RFC 1069 (rfc1069) - Page 2 of 10
Guidelines for the use of Internet-IP addresses in the ISO Connectionless-Mode Network Protocol
Alternative Format: Original Text Document
RFC 1069 IP ISO Addressing February 1989
regard to the ISO addressing within the CLNP. In particular, the ISO
network layer addressing standard allows a great deal of flexibility
in the assignment of addresses, and a particular address format must
be chosen. A further problem is the need for implementation and
integration of routing facilities for the ISO-compatible subset of
the Internet environment.
This paper proposed to use addresses which are considerably more
flexible than the addresses used in the current IP Internet
environment. This flexibility is necessary in order to allow some
routing domains to base their internal routing protocol on addresses
derived from the current IP addresses, to allow other routing domains
to base routing on addresses in accordance to the intra-domain
routing protocol being developed by ANSI and ISO [6], and to allow
generality for a future inter-domain routing protocol.
The addressing scheme proposed here makes use of the concept of
"routing domains" as used in ANSI and ISO. This concept is similar
to, but not identical with, the concept of "Autonomous System" used
in the Internet. Routing domains include a combination of gateways,
networks, and end systems (not just gateways), and routing domain
boundaries may be used to define associated access control and policy
routing constraints. Like autonomous systems, routing domains may be
assumed to be topologically contiguous. There is no a priori reason
why routing domains assigned for use with the ISO IP need to have any
particular relation with existing autonomous systems which have been
assigned for use with the IP. The assignment of specific routing
domain identifiers is an "assigned numbers" function which is
necessary for use of the ISO IP in the Internet, but is beyond the
scope of this document.
It is expected that this addressing scheme will be appropriate for
long term use with the ISO IP in the Internet. However, it is also
expected that in the long term, the Internet will be interconnected
with other routing domains making use of other schemes, such as
addresses assigned to commercial internets through ANSI, and
addresses assigned by national standards organizations in other
countries. This implies that, in the long term, gateways in the
Internet will need to be able to route datagrams to destinations in
other routing domains not conforming to the addressing format
proposed here. This is discussed in greater detail in section 6.
2. Introduction
The CLNP is documented in [1], but for matters of completeness the
following illustration of the CLNP header is included here as Figure
1.
Callon & Braun