draft-ietf-softwire-mesh-multicast-05.txt   draft-ietf-softwire-mesh-multicast-06.txt 
Network Working Group M. Xu Network Working Group M. Xu
Internet-Draft Y. Cui Internet-Draft Y. Cui
Expires: January 16, 2014 J. Wu Expires: July 19, 2014 J. Wu
S. Yang S. Yang
Tsinghua University Tsinghua University
C. Metz C. Metz
G. Shepherd G. Shepherd
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
July 15, 2013 January 15, 2014
Softwire Mesh Multicast Softwire Mesh Multicast
draft-ietf-softwire-mesh-multicast-05 draft-ietf-softwire-mesh-multicast-06
Abstract Abstract
The Internet needs to support IPv4 and IPv6 packets. Both address The Internet needs to support IPv4 and IPv6 packets. Both address
families and their attendant protocol suites support multicast of the families and their attendant protocol suites support multicast of the
single-source and any-source varieties. As part of the transition to single-source and any-source varieties. As part of the transition to
IPv6, there will be scenarios where a backbone network running one IP IPv6, there will be scenarios where a backbone network running one IP
address family internally (referred to as internal IP or I-IP) will address family internally (referred to as internal IP or I-IP) will
provide transit services to attached client networks running another provide transit services to attached client networks running another
IP address family (referred to as external IP or E-IP). It is IP address family (referred to as external IP or E-IP). It is
skipping to change at page 1, line 48 skipping to change at page 1, line 48
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 http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://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 January 16, 2014. This Internet-Draft will expire on July 19, 2014.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2014 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
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://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
skipping to change at page 2, line 39 skipping to change at page 2, line 39
it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other
than English. than English.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Scenarios of Interest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3. Scenarios of Interest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.1. IPv4-over-IPv6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.1. IPv4-over-IPv6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.2. IPv6-over-IPv4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.2. IPv6-over-IPv4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4. IPv4-over-IPv6 Mechanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 4. IPv4-over-IPv6 Mechanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.1. Mechanism Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 4.1. Mechanism Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.2. Group Address Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 4.2. Group Address Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.3. Source Address Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 4.3. Source Address Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.4. Routing Mechanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4.4. Routing Mechanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5. IPv6-over-IPv4 Mechanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 5. IPv6-over-IPv4 Mechanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.1. Mechanism Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 5.1. Mechanism Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.2. Group Address Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 5.2. Group Address Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.3. Source Address Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 5.3. Source Address Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.4. Routing Mechanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 5.4. Routing Mechanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
6. Control Plane Functions of AFBR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 6. Control Plane Functions of AFBR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
6.1. E-IP (*,G) State Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 6.1. E-IP (*,G) State Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
6.2. E-IP (S,G) State Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 6.2. E-IP (S,G) State Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
6.3. I-IP (S',G') State Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 6.3. I-IP (S',G') State Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
6.4. E-IP (S,G,rpt) State Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 6.4. E-IP (S,G,rpt) State Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
6.5. Inter-AFBR Signaling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 6.5. Inter-AFBR Signaling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
6.6. SPT Switchover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 6.6. SPT Switchover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
6.7. Other PIM Message Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 6.7. Other PIM Message Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
6.8. Other PIM States Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 6.8. Other PIM States Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
7. Data Plane Functions of AFBR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 7. Data Plane Functions of AFBR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
7.1. Process and Forward Multicast Data . . . . . . . . . . . 17 7.1. Process and Forward Multicast Data . . . . . . . . . . . 17
7.2. Selecting a Tunneling Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 7.2. Selecting a Tunneling Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
7.3. TTL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 7.3. TTL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
7.4. Fragmentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 7.4. Fragmentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Appendix A. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Appendix A. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
The Internet needs to support IPv4 and IPv6 packets. Both address The Internet needs to support IPv4 and IPv6 packets. Both address
families and their attendant protocol suites support multicast of the families and their attendant protocol suites support multicast of the
single-source and any-source varieties. As part of the transition to single-source and any-source varieties. As part of the transition to
IPv6, there will be scenarios where a backbone network running one IP IPv6, there will be scenarios where a backbone network running one IP
skipping to change at page 18, line 28 skipping to change at page 18, line 34
The encapsulation performed by upstream AFBR will increase the size The encapsulation performed by upstream AFBR will increase the size
of packets. As a result, the outgoing I-IP link MTU may not of packets. As a result, the outgoing I-IP link MTU may not
accommodate the extra size. As it's not always possible for core accommodate the extra size. As it's not always possible for core
operators to increase the MTU of every link. Fragmentation and operators to increase the MTU of every link. Fragmentation and
reassembling of encapsulated packets MUST be supported by AFBRs. reassembling of encapsulated packets MUST be supported by AFBRs.
8. Security Considerations 8. Security Considerations
The AFBR routers could maintain secure communications within Security The AFBR routers could maintain secure communications within Security
Architecture for the Internet Protocol as described in [RFC4301]. Architecture for the Internet Protocol as described in [RFC4301]. To
protect against unwanted forged PIM protocol messages, the PIM
messages can be authenticated using IPsec as described in [RFC4601].
But when adopting some schemes that will cause heavy burden on But when adopting some schemes that will cause heavy burden on
routers, some attacker may use it as a tool for DDoS attack. routers, some attacker may use it as a tool for DDoS attack.
Compared with [RFC4301], the security concerns should be more
carefully considered. The attackers can set up many multicast trees
in the edge networks, causing too many multicast trees to get set up
in the core network.
9. IANA Considerations 9. IANA Considerations
When AFBRs perform address mapping, they should follow some When AFBRs perform address mapping, they should follow some
predefined rules, especially the IPv6 prefix for source address predefined rules, especially the IPv6 prefix for source address
mapping should be predefined, such that ingress AFBRs and egress mapping should be predefined, such that ingress AFBRs and egress
AFBRs can finish the mapping procedure correctly. The IPv6 prefix AFBRs can finish the mapping procedure correctly. The IPv6 prefix
for translation can be unified within only the transit core, or for translation can be unified within only the transit core, or
within global area. In the later condition, the prefix should be within global area. In the later condition, the prefix should be
assigned by IANA. assigned by IANA.
10. References 10. References
10.1. Normative References 10.1. Normative References
[RFC2784] Farinacci, D., Li, T., Hanks, S., Meyer, D., and P.
Traina, "Generic Routing Encapsulation (GRE)", RFC 2784,
March 2000.
[RFC3991] Foster, B. and F. Andreasen, "Media Gateway Control
Protocol (MGCP) Redirect and Reset Package", RFC 3991,
February 2005.
[RFC2373] Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "IP Version 6 Addressing
Architecture", RFC 2373, July 1998.
[RFC4291] Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "IP Version 6 Addressing [RFC4291] Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "IP Version 6 Addressing
Architecture", RFC 4291, February 2006. Architecture", RFC 4291, February 2006.
[RFC4301] Kent, S. and K. Seo, "Security Architecture for the
Internet Protocol", RFC 4301, December 2005.
[RFC4601] Fenner, B., Handley, M., Holbrook, H., and I. Kouvelas, [RFC4601] Fenner, B., Handley, M., Holbrook, H., and I. Kouvelas,
"Protocol Independent Multicast - Sparse Mode (PIM-SM): "Protocol Independent Multicast - Sparse Mode (PIM-SM):
Protocol Specification (Revised)", RFC 4601, August 2006. Protocol Specification (Revised)", RFC 4601, August 2006.
[RFC4925] Li, X., Dawkins, S., Ward, D., and A. Durand, "Softwire [RFC4925] Li, X., Dawkins, S., Ward, D., and A. Durand, "Softwire
Problem Statement", RFC 4925, July 2007. Problem Statement", RFC 4925, July 2007.
[RFC5496] Wijnands, IJ., Boers, A., and E. Rosen, "The Reverse Path
Forwarding (RPF) Vector TLV", RFC 5496, March 2009.
[RFC5565] Wu, J., Cui, Y., Metz, C., and E. Rosen, "Softwire Mesh [RFC5565] Wu, J., Cui, Y., Metz, C., and E. Rosen, "Softwire Mesh
Framework", RFC 5565, June 2009. Framework", RFC 5565, June 2009.
[RFC6052] Bao, C., Huitema, C., Bagnulo, M., Boucadair, M., and X. [RFC6052] Bao, C., Huitema, C., Bagnulo, M., Boucadair, M., and X.
Li, "IPv6 Addressing of IPv4/IPv6 Translators", RFC 6052, Li, "IPv6 Addressing of IPv4/IPv6 Translators", RFC 6052,
October 2010. October 2010.
[RFC6513] Rosen, E. and R. Aggarwal, "Multicast in MPLS/BGP IP [RFC6513] Rosen, E. and R. Aggarwal, "Multicast in MPLS/BGP IP
VPNs", RFC 6513, February 2012. VPNs", RFC 6513, February 2012.
 End of changes. 14 change blocks. 
29 lines changed or deleted 25 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.41. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/