A modified charter has been submitted for the Locator/ID Separation Protocol (lisp) working group in the Internet Area of the IETF. The IESG has not made any determination as yet. The modified charter is provided below for informational purposes only. Please send your comments to the IESG mailing list (iesg@ietf.org) by Thursday, January 26, 2012 Locator/ID Separation Protocol (lisp) ------------------------------------- Current Status: Active Last updated: 2012-01-19 Chairs: Joel Halpern <jmh@joelhalpern.com> Terry Manderson <terry.manderson@icann.org> Internet Area Directors: Ralph Droms <rdroms.ietf@gmail.com> Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net> Internet Area Advisor: Jari Arkko <jari.arkko@piuha.net> Secretaries: Wassim Haddad <Wassim.Haddad@ericsson.com> Luigi Iannone <luigi@net.t-labs.tu-berlin.de> Mailing Lists: General Discussion: lisp@ietf.org To Subscribe: https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lisp Archive: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/lisp/current/maillist.html Description of Working Group: The IAB's October 2006 Routing and Addressing Workshop (RFC 4984) rekindled interest in scalable routing and addressing architectures for the Internet. Among the many issues driving this renewed interest are concerns about the scalability of the routing system. Since the IAB workshop, several proposals have emerged which attempt to address the concerns expressed there and elsewhere. In general, these proposals are based on the "locator/identifier separation". The basic idea behind the separation is that the Internet architecture combines two functions, routing locators, (where you are attached to the network) and identifiers (who you are) in one number space: The IP address. Proponents of the separation architecture postulate that splitting these functions apart will yield several advantages, including improved scalability for the routing system. The separation aims to decouple 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 most routers. LISP aims for an incrementally deployable protocol. A number of approaches are being looked at in parallel in other contexts. The IRTF RRG examined several proposals, some of which were published as IRTF-track Experimental RFCs. The LISP WG is chartered to work on the LISP base protocol, completing the ongoing work, and any items which directly impact LISP protocol structures and are related to using LISP for improving Internet routing scalability. Specifically, the group will work on: - LISP security threats and solutions - MIBs - deployment models - allocation of EID space - alternate mapping system designs In addition, if work chartered in some other IETF WG requires changes in the LISP base protocol or any items which directly impact LISP protocol structures, then the LISP WG is chartered to work on such changes. The working group will encourage and support interoperable LISP implementations as well as defining requirements for alternate mapping systems. The Working Group will also develop security profiles for LISP and the various LISP mapping systems. It is expected that the results of specifying, implementing, and testing LISP will be fed to the general efforts at the IETF and IRTF to understand which type of a solution is optimal. The LISP WG is not chartered to develop a standard solution for solving the routing scalability problem at this time. The specifications developed by the WG are Experimental and labeled with accurate disclaimers about their limitations and not fully understood implications for Internet traffic. In addition, as these issues are understood, the working group will analyze and document the implications of LISP on Internet traffic, applications, routers, and security. This analysis will explain what role LISP can play in scalable routing. The analysis should also look at scalability and levels of state required for encapsulation, decapsulation, liveness, and so on as well as the manageability and operability of LISP. Specifically, the group will work on: - documenting areas that need experimentation - summarizing the results of implementation, experiments, and deployment experience - describing the implications of employing LISP - operational guidance for using LISP Goals and Milestones Jun 2012 Forward draft-ietf-lisp-mib to the IESG Jun 2012 Forward draft-ietf-lisp-sec to the IESG Jun 2012 Forward to the IESG an operational document which should include cache management and ETR synchronization techniques (draft-ietf-lisp-deployment). Oct 2012 Forward to the IESG a document providing a solution to replay issues with Map-Register/Map-Notify Dec 2013 Publish an example cache management specification. Dec 2013 Forward to the IESG an evaluation of the security threat to cache maintenance (draft-ietf-lisp-threats) Dec 2013 Forward to the IESG a document addressing the areas which require further experimentation. Jun 2014 Evaluate the applicability and coverage for LISP from a reuse of SIDR technology. Jun 2014 Summarize results of specifying, implementing, and testing LISP and forward to IESG and/or IRTF. Jun 2014 Analyze and document the implications of LISP deployments in Internet topologies and forward to IESG for publication. Dec 2014 Re-charter or close _______________________________________________ IETF-Announce mailing list IETF-Announce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce