Network Working Group N. Shen
Request for Comments: 2763 Siara Systems
Category: Informational H. Smit
Cisco Systems
February 2000
Dynamic Hostname Exchange Mechanism for IS-IS
1. Introduction
IS-IS uses a 1-8 byte system ID (normally 6 bytes) to represent a node in the network. For management and operation reasons, network operators need to check the status of IS-IS adjacencies, entries in the routing table and the content of the IS-IS link state database. It is obvious that, when looking at diagnostics information, hexadecimal representations of systemIDs and LSP identifiers are less clear than symbolic names.
Shen & Smit Informational [Page 1]
RFC 2763 Dynamic Hostname February 2000 2. Possible solutionsThe obvious drawback of static configuration of mappings is the issue of scalability and maintainability. The network operators have to maintain the name tables. They have to maintain an entry in the table for every router in the network. They have to maintain this table on each router in the network. The effort to create and maintain these static tables grows with the total number of routers on the network. Changing the name or systemID of one router, or adding one new router introduced will affect the configurations of all the other routers on the network. This will make it very likely that those static tables are outdated.
3. The Dynamic Hostname TLV
The Dynamic hostname TLV is defined here as TLV type 137.
Shen & Smit Informational [Page 2]
RFC 2763 Dynamic Hostname February 2000
If this TLV is present in a pseudo node LSP, then it should not be interpreted as the DNS hostname of the router.
4. Implementation
The Dynamic Hostname TLV is optional. When originating an LSP, a router may decide to include this TLV in its LSP. Upon receipt of an LSP with the dynamic hostname TLV, a router may decide to ignore this TLV, or to install the symbolic name and systemID in its hostname mapping table.
5. Security Considerations
This document raises no new security issues for IS-IS. However, it is encouraged to use authentications for IS-IS routing protocol. The authentication mechanism for IS-IS protocol is specified in [1] and it is being enhanced within IETF in [2].
6. Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Enke Chen and Yakov Rekhter for their comments on this work.
7. References
[1] ISO, "Intermediate system to Intermediate system routing
Shen & Smit Informational [Page 3]
RFC 2763 Dynamic Hostname February 2000 8. Authors' AddressesNaiming Shen Siara Systems, Inc. 1195 Borregas Avenue Sunnyvale, CA, 94089
Shen & Smit Informational [Page 4]
RFC 2763 Dynamic Hostname February 2000 9. Full Copyright StatementCopyright (C) The Internet Society (2000). All Rights Reserved.