Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) Endpoint Identifier (EID) Block

Lewis, Darrel; Fuller, Vince; Meyer, David; Iannone, Luigi

doi:10.17487/rfc7954

Cited by 2 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Organization (In the case of individuals requesting an EID prefix, this section can be left empty) (a) Organization Name The policy outlined in the present document is tied to the existence of the experimental LISP EID block requested in [RFC7954] and is valid until August 2019.…”

Section: Eid Prefix Request Templatementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Note that, as stated in [RFC7954], the transition of the EID block into a permanent allocation has the potential to pose policy issues (as recognized in [RFC2860], Section 4.3); hence, discussion with the IANA, the Regional Internet Registry (RIR) communities, and the IETF community will be necessary to determine the appropriate policy for permanent EID prefix management, which will be effective after August 2022.…”

Section: Eid Prefix Request Templatementioning

confidence: 99%

“…For the duration defined in [RFC7954], RIPE NCC will manage the LISP EID prefix as described herein. Therefore, this document has no IANA actions.…”

Section: Security Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The rationale, intent, size, and usage of the EID address block are described in [RFC7954]. This document proposes a management framework for the registration of EID prefixes from that block, allowing the requesting organization exclusive use of those EID prefixes limited to the duration of the LISP experiment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Management Guidelines for the Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) Endpoint Identifier (EID) Block

Huston¹,

Jorgensen²,

Iannone³

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Eid Prefix Request Templatementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Eid Prefix Request Templatementioning

confidence: 99%

“…For the duration defined in [RFC7954], RIPE NCC will manage the LISP EID prefix as described herein. Therefore, this document has no IANA actions.…”

Section: Security Considerationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Management Guidelines for the Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) Endpoint Identifier (EID) Block

Huston¹,

Jorgensen²,

Iannone³

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The registrars in this case remain the current five Regional Internet Registries (RIRs). In the case of IPv6, the possibility of reserving a /16 block as EID space is currently under consideration [46]. If granted by IANA, the community will have to determine the body responsible for allocations from this block, and the associated policies.…”

Section: Summary and Feature Matrixmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of locator/identifier separation to improve the future internet routing system

Jakab

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Internet evolved from its early days of being a small research network to become a critical infrastructure many organizations and individuals rely on. One dimension of this evolution is the continuous growth of the number of participants in the network, far beyond what the initial designers had in mind. While it does work today, it is widely believed that the current design of the global routing system cannot scale to accommodate future challenges. In 2006 an Internet Architecture Board (IAB) workshop was held to develop a shared understanding of the Internet routing system scalability issues faced by the large backbone operators. The participants documented in RFC 4984 their belief that "routing scalability is the most important problem facing the Internet today and must be solved." A potential solution to the routing scalability problem is ending the semantic overloading of Internet addresses, by separating node location from identity. Several proposals exist to apply this idea to current Internet addressing, among which the Locator/Identifier Separation Protocol (LISP) is the only one already being shipped in production routers. Separating locators from identifiers results in another level of indirection, and introduces a new problem: how to determine location, when the identity is known. The first part of our work analyzes existing proposals for systems that map identifiers to locators and proposes an alternative system, within the LISP ecosystem. We created a large-scale Internet topology simulator and used it to compare the performance of three mapping systems: LISP-DHT, LISP+ALT and the proposed LISP-TREE. We analyzed and contrasted their architectural properties as well. The monitoring projects that supplied Internet routing table growth data over a large timespan inspired us to create LISPmon, a monitoring platform aimed at collecting, storing and presenting data gathered from the LISP pilot network, early in the deployment of the LISP protocol. The project web site and collected data is publicly available and will assist researchers in studying the evolution of the LISP mapping system. We also document how the newly introduced LISP network elements fit into the current Internet, advantages and disadvantages of different deployment options, and how the proposed transition mechanism scenarios could affect the evolution of the global routing system. This work is currently available as an active Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Internet Draft. The second part looks at the problem of efficient one-to-many communications, assuming a routing system that implements the above mentioned locator/identifier split paradigm. We propose a network layer protocol for efficient live streaming. It is incrementally deployable, with changes required only in the same border routers that should be upgraded to support locator/identifier separation. Our proof-of-concept Linux kernel implementation shows the feasibility of the protocol, and our comparison to popular peer-to-peer live streaming systems indicates important savings in inter-domain traffic. We believe LISP has considerable potential of getting adopted, and an important aspect of this work is how it might contribute towards a better mapping system design, by showing the weaknesses of current favorites and proposing alternatives. The presented results are an important step forward in addressing the routing scalability problem described in RFC 4984, and improving the delivery of live streaming video over the Internet.

show abstract

Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) Endpoint Identifier (EID) Block

Abstract: This document directs IANA to allocate a /32 IPv6 prefix for use with the Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP). The prefix will be used for local intra-domain routing and global endpoint identification, by sites deploying LISP as Endpoint Identifier (EID) addressing space.

Cited by 2 publications

References 13 publications

Management Guidelines for the Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) Endpoint Identifier (EID) Block

Management Guidelines for the Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) Endpoint Identifier (EID) Block

Use of locator/identifier separation to improve the future internet routing system

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About