--- 1/draft-ietf-lisp-gpe-08.txt 2019-10-25 10:13:11.328777869 -0700 +++ 2/draft-ietf-lisp-gpe-09.txt 2019-10-25 10:13:11.364778778 -0700 @@ -1,24 +1,24 @@ Internet Engineering Task Force F. Maino, Ed. Internet-Draft Cisco Intended status: Standards Track J. Lemon -Expires: April 26, 2020 Broadcom +Expires: April 27, 2020 Broadcom P. Agarwal Innovium D. Lewis M. Smith Cisco - October 24, 2019 + October 25, 2019 LISP Generic Protocol Extension - draft-ietf-lisp-gpe-08 + draft-ietf-lisp-gpe-09 Abstract This document describes extentions to the Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) Data-Plane, via changes to the LISP header, to support multi-protocol encapsulation. Status of This Memo This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the @@ -27,21 +27,21 @@ 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 April 26, 2020. + This Internet-Draft will expire on April 27, 2020. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2019 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 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents @@ -551,21 +551,21 @@ LISP-GPE security considerations are similar to the LISP security considerations and mitigation techniques documented in [RFC7835]. The Echo Nonce Algorithm described in [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis] relies on the nonce to detect reachability from ITR to ETR. In LISP- GPE the use of a 16-bit nonce, compared with the 24-bit nonce used in LISP, increases the probability of an off-path attacker to correctly guess the nonce and force the ITR to believe that a non-reachable RLOC is reachable. However, the use of common anti-spoofing - mechanisms such as uRPF mitigates this form of attack. + mechanisms such as uRPF partially mitigates this form of attack. The considerations made in [I-D.ietf-lisp-rfc6830bis] that Echo Nonce, Map-Versioning, and Locator-Status-Bits SHOULD NOT be used over the public Internet and SHOULD only be used in trusted and closed deployments apply to LISP-GPE as well. These considerations are even more important for LISP-GPE, considering the reduced size of the Nonce/Map-versioning field. LISP-GPE, as many encapsulations that use optional extensions, is subject to on-path adversaries that by manipulating the g-Bit and the @@ -630,24 +630,20 @@ [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, . [RFC6040] Briscoe, B., "Tunnelling of Explicit Congestion Notification", RFC 6040, DOI 10.17487/RFC6040, November 2010, . - [RFC8060] Farinacci, D., Meyer, D., and J. Snijders, "LISP Canonical - Address Format (LCAF)", RFC 8060, DOI 10.17487/RFC8060, - February 2017, . - 9.2. Informative References [I-D.brockners-ippm-ioam-vxlan-gpe] Brockners, F., Bhandari, S., Govindan, V., Pignataro, C., Gredler, H., Leddy, J., Youell, S., Mizrahi, T., Kfir, A., Gafni, B., Lapukhov, P., and M. Spiegel, "VXLAN-GPE Encapsulation for In-situ OAM Data", draft-brockners-ippm- ioam-vxlan-gpe-02 (work in progress), July 2019. [I-D.ietf-tsvwg-ecn-encap-guidelines] @@ -680,20 +676,24 @@ eXtensible Local Area Network (VXLAN): A Framework for Overlaying Virtualized Layer 2 Networks over Layer 3 Networks", RFC 7348, DOI 10.17487/RFC7348, August 2014, . [RFC7835] Saucez, D., Iannone, L., and O. Bonaventure, "Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) Threat Analysis", RFC 7835, DOI 10.17487/RFC7835, April 2016, . + [RFC8060] Farinacci, D., Meyer, D., and J. Snijders, "LISP Canonical + Address Format (LCAF)", RFC 8060, DOI 10.17487/RFC8060, + February 2017, . + [RFC8085] Eggert, L., Fairhurst, G., and G. Shepherd, "UDP Usage Guidelines", BCP 145, RFC 8085, DOI 10.17487/RFC8085, March 2017, . [RFC8086] Yong, L., Ed., Crabbe, E., Xu, X., and T. Herbert, "GRE- in-UDP Encapsulation", RFC 8086, DOI 10.17487/RFC8086, March 2017, . [RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26,