draft-ietf-softwire-mesh-multicast-21.txt   draft-ietf-softwire-mesh-multicast-22.txt 
Softwire WG M. Xu Softwire WG M. Xu
Internet-Draft Y. Cui Internet-Draft Y. Cui
Intended status: Standards Track J. Wu Intended status: Standards Track J. Wu
Expires: December 2, 2018 Tsinghua University Expires: December 20, 2018 Tsinghua University
S. Yang S. Yang
Oudmon Tech Oudmon Tech
C. Metz C. Metz
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
May 31, 2018 June 18, 2018
IPv4 Multicast over an IPv6 Multicast in Softwire Mesh Network IPv4 Multicast over an IPv6 Multicast in Softwire Mesh Network
draft-ietf-softwire-mesh-multicast-21 draft-ietf-softwire-mesh-multicast-22
Abstract Abstract
During the transition to IPv6, there will be scenarios where a During the transition to IPv6, there will be scenarios where a
backbone network internally running one IP address family (referred backbone network internally running one IP address family (referred
to as the internal IP or I-IP family), connects client networks to as the internal IP or I-IP family), connects client networks
running another IP address family (referred to as the external IP or running another IP address family (referred to as the external IP or
E-IP family). In such cases, the I-IP backbone needs to offer both E-IP family). In such cases, the I-IP backbone needs to offer both
unicast and multicast transit services to the client E-IP networks. unicast and multicast transit services to the client E-IP networks.
skipping to change at page 1, line 45 skipping to change at page 1, line 45
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 December 2, 2018. This Internet-Draft will expire on December 20, 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 51 skipping to change at page 2, line 51
7.2. TTL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 7.2. TTL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
7.3. Fragmentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 7.3. Fragmentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
8. Packet Format and Translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 8. Packet Format and Translation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
9. Softwire Mesh Multicast Encapsulation . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 9. Softwire Mesh Multicast Encapsulation . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
11. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 11. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
12.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 12.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Appendix A. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Appendix A. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
During the transition to IPv6, there will be scenarios where a During the transition to IPv6, there will be scenarios where a
backbone network internally running one IP address family (referred backbone network internally running one IP address family (referred
to as the internal IP or I-IP family), connects client networks to as the internal IP or I-IP family), connects client networks
running another IP address family (referred to as the external IP or running another IP address family (referred to as the external IP or
E-IP family). E-IP family).
One solution is to leverage the multicast functions inherent in the One solution is to leverage the multicast functions inherent in the
skipping to change at page 10, line 35 skipping to change at page 10, line 35
to a PIMv4 message and process it. to a PIMv4 message and process it.
6.3. E-IP (S,G,rpt) State Maintenance 6.3. E-IP (S,G,rpt) State Maintenance
When an AFBR wishes to propagate a Join/Prune(S,G,rpt) message to an When an AFBR wishes to propagate a Join/Prune(S,G,rpt) message to an
I-IP upstream router, the AFBR MUST operate as specified in I-IP upstream router, the AFBR MUST operate as specified in
Section 6.5 and Section 6.6. Section 6.5 and Section 6.6.
6.4. Inter-AFBR Signaling 6.4. Inter-AFBR Signaling
Assume that one downstream AFBR has joined a RPT of (*,G) and a SPT Assume that one downstream AFBR has joined an RPT of (*,G) and an SPT
of (S,G), and decided to perform an SPT switchover. According to of (S,G), and decided to perform an SPT switchover. According to
[RFC7761], it SHOULD propagate a Prune(S,G,rpt) message along with [RFC7761], it SHOULD propagate a Prune(S,G,rpt) message along with
the periodical Join(*,G) message upstream towards the RP. However, the periodical Join(*,G) message upstream towards the RP. However,
routers in the I-IP transit core do not process (S,G,rpt) messages routers in the I-IP transit core do not process (S,G,rpt) messages
since the I-IP transit core is treated as SSM-only. As a result, the since the I-IP transit core is treated as SSM-only. As a result, the
downstream AFBR is unable to prune S from this RPT, so it will downstream AFBR is unable to prune S from this RPT, so it will
receive two copies of the same data for (S,G). In order to solve receive two copies of the same data for (S,G). In order to solve
this problem, we introduce a new mechanism for downstream AFBRs to this problem, we introduce a new mechanism for downstream AFBRs to
inform upstream AFBRs of pruning any given S from an RPT. inform upstream AFBRs of pruning any given S from an RPT.
skipping to change at page 16, line 33 skipping to change at page 16, line 33
12. References 12. References
12.1. Normative References 12.1. 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>.
[RFC4291] Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "IP Version 6 Addressing
Architecture", RFC 4291, DOI 10.17487/RFC4291, February
2006, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4291>.
[RFC4301] Kent, S. and K. Seo, "Security Architecture for the
Internet Protocol", RFC 4301, DOI 10.17487/RFC4301,
December 2005, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4301>.
[RFC4760] Bates, T., Chandra, R., Katz, D., and Y. Rekhter, [RFC4760] Bates, T., Chandra, R., Katz, D., and Y. Rekhter,
"Multiprotocol Extensions for BGP-4", RFC 4760, "Multiprotocol Extensions for BGP-4", RFC 4760,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4760, January 2007, DOI 10.17487/RFC4760, January 2007,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4760>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4760>.
[RFC4925] Li, X., Ed., Dawkins, S., Ed., Ward, D., Ed., and A.
Durand, Ed., "Softwire Problem Statement", RFC 4925,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4925, July 2007,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4925>.
[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, DOI 10.17487/RFC5565, June 2009, Framework", RFC 5565, DOI 10.17487/RFC5565, June 2009,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5565>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5565>.
[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,
DOI 10.17487/RFC6052, October 2010, DOI 10.17487/RFC6052, October 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6052>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6052>.
[RFC6333] Durand, A., Droms, R., Woodyatt, J., and Y. Lee, "Dual- [RFC6333] Durand, A., Droms, R., Woodyatt, J., and Y. Lee, "Dual-
skipping to change at page 17, line 42 skipping to change at page 17, line 28
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7899>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7899>.
[RFC8114] Boucadair, M., Qin, C., Jacquenet, C., Lee, Y., and Q. [RFC8114] Boucadair, M., Qin, C., Jacquenet, C., Lee, Y., and Q.
Wang, "Delivery of IPv4 Multicast Services to IPv4 Clients Wang, "Delivery of IPv4 Multicast Services to IPv4 Clients
over an IPv6 Multicast Network", RFC 8114, over an IPv6 Multicast Network", RFC 8114,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8114, March 2017, DOI 10.17487/RFC8114, March 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8114>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8114>.
12.2. Informative References 12.2. Informative References
[RFC7371] Boucadair, M. and S. Venaas, "Updates to the IPv6 [RFC4925] Li, X., Ed., Dawkins, S., Ed., Ward, D., Ed., and A.
Multicast Addressing Architecture", RFC 7371, Durand, Ed., "Softwire Problem Statement", RFC 4925,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7371, September 2014, DOI 10.17487/RFC4925, July 2007,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7371>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4925>.
Appendix A. Acknowledgements Appendix A. Acknowledgements
Wenlong Chen, Xuan Chen, Alain Durand, Yiu Lee, Jacni Qin and Stig Wenlong Chen, Xuan Chen, Alain Durand, Yiu Lee, Jacni Qin and Stig
Venaas provided useful input into this document. Venaas provided useful input into this document.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Mingwei Xu Mingwei Xu
Tsinghua University Tsinghua University
 End of changes. 9 change blocks. 
23 lines changed or deleted 10 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/