VPN Identifier: Virtual Private Networks Identifier
A short global code that names one private network, so private addresses from different VPNs cannot be confused.
Fox, B. and B. Gleeson, "Virtual Private Networks Identifier", RFC 2685, DOI 10.17487/RFC2685, September 1999, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2685>.
@misc{rfc2685,
series = {Request for Comments},
number = 2685,
howpublished = {RFC 2685},
publisher = {RFC Editor},
doi = {10.17487/RFC2685},
url = {https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2685},
author = {B. Fox and B. Gleeson},
title = {{Virtual Private Networks Identifier}},
pagetotal = 6,
year = 1999,
month = sep,
} RFC text
Contents
Network Working Group B. Fox
Request for Comments: 2685 Lucent Technologies
Category: Standards Track B. Gleeson
Nortel Networks
September 1999
Virtual Private Networks Identifier
Status of this Memo
This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the
Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet
Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state
and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1999). All Rights Reserved.
Abstract
Virtual Private IP networks may span multiple Autonomous Systems or
Service Providers. There is a requirement for the use of a globally
unique VPN identifier in order to be able to refer to a particular
VPN (see section 6.1.1 of [1]). This document proposes a format for
a globally unique VPN identifier.
1. Introduction
As the Public Internet expands and extends its infrastructure
globally, the determination to exploit this infrastructure has led to
widespread interest in IP based Virtual Private Networks. A VPN
emulates a private IP network over public or shared infrastructures.
Virtual Private Networks provide advantages to both the Service
Provider and its customers. For its customers, a VPN can extend the
IP capabilities of a corporate site to remote offices and/or users
with intranet, extranet, and dialup services. This connectivity
should be achieved at a lower cost to the customer with savings in
capital equipment, operations, and services. The Service Provider
is able to make better use of its infrastructure and network
administration expertise offering IP VPN connectivity and/or services
to its customers.
There are many ways in which IP VPN services may be implemented. The
IP based VPN framework document [1] identifies four types of VPN to
be supported: Virtual Leased Lines, Virtual Private Routed Networks,
Virtual Private Dial Networks, and Virtual Private LAN Segments. In
addition, numerous drafts and white papers outline methods to be used
by Service Providers and/or Service Provider customers to enable this
service. Solutions may be customer based or network based. Network
based solutions may provide connectivity and services at layer 2
and/or layer 3. The devices involved in enabling the solution may be
Customer Premises Equipment (CPE), Service Provider Edge equipment,
Service Provider Core equipment, or some combination of these.
While the various methods of VPN service implementation are being
discussed and debated, there are two points on which there is
agreement:
Because a VPN is private, it may use a private address space which
may overlap with the address space of another VPN or the Public
Internet.
A VPN may span multiple IP Autonomous Systems (AS) or Service
Providers.
The first point indicates that an IP address only has meaning within
the VPN in which it exists. For this reason, it is necessary to
identify the VPN in which a particular IP address has meaning, the
"scope" of the IP address.
The second point indicates that several methods of VPN service
implementation may be used to provide connectivity and services to a
single VPN. Different service providers may employ different
strategies based on their infrastructure and expertise. It is
desirable to be able to identify any particular VPN at any layer and
at any location in which it exists using the same VPN identifier.
2. Global VPN Identifier
The purpose of a VPN-ID is to identify a VPN. This identifier may be
used in various ways depending on the method of VPN service
implementation. For example, the VPN-ID may be included:
- In a MIB to configure attributes to a VPN, or to assign a physical
or logical access interface to a particular VPN.
- In a control or data packet, to identify the "scope" of a private
IP address and the VPN to which the data belongs.
It is necessary to be able to identify the VPN with which a data
packet is associated. The VPN-ID may be used to make this
association, either explicitly (e.g. through inclusion of the VPN-ID
in an encapsulation header [2]) or implicitly (e.g. through inclusion
of the VPN-ID in a ATM signalling exchange [3]). The appropriateness
of using the VPN-ID in other contexts needs to be carefully
evaluated.
There is another very important function that may be served by the
VPN identifier. The VPN identifier may be used to define the "VPN
authority" who is responsible for coordinating the connectivity and
services employed by that VPN. The VPN authority may be the Private
Network administrator or the primary Service Provider. The VPN
authority will administer and serve as the main point of contact for
the VPN. The authority may outsource some functions and
connectivity, set up contractual agreements with the different
Service Providers involved, and coordinate configuration,
performance, and fault management.
These functions require a VPN that is global in scope and usable in
various solutions. To be a truly global VPN identifier, the format
cannot force assumptions about the shared network(s). Conversely, the
format should not be defined in such a way as to prohibit use of
features of the shared network. It is necessary to note that the
same VPN may be identified at different layers of the same shared
network, e.g. ATM and IP layers. The same VPN-ID format and value
should apply at both layers.
The methods of VPN-ID usage are beyond the scope of this memo.
3. Global VPN Identifier Format Requirements
The VPN Identifier format should meet the following requirements:
- Provide a globally unique VPN Identifier usable across
multiple Service Providers.
- Enable support of a non-IP dependent VPN-ID for use in
layer 2 VPNs.
- Identify the VPN Authority within the VPN Identifier.
4. Global VPN Identifier Format
The global VPN Identifier format is:
3 octet VPN authority Organizationally Unique Identifier [4]
followed by
4 octet VPN index identifying VPN according to OUI
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| VPN OUI (MSB) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| VPN OUI |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| VPN OUI (LSB) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|VPN Index (MSB)|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| VPN Index |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| VPN Index |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|VPN Index (LSB)|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
The VPN OUI (IEEE 802-1990 Organizationally Unique Identifier) [4]
identifies the VPN authority. The VPN authority will serve as the
primary VPN administrator. The VPN authority may be the
company/organization to which the VPN belongs or a Service Provider
that provides the underlying infrastructure using its own and/or
other providers' shared networks. The 4 octet VPN Index identifies a
particular VPN serviced by the VPN authority.
5. Security Considerations
This document defines the format of the global VPN identifier without
specifying usage. However, the association of particular
characteristics and capabilities with a VPN identifier necessitates
use of standard security procedures with any specified usage.
Misconfiguration or deliberate forging of VPN identifier may result
different breaches in security including the interconnection of
different VPNs.
6. References
[1] Gleeson, Heinanen, Lin, Armitage, Malis, "A Framework for IP
Based Virtual Private Networks", Work in Progress.
[2] Grossman, D. and J. Heinanen, "Multiprotocol Encapsulation over
ATM Adaptation Layer 5", RFC 2684, September 1999.
[3] "MPOA v1.1 Addendum on VPN Support", ATM Forum, af-mpoa-0129.000,
August, 1999, Bernhard Petri, editor, final ballot document.
[4] http://standards.ieee.org/regauth/oui/index.html
7. Authors' Addresses
Barbara A. Fox
Lucent Technologies
300 Baker Ave, Suite 100
Concord, MA 01742-2168
Phone: +1-978-287-2843
EMail: barbarafox@lucent.com
Bryan Gleeson
Nortel Networks
4500 Great America Parkway,
Santa Clara, CA 95054
Phone: +1-408-855-3711
EMail: bgleeson@shastanets.com
8. Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1999). All Rights Reserved.
This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
English.
The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.
This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Acknowledgement
Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
Internet Society.
ISO Plain Language
On this page
§1VPNs and the Need for an Identifier
An IP virtual private network (VPN) emulates a private IP network over public or shared infrastructure. For a customer it extends the IP capabilities of a corporate site to remote offices and users with intranet, extranet and dialup services, at a lower cost in capital equipment, operations and services. For a service provider it makes better use of the infrastructure and of its network administration expertise.
There are many ways to implement a VPN service. The IP VPN framework document identifies four types that are to be supported: Virtual Leased Lines, Virtual Private Routed Networks, Virtual Private Dial Networks and Virtual Private LAN Segments. The equipment involved may be customer premises equipment, service provider edge equipment, service provider core equipment, or some combination of these.
While the methods were still being debated, two points had general agreement. Because a VPN is private, it may use a private address space that overlaps with the address space of another VPN or with the public Internet. And a VPN may span multiple IP autonomous systems or service providers.
Those two points lead straight to the need for an identifier. An IP address only has meaning within the VPN in which it exists, so the scope of the address, meaning the VPN it belongs to, has to be established whenever the address is used. The document proposes a format for a globally unique VPN identifier that can serve that purpose.
A VPN runs a private IP network over shared infrastructure. Because two VPNs can use the same private address space, an address on its own says nothing. RFC 2685 proposes a short global identifier that says which VPN an address belongs to, so the same name works across providers and across layers.
§2What the VPN Identifier Is For
The purpose of a VPN-ID is to identify a VPN, and it may be used in different ways depending on how the VPN service is implemented. It may be included in a MIB, to configure attributes for a VPN or to assign a physical or logical access interface to a particular VPN. It may also be included in a control or data packet, to identify the scope of a private IP address and the VPN to which the data belongs.
The association between a packet and a VPN can be made explicitly, for example through inclusion of the VPN-ID in an encapsulation header, or implicitly, for example through inclusion of the VPN-ID in an ATM signalling exchange. Whether the VPN-ID is appropriate in other contexts needs to be carefully evaluated.
The identifier also defines the VPN authority, the party responsible for coordinating the connectivity and services employed by that VPN. The authority may be the private network administrator or the primary service provider. It administers the VPN and serves as the main point of contact for it. It may outsource some functions and connectivity, set up contractual agreements with the different service providers involved, and coordinate configuration, performance and fault management.
These functions call for a VPN that is global in scope and usable in various solutions, so the format cannot force assumptions about the shared networks involved, and it must not be defined in a way that prohibits the use of features of those networks. The same VPN may be identified at different layers of the same shared network, for example at the ATM layer and the IP layer, and the RFC states that the same VPN-ID format and value should apply at both layers.
The identifier has two jobs. It says which VPN a private address belongs to, and it names the organisation in charge of that VPN. It can be carried in a management database, in an encapsulation header, or in a signalling exchange. The same value should be used at every layer of a network, so one name covers the whole VPN.
§3Requirements for the Format
The format has to meet three requirements. It must provide a globally unique VPN identifier usable across multiple service providers. It must enable support of a non-IP dependent VPN-ID, for use in layer 2 VPNs. And it must identify the VPN authority within the VPN identifier.
Each requirement follows from the properties of VPNs set out earlier. A VPN may span several autonomous systems and several providers, so one name has to work everywhere; a layer 2 VPN has no IP addresses of its own to build a name from; and the authority has to be discoverable from the identifier itself, because the authority is what coordinates the multiple providers involved.
The format must be unique across providers, must also work for VPNs that do not use IP, and must name the authority inside the identifier itself.
- Globally uniqueUsable across multiple service providers, so one name identifies a VPN everywhere it reaches.
- Not tied to IPSupports a non-IP dependent VPN-ID, so layer 2 VPNs can be identified too.
- Names the authorityThe VPN authority is identified within the identifier itself.
§4The Global VPN Identifier Format
The global VPN identifier has a fixed shape. It is a 3 octet VPN authority Organizationally Unique Identifier, followed by a 4 octet VPN index that identifies the VPN according to that OUI.
The OUI, the IEEE 802-1990 Organizationally Unique Identifier, identifies the VPN authority, which serves as the primary VPN administrator. That authority may be the company or organization to which the VPN belongs, or a service provider that provides the underlying infrastructure using its own and/or other providers' shared networks. The VPN index then identifies one particular VPN among those serviced by the authority.
The split reflects the two requirements. The OUI part is what makes the identifier global, because it is issued to one organisation, and the index part is what makes it specific, because it names a single VPN within that organisation.
The identifier has two parts. The first three octets are the number the IEEE issues to the organisation in charge of the VPN. The next four octets pick out one VPN from those that organisation runs. Together they name a single VPN anywhere in the world.
| Field | Name | Size | Value | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|
VPN-OUI-MSB | VPN OUI (MSB) | 1 byte | Most significant octet of the 3 octet VPN authority Organizationally Unique Identifier. | |
VPN-OUI | VPN OUI | 1 byte | Middle octet of the VPN authority OUI. | |
VPN-OUI-LSB | VPN OUI (LSB) | 1 byte | Least significant octet of the VPN authority OUI. The OUI identifies the VPN authority. | |
VPN-INDEX-MSB | VPN Index (MSB) | 1 byte | Most significant octet of the 4 octet VPN index. | |
VPN-INDEX | VPN Index | 1 byte | Second octet of the VPN index. | |
VPN-INDEX-2 | VPN Index | 1 byte | Third octet of the VPN index. | |
VPN-INDEX-LSB | VPN Index (LSB) | 1 byte | Least significant octet of the VPN index. The index identifies one VPN within the authority. |
§5Security Considerations
The RFC defines the format of the global VPN identifier without specifying usage. It notes that associating particular characteristics and capabilities with a VPN identifier makes it necessary to use standard security procedures with any specified usage.
Two failure modes follow from that. A misconfiguration, or a deliberate forging of the VPN identifier, may result in different breaches in security, including the interconnection of different VPNs, which is exactly the separation that the private nature of a VPN is meant to provide.
The document only defines the format, not how the identifier is used, and it warns that any use of it needs the usual security care. A wrong or deliberately forged identifier can breach the isolation between two VPNs.