Last Modified: 2004-06-24
The goals of this working group are: 1. Define and develop a standard virtual router redundancy protocol for IPv4 and IPv6.
2. Develop VRRP MIB(s).
3. Separate specifications will be developed for IPv4 and IPv6.
4. Determine whether static (configuration based) load sharing is adequate or if some amount of dynamic load sharing is required.
5. Working group will examine security issues to determine what security threats it is appropriate for the VRRP protocol to handle and include the appropriate mechanisms in the VRRP protocol.
6. The internet draft "Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol" (draft-hinden-vrrp-00.txt) will be use as the basis of virtual router redundancy protocol. The working group will also consider other Internet-Drafts related to this topic allowing for issues regarding change control, security, running code, etc.
7. Intellectual property issues regarding the technology to develop a virtual router redundancy protocol will be identified and addressed.
|Done||Charter Working Group|
|Done||Issue new Internet Drafts for IPv4 version of the protocol.|
|Done||Review and finalize IPv4 Internet Drafts.|
|Done||Issue Internet Draft for IPv6 version of VRRP.|
|Done||Submit revised IPv4 Internet Drafts to IESG for proposed standard.|
|Done||Issue VRRP MIB drafts.|
|Done||Issue revised draft for IPv6 version of VRRP.|
|Done||Finalize MIB draft and submit to IESG.|
|Done||Resolve open issues with authentication methods|
|Done||Issue VRRPv3 (VRRP for IPv6) MIB drafts|
|Done||Submit updated version of VRRP (IPv4) for Draft Standard|
|Done||Decide on the VRRP MIB draft (unified or separated MIBs)|
|Done||Resolve ND vs VMACs issue with VRRPv3|
|Oct 04||Submit MIB for VRRPv3 for Proposed Standard|
|Oct 04||Submit VRRP for IPv6 (VRRPv3) for Proposed Standard|
|Nov 04||Review the WG goals and future potential|
|RFC2338||PS||Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol|
|RFC2787||PS||Definitions of Managed Objects for the Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol using SNMPv2|
|RFC3768||Standard||Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol|
Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol WG (vrrp)
Tuesday, August 3 at 1415-1515
CHAIRS: Mukesh Gupta <Mukesh.Gupta@nokia.com>
Radia Perlman <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Agenda Bashing Chairs 5 mins
Current Drafts' status Chairs 5 minutes
VRRPv3 and IPv6 ND RA Bob Hinden 15 minutes
Mukesh Gupta - agenda
vrrp for IPv4 is draft standard now (RFC 3768)
vrrp for ipv6 there are implementations
they have raised issues
vrrp mib: The draft is available and needs to be reviewed.
no mechanism in ND that insures that hosts send to multiple routers.
need to insure that backup vrrp routers send all nd options that address owner was sending.
general question about the use of nd and vrrp.
Issue 1 - ND Load Balancing
ND currently doesn't insure that
IPv6 host to router load sharing
Resolution of the issue:
IPv6 load sharing draft provides needed mechanism
no change is required in vrrpv6
Need to insure that backup VRRP routers send all ND options that address owner was sending.
Recommend adding text that makes this requirement clear.
Require backup router to have address owner option information.
Bob thinks he is volunteering to look at the ND stuff to look at this to make sure this works.
General question raised about the use of ND in VRRP
Issue isn't clear to Bob Hinden
Radia mentioned that the only possible problem with having all backup routers send all the same options as the address owner is that there might potentially be options that are router specific rather than address specific, for instance, which destination prefixes are best reachable through that router. In that case it might be reasonable to customize the options sent, and have backup routers give different values than the address owner. Bob Hinden volunteered to check with the ND spec to see if there are any such options. This will help clarify whether we should mandate that all backup routers be configured to send the same set of options as the address owner, recommend it, or explicitly not require it.