idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-pwe3-mpls-tp-cv-adv-06.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: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == It seems as if not all pages are separated by form feeds - found 0 form feeds but 7 pages Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (January 23, 2014) is 3744 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) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 4447 (Obsoleted by RFC 8077) -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 5226 (Obsoleted by RFC 8126) Summary: 1 error (**), 0 flaws (~~), 2 warnings (==), 2 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group G. Mirsky 3 Internet-Draft Ericsson 4 Intended status: Standards Track January 23, 2014 5 Expires: July 27, 2014 7 VCCV MPLS-TP Connectivity Verification (CV) Capability Advertisement 8 draft-ietf-pwe3-mpls-tp-cv-adv-06 10 Abstract 12 This document specifies how signaling and selection processes for 13 Pseudowire (PW) Virtual Circuit Connectivity Verification (VCCV) are 14 modified to ensure backward compatibility and allow use of proactive 15 Connectivity Verification (CV), Continuity Check (CC), and Remote 16 Defect Indication (RDI) over MPLS Transport Profile (MPLS-TP) PWs. 17 This document introduces four new CV types and, to accommodate them, 18 a new VCCV Extended CV parameter for PW Interface Parameters Sub-TLV 19 is defined. 21 Status of this Memo 23 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 24 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 26 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 27 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 28 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 29 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 31 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 32 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 33 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 34 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 36 This Internet-Draft will expire on July 27, 2014. 38 Copyright Notice 40 Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 41 document authors. All rights reserved. 43 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 44 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 45 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 46 publication of this document. Please review these documents 47 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 48 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 49 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 50 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 51 described in the Simplified BSD License. 53 Table of Contents 55 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 56 1.1. Conventions used in this document . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 57 1.1.1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 58 1.1.2. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 59 2. MPLS-TP CC-CV on Pseudowires . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 60 2.1. VCCV Extended CV Advertisement sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . 3 61 2.2. MPLS-TP CC-CV Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 62 2.3. MPLS-TP CC-CV Type Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 63 2.4. CV Type Selection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 64 3. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 65 3.1. VCCV Extended CV Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 66 4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 67 5. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 68 6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 69 6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 70 6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 71 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 73 1. Introduction 75 Proactive Connectivity Verification (CV), Continuity Check (CC), and 76 Remote Defect Indication (RDI) for the MPLS Transport Profile 77 [RFC6428] are applicable to all constructs of the MPLS-TP, including 78 pseudowires (PWs). If control plane is used to operate and manage 79 PWs then the procedures defined in [RFC5085] and [RFC5885] should be 80 used to select proper type of Control Channel and corresponding type 81 of Connectivity Verification. This document specifies how signaling 82 and selection processes are modified to ensure backward compatibility 83 and allow use of proactive CV-CC-RDI over MPLS-TP PWs. 85 1.1. Conventions used in this document 87 1.1.1. Terminology 89 BFD: Bidirectional Forwarding Detection 91 CC: Continuity Check 93 CV: Connectivity Verification 95 PE: Provider Edge 97 VCCV: Virtual Circuit Connectivity Verification 99 1.1.2. Requirements Language 101 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 102 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and 103 "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in 104 [RFC2119]. 106 2. MPLS-TP CC-CV on Pseudowires 108 PW VCCV can support several CV Types, and can support arbitrary 109 combination of CV modes advertised in the CV Types field of VCCV 110 Interface Parameter sub-TLV [RFC4446], [RFC4447]. Currently six 111 types of CV have been defined for PW VCCV. This document introduces 112 four new CV types and, to accommodate them, a new VCCV Extended CV 113 parameter for PW Interface Parameters Sub-TLV is defined. 115 2.1. VCCV Extended CV Advertisement sub-TLV 117 The format of VCCV Extended CV Advertisement is a TLV where: 119 0 1 2 3 120 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 1 121 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 122 | Type = 0x19 | Length | CV Type | Reserved | 123 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 125 Figure 1: VCCV Extended CV parameter format 127 The Length field is the length of the sub-TLV, including type and the 128 Length field itself. The minimum length is 4. It is recommended 129 that extensions to the sub-TLV be done in 4 bytes increments. 131 The Reserved field MUST be set to zeroes on transmit and ignored on 132 receive. 134 The CV Type field is a bitmask that lists types of CV monitoring that 135 a PE is capable to support. The VCCV Extended CV parameter sub-TLV 136 MUST appear in combination with the VCCV parameter sub-TLV. If the 137 VCCV parameter sub-TLV is missing then the VCCV Extended CV parameter 138 sub-TLV SHOULD be ignored. 140 2.2. MPLS-TP CC-CV Types 142 [RFC6428] defines coordinated and independent modes of monitoring 143 point-to-point bi-directional connection that can be applied to 144 monitoring PWs. At the same time [RFC6310] defines how BFD-based OAM 145 can map and be mapped to status of an Attachment Circuit. Thus there 146 could be four MPLS-TP CV types as combination of modes and 147 functionality: 149 +----------------+-------------------+------------------------------+ 150 | Modes | Fault Detection | Fault Detection and Status | 151 | | Only | Signaling | 152 +----------------+-------------------+------------------------------+ 153 | Independent | 0x01 | 0x02 | 154 | Mode | | | 155 | Coordinated | 0x04 | 0x08 | 156 | Mode | | | 157 +----------------+-------------------+------------------------------+ 159 Table 1: Bitmask Values for MPLS-TP CV Types 161 2.3. MPLS-TP CC-CV Type Operation 163 Connectivity verification according to [RFC6428] is part of MPLS-TP 164 CC/CV operation that can be used with VCCV Control Channel Type 1 165 [RFC5085] . If VCCV Control Channel Type 1 selected, then PEs MAY 166 select one of MPLS-TP CC-CV types as VCCV CV mechanism to be used for 167 this PW. 169 2.4. CV Type Selection 171 CV selection rules that have been defined in Section 7 of [RFC5085] 172 and updated Section 4 of [RFC5885] are augmented in this document. 174 If VCCV Control Channel Type 1 is chosen according to Section 7 175 [RFC5085] and a common set of proactive CV types that are advertised 176 by both PEs includes MPLS-TP CC-CV types and some BFD CV types, then 177 MPLS-TP CC-CV takes precedence over any type of BFD CV. If multiple 178 MPLS-TP CV types are advertised by both PEs, then the following list 179 sorted in descending priority order is used: 181 1. 0x08 - coordinated mode for PW Fault Detection and AC/PW Fault 182 Status Signaling 184 2. 0x04 - coordinated mode for PW Fault Detection only 186 3. 0x02 - independent mode for PW Fault Detection and AC/PW Fault 187 Status Signaling 189 4. 0x01 - independent mode for PW Fault Detection only 191 3. IANA Considerations 193 The PW Interface Parameters Sub-TLV registry is defined in [RFC4446]. 195 IANA is requested to reserve a new PW Interface Parameters Sub-TLV 196 type as follows: 198 +-----------+----------+----------------------------+---------------+ 199 | Parameter | Length | Description | Reference | 200 | ID | | | | 201 +-----------+----------+----------------------------+---------------+ 202 | 0x19 | variable | VCCV Extended CV Parameter | This document | 203 +-----------+----------+----------------------------+---------------+ 205 Table 2: New PW Interface Parameters Sub-TLV 207 3.1. VCCV Extended CV Types 209 IANA is requested to set up a registry of VCCV Extended CV Types. 210 These are 8 bit values. Extended CV Type values 0x01, 0x02, 0x04 and 211 0x08 are specified in Section 2.2 of this document. The remaining 212 values (0x10 through 0x80) are to be assigned by IANA using the "IETF 213 Review" policy defined in [RFC5226]. A VCCV Extended Connectivity 214 Verification Type description and a reference to an RFC approved by 215 the IESG are required for any assignment from this registry. 217 +--------------+----------------------------------------------------+ 218 | Bit(Value) | Description | 219 +--------------+----------------------------------------------------+ 220 | Bit 0 (0x01) | Independent mode for PW Fault Detection only | 221 | Bit 1 (0x02) | Independent mode for PW Fault Detection and AC/PW | 222 | | Fault Status Signaling | 223 | Bit 2 (0x04) | Coordinated mode for PW Fault Detection only | 224 | Bit 3 (0x08) | Coordinated mode for PW Fault Detection and AC/PW | 225 | | Fault Status Signaling | 226 | Bit 4 (0x10) | Unassigned | 227 | Bit 5 (0x20) | Unassigned | 228 | Bit 6 (0x40) | Unassigned | 229 | Bit 7 (0x80) | Unassigned | 230 +--------------+----------------------------------------------------+ 232 Table 3: VCCV Extended Connectivity Verification (CV) Types 234 4. Security Considerations 236 Routers that implement the additional CV Type defined herein are 237 subject to the same security considerations as defined in [RFC5085], 238 [RFC5880], [RFC5881], and [RFC6428]. This specification does not 239 raise any additional security issues beyond these. 241 5. Acknowledgements 243 The author gratefully acknowledges the thoughtful review, comments, 244 and explanations provided by Dave Allan, and by Carlos Pignataro. 246 6. References 248 6.1. Normative References 250 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 251 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 253 [RFC4446] Martini, L., "IANA Allocations for Pseudowire Edge to Edge 254 Emulation (PWE3)", BCP 116, RFC 4446, April 2006. 256 [RFC4447] Martini, L., Rosen, E., El-Aawar, N., Smith, T., and G. 257 Heron, "Pseudowire Setup and Maintenance Using the Label 258 Distribution Protocol (LDP)", RFC 4447, April 2006. 260 [RFC5085] Nadeau, T. and C. Pignataro, "Pseudowire Virtual Circuit 261 Connectivity Verification (VCCV): A Control Channel for 262 Pseudowires", RFC 5085, December 2007. 264 [RFC5880] Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection 265 (BFD)", RFC 5880, June 2010. 267 [RFC5881] Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection 268 (BFD) for IPv4 and IPv6 (Single Hop)", RFC 5881, 269 June 2010. 271 [RFC5885] Nadeau, T. and C. Pignataro, "Bidirectional Forwarding 272 Detection (BFD) for the Pseudowire Virtual Circuit 273 Connectivity Verification (VCCV)", RFC 5885, June 2010. 275 [RFC6310] Aissaoui, M., Busschbach, P., Martini, L., Morrow, M., 276 Nadeau, T., and Y(J). Stein, "Pseudowire (PW) Operations, 277 Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) Message Mapping", 278 RFC 6310, July 2011. 280 [RFC6428] Allan, D., Swallow Ed. , G., and J. Drake Ed. , "Proactive 281 Connectivity Verification, Continuity Check, and Remote 282 Defect Indication for the MPLS Transport Profile", 283 RFC 6428, November 2011. 285 6.2. Informative References 287 [RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an 288 IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226, 289 May 2008. 291 Author's Address 293 Greg Mirsky 294 Ericsson 296 Email: gregory.mirsky@ericsson.com