IDR WG, IETF Dublin, July, 2008 Vince Fuller (for the LISP crew) LISP and BGP IDR WG, IETF Dublin, July, 2008 Vince Fuller (for the LISP crew)

Agenda Motivation for LISP (and ALT) How LISP+ALT uses BGP A few considerations IDR WG IETF Dublin, July, 2008

LISP Internet Drafts draft-farinacci-lisp-08.txt draft-fuller-lisp-alt-02.txt draft-lewis-lisp-interworking-01.txt draft-farinacci-lisp-multicast-00.txt draft-meyer-lisp-eid-block-01.txt draft-mathy-lisp-dht-00.txt draft-iannone-openlisp-implementation-01.txt draft-brim-lisp-analysis-00.txt draft-meyer-lisp-cons-04.txt draft-lear-lisp-nerd-04.txt draft-curran-lisp-emacs-00.txt IDR WG IETF Dublin, July, 2008

Separate EID/RLOC topologies “Addressing can follow topology or topology can follow addressing – choose one” –Y.R. ID/LOC separation avoids this dilemma EIDs uses organization/geo hierarchy RLOCs follow network topology Reduce global routing state through RLOC aggregation EID prefixes are not generally visible in global routing system IDR WG IETF Dublin, July, 2008

EID vs RLOC assignment ISP allocates 1 locator address per physical attachment point (follows network topology) Provider A 10.0.0.0/8 Provider B 11.0.0.0/8 10.0.0.1 11.0.0.1 R1 R2 RIR allocates EID-prefixes (follows org/geo hierarchy) Site Legend: EIDs -> Green Locators -> Red PI EID-prefix 240.1.0.0/16 IDR WG IETF Dublin, July, 2008

LISP+ALT: What, How and Why Hybrid push/pull approach ALT pushes aggregates - find ETRs for EID ITR uses LISP to find RLOCs for specific EID Hierarchical EID prefix assignment Aggregation of EID prefixes Tunnel-based overlay network BGP used to advertise EIDs on overlay Why invent something new? (or use DNS?) Option for data-triggered Map-Replies IDR WG IETF Dublin, July, 2008

LISP+ALT in action ? ? ? ? EID-prefix 240.0.0.0/24 EID-prefix 240.0.0.1 -> 240.1.1.1 11.0.0.1 -> 240.1.1.1 ? 240.0.0.1 -> 240.1.1.1 11.0.0.1 -> 240.1.1.1 ? 240.0.0.1 -> 240.1.1.1 EID-prefix 240.0.0.0/24 ETR EID-prefix 240.1.1.0/24 ITR ? <- 240.1.1.0/24 <- 240.1.2.0/24 < - 240.1.0.0/16 240.0.0.1 -> 240.1.1.1 1.1.1.1 -> 11.0.0.1 1.1.1.1 11.0.0.1 ALT-rtr ALT-rtr 240.0.0.1 -> 240.1.1.1 11.0.0.1 -> 1.1.1.1 ETR ITR ALT-rtr ALT-rtr 2.2.2.2 12.0.0.1 Legend: EIDs -> Green Locators -> Red GRE Tunnel Low Opex Physical link Data Packet Map-Request Map-Reply ALT-rtr ALT-rtr 3.3.3.3 ETR LAT ? IDR WG IETF Dublin, July, 2008

Securing the mapping system ALT can use existing/proposed BGP security mechanisms (SBGP, etc.) DOS-mitigation using well-known control plane rate-limiting techniques Nonce in LISP protocol exchange More needed? IDR WG IETF Dublin, July, 2008

Non-BGP traffic engineering ALT separates ETR discovery from the ITR-ETR mapping exchange very coarse prefixes globally-advertised more-specific info exchanged where needed Regional ETRs could return more- specific mappings for simple TE Alternative to current practice of advertising more-specific prefixes IDR WG IETF Dublin, July, 2008

Simple BGP configs No BGP changes required for LISP+ALT None made for pilot deployment Though separate AFI/SAFI might be a good idea for debugging/management No need for route-reflectors, etc. May use iBGP in some cases IDR WG IETF Dublin, July, 2008

Questions/Comments? Thanks! Contact us: lisp-interest@lists.civil-tongue.net Information: http://www.lisp4.net OpenLISP: http://inl.info.ucl.ac.be Thanks! IDR WG IETF Dublin, July, 2008 Slide 11