MPLS S. Boutros Internet-Draft S. Bryant, Ed. Intended status: Standards Track S. Sivabalan Expires: September 6, 2010 G . Swallow Cisco Systems D. Ward Juniper Networks V. Manral IP Infusion Inc. March 5, 2010 Definition of ACH TLV Structure draft-ietf-mpls-tp-ach-tlv-02 Abstract In some application of the associated channel header (ACH), it is necessary to have the ability to include a set of TLVs to provide additional context information for the ACH payload. This document defines a number of TLV types. This document is a product of a joint Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) / International Telecommunications Union Telecommunications Standardization Sector (ITU-T) effort to include an MPLS Transport Profile within the IETF MPLS and PWE3 architectures to support the capabilities and functionalities of a packet transport network as defined by the ITU-T. Requirements Language The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC2119 [1]. Status of this Memo This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- Drafts. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference Boutros, et al. Expires September 6, 2010 [Page 1] Internet-Draft ACH TLV March 2010 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. This Internet-Draft will expire on September 6, 2010. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2010 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the BSD License. Boutros, et al. Expires September 6, 2010 [Page 2] Internet-Draft ACH TLV March 2010 Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. ACH TLV Object Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.1. The Null TLV Object . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.2. IPv4 Source Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.3. IPv6 Source Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.4. ITU-T Carrier Code . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.5. Global Identifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2.6. Network Interface Identifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2.7. Authentication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 5.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 5.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Boutros, et al. Expires September 6, 2010 [Page 3] Internet-Draft ACH TLV March 2010 1. Introduction The MPLS generic associated channel header specification [6] (GACH) describes a TLV structure that is used to provide additional context information for the ACH payload. This document defines a number of TLVs that are required by the MPLS-TP design [7], [8]. 2. ACH TLV Object Definitions This section provides the definition for a number of ACH TLV objects. In each case the length in the TLV header is the length of only the value component. 2.1. The Null TLV Object The Null TLV provides an OPTIONAL mechanism of restoring 32bit alignment of the following element in the packet and also provides an OPTIONAL mechanism to reserve space in the packet to be used by TLV objects that will be written by LSR that perform some operation on the packet at a later time. For security reasons the value must be zero. 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | AchTlvType = 0 | Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ~ Value = 0 ~ | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Figure 1: Null TLV Object 2.2. IPv4 Source Address This TLV specifies the IPv4 [2] source address (SAv4) of an ACH packet. Where the packet is associated with a maintenance request/response operation it refers to the requester of the operation, i.e. It is the address of the Maintenance End Point that initiated the operation being either requested, or is being responded to. Boutros, et al. Expires September 6, 2010 [Page 4] Internet-Draft ACH TLV March 2010 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | AchTlvType = 1 | Length = 4 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | IPv4 Address | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Figure 2: IPv4 Source Address 2.3. IPv6 Source Address This TLV specifies the IPv6 [3] source address (SAv6) of an ACH packet. Where the packet is associated with a maintenance request/response operation it refers to the requester of the operation, i.e. It is the address of the Maintenance End Point that initiated the operation being either requested, or is being responded to. 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | AchTlvType = 2 | Length = 16 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ~ IPv6 Address | | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Figure 3: IPv4 Source Address 2.4. ITU-T Carrier Code This TLV is used to carry an ITU-T Carrier Code Identifier (ICC) as defined in M.1400 [4]. Boutros, et al. Expires September 6, 2010 [Page 5] Internet-Draft ACH TLV March 2010 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | AchTlvType = 3 | Length = 16 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | ICC | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Figure 4: ITU-T Carrier Code The ICC is encoded in ASCII in a fixed format 6 byte field, with unused trailing bytes set to NULL (0). 2.5. Global Identifier This TLV is used to carry a Global Identifier (Global_ID) [5] . 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | AchTlvType = 4 | Length = 4 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Global ID | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Figure 5: Global_ID TLV 2.6. Network Interface Identifier This TLV is used to carry Network Interface ID (IF_ID) [5] . As defined in [5], an IF_ID consists of a node identifier (Node_ID) and a Logical Interface Handle (LIH), both or which are 32 bit identifiers. Boutros, et al. Expires September 6, 2010 [Page 6] Internet-Draft ACH TLV March 2010 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | AchTlvType = 5 | Length = 8 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Node_ID | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | LIH | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Figure 6: IF_ID TLV 2.7. Authentication The structure of the ACH authentication (auth) TLV is as follows: 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | AchTlvType = 6 | Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Auth Type | Auth Len | Authentication Data... | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ The authentication proceedures and data format used is the same as that defined in Sections 4.1, 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4 of [9] . Each document which defines a channel type needs to define whether an authentication TLV is required, permitted, or disallowed, and the actions to be taken in normal and error situations. An application not supporting data origin authentication MAY use this mechanism instead of defining its own proprietery mechanism. 3. Security Considerations This specification defines a mechanism to identify a set of protocol parameters. The necessary security considerations will be described in the definition of the protocols that uses these parameters. 4. IANA Considerations IANA is requested to create a new registry in the pseudowire name spaces: the ACH TLV Registry. The ACH TLV Registry should be initialized with the following Boutros, et al. Expires September 6, 2010 [Page 7] Internet-Draft ACH TLV March 2010 entries. The allocation policy for this registry is IETF consensus. Name Type Length Description Reference (octets) Null 0 3 Null TLV This Draft SAv4 1 4 IPv4 Source Address This Draft SAv6 2 16 IPv6 Source Address This Draft ICC 3 6 ITU-T Carrier Code This Draft Global_ID 4 4 Global Identifier This Draft IF_ID 5 8 Network Interface ID This Draft Auth 6 var Authentication This Draft 5. References 5.1. Normative References [1] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. [2] Postel, J., "Internet Protocol", STD 5, RFC 791, September 1981. [3] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6) Specification", RFC 2460, December 1998. [4] "ITU-T Recommendation M.1400, "Designations for interconnections among operators' networks"", 2006. [5] Bocci, M. and G. Swallow, "MPLS-TP Identifiers", draft-ietf-mpls-tp-identifiers-00 (work in progress), November 2009. 5.2. Informative References [6] Bocci, M., Vigoureux, M., and S. Bryant, "MPLS Generic Associated Channel", RFC 5586, June 2009. [7] Niven-Jenkins, B., Brungard, D., Betts, M., Sprecher, N., and S. Ueno, "Requirements of an MPLS Transport Profile", RFC 5654, September 2009. [8] Bocci, M., Bryant, S., Frost, D., Levrau, L., and L. Berger, "A Framework for MPLS in Transport Networks", draft-ietf-mpls-tp-framework-10 (work in progress), February 2010. [9] Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection", draft-ietf-bfd-base-11 (work in progress), January 2010. Boutros, et al. Expires September 6, 2010 [Page 8] Internet-Draft ACH TLV March 2010 Authors' Addresses Sami Boutros Cisco Systems Email: sboutros@cisco.com Stewart Bryant (editor) Cisco Systems Email: stbryant@cisco.com Siva Sivabalan Cisco Systems Email: msiva@cisco.com George Swallow Cisco Systems Email: swallow@cisco.com David Ward Juniper Networks Email: dward@Juniper.net Vishwas Manral IP Infusion Inc. Bamankhola, Bansgali,, Almora, Uttaranchal 263601 India Email: vishwas.ietf@gmail.com Boutros, et al. Expires September 6, 2010 [Page 9]