Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                      D. Farinacci
Internet-Draft
Request for Comments: 9735                                   lispers.net
Intended status:
Category: Standards Track                                L. Iannone, Ed.
Expires: 12 June 2025
ISSN: 2070-1721                                                   Huawei
                                                         9 December 2024

                    LISP
                                                           February 2025

   Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) Distinguished Name Encoding
                    draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-17

Abstract

   This documents document defines how to use the "Distinguished Name" Address
   Family Identifier (AFI)
   17 "Distinguished Names" in LISP. the Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP).
   Distinguished Names (DNs) can be used
   either in either Endpoint Identifiers Identifier
   (EID) records or Routing Locators Locator (RLOC) records in LISP control
   messages to convey additional information.

Requirements Language

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
   "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
   14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
   capitals, as shown here.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents an Internet Standards Track document.

   This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
   (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list  It represents the consensus of current Internet-
   Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid the IETF community.  It has
   received public review and has been approved for a maximum publication by the
   Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Further information on
   Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 7841.

   Information about the current status of six months this document, any errata,
   and how to provide feedback on it may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents obtained 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 12 June 2025.
   https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9735.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2024 2025 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 (https://trustee.ietf.org/
   license-info)
   (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Revised BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the
   Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described
   in the Revised BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   2.  Terminology
     2.1.  Definition of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     2.2.  Requirements Language
   3.  Distinguished Name Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  Mapping System Lookups for Distinguished Name EIDs  . . . . .   5
   5.  Example Use-Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5 Use Cases
   6.  Name Collision  Name-Collision Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   7.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   8.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   9.  Sample LISP Distinguished Name (DN) Deployment Experience . .   6
     9.1.  DNs to Advertise Specific Device Roles or Functions . . .   6
     9.2.  DNs to Drive xTR On-Boarding Onboarding Procedures . . . . . . . . .   7
     9.3.  DNs for NAT-Traversal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     9.4.  DNs for Self-Documenting RLOC Names . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     9.5.  DNs used as EID Names . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   10. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     10.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     10.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   Appendix A.
   Acknowledgments  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   Appendix B.  Document Change Log  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     B.1.  Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-17 . . . . . . .  10
     B.2.  Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-16 . . . . . . .  10
     B.3.  Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-15 . . . . . . .  10
     B.4.  Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-14 . . . . . . .  11
     B.5.  Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-13 . . . . . . .  11
     B.6.  Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-12 . . . . . . .  11
     B.7.  Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-11 . . . . . . .  11
     B.8.  Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-10 . . . . . . .  11
     B.9.  Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-09 . . . . . . .  11
     B.10. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-08 . . . . . . .  11
     B.11. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-07 . . . . . . .  12
     B.12. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-06 . . . . . . .  12
     B.13. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-05 . . . . . . .  12
     B.14. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-04 . . . . . . .  12
     B.15. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-03 . . . . . . .  12
     B.16. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-02 . . . . . . .  12
     B.17. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-01 . . . . . . .  13
     B.18. Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-00 . . . . . . .  13
     B.19. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-name-encoding-15  . . . .  13
     B.20. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-name-encoding-14  . . . .  13
     B.21. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-name-encoding-13  . . . .  13
     B.22. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-name-encoding-12  . . . .  13
     B.23. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-name-encoding-11  . . . .  13
     B.24. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-name-encoding-10  . . . .  14
     B.25. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-name-encoding-09  . . . .  14
     B.26. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-name-encoding-08  . . . .  14
     B.27. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-name-encoding-07  . . . .  14
     B.28. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-name-encoding-06  . . . .  14
     B.29. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-name-encoding-05  . . . .  14
     B.30. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-name-encoding-04  . . . .  14
     B.31. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-name-encoding-03  . . . .  14
     B.32. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-name-encoding-02  . . . .  15
     B.33. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-name-encoding-01  . . . .  15
     B.34. Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-name-encoding-00  . . . .  15
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15

1.  Introduction

   The LISP architecture and protocols ([RFC9300], (see [RFC9300] and [RFC9301]) introduces
   introduce two new numbering spaces, spaces: Endpoint Identifiers (EIDs) and
   Routing Locators (RLOCs).  To provide flexibility for current and
   future applications, these values can be encoded in LISP control
   messages using a general syntax that includes the Address Family
   Identifier (AFI).

   The length of addresses encoded in EID and RLOC records can be easily be
   determined by the AFI field, as the size of the address is implicit
   in its AFI value.  For instance, for AFI = 1, which is IP "IP (IP
   version 4, 4)", the address length is known to be 4 octets.  However,
   AFI 17 "Distinguished Name", is a variable length variable-length value, so the
   length cannot be determined solely from the AFI value 17. 17
   [IANA-ADDRESS-FAMILY-REGISTRY].  This document defines a termination
   character, an 8-bit value of 0 0, to be used as a string terminator so
   the length can be determined.

   LISP Distinguished Names are useful when encoded either in EID-
   Records or RLOC-records in LISP control messages.  As EIDs, they can
   be registered in the mapping system to find resources, services, or
   simply be used as a self-documenting feature that accompany accompanies other
   address specific
   address-specific EIDs.  As RLOCs, Distinguished Names, along with
   RLOC specific
   RLOC-specific addresses and parameters, can be used as labels to
   identify equipment type, location, or any self-documenting string a
   registering device desires to convey.

   The Distinguished Name field in this document has no relationship to
   the similarly named field in the Public-Key Infrastructure using
   X.509 (PKIX) specifications [RFC5280].

2.  Terminology

2.1.  Definition of Terms

   Address Family Identifier (AFI):  a term used to describe an address
      encoding in a packet.  An address family is currently defined for
      IPv4 or IPv6 addresses.  See [IANA-ADDRESS-FAMILY-REGISTRY] for
      details on other types of information that can be AFI encoded.

2.2.  Requirements Language

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
   "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
   BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
   capitals, as shown here.

3.  Distinguished Name Format

   An AFI=17 Distinguished Name is encoded as:

     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
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    |            AFI = 17           |    NULL Terminated US-ASCII   ~
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+    String                     |
    ~                                                               |
    +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   The variable length variable-length string of characters are encoded as a NULL (0x00)
   terminated US-ASCII character-set character set as defined in [RFC3629], where
   UTF-8 has the characteristic of preserving the full US-ASCII range.
   A NULL character MUST be appear only once in the string and MUST be at
   the end of the string.

   When Distinguished Names are encoded for EIDs, the EID Mask-Len
   length of the EIDs as they appear in EID-Records for all LISP control
   messages [RFC9301] is the length of the string in bits (including the
   terminating NULL 0x00 octet).

   Where Distinguished Names are encoded anywhere else (i.e., nested in
   LCAF
   LISP Canonical Address Format (LCAF) encodings [RFC8060]), then a an
   explicit length field can be used to indicate the length of the ASCII
   string in octets, the octets.  The length field MUST include the NULL 0 octet.
   The string MUST still be NULL terminated.  If a NULL 0 octet appears
   before the end of the octet field, i.e., the NULL octet appears
   before the the last position in the octet fields, then the string MAY be
   accepted and the octets after the NULL 0 octet MUST NOT be used as
   part of the octet string.

   If the octet after the AFI field is the NULL 0 octet, the string is a
   NULL string and MUST be accepted.  That is, an AFI=17 encoded string
   MUST be at least 1 octet in length.

4.  Mapping System Lookups for Distinguished Name EIDs

   Distinguished Name EID lookups MUST carry as an EID Mask-Len length
   equal to the length of the name string.  This instructs the mapping
   system to do either an exact match exact-match or longest match a longest-match lookup.

   If the Distinguished Name EID is registered with the same length as
   the length in a Map-Request, the Map-Server (when configured for
   proxy Map-Replying) returns an exact match exact-match lookup with the same EID
   Mask-Len length.  If a less specific name is registered, then the
   Map-Server returns the registered name with the registered EID Mask-
   Len length.

   For example, if the registered EID name is "ietf" with an EID Mask-Len Mask-
   Len length of 40 bits (the length of the string "ietf" plus the null
   octet is 5 octets), and a Map-Request is received for EID name
   "ietf.lisp" with an EID Mask-Len length of 80 bits, the Map-Server
   will return EID "ietf" with a length of 40 bits.

5.  Example Use-Cases Use Cases

   This section identifies three specific use-cases use-case examples for the
   Distinguished Name format.  Two format: two are used for an EID encoding and one
   for an RLOC-record encoding.  When storing public keys in the mapping
   system, as in [I-D.ietf-lisp-ecdsa-auth], [LISP-ECDSA], a well-known format for a public-key hash
   can be encoded as a Distinguished Name.  When street
   location to GPS street-location-to-GPS-
   coordinate mappings exist in the mapping system, as in [I-D.ietf-lisp-geo], [LISP-GEO],
   the street location can be a free form free-form UTF-8 ASCII representation
   (with whitespace characters) encoded as a Distinguished Name.  An
   RLOC that describes an Ingress or Egress Tunnel Router (xTR) behind a
   NAT device can be identified by its router name, as in [I-D.farinacci-lisp-lispers-net-nat].
   [LISP-NET-NAT].  In this case, Distinguished Name encoding is used in
   NAT Info-Request messages after the EID-prefix field of the message.

6.  Name Collision  Name-Collision Considerations

   When a Distinguished Name encoding is used to format an EID, the
   uniqueness and allocation concerns are no different than registering
   IPv4 or IPv6 EIDs to the mapping system.  See [RFC9301] for more
   details.  Also, the use-case documents specified use cases documented in Section 5 of this
   specification provide allocation recommendations for their specific
   uses.

   It is RECOMMENDED that each use-case use case register their Distinguished
   Names with a unique Instance-ID.  For any use-cases which  Any use cases that require
   different uses for Distinguish Distinguished Names within an Instance-ID MUST
   define their own Instance-ID and structure syntax structure for the name
   registered to the Mapping System.  See the encoding procedures in
   [I-D.ietf-lisp-vpn]
   [LISP-VPN] for an example.

7.  Security Considerations

   Distinguished Names are used in mappings that are part of the LISP
   control plane and may be encoded using LCAF, as such LCAF; thus, the security
   considerations of [RFC9301] and [RFC8060] apply.

8.  IANA Considerations

   The code-point value in this specification, namely AFI 17, is already
   allocated in [IANA-ADDRESS-FAMILY-REGISTRY].

   This document has no IANA actions.

9.  Sample LISP Distinguished Name (DN) Deployment Experience

   Practical implementations of the LISP Distinguished Name
   specification have been running in production networks for some time.
   The following sections provide some examples of its usage and lessons
   gathered
   learned out of this experience.

9.1.  DNs to Advertise Specific Device Roles or Functions

   In a practical implementation of
   [I-D.ietf-lisp-site-external-connectivity] [LISP-EXT] on LISP deployments,
   routers running as Proxy Egress Tunnel Routers (Proxy-ETRs) register
   their role with the Mapping System in order to attract traffic
   destined for external networks.  Practical implementations of this
   functionality make use of a Distinguished Name as an EID to identify
   the Proxy-ETR role in a Map-Registration.

   In this case case, all Proxy-ETRs supporting this function register a
   common Distinguished Name together with their own offered locator.
   The Mapping-System aggregates the locators received from all Proxy-
   ETRs as a common locator-set that is associated with this DN EID.
   The  In
   this scenario, the Distinguished Name in this case serves as a common reference
   EID that can be requested (or subscribed as per [RFC9437]) to
   dynamically gather this Proxy-ETR list as specified in the LISP Site
   External Connectivity document.

   The use of a Distinguished Name in this case here provides descriptive information
   about the role being registered and allows the Mapping System to form
   locator-sets associated to with a specific role.  These locator-sets can
   be distributed on-demand based on using the shared DN as EID.  It
   also allows the network admin and the Mapping System to selectively
   choose what roles and functions can be registered and distributed to
   the rest of the participants in the network.

9.2.  DNs to Drive xTR On-Boarding Onboarding Procedures

   Following the LISP reliable transport
   [I-D.ietf-lisp-map-server-reliable-transport], [LISP-MAP], ETRs that plan to
   switch to using reliable transport to hold registrations first need
   to start with traditional UDP registrations.  The UDP registration
   allows the Map-Server to perform basic authentication of the ETR and
   to create the necessary state to permit the reliable transport
   session to be established (e.g., establish a passive open on TCP port
   4342 and add the ETR RLOC to the list allowed to establish a
   session).

   In the basic implementation of this process, the ETRs need to wait
   until local mappings are available and ready to be registered with
   the Mapping System.  Furthermore, when the mapping system is
   distributed, the ETR requires having one specific mapping ready to be
   registered with each one of the relevant Map-Servers.  This process
   may delay the onboarding of ETRs with the Mapping System so that they
   can switch to using reliable transport.  This can also lead to
   generating unnecessary signaling as a reaction to certain triggers
   like local port flaps and device failures.

   The use of dedicated name registrations allows driving this initial
   ETR on-boarding onboarding on the Mapping System as a deterministic process that
   does not depend on the availability of other mappings.  It also
   provides more stability to the reliable transport session to survive
   through transient events.

   In practice, LISP deployments use dedicated Distinguished Names that
   are registered as soon as xTRs come online with all the necessary
   Map-Servers in the Mapping System.  The mapping with the dedicated DN
   together with the RLOCs of each Egress Tunnel Router (ETR) in the
   locator-set is used to drive the initial UDP registration and also to
   keep the reliable transport state stable through network condition
   changes.  On the Map-Server, these DN registrations facilitate
   setting up the necessary state to onboard new ETRs rapidly and in a
   more deterministic manner.

9.3.  DNs for NAT-Traversal

   The open source lispers.net NAT-Traversal implementation
   [I-D.farinacci-lisp-lispers-net-nat]
   [LISP-NET-NAT] has had 10 years of deployment experience using
   Distinguished Names for documenting xTRs versus Re-
   encapsulating Re-encapsulating
   Tunnel Router Routers (RTRs) as they appear in a locator-set.

9.4.  DNs for Self-Documenting RLOC Names

   The open source lispers.net implementation has had 10 years of self-
   documenting RLOC names in production and pilot environments.  The
   RLOC name is encoded with the RLOC address in Distinguished Name
   format.

9.5.  DNs used as EID Names

   The open source lispers.net implementation has had 10 years of
   deployment experience allowing xTRs to register EIDs as Distinguished
   Names.  The LISP Mapping System can be used as a DNS proxy for Name-
   to-EID-address or Name-to-RLOC-address mappings.  The implementation
   also supports Name-to-Public-Key mappings to provide key management
   features in [I-D.ietf-lisp-ecdsa-auth]. [LISP-ECDSA].

10.  References

10.1.  Normative References

   [IANA-ADDRESS-FAMILY-REGISTRY]
              IANA, "IANA Address "Address Family Numbers Registry",
              https://www.iana.org/assignments/address-family-numbers/,
              December 2024. Numbers",
              <https://www.iana.org/assignments/address-family-numbers>.

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

   [RFC3629]  Yergeau, F., "UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO
              10646", STD 63, RFC 3629, DOI 10.17487/RFC3629, November
              2003, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3629>.

   [RFC8174]  Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
              2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
              May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.

   [RFC9300]  Farinacci, D., Fuller, V., Meyer, D., Lewis, D., and A.
              Cabellos, Ed., "The Locator/ID Separation Protocol
              (LISP)", RFC 9300, DOI 10.17487/RFC9300, October 2022,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9300>.

   [RFC9301]  Farinacci, D., Maino, F., Fuller, V., and A. Cabellos,
              Ed., "Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP) Control
              Plane", RFC 9301, DOI 10.17487/RFC9301, October 2022,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9301>.

   [RFC9437]  Rodriguez-Natal, A., Ermagan, V., Cabellos, A., Barkai,
              S., and M. Boucadair, "Publish/Subscribe Functionality for
              the Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP)", RFC 9437,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC9437, August 2023,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9437>.

10.2.  Informative References

   [I-D.farinacci-lisp-lispers-net-nat]
              Farinacci, D., "lispers.net LISP NAT-Traversal
              Implementation Report", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft,
              draft-farinacci-lisp-lispers-net-nat-08, 17 June 2024,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-farinacci-
              lisp-lispers-net-nat-08>.

   [I-D.ietf-lisp-ecdsa-auth]

   [LISP-ECDSA]
              Farinacci, D. and E. Nordmark, "LISP Control-Plane ECDSA
              Authentication and Authorization", Work in Progress,
              Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-lisp-ecdsa-auth-13, 18 August
              2024, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-
              lisp-ecdsa-auth-13>.

   [I-D.ietf-lisp-geo]

   [LISP-EXT] Jain, P., Moreno, V., and S. Hooda, "LISP Site External
              Connectivity", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-
              ietf-lisp-site-external-connectivity-01, 24 September
              2024, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-
              lisp-site-external-connectivity-01>.

   [LISP-GEO] Farinacci, D., "LISP Geo-Coordinate Use-Cases", Work in
              Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-lisp-geo-08, 21 July
              2024, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-
              lisp-geo-08>.

   [I-D.ietf-lisp-map-server-reliable-transport] draft-ietf-lisp-geo-09, 15
              January 2025, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/
              draft-ietf-lisp-geo-09>.

   [LISP-MAP] Venkatachalapathy, B., Portoles-Comeras, M., Lewis, D.,
              Kouvelas, I., and C. Cassar, "LISP Map Server Reliable
              Transport", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-
              lisp-map-server-reliable-transport-05, 4 November 2024,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-lisp-
              map-server-reliable-transport-05>.

   [I-D.ietf-lisp-site-external-connectivity]
              Jain, P., Moreno, V., and S. Hooda, "LISP Site External
              Connectivity",

   [LISP-NET-NAT]
              Farinacci, D., "lispers.net LISP NAT-Traversal
              Implementation Report", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-
              ietf-lisp-site-external-connectivity-01, 24 September
              draft-farinacci-lisp-lispers-net-nat-09, 8 December 2024, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-
              lisp-site-external-connectivity-01>.

   [I-D.ietf-lisp-vpn]
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-farinacci-
              lisp-lispers-net-nat-09>.

   [LISP-VPN] Moreno, V. and D. Farinacci, "LISP Virtual Private
              Networks (VPNs)", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-
              ietf-lisp-vpn-12, 19 September 2023,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-lisp-
              vpn-12>.

   [RFC5280]  Cooper, D., Santesson, S., Farrell, S., Boeyen, S.,
              Housley, R., and W. Polk, "Internet X.509 Public Key
              Infrastructure Certificate and Certificate Revocation List
              (CRL) Profile", RFC 5280, DOI 10.17487/RFC5280, May 2008,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5280>.

   [RFC8060]  Farinacci, D., Meyer, D., and J. Snijders, "LISP Canonical
              Address Format (LCAF)", RFC 8060, DOI 10.17487/RFC8060,
              February 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8060>.

Appendix A.

Acknowledgments

   The author authors would like to thank the LISP WG for their review and
   acceptance of this draft.  And a document.  A special thank you goes to Marc
   Portoles for moving this document through the process and providing
   deployment experience
   deployment-experience samples.

Appendix B.  Document Change Log

B.1.  Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-17

   *  Submitted 9 December 2024.

   *  Refined wording for explicit length usage.

B.2.  Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-16

   *  Submitted 6 December 2024.

   *  Fixed wording for explicit length usage.

B.3.  Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-15

   *  Submitted 3 December 2024.

   *  Luigi Iannone joined as editor.

   *  Re-wording some text for clarification and address Paul Wouters
      concerns.

   *  Updated security consideration section.

   *  Updated abstract.

   *  Moved some references to avoid downref.

B.4.  Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-14

   *  Submitted August 2024.

   *  Use Paul Wouters suggestion to draw packet format for AFI=17
      encoding in Section 3.

B.5.  Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-13

   *  Submitted August 2024.

   *  Use Paul Wouters referene suggestion for RFC3629 to point ASCII
      references in this document to UTF-8.

B.6.  Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-12

   *  Submitted August 2024.

   *  Made changes based on comments from Mahesh Jethanandani and Paul
      Wouters during IESG review.

B.7.  Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-11

   *  Submitted August 2024.

   *  Fix typo found by Erik Kline.

B.8.  Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-10

   *  Submitted August 2024.

   *  Change to "EID mask-len" per Roman Danyliw's comments.

B.9.  Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-09

   *  Submitted July 2024.

   *  Added editorial suggestions from Acee Lindem.

B.10.  Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-08

   *  Submitted June 2024.

   *  Made changes to reflect AD Jim Guichard's comments.

B.11.  Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-07

   *  Submitted May 2024.

   *  Changed document status to "Proposed Standard" and some rewording
      per Alberto for the pETR use-case section.

B.12.  Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-06

   *  Submitted April 2024.

   *  Add Deployment Experience section for standards track
      requirements.

   *  Update references.

B.13.  Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-05

   *  Submitted December 2023.

   *  Update IANA AFI reference.

B.14.  Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-04

   *  Submitted December 2023.

   *  More comments from Alberto.  Change to standard spellings
      throughout.

   *  Add RFC 2119 boilerplate.

   *  Update reference RFC1700 to RFC3232.

B.15.  Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-03

   *  Submitted December 2023.

   *  Address comments from Alberto, document shepherd.

   *  Update references.

B.16.  Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-02

   *  Submitted August 2023.

   *  Update references and document expiry timer.

B.17.  Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-01

   *  Submitted February 2023.

   *  Update references and document expiry timer.

   *  Change 68**.bis references to proposed RFC references.

B.18.  Changes to draft-ietf-lisp-name-encoding-00

   *  Submitted August 2022.

   *  Move individual submission to LISP WG document.

B.19.  Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-name-encoding-15

   *  Submitted July 2022.

   *  Added more clarity text about how using VPNs (instance-ID
      encoding) addresses name collisions from multiple use-cases.

   *  Update references and document expiry timer.

B.20.  Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-name-encoding-14

   *  Submitted May 2022.

   *  Update references and document expiry timer.

B.21.  Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-name-encoding-13

   *  Submitted November 2021.

   *  Update references and document expiry timer.

B.22.  Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-name-encoding-12

   *  Submitted May 2021.

   *  Update references and document expiry timer.

B.23.  Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-name-encoding-11

   *  Submitted November 2020.

   *  Made changes to reflect working group comments.

   *  Update references and document expiry timer.

B.24.  Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-name-encoding-10

   *  Submitted August 2020.

   *  Update references and document expiry timer.

B.25.  Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-name-encoding-09

   *  Submitted March 2020.

   *  Update references and document expiry timer.

B.26.  Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-name-encoding-08

   *  Submitted September 2019.

   *  Update references and document expiry timer.

B.27.  Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-name-encoding-07

   *  Submitted March 2019.

   *  Update referenes and document expiry timer.

B.28.  Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-name-encoding-06

   *  Submitted September 2018.

   *  Update document expiry timer.

B.29.  Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-name-encoding-05

   *  Submitted March 2018.

   *  Update document expiry timer.

B.30.  Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-name-encoding-04

   *  Submitted September 2017.

   *  Update document expiry timer.

B.31.  Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-name-encoding-03

   *  Submitted March 2017.

   *  Update document expiry timer.

B.32.  Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-name-encoding-02

   *  Submitted October 2016.

   *  Add a comment that the distinguished-name encoding is restricted
      to ASCII character encodings only.

B.33.  Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-name-encoding-01

   *  Submitted October 2016.

   *  Update document timer.

B.34.  Changes to draft-farinacci-lisp-name-encoding-00

   *  Initial draft submitted April 2016.

Authors' Addresses

   Dino Farinacci
   lispers.net
   San Jose, CA
   United States of America
   Email: farinacci@gmail.com

   Luigi Iannone (editor)
   Huawei Technologies France S.A.S.U.
   18, Quai du Point du Jour
   92100 Boulogne-Billancourt
   France
   Email: luigi.iannone@huawei.com