idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-isis-reg-purge-01.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- The draft header indicates that this document updates RFC5310, but the abstract doesn't seem to mention this, which it should. -- The draft header indicates that this document updates RFC5304, but the abstract doesn't seem to mention this, which it should. -- The draft header indicates that this document updates RFC3563, but the abstract doesn't seem to mention this, which it should. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year (Using the creation date from RFC3563, updated by this document, for RFC5378 checks: 2002-10-24) -- The document seems to lack a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, but may have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008. If you have contacted all the original authors and they are all willing to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust, then this is fine, and you can ignore this comment. If not, you may need to add the pre-RFC5378 disclaimer. (See the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.) -- The document date (March 1, 2011) is 4797 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) -- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. 'ISO 10589' ** Downref: Normative reference to an Informational RFC: RFC 3563 Summary: 1 error (**), 0 flaws (~~), 1 warning (==), 6 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 IS-IS Working Group T. Li 3 Internet-Draft L. Ginsberg 4 Updates: 3563 5304 5310 Cisco Systems, Inc. 5 (if approved) March 1, 2011 6 Intended status: Standards Track 7 Expires: September 2, 2011 9 IS-IS Registry Extension for Purges 10 draft-ietf-isis-reg-purge-01 12 Abstract 14 IANA maintains the IS-IS TLV Codepoint Registry. This registry 15 documents which TLVs can appear in different types of IS-IS Protocol 16 Data Units (PDUs), but does not document which TLVs can be found in 17 zero Remaining Lifetime Link State PDUs (LSPs, a.k.a., purges). This 18 document extends the existing registry to record the set of TLVs that 19 are permissible in purges, and updates the rules for generating and 20 processing purges in the presence of authentication. 22 Status of this Memo 24 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 25 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 27 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 28 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 29 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 30 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 32 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 33 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 34 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 35 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 37 This Internet-Draft will expire on September 2, 2011. 39 Copyright Notice 41 Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 42 document authors. All rights reserved. 44 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 45 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 46 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 47 publication of this document. Please review these documents 48 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 49 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 50 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 51 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 52 described in the Simplified BSD License. 54 Table of Contents 56 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 57 1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 58 2. Registry Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 59 3. Purges and Authentication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 60 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 61 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 62 6. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 63 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 65 1. Introduction 67 The IS-IS [ISO 10589] routing protocol maintains a link state 68 database of the topology of its routing domain by flooding a set of 69 Link State Protocol Data Units (LSPs). When the protocol no longer 70 needs the information stored in an LSP, it uses the purge mechanism 71 to cause the Intermediate Systems (ISs) in its domain to discard the 72 information contained in the LSP. The process for generating purges 73 can be found in Section 7.3.16.4 of [ISO 10589]. This process 74 retains only the LSP header, discarding any TLVs that had been 75 carried within the LSP. 77 Subsequent enhancements to IS-IS, such as [RFC5304] [RFC5310], amend 78 the process of generating a purge and allow the inclusion of certain 79 TLVs in purges. 81 1.1. Requirements Language 83 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 84 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 85 document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. 87 2. Registry Changes 89 This document extends the current IS-IS TLV Codepoint Registry, 90 defined in [RFC3563], to record the set of TLVs that MAY be found in 91 purges. All other TLVs MUST NOT appear in purges. This will serve 92 as an aid to subsequent documents, which can then refer to the 93 registry as the definitive list of the TLVs allowed in purges. This 94 will also act as an aid to implementers, providing them with an 95 easily accessible compendium of allowable TLVs. 97 The purge status defined for a given TLV applies to all sub-TLVs 98 defined for that TLV. 100 3. Purges and Authentication 102 Previous documents on Authentication [RFC5304] [RFC5310] required 103 that an IS only accept a purge if it only contained the 104 Authentication TLV. 106 This document updates and generalizes that behavior as follows: an 107 implementation that implements Authentication MUST NOT accept a purge 108 that contains any TLV listed in the registry that is not acceptable 109 in a purge. An implementation MUST NOT accept a purge that contains 110 a TLV not listed in the registry unless the purge also contains the 111 Purge Originator Identification (POI) TLV [I-D.ietf-isis-purge-tlv]. 112 Purges that are accepted MUST be propagated without removal of TLVs. 113 If multiple purges are received for the same LSP, then the 114 implementation MAY propagate any one of the purges. 116 If an implementation that implements Authentication accepts a purge 117 that does not include the POI TLV and it chooses to insert the POI 118 TLV, it MUST also recompute Authentication. 120 ISs MUST NOT accept LSPs with a non-zero Remaining Lifetime that 121 contain the POI TLV. 123 Purge generation is updated as follows: an implementation that 124 implements Authentication generates a purge by first removing any 125 TLVs that are not listed in the registry as being acceptable in 126 purges. The POI TLV MUST be added. Then any other TLVs that MAY be 127 in purges, as shown by the registry, MAY be added. Finally, 128 Authentication, if any, is added. 130 4. IANA Considerations 132 This document requests that IANA modify the IS-IS 'TLV Codepoints 133 Registry' by adding a column in the registry for 'Purge'. A 'y' in 134 this column indicates that the TLV for this row MAY be found in a 135 purge. A 'n' in this column indicates that the TLV for this row MUST 136 NOT be found in a purge. 138 The 'Purge' column should initially contain a 'y' for TLV type 10 139 (Authentication) and for TLV type 137 (Dynamic hostname). All other 140 entries in this column should have an 'n'. Other additions to this 141 registry should explicitly specify their value for this column. 143 5. Security Considerations 145 This document introduces no new security issues. 147 6. Normative References 149 [I-D.ietf-isis-purge-tlv] 150 Wei, F., Qin, Y., Li, Z., Li, T., and J. Dong, "Purge 151 Originator Identification TLV for IS-IS", 152 draft-ietf-isis-purge-tlv-05 (work in progress), 153 October 2010. 155 [ISO 10589] 156 ISO, "Intermediate system to Intermediate system routeing 157 information exchange protocol for use in conjunction with 158 the Protocol for providing the Connectionless-mode Network 159 Service (ISO 8473)", ISO/IEC 10589:2002. 161 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 162 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 164 [RFC3563] Zinin, A., "Cooperative Agreement Between the ISOC/IETF 165 and ISO/IEC Joint Technical Committee 1/Sub Committee 6 166 (JTC1/SC6) on IS-IS Routing Protocol Development", 167 RFC 3563, July 2003. 169 [RFC5304] Li, T. and R. Atkinson, "IS-IS Cryptographic 170 Authentication", RFC 5304, October 2008. 172 [RFC5310] Bhatia, M., Manral, V., Li, T., Atkinson, R., White, R., 173 and M. Fanto, "IS-IS Generic Cryptographic 174 Authentication", RFC 5310, February 2009. 176 Authors' Addresses 178 Tony Li 179 Cisco Systems, Inc. 180 170 W. Tasman Dr. 181 San Jose, CA 95134 182 USA 184 Email: tony.li@tony.li 186 Les Ginsberg 187 Cisco Systems, Inc. 188 170 W. Tasman Dr. 189 San Jose, CA 95134 190 USA 192 Email: ginsberg@cisco.com