15
IETF/IRTF Chicago - July 2007 Dino Farinacci Dave Meyer Vince Fuller Dave Oran LISP Draft Changes LISP Draft Changes

LISP Draft Changes

  • Upload
    sherry

  • View
    46

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

LISP Draft Changes. IETF/IRTF Chicago - July 2007 Dino Farinacci Dave Meyer Vince Fuller Dave Oran. Agenda. Intro on the -00 draft Describe diffs from -00 to -01 Describe diffs from -01 to -02. draft-farinacci-lisp-00.txt. Published in January 2007 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Page 1: LISP Draft Changes

IETF/IRTF Chicago - July 2007

Dino FarinacciDave MeyerVince FullerDave Oran

LISP Draft ChangesLISP Draft Changes

Page 2: LISP Draft Changes

LISP Implementation ReportLISP Implementation Report IETF/IRTF Chicago 2007IETF/IRTF Chicago 2007 Slide Slide 22

AgendaAgenda

• Intro on the -00 draft• Describe diffs from -00 to -01• Describe diffs from -01 to -02

Page 3: LISP Draft Changes

LISP Implementation ReportLISP Implementation Report IETF/IRTF Chicago 2007IETF/IRTF Chicago 2007 Slide Slide 33

draft-farinacci-lisp-00.txtdraft-farinacci-lisp-00.txt

• Published in January 2007– Describes idea and terminology with variants before

knowing about a mapping service– Describes IP-n-IP encapsulation and where to place

tunnel routers– Describes a “data-triggered” mapping method– Describes locator reachability via ICMP unreachables

and Request polling– Designed specifically to solve site and ISP Traffic

Engineering issues• With the side-benefit of reducing routing table bloat

Page 4: LISP Draft Changes

LISP Implementation ReportLISP Implementation Report IETF/IRTF Chicago 2007IETF/IRTF Chicago 2007 Slide Slide 44

draft-farinacci-lisp-00.txtdraft-farinacci-lisp-00.txt

• Many ideas from the RAWS in October 2006

• Lots of comments received privately and from the RAM & RRG mailing list

Dave Meyer, Jason Schiller, Lixia Zhang, Dorian Kim,Peter Schoenmaker, Darrel Lewis, Vijay Gill, Geoff Huston, David Conrad, Ron Bonica, Ted Seely, and Mark Townsley.

Page 5: LISP Draft Changes

LISP Implementation ReportLISP Implementation Report IETF/IRTF Chicago 2007IETF/IRTF Chicago 2007 Slide Slide 55

draft-farinacci-lisp-01.txtdraft-farinacci-lisp-01.txt• Published June 2007

– IETF latency made it July 2007– Huge contributions from Dave Meyer, now co-author

• Changed encapsulation format to UDP• Made LISP AFI agnostic• Added noncing and loc-reach-bits• Added text now that CONS, NERD, and APT

were clearly documented• Added to the security section• Added to the multicast section

Page 6: LISP Draft Changes

LISP Implementation ReportLISP Implementation Report IETF/IRTF Chicago 2007IETF/IRTF Chicago 2007 Slide Slide 66

draft-farinacci-lisp-01.txtdraft-farinacci-lisp-01.txt

• Even more comments received privately and from the RAM & RRG mailing lists

Jason Schiller, Lixia Zhang, Dorian Kim, Peter Schoenmaker, Darrel Lewis, Vijay Gill, Geoff Huston, David Conrad, Ron Bonica, Ted Seely, Mark Townsley, Chris Morrow, Brian Weis, Dave McGrew, Peter Lothberg, Dave Thaler, Scott Brim, Eliot Lear, Shane Amante, Ved Kafle, and Olivier Bonaventure

Page 7: LISP Draft Changes

LISP Implementation ReportLISP Implementation Report IETF/IRTF Chicago 2007IETF/IRTF Chicago 2007 Slide Slide 77

draft-farinacci-lisp-01.txtdraft-farinacci-lisp-01.txt

• New encapsulation format is UDP– Get through firewalls– ITR hashes on inner header to

produce a source port LAG router can hash on

– Can carry nonce for ETR anti-spoofing– Can carry Locator reachability bits

Page 8: LISP Draft Changes

LISP Implementation ReportLISP Implementation Report IETF/IRTF Chicago 2007IETF/IRTF Chicago 2007 Slide Slide 88

draft-farinacci-lisp-01.txtdraft-farinacci-lisp-01.txt 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ / |Version| IHL |Type of Service| Total Length | / +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ / | Identification |Flags| Fragment Offset | / +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+OH | Time to Live | Protocol = 17 | Header Checksum | \ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ \ | Source Routing Locator | \ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ \ | Destination Routing Locator | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ / | Source Port | Dest Port | UDP +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ \ | UDP length | UDP Checksum | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ / | Type | Locator Reach Bits | Nonce ... | LISP +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ \ | ... Nonce | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ / |Version| IHL |Type of Service| Total Length | / +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ / | Identification |Flags| Fragment Offset | / +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+IH | Time to Live | Protocol | Header Checksum | \ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ \ | Source EID | \ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ \ | Destination EID | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Page 9: LISP Draft Changes

LISP Implementation ReportLISP Implementation Report IETF/IRTF Chicago 2007IETF/IRTF Chicago 2007 Slide Slide 99

draft-farinacci-lisp-01.txtdraft-farinacci-lisp-01.txt +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ / |Version| Traffic Class | Flow Label | / +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ / | Payload Length | Next Header=17| Hop Limit | / +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | O + + u | | t + Source Routing Locator + e | | r + + | | H +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ d | | r + + | | \ + Destination Routing Locator + \ | | \ + + \ | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ / | Source Port = xxxx | Dest Port = 4342 | UDP +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ \ | UDP length | UDP Checksum | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ / |Type=1 | Locator Reach Bits | Nonce ... | LISP +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ \ | ... Nonce | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ . . .

Page 10: LISP Draft Changes

LISP Implementation ReportLISP Implementation Report IETF/IRTF Chicago 2007IETF/IRTF Chicago 2007 Slide Slide 1010

draft-farinacci-lisp-01.txtdraft-farinacci-lisp-01.txt . . . +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ / | Source Port = xxxx | Dest Port = 4342 | UDP +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ \ | UDP length | UDP Checksum | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ / |Type=1 | Locator Reach Bits | Nonce ... | LISP +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ \ | ... Nonce | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ / |Version| Traffic Class | Flow Label | / +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ / | Payload Length | Next Header | Hop Limit | / +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | I + + n | | n + Source EID + e | | r + + | | H +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ d | | r + + | | \ + Destination EID + \ | | \ + + \ | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Page 11: LISP Draft Changes

LISP Implementation ReportLISP Implementation Report IETF/IRTF Chicago 2007IETF/IRTF Chicago 2007 Slide Slide 1111

draft-farinacci-lisp-01.txtdraft-farinacci-lisp-01.txt

• Imperative that Locator reachability not in mapping service– To scale mapping cannot change often

• ICMP Unreachables may be used• Piggyback Locator reachability in data

messages– ITRs at sites know when each other are

unreachable, they tell ETR– ETR (when it is an ITR) uses Locators that are

reachable

Page 12: LISP Draft Changes

LISP Implementation ReportLISP Implementation Report IETF/IRTF Chicago 2007IETF/IRTF Chicago 2007 Slide Slide 1212

draft-farinacci-lisp-01.txtdraft-farinacci-lisp-01.txtEID-prefix: 2.0.0.0/8

Locator-set:

12.0.0.2, priority: 1, weight: 50

13.0.0.2, priority: 1, weight: 50

14.0.0.2, priority: 2, weight: 70

15.0.0.2, priority: 2, weight: 30

Mapping

EntryITR load-splits flows across 2 locators

Ordinal assigments:

0 -> 12.0.0.2

1 -> 13.0.0.2

2 -> 14.0.0.2

3 -> 15.0.0.2

Locator reachability:

12.0.0.2 -> Up

13.0.0.2 -> Up

14.0.0.2 -> Down

15.0.0.2 -> Up

Loc-reach-bits bitfield:

0x00b -> b’0000 0000 1011’

Advertised by all ITRs from site which

they encapsulate anywhere

1) In this scenario, ITR load-splits equally across 12.0.0.2 and 13.0.0.2 because they are up.

2) When any site locator advertises loc-reach-bits of 0x009, only 12.0.0.2 will be used.

X

3) When any site locator advertises loc-reach-bits of 0x008, ony 15.0.0.2 for priority 2 is used.

X

Page 13: LISP Draft Changes

LISP Implementation ReportLISP Implementation Report IETF/IRTF Chicago 2007IETF/IRTF Chicago 2007 Slide Slide 1313

draft-farinacci-lisp-02.txtdraft-farinacci-lisp-02.txt

• Published mid-July 2007– Not in ID directory because of deadline

• Fixed bugs in packet format– Added loc-reach-bits to Map-Request &

Map-Reply messages

• Consistent packet format with CONS• Prototype also in sync with LISP-02

Page 14: LISP Draft Changes

LISP Implementation ReportLISP Implementation Report IETF/IRTF Chicago 2007IETF/IRTF Chicago 2007 Slide Slide 1414

So what did the 3rd grader say So what did the 3rd grader say after Steve Jobs gave an iPhone after Steve Jobs gave an iPhone demo to demo to the class?the class?

Page 15: LISP Draft Changes

LISP Implementation ReportLISP Implementation Report IETF/IRTF Chicago 2007IETF/IRTF Chicago 2007 Slide Slide 1515