Network Working Group Christian Martin INTERNET DRAFTVerizonVerzion Global Networks,Inc Expiration Date: October, 2001 April 2001Inc. Administrative Tags in IS-IS<draft-martin-isis-admin-tags-00.txt><draft-martin-isis-admin-tags-01.txt> 1. Status of this Memo This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with all provisions of Section 10 ofRFC2026.RFC 2026. 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 useInternet-DraftsInternet- Drafts as reference 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.1.02. Abstract This document describes an extension to the IS-IS protocol to add operational capabilities that allow foreasier managementease of management and control over IP prefix distribution within an IS-IS domain. TheIS-ISIS- IS protocol is specified in [1], with extensions for supporting IPv4 specified in [2] and further enhancements for TrafficEngineering[4]Engineering [4] in [3]. This document enhances the IS-IS protocol by extending the information that a Intermediate System (IS) [router] can place in Link State Protocol Data Units (LSPs) as specified in [2]. Thisinformation may be of use toextension will provide operatorswho mustwith a mechanism to controlthe wayIP prefixinformation is distributeddistribution throughouta multi-level, large scalemulti-level IS-IStopology. 2. Conventions used in this document 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 RFC-2119 [4]. 3.0domains. 3. Introduction As defined in [2] and extended in [3], the IS-IS protocol may be used to distribute IP prefix reachibility information throughout an IS-IS domain. The IP prefix information is encoded as TLV type 130 in [2], with additional information carried in TLV 135 as specified in [3]. In particular, the extended IP Reachibilty TLV (135) contains support for a larger metric space, an up/down bit to indicate redistribution between different levels in the hierarchy,thean IP prefix, and one or more sub-TLVs that can be used to carry specific information about the prefix. As of this writing no sub-TLVs have been defined; however, this draft proposestwoa newsub-TLVssub-TLV that may be used to carry administrative information about an IP prefix.This document is a publication of the IS-IS Working Group within the IETF, and is a contribution to ISO IEC JTC1/SC6, for eventual inclusion with ISO 10589. 4.04. Sub-TLV Additions This draft proposes a new "Administrative Tag" sub-TLV to be added to TLV 135. This TLV specifies a 32 bit unsigned integer that may be associated with an IP prefix.One use forExample uses of this tagwould be forinclude controlling redistribution between areas, different routing protocols, or multiple instances of IS-IS running on the same router. The methods for which their use isimplementedemployed is beyond the scope of this document andisleft to theoperators of IS-IS networks to decide. It is assumed, however, that vendors will provide tools to match and set these tags in routing policy configuration tools.implementer and/or operator. The encoding ofthis new TLVthe sub-TLV isas follows: 4.1 Sub-TLV <?>:discussed in the following subsection. 4.1. Administrative Tag Sub-TLV [TBA] This sub-TLV [TBA] shall be used to associate an integer value with an IP prefix such that it may be used in routing policy to control the distribution of routing information within an IS-IS domain. The Administrative Tag shall be encoded as a 4 octet unsigned integer.5.0See the "IANA Considerations" section for additional information. 5. Security Considerations This document raises no new security issues for IS-IS, as any annotations to IP prefixes should not pass outside the administrative control of the network operator of the IS-IS domain. Such an allowance would violate the spirit of Interior Gateway Protocols in general and IS-IS in particular.6.06. IANA Considerations The value of the Administrative Tag sub-TLV [TBA] must be allocated. 7. Acknowledgments The author would like to thank Henk Smit for clarifying the best place to describe this new information, Danny McPherson for his comments and assistance with formatting, and Tony Li for useful comments on this draft.7.08. References [1]ISO 10589,"Intermediate System to Intermediate SystemIntra- DomainIntra-Domain Routeing Exchange Protocol for use in Conjunction with the Protocol for Providing the Connectionless-mode Network Service (ISO8473)" [Also republished as RFC 1142]8473)", ISO 10589. [2] Callon, R., RFC 1195, "Use of OSI IS-IS for routing in TCP/IP and dual environments",R.W. Callon, Dec. 1990RFC 1195, December 1990. [3]draft-ietf-isis-traffic-02.txt,Li, T., and Smit, H., "IS-IS extensions for Traffic Engineering",T. Li, H. Smit, Sep. 2000Internet Draft, "Work in Progress", September 2000. [4]RFC 2702,Adwuche, D., Malcolm, J., Agogbua, M., O'Dell, M. and McManus, J., "Requirements for Traffic Engineering Over MPLS,"D. Awduche, J. Malcolm, J. Agogbua, M. O'Dell, and J. McManus,RFC 2702, September 1999.9.010. Author's Address Christian Martin Verizon Global Networks, Inc. 1880 Campus Commons Dr Reston, VA 20191 Email: cmartin@verizongni.com Voice: 1 (703) 2954394 Fax: 1 (703) 2954279Expiration Date: October, 2001