draft-ietf-bier-ospf-bier-extensions-13.txt   draft-ietf-bier-ospf-bier-extensions-14.txt 
OSPF P. Psenak, Ed. OSPF P. Psenak, Ed.
Internet-Draft N. Kumar Internet-Draft N. Kumar
Intended status: Standards Track IJ. Wijnands Intended status: Standards Track IJ. Wijnands
Expires: August 24, 2018 Cisco Expires: August 26, 2018 Cisco
A. Dolganow A. Dolganow
Nokia Nokia
T. Przygienda T. Przygienda
J. Zhang J. Zhang
Juniper Networks, Inc. Juniper Networks, Inc.
S. Aldrin S. Aldrin
Google, Inc. Google, Inc.
February 20, 2018 February 22, 2018
OSPF Extensions for BIER OSPF Extensions for BIER
draft-ietf-bier-ospf-bier-extensions-13.txt draft-ietf-bier-ospf-bier-extensions-14.txt
Abstract Abstract
Bit Index Explicit Replication (BIER) is an architecture that Bit Index Explicit Replication (BIER) is an architecture that
provides multicast forwarding through a "BIER domain" without provides multicast forwarding through a "BIER domain" without
requiring intermediate routers to maintain multicast related per-flow requiring intermediate routers to maintain multicast related per-flow
state. Neither does BIER require an explicit tree-building protocol state. Neither does BIER require an explicit tree-building protocol
for its operation. A multicast data packet enters a BIER domain at a for its operation. A multicast data packet enters a BIER domain at a
"Bit-Forwarding Ingress Router" (BFIR), and leaves the BIER domain at "Bit-Forwarding Ingress Router" (BFIR), and leaves the BIER domain at
one or more "Bit-Forwarding Egress Routers" (BFERs). The BFIR router one or more "Bit-Forwarding Egress Routers" (BFERs). The BFIR router
adds a BIER header to the packet. Such header contains a bit-string adds a BIER header to the packet. Such header contains a bit-string
in which each bit represents exactly one BFER to forward the packet in which each bit represents exactly one BFER to forward the packet
to. The set of BFERs to which the multicast packet needs to be to. The set of BFERs to which the multicast packet needs to be
forwarded is expressed by the according set of bits set in BIER forwarded is expressed by the according set of bits set in BIER
packet header. packet header.
This document describes the OSPF [RFC2328] protocol extension This document describes the OSPF [RFC2328] protocol extension
required for BIER with MPLS encapsulation. required for BIER with MPLS encapsulation [RFC8296]. Support for
other encapsulation types is outside thescope of this document. The
use of multiple encapsulation types is outside the scope of this
document.
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 August 24, 2018. This Internet-Draft will expire on August 26, 2018.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2018 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
skipping to change at page 2, line 29 skipping to change at page 2, line 32
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. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Flooding of the BIER Information in OSPF . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Flooding of the BIER Information in OSPF . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. BIER Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.1. BIER Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2. BIER MPLS Encapsulation Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.2. BIER MPLS Encapsulation Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.3. Flooding scope of BIER Information . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2.3. Flooding scope of BIER Information . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 6. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
Bit Index Explicit Replication (BIER) is an architecture that Bit Index Explicit Replication (BIER) is an architecture that
provides optimal multicast forwarding through a "BIER domain" without provides optimal multicast forwarding through a "BIER domain" without
requiring intermediate routers to maintain any multicast related per- requiring intermediate routers to maintain any multicast related per-
flow state. Neither does BIER explicitly require a tree-building flow state. Neither does BIER explicitly require a tree-building
protocol for its operation. A multicast data packet enters a BIER protocol for its operation. A multicast data packet enters a BIER
domain at a "Bit-Forwarding Ingress Router" (BFIR), and leaves the domain at a "Bit-Forwarding Ingress Router" (BFIR), and leaves the
skipping to change at page 3, line 44 skipping to change at page 3, line 46
The BIER Sub-TLV has the following format: The BIER Sub-TLV has the following format:
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length | | Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Sub-domain-ID | MT-ID | BFR-id | | Sub-domain-ID | MT-ID | BFR-id |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| BAR | Reserved | | BAR | IPA | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Sub-TLVs (variable) | | Sub-TLVs (variable) |
+- -+ +- -+
| | | |
Type: 9 Type: 9
Length: Variable, dependent on sub-TLVs. Length: Variable, dependent on sub-TLVs.
Sub-domain-ID: Unique value identifying the BIER sub-domain within Sub-domain-ID: Unique value identifying the BIER sub-domain within
the BIER domain, as described in section 1 of [RFC8279]. the BIER domain, as described in section 1 of [RFC8279].
MT-ID: Multi-Topology ID (as defined in [RFC4915]) that identifies MT-ID: Multi-Topology ID (as defined in [RFC4915]) that identifies
the topology that is associated with the BIER sub-domain. the topology that is associated with the BIER sub-domain.
BFR-id: A 2 octet field encoding the BFR-id, as documented in BFR-id: A 2 octet field encoding the BFR-id, as documented in
section 2 of [RFC8279]. If the BFR is not locally configured with section 2 of [RFC8279]. If the BFR is not locally configured with
skipping to change at page 4, line 17 skipping to change at page 4, line 19
the BIER domain, as described in section 1 of [RFC8279]. the BIER domain, as described in section 1 of [RFC8279].
MT-ID: Multi-Topology ID (as defined in [RFC4915]) that identifies MT-ID: Multi-Topology ID (as defined in [RFC4915]) that identifies
the topology that is associated with the BIER sub-domain. the topology that is associated with the BIER sub-domain.
BFR-id: A 2 octet field encoding the BFR-id, as documented in BFR-id: A 2 octet field encoding the BFR-id, as documented in
section 2 of [RFC8279]. If the BFR is not locally configured with section 2 of [RFC8279]. If the BFR is not locally configured with
a valid BFR-id, the value of this field is set to invalid BFR-id a valid BFR-id, the value of this field is set to invalid BFR-id
per [RFC8279]. per [RFC8279].
BAR: Single octet BIER Algorithm. 0 is the only supported value BAR: Single octet BIER specific algorithm used to calculate
defined in this document and represents Shortest Path First (SPF) underlay paths to reach other BFRs. Values are allocated from the
algorithm based on IGP link metric. This is the standard shortest "BIER Algorithm Registry" which is defined in
path algorithm as computed by the OSPF protocol. Other values may [I-D.ietf-bier-isis-extensions].
be defined in the future.
IPA: Single octet IGP algorithm to either modify, enhance or
replace the calculation of underlay paths to reach other BFRs as
defined by the BAR value. Values are defined in the "IGP
Algorithm Types" registry.
Each BFR sub-domain MUST be associated with one and only one OSPF Each BFR sub-domain MUST be associated with one and only one OSPF
topology that is identified by the MT-ID. If the association between topology that is identified by the MT-ID. If the association between
BIER sub-domain and OSPF topology advertised in the BIER sub-TLV by BIER sub-domain and OSPF topology advertised in the BIER sub-TLV by
other BFRs is in conflict with the association locally configured on other BFRs is in conflict with the association locally configured on
the receiving router, the BIER Sub-TLV MUST be ignored. the receiving router, the BIER Sub-TLV MUST be ignored.
If a BFR advertises the same Sub-domain-ID in multiple BIER sub-TLVs, If a BFR advertises the same Sub-domain-ID in multiple BIER sub-TLVs,
the BRF MUST be treated as if it did not advertise a BIER sub-TLV for the BRF MUST be treated as if it did not advertise a BIER sub-TLV for
such sub-domain. such sub-domain.
All BFRs MUST detect advertisement of duplicate valid BFR-IDs for a All BFRs MUST detect advertisement of duplicate valid BFR-IDs for a
given MT-ID and Sub-domain-ID. When such duplication is detected all given MT-ID and Sub-domain-ID. When such duplication is detected all
BFRs advertising duplicates MUST be treated as if they did not BFRs advertising duplicates MUST be treated as if they did not
advertise a valid BFR-id. advertise a valid BFR-id.
The supported algorithm MUST be consistent for all routers supporting The supported BAR and IPA algorithms MUST be consistent for all
a given BFR sub-domain. A router receiving BIER Sub-TLV routers supporting a given BFR sub-domain. A router receiving BIER
advertisement with a BAR which does not match the locally configured Sub-TLV advertisement with a value in BAR or IPA fields which does
value MUST report a misconfiguration for the given BIER sub-domain not match the locally configured value for a given BFR sub-domain,
and MUST ignore such BIER sub-TLV. MUST report a misconfiguration for such BIER sub-domain and MUST
ignore such BIER sub-TLV.
The use of non-zero values in either the BAR field or the IPA field
is outside the scope of this document.
2.2. BIER MPLS Encapsulation Sub-TLV 2.2. BIER MPLS Encapsulation Sub-TLV
The BIER MPLS Encapsulation Sub-TLV is a Sub-TLV of the BIER Sub-TLV. The BIER MPLS Encapsulation Sub-TLV is a Sub-TLV of the BIER Sub-TLV.
The BIER MPLS Encapsulation Sub-TLV is used in order to advertise The BIER MPLS Encapsulation Sub-TLV is used in order to advertise
MPLS specific information used for BIER. It MAY appear multiple MPLS specific information used for BIER. It MAY appear multiple
times in the BIER Sub-TLV. times in the BIER Sub-TLV.
The BIER MPLS Encapsulation Sub-TLV has the following format: The BIER MPLS Encapsulation Sub-TLV has the following format:
skipping to change at page 7, line 45 skipping to change at page 8, line 12
BIER MPLS Encapsulation Sub-TLV: 10 BIER MPLS Encapsulation Sub-TLV: 10
5. Acknowledgments 5. Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Rajiv Asati, Christian Martin, Greg The authors would like to thank Rajiv Asati, Christian Martin, Greg
Shepherd and Eric Rosen for their contribution. Shepherd and Eric Rosen for their contribution.
6. Normative References 6. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-bier-isis-extensions]
Ginsberg, L., Przygienda, T., Aldrin, S., and Z. Zhang,
"BIER support via ISIS", draft-ietf-bier-isis-
extensions-07 (work in progress), February 2018.
[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>.
[RFC2328] Moy, J., "OSPF Version 2", STD 54, RFC 2328, [RFC2328] Moy, J., "OSPF Version 2", STD 54, RFC 2328,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2328, April 1998, DOI 10.17487/RFC2328, April 1998,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2328>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2328>.
[RFC4915] Psenak, P., Mirtorabi, S., Roy, A., Nguyen, L., and P. [RFC4915] Psenak, P., Mirtorabi, S., Roy, A., Nguyen, L., and P.
 End of changes. 13 change blocks. 
20 lines changed or deleted 36 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.46. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/