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
