draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-msdp-sa-interoperation-03.txt   draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-msdp-sa-interoperation-04.txt 
BESS Z. Zhang BESS Z. Zhang
Internet-Draft L. Giuliano Internet-Draft L. Giuliano
Updates: 6514 (if approved) Juniper Networks Updates: 6514 (if approved) Juniper Networks
Intended status: Standards Track September 2, 2019 Intended status: Standards Track October 16, 2019
Expires: March 5, 2020 Expires: April 18, 2020
MVPN and MSDP SA Interoperation MVPN and MSDP SA Interoperation
draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-msdp-sa-interoperation-03 draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-msdp-sa-interoperation-04
Abstract Abstract
This document specifies the procedures for interoperation between This document specifies the procedures for interoperation between
MVPN Source Active routes and customer MSDP Source Active routes, Multicast Virtual Private Network (MVPN) Source Active routes and
which is useful for MVPN provider networks offering services to customer Multicast Source Discovery Protocol (MSDP) Source Active
customers with an existing MSDP infrastructure. Without the routes, which is useful for MVPN provider networks offering services
to customers with an existing MSDP infrastructure. Without the
procedures described in this document, VPN-specific MSDP sessions are procedures described in this document, VPN-specific MSDP sessions are
required among the PEs that are customer MSDP peers. required among the PEs that are customer MSDP peers. This document
updates RFC6514.
Requirements Language Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC2119. "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 Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on March 5, 2020. This Internet-Draft will expire on April 18, 2020.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Terminologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Terminologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. MVPN RPT-SPT Mode . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.1. MVPN RPT-SPT Mode . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. Specification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5. IANA Assignment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1. Terminologies 1. Terminologies
Familiarity with MVPN and MSDP protocols and procedures is assumed. Familiarity with MVPN and MSDP protocols and procedures is assumed.
Some terminologies are listed below for convenience. Some terminologies are listed below for convenience.
skipping to change at page 4, line 11 skipping to change at page 4, line 16
describes how to convey the RP address information into the MVPN describes how to convey the RP address information into the MVPN
Source Active route using an Extended Community so this information Source Active route using an Extended Community so this information
can be shared with an existing MSDP infrastructure. can be shared with an existing MSDP infrastructure.
The procedures apply to Global Table Multicast (GTM) [RFC7716] as The procedures apply to Global Table Multicast (GTM) [RFC7716] as
well. well.
2.1. MVPN RPT-SPT Mode 2.1. MVPN RPT-SPT Mode
For comparison, another method of supporting customer ASM is For comparison, another method of supporting customer ASM is
generally referred to "rpt-spt" mode. Section "13. Switching from a generally referred to as "rpt-spt" mode. Section "13. Switching
Shared C-Tree to a Source C-Tree" of [RFC6514] specifies the MVPN SA from a Shared C-Tree to a Source C-Tree" of [RFC6514] specifies the
procedures for that mode, but those SA routes are replacement for MVPN SA procedures for that mode, but those SA routes are a
PIM-ASM assert and (s,g,rpt) prune mechanisms, not for source replacement for PIM-ASM assert and (s,g,rpt) prune mechanisms, not
discovery purpose. MVPN/MSDP SA interoperation for the "rpt-spt" for source discovery purposes. MVPN/MSDP SA interoperation for the
mode is outside of the scope of this document. In the rest of the "rpt-spt" mode is outside of the scope of this document. In the rest
document, the "spt-only" mode is assumed. of the document, the "spt-only" mode is assumed.
3. Specification 3. Specification
The MVPN PEs that act as customer RPs or have one or more MSDP The MVPN PEs that act as customer RPs or have one or more MSDP
sessions in a VPN (or the global table in case of GTM) are treated as sessions in a VPN (or the global table in case of GTM) are treated as
an MSDP mesh group for that VPN (or the global table). In the rest an MSDP mesh group for that VPN (or the global table). In the rest
of the document, it is referred to as the PE mesh group. It MUST not of the document, it is referred to as the PE mesh group. It MUST NOT
include other MSDP speakers, and is integrated into the rest of MSDP include other MSDP speakers, and is integrated into the rest of MSDP
infrastructure for the VPN (or the global table) following normal infrastructure for the VPN (or the global table) following normal
MSDP rules and practices. MSDP rules and practices.
When an MVPN PE advertises an MVPN SA route following procedures in When an MVPN PE advertises an MVPN SA route following procedures in
[RFC6514] for the "spt-only" mode, it SHOULD attach an "MVPN SA RP- [RFC6514] for the "spt-only" mode, it SHOULD attach an "MVPN SA RP-
address Extended Community". This is a Transitive IPv4-Address- address Extended Community". This is a Transitive IPv4-Address-
Specific Extended Community. The Local Administrative field is set Specific Extended Community. The Local Administrative field is set
to zero and the Global Administrative field is set to an RP address to zero and the Global Administrative field is set to an RP address
determined as the following: determined as the following:
o If the (C-S,C-G) is learnt as result of PIM Register mechanism, o If the (C-S,C-G) is learnt as result of PIM Register mechanism,
the local RP address for the C-G is used. the local RP address for the C-G is used.
o If the (C-S,C-G) is learnt as result of incoming MSDP SA messages, o If the (C-S,C-G) is learnt as result of incoming MSDP SA messages,
the RP address in the selected MSDP SA message is used. the RP address in the selected MSDP SA message is used.
In addition to procedures in [RFC6514], an MVPN PE may be provisioned In addition to procedures in [RFC6514], an MVPN PE may be provisioned
to generate MSDP SA messages from received MVPN SA routes, with or to generate MSDP SA messages from received MVPN SA routes, with or
without fine policy control. If a received MVPN SA route is to without fine grained policy control. If a received MVPN SA route is
trigger MSDP SA message, it is treated as if a corresponding MSDP SA to trigger MSDP SA message, it is treated as if a corresponding MSDP
message was received from within the PE mesh group and normal MSDP SA message was received from within the PE mesh group and normal MSDP
procedure is followed (e.g. an MSDP SA message is advertised to other procedure is followed (e.g. an MSDP SA message is advertised to other
MSDP peers outside the PE mesh group). The (S,G) information comes MSDP peers outside the PE mesh group). The (S,G) information comes
from the (C-S,C-G) encoding in the MVPN SA NLRI and the RP address from the (C-S,C-G) encoding in the MVPN SA NLRI and the RP address
comes from the "MVPN SA RP-address EC" mentioned above. If the comes from the "MVPN SA RP-address EC" mentioned above. If the
received MVPN SA route does not have the EC (this could be from a received MVPN SA route does not have the EC (this could be from a
legacy PE that does not have the capability to attach the EC), the legacy PE that does not have the capability to attach the EC), the
local RP address for the C-G is used. In that case, it is possible local RP address for the C-G is used. In that case, it is possible
that receiving PE's RP for the C-G is actually the MSDP peer to which that receiving PE's RP for the C-G is actually the MSDP peer to which
the generated MSDP message is advertised, causing the peer to discard the generated MSDP message is advertised, causing the peer to discard
it due to RPF failure. To get around that problem the peer SHOULD it due to RPF failure. To get around that problem the peer SHOULD
skipping to change at page 5, line 37 skipping to change at page 5, line 43
direction - upon receiving an MVPN SA route in a VPN generate direction - upon receiving an MVPN SA route in a VPN generate
corresponding MSDP SA and advertise to MSDP peers in the same VPN. corresponding MSDP SA and advertise to MSDP peers in the same VPN.
As such, the capabilities specified in this document introduce no As such, the capabilities specified in this document introduce no
additional security considerations beyond those already specified in additional security considerations beyond those already specified in
RFC6514 and RFC3618. Moreover, the capabilities specified in this RFC6514 and RFC3618. Moreover, the capabilities specified in this
document actually eliminate the control message amplification that document actually eliminate the control message amplification that
exists today where VPN-specific MSDP sessions are required among the exists today where VPN-specific MSDP sessions are required among the
PEs that are customer MSDP peers, which lead to redundant messages PEs that are customer MSDP peers, which lead to redundant messages
(MSDP SAs and MVPN SAs) being carried in parallel between PEs. (MSDP SAs and MVPN SAs) being carried in parallel between PEs.
5. IANA Assignment 5. IANA Considerations
This document introduces a new Transitive IPv4 Address Specific This document introduces a new Transitive IPv4 Address Specific
Extended Community "MVPN SA RP-address Extended Community". IANA has Extended Community "MVPN SA RP-address Extended Community". IANA has
registered subcode 0x20 in the Transitive IPv4-Address-Specific registered subcode 0x20 in the Transitive IPv4-Address-Specific
Extended Community Sub-Types registry for this EC. Extended Community Sub-Types registry for this EC.
6. Acknowledgements 6. Acknowledgements
The authors thank Eric Rosen and Vinod Kumar for their review, The authors thank Eric Rosen and Vinod Kumar for their review,
comments, questions and suggestions for this document. The authors comments, questions and suggestions for this document. The authors
skipping to change at page 6, line 14 skipping to change at page 6, line 20
7. References 7. References
7.1. Normative References 7.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC3618] Fenner, B., Ed. and D. Meyer, Ed., "Multicast Source
Discovery Protocol (MSDP)", RFC 3618,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3618, October 2003,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3618>.
[RFC6514] Aggarwal, R., Rosen, E., Morin, T., and Y. Rekhter, "BGP [RFC6514] Aggarwal, R., Rosen, E., Morin, T., and Y. Rekhter, "BGP
Encodings and Procedures for Multicast in MPLS/BGP IP Encodings and Procedures for Multicast in MPLS/BGP IP
VPNs", RFC 6514, DOI 10.17487/RFC6514, February 2012, VPNs", RFC 6514, DOI 10.17487/RFC6514, February 2012,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6514>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6514>.
[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>.
7.2. Informative References 7.2. Informative References
[RFC3618] Fenner, B., Ed. and D. Meyer, Ed., "Multicast Source
Discovery Protocol (MSDP)", RFC 3618,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3618, October 2003,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3618>.
[RFC7716] Zhang, J., Giuliano, L., Rosen, E., Ed., Subramanian, K., [RFC7716] Zhang, J., Giuliano, L., Rosen, E., Ed., Subramanian, K.,
and D. Pacella, "Global Table Multicast with BGP Multicast and D. Pacella, "Global Table Multicast with BGP Multicast
VPN (BGP-MVPN) Procedures", RFC 7716, VPN (BGP-MVPN) Procedures", RFC 7716,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7716, December 2015, DOI 10.17487/RFC7716, December 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7716>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7716>.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Zhaohui Zhang Zhaohui Zhang
Juniper Networks Juniper Networks
 End of changes. 15 change blocks. 
30 lines changed or deleted 38 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.47. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/