emerging from other Working Groups such as NVO3 and SFC.
Alternative Mapping System Design: By extending LISP with new
multi-protocols support, it becomes necessary to develop the required
mapping function and control plane extensions to operate LISP
map-assisted networks (which might include Hierarchical Pull,
Publish/Subscribe, or Push models, independent mapping systems
interconnection, security extensions, or alternative transports of the
LISP control protocol).
Mobility: Some LISP deployment scenarios include mobile nodes
(in mobile environments) or Virtual Machines (VMs in data centers),
hence, support needs to be provided in order to achieve seamless
connectivity. This work item may benefit from experience of other
Working Groups like DMM (Distributed Mobility Management) or NVO3
(for VM migration).
Multicast: Support for overlay multicast by means of replication
as well as interfacing with existing underlay multicast support. This
may need discussion with other Working Groups related to multicast
solutions (e.g. PIM).
Data-Plane Encryption: In some scenarios, it may be desirable to
encrypt LISP encapsulated traffic. In this case, the data-plane
encryption mechanism itself and support for control-plane security
material exchange needs to be specified. Any solution proposed in this
work item has to be reviewed by security experts.
NAT-Traversal: Support for NAT-traversal solution in deployments
where LISP tunnel routers are separated from correspondent tunnel
routers by a NAT (e.g., LISP mobile node).
Models for managing the LISP protocol and deployments that include
data models, as well as allowing for programmable management interfaces.
These management methods should be considered for both the data-plane,
control plane, and mapping system components of standards-track
Similar to the main work item, documents for these work items will as
well target standard-track unless the document is of a different
maturity level (e.g., Informational or Experimental). In the latter
case, the Working Group will evaluate the maturity level and propose a
recommended track for the document.
Collaboration with other working groups, as stated in the different work
items (e.g., PIM, NVO3, DMM, SFC), is important to ensure to have
technologies that work smoothly together. The LISP Working Group is
chartered to work on the LISP technology. It may use technologies
developed in other working groups, but if it identifies needs for
extensions or modifications, those extensions and modifications will be
addressed in the working groups that developed those technologies. The
LISP Working Group may provide feedback to other working groups based on
experience gained while using their solutions.
|Jul 2017||Submit a LISP Mobility document to the IESG for consideration as Proposed Standard|
|Jul 2017||Submit a LISP interworking specification (6832bis) document to the IESG for consideration as Proposed Standard|
|Jul 2017||Submit a LISP control-plane specification (6833bis) document to the IESG for consideration as Proposed Standard|
|Apr 2017||Submit a LISP multicast data-plane specification (6831bis) document to the IESG for consideration as Proposed Standard|
|Apr 2017||Submit a LISP unicast data-plane specification (6830bis) document to the IESG for consideration as Proposed Standard|
|Aug 2016||Submit a LISP control-plane security mechanism document to the IESG for consideration as Experimental|