| < draft-ietf-bier-source-protection-01.txt | draft-ietf-bier-source-protection-02.txt > | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BIER WG Z. Zhang | BIER WG Z. Zhang | |||
| Internet-Draft ZTE Corporation | Internet-Draft ZTE Corporation | |||
| Intended status: Informational G. Mirsky | Intended status: Informational G. Mirsky | |||
| Expires: 27 April 2022 Ericsson | Expires: 26 October 2022 Ericsson | |||
| Q. Xiong | Q. Xiong | |||
| ZTE Corporation | ZTE Corporation | |||
| Y. Liu | Y. Liu | |||
| China Mobile | China Mobile | |||
| H. Li | H. Li | |||
| China Telecom | China Telecom | |||
| 24 October 2021 | 24 April 2022 | |||
| BIER (Bit Index Explicit Replication) Redundant Ingress Router Failover | BIER (Bit Index Explicit Replication) Redundant Ingress Router Failover | |||
| draft-ietf-bier-source-protection-01 | draft-ietf-bier-source-protection-02 | |||
| Abstract | Abstract | |||
| This document describes a failover in the Bit Index Explicit | This document describes a failover in the Bit Index Explicit | |||
| Replication domain with a redundant ingress router. | Replication domain with a redundant ingress router. | |||
| Status of This Memo | Status of This Memo | |||
| This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the | This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the | |||
| provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. | provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. | |||
| skipping to change at page 1, line 38 ¶ | skipping to change at page 1, line 38 ¶ | |||
| Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | |||
| Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute | Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute | |||
| working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- | working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- | |||
| Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. | Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. | |||
| Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months | Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months | |||
| and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any | and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any | |||
| time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference | time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference | |||
| material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." | material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." | |||
| This Internet-Draft will expire on 27 April 2022. | This Internet-Draft will expire on 26 October 2022. | |||
| Copyright Notice | Copyright Notice | |||
| Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | Copyright (c) 2022 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | |||
| document authors. All rights reserved. | document authors. All rights reserved. | |||
| This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal | This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal | |||
| Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/ | Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/ | |||
| license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. | license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. | |||
| Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights | Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights | |||
| and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components | and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components | |||
| extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text | extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as | |||
| as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are | described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are | |||
| provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. | provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License. | |||
| Table of Contents | Table of Contents | |||
| 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 | 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 | |||
| 2. Keywords . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | 2. Keywords . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | |||
| 3. The Redundant BFIR Failover Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | 3. The Redundant BFIR Failover Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | |||
| 3.1. Node Failure Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | 3.1. Node Failure Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | |||
| 3.2. Monitoring of the Working Path for a Failure . . . . . . 5 | 3.2. Monitoring of the Working Path for a Failure . . . . . . 5 | |||
| 4. BFD and Ping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | 4. BFD and Ping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | |||
| 4.1. BIER Ping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | 4.1. BIER Ping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | |||
| skipping to change at page 3, line 32 ¶ | skipping to change at page 3, line 32 ¶ | |||
| flow information. Based on that, a BFER selects the UMH (Upstream | flow information. Based on that, a BFER selects the UMH (Upstream | |||
| Multicast Hop) BFIR as the ingress router. The BFIR selected as the | Multicast Hop) BFIR as the ingress router. The BFIR selected as the | |||
| UMH through a BIER overlay protocol learns of BFERs which have chosen | UMH through a BIER overlay protocol learns of BFERs which have chosen | |||
| it to receive the particular multicast flow. BIER transport is used | it to receive the particular multicast flow. BIER transport is used | |||
| to deliver the multicast packet to the destination BFERs. The | to deliver the multicast packet to the destination BFERs. The | |||
| detection of a defect in the BIER transport layer ensures that the | detection of a defect in the BIER transport layer ensures that the | |||
| source flow protection is uninterrupted. The switchover is performed | source flow protection is uninterrupted. The switchover is performed | |||
| at the BIER overlay layer. Upon detecting the failure, an update in | at the BIER overlay layer. Upon detecting the failure, an update in | |||
| the BIER overlay can trigger BFIR re-selection by BFERs. | the BIER overlay can trigger BFIR re-selection by BFERs. | |||
| As described in [I-D.szcl-mboned-redundant-ingress-failover], the | As described in [I-D.ietf-mboned-redundant-ingress-failover], the | |||
| root standby modes, i.e., Cold Standby, Warm Standby, and Hot | root standby modes, i.e., Cold Standby, Warm Standby, and Hot | |||
| Standby, can be used in the BIER environment. In Warm and Hot | Standby, can be used in the BIER environment. In Warm and Hot | |||
| Standby modes, the protection BFIR needs to learn through BIER | Standby modes, the protection BFIR needs to learn through BIER | |||
| overlay protocols the identities of BFERs in the particular multicast | overlay protocols the identities of BFERs in the particular multicast | |||
| group. In the Hot Standby mode, BFER receives duplicate flows from | group. In the Hot Standby mode, BFER receives duplicate flows from | |||
| the selected active BFIR and protection BFIR, BFER accepts the flow | the selected active BFIR and protection BFIR, BFER accepts the flow | |||
| packet from the selected active BFIR, identified, for example, by | packet from the selected active BFIR, identified, for example, by | |||
| BFIR-id in the BIER header, discards the multicast packet from the | BFIR-id in the BIER header, discards the multicast packet from the | |||
| protection BFIR. | protection BFIR. | |||
| skipping to change at page 5, line 28 ¶ | skipping to change at page 5, line 28 ¶ | |||
| domain. A ping protocol listed above or BIER ping | domain. A ping protocol listed above or BIER ping | |||
| [I-D.ietf-bier-ping] can be used. In case there is no direct | [I-D.ietf-bier-ping] can be used. In case there is no direct | |||
| connection between BFIR1 and BFIR2, multiple hops will be traversed. | connection between BFIR1 and BFIR2, multiple hops will be traversed. | |||
| Similarly, any of the listed above path continuity checking methods | Similarly, any of the listed above path continuity checking methods | |||
| can be used by a BFER to monitor the path to and state of S-BFIR. | can be used by a BFER to monitor the path to and state of S-BFIR. | |||
| The case when the S-BFIR monitors the working path to a BFER is | The case when the S-BFIR monitors the working path to a BFER is | |||
| considered further in the document in more details. | considered further in the document in more details. | |||
| The monitoring case between S-BFIR and B-BFIR, referred to as the | The monitoring case between S-BFIR and B-BFIR, referred to as the | |||
| Warm Standby mode, is described in section 4.2 | Warm Standby mode, is described in section 4.2 | |||
| [I-D.szcl-mboned-redundant-ingress-failover]. For code and Hot | [I-D.ietf-mboned-redundant-ingress-failover]. For code and Hot | |||
| Standby modes described in Sections 4.1 and 4.3 | Standby modes described in Sections 4.1 and 4.3 | |||
| [I-D.szcl-mboned-redundant-ingress-failover], the monitoring between | [I-D.ietf-mboned-redundant-ingress-failover], the monitoring between | |||
| S-BFIR and B-BFIR may not be necessary. | S-BFIR and B-BFIR may not be necessary. | |||
| For the monitoring between BFIR and BFERs, the BFIR node failure | For the monitoring between BFIR and BFERs, the BFIR node failure | |||
| detection is also be combined with working path failure detection. | detection is also be combined with working path failure detection. | |||
| 3.2. Monitoring of the Working Path for a Failure | 3.2. Monitoring of the Working Path for a Failure | |||
| +--------+S1+-------+ | +--------+S1+-------+ | |||
| | | | | | | |||
| +--v----+ +---v---+ | +--v----+ +---v---+ | |||
| +------+ BFIR1 |..........| BFIR2 +-------+ | +------+ BFIR1 |..........| BFIR2 +-------+ | |||
| skipping to change at page 7, line 15 ¶ | skipping to change at page 7, line 15 ¶ | |||
| * S-BFIR monitors all the BFERs; | * S-BFIR monitors all the BFERs; | |||
| * BFER monitors the S-BFIR. | * BFER monitors the S-BFIR. | |||
| In the BIER transport environment, the defect detection is based on a | In the BIER transport environment, the defect detection is based on a | |||
| BIER-specific mechanism, e.g., BIER Ping [I-D.ietf-bier-ping], BIER | BIER-specific mechanism, e.g., BIER Ping [I-D.ietf-bier-ping], BIER | |||
| BFD [I-D.ietf-bier-bfd]. BIER BFD [I-D.ietf-bier-bfd] reduces the | BFD [I-D.ietf-bier-bfd]. BIER BFD [I-D.ietf-bier-bfd] reduces the | |||
| number of BFD sessions between S-BFIR and each of BFERs. Only one | number of BFD sessions between S-BFIR and each of BFERs. Only one | |||
| multipoint BFD session will be built among S-BFIR and all the BFERs | multipoint BFD session will be built among S-BFIR and all the BFERs | |||
| and B-BFIR. When MVPN is used as the BIER overlay protocol, BFD | and B-BFIR. When MVPN is used as the BIER overlay protocol, BFD | |||
| Discriminator attribute, defined in Section 3.1.6 in | Discriminator attribute, defined in Section 3.1.6 in [RFC9026], can | |||
| [I-D.ietf-bess-mvpn-fast-failover], can be used to bootstrap the | be used to bootstrap the multipoint BFD session between a BFIR and | |||
| multipoint BFD session between a BFIR and BFERs. In this situation, | BFERs. In this situation, only S-BFIR sends the BFD Discriminator | |||
| only S-BFIR sends the BFD Discriminator attribute and transmits | attribute and transmits periodic BFD Control messages, BFER and | |||
| periodic BFD Control messages, BFER and B-BFIR can monitor S-BFIR, | B-BFIR can monitor S-BFIR, S-BFIR doesn't monitor BFER and B-BFIR. | |||
| S-BFIR doesn't monitor BFER and B-BFIR. | ||||
| Consider when S-BFIR monitors paths to and state of all BFERs in the | Consider when S-BFIR monitors paths to and state of all BFERs in the | |||
| particular multicast group. Once S-BFIR detects that a BFER is | particular multicast group. Once S-BFIR detects that a BFER is | |||
| unreachable, S-BFIR notifies B-BFIR and the latter may start | unreachable, S-BFIR notifies B-BFIR and the latter may start | |||
| frowarding that multicast packets to that BFER. The monitoring can | frowarding that multicast packets to that BFER. The monitoring can | |||
| be achieved by a P2P BFD session between S-BFIR and each of BFERs. | be achieved by a P2P BFD session between S-BFIR and each of BFERs. | |||
| Alternatively, a P2MP BFD session with active tails between S-BFIR | Alternatively, a P2MP BFD session with active tails between S-BFIR | |||
| and BFERs can be used. This behavior can be used for the Warm | and BFERs can be used. This behavior can be used for the Warm | |||
| Standby mode. | Standby mode. | |||
| skipping to change at page 9, line 17 ¶ | skipping to change at page 9, line 17 ¶ | |||
| it takes on the role of S-BFIR and begins to forward the multicast | it takes on the role of S-BFIR and begins to forward the multicast | |||
| flow to BFERs. | flow to BFERs. | |||
| 5. IANA Considerations | 5. IANA Considerations | |||
| This document does not have any requests for IANA allocation. This | This document does not have any requests for IANA allocation. This | |||
| section can be deleted before the publication of the draft. | section can be deleted before the publication of the draft. | |||
| 6. Security Considerations | 6. Security Considerations | |||
| Security considerations discussed in [RFC8279], [RFC8562], | Security considerations discussed in [RFC8279], [RFC8562], [RFC9026], | |||
| [I-D.ietf-bier-ping], [I-D.ietf-bess-mvpn-fast-failover] and | [I-D.ietf-bier-ping] and [I-D.ietf-bier-bfd] apply to this document. | |||
| [I-D.ietf-bier-bfd] apply to this document. | ||||
| 7. References | 7. References | |||
| 7.1. Normative References | 7.1. Normative References | |||
| [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate | [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate | |||
| Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, | Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, | |||
| DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, | DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, | |||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. | |||
| [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC | [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC | |||
| 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, | 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, | |||
| May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>. | May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>. | |||
| 7.2. Informative References | 7.2. Informative References | |||
| [I-D.ietf-bess-mvpn-fast-failover] | ||||
| Morin, T., Kebler, R., and G. Mirsky, "Multicast VPN Fast | ||||
| Upstream Failover", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, | ||||
| draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-fast-failover-15, 21 January 2021, | ||||
| <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-bess-mvpn- | ||||
| fast-failover-15.txt>. | ||||
| [I-D.ietf-bier-bfd] | [I-D.ietf-bier-bfd] | |||
| Xiong, Q., Mirsky, G., Hu, F., and C. Liu, "BIER BFD", | Xiong, Q., Mirsky, G., Hu, F., and C. Liu, "BIER BFD", | |||
| Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-bier-bfd-01, | Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-bier-bfd-01, | |||
| 8 April 2021, <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf- | 8 April 2021, <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf- | |||
| bier-bfd-01.txt>. | bier-bfd-01.txt>. | |||
| [I-D.ietf-bier-mld] | [I-D.ietf-bier-mld] | |||
| Pfister, P., Wijnands, I., Venaas, S., Wang, C., Zhang, | Pfister, P., Wijnands, I., Venaas, S., Wang, C., Zhang, | |||
| Z., and M. Stenberg, "BIER Ingress Multicast Flow Overlay | Z., and M. Stenberg, "BIER Ingress Multicast Flow Overlay | |||
| using Multicast Listener Discovery Protocols", Work in | using Multicast Listener Discovery Protocols", Work in | |||
| Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-bier-mld-05, 22 | Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-bier-mld-06, 5 | |||
| February 2021, <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft- | January 2022, <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf- | |||
| ietf-bier-mld-05.txt>. | bier-mld-06.txt>. | |||
| [I-D.ietf-bier-pim-signaling] | [I-D.ietf-bier-pim-signaling] | |||
| Bidgoli, H., Xu, F., Kotalwar, J., Wijnands, I., Mishra, | Bidgoli, H., Xu, F., Kotalwar, J., Wijnands, I., Mishra, | |||
| M., and Z. Zhang, "PIM Signaling Through BIER Core", Work | M., and Z. Zhang, "PIM Signaling Through BIER Core", Work | |||
| in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-bier-pim- | in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-bier-pim- | |||
| signaling-12, 25 July 2021, | signaling-12, 25 July 2021, | |||
| <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-bier-pim- | <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-bier-pim- | |||
| signaling-12.txt>. | signaling-12.txt>. | |||
| [I-D.ietf-bier-ping] | [I-D.ietf-bier-ping] | |||
| Kumar, N., Pignataro, C., Akiya, N., Zheng, L., Chen, M., | Kumar, N., Pignataro, C., Akiya, N., Zheng, L., Chen, M., | |||
| and G. Mirsky, "BIER Ping and Trace", Work in Progress, | and G. Mirsky, "BIER Ping and Trace", Work in Progress, | |||
| Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-bier-ping-07, 11 May 2020, | Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-bier-ping-07, 11 May 2020, | |||
| <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-bier-ping- | <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-bier-ping- | |||
| 07.txt>. | 07.txt>. | |||
| [I-D.szcl-mboned-redundant-ingress-failover] | [I-D.ietf-mboned-redundant-ingress-failover] | |||
| Shepherd, G., Zhang, Z., Liu, Y., and Y. Cheng, "Multicast | Shepherd, G., Zhang, Z., Liu, Y., and Y. Cheng, "Multicast | |||
| Redundant Ingress Router Failover", Work in Progress, | Redundant Ingress Router Failover", Work in Progress, | |||
| Internet-Draft, draft-szcl-mboned-redundant-ingress- | Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-mboned-redundant-ingress- | |||
| failover-01, 8 July 2021, | failover-00, 7 April 2022, | |||
| <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-szcl-mboned- | <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-mboned- | |||
| redundant-ingress-failover-01.txt>. | redundant-ingress-failover-00.txt>. | |||
| [RFC0792] Postel, J., "Internet Control Message Protocol", STD 5, | [RFC0792] Postel, J., "Internet Control Message Protocol", STD 5, | |||
| RFC 792, DOI 10.17487/RFC0792, September 1981, | RFC 792, DOI 10.17487/RFC0792, September 1981, | |||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc792>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc792>. | |||
| [RFC4443] Conta, A., Deering, S., and M. Gupta, Ed., "Internet | [RFC4443] Conta, A., Deering, S., and M. Gupta, Ed., "Internet | |||
| Control Message Protocol (ICMPv6) for the Internet | Control Message Protocol (ICMPv6) for the Internet | |||
| Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Specification", STD 89, | Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) Specification", STD 89, | |||
| RFC 4443, DOI 10.17487/RFC4443, March 2006, | RFC 4443, DOI 10.17487/RFC4443, March 2006, | |||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4443>. | <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4443>. | |||
| skipping to change at page 11, line 21 ¶ | skipping to change at page 11, line 15 ¶ | |||
| [RFC8556] Rosen, E., Ed., Sivakumar, M., Przygienda, T., Aldrin, S., | [RFC8556] Rosen, E., Ed., Sivakumar, M., Przygienda, T., Aldrin, S., | |||
| and A. Dolganow, "Multicast VPN Using Bit Index Explicit | and A. Dolganow, "Multicast VPN Using Bit Index Explicit | |||
| Replication (BIER)", RFC 8556, DOI 10.17487/RFC8556, April | Replication (BIER)", RFC 8556, DOI 10.17487/RFC8556, April | |||
| 2019, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8556>. | 2019, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8556>. | |||
| [RFC8562] Katz, D., Ward, D., Pallagatti, S., Ed., and G. Mirsky, | [RFC8562] Katz, D., Ward, D., Pallagatti, S., Ed., and G. Mirsky, | |||
| Ed., "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) for | Ed., "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) for | |||
| Multipoint Networks", RFC 8562, DOI 10.17487/RFC8562, | Multipoint Networks", RFC 8562, DOI 10.17487/RFC8562, | |||
| April 2019, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8562>. | April 2019, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8562>. | |||
| [RFC9026] Morin, T., Ed., Kebler, R., Ed., and G. Mirsky, Ed., | ||||
| "Multicast VPN Fast Upstream Failover", RFC 9026, | ||||
| DOI 10.17487/RFC9026, April 2021, | ||||
| <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9026>. | ||||
| Authors' Addresses | Authors' Addresses | |||
| Zheng Zhang | Zheng Zhang | |||
| ZTE Corporation | ZTE Corporation | |||
| Email: zhang.zheng@zte.com.cn | Email: zhang.zheng@zte.com.cn | |||
| Greg Mirsky | Greg Mirsky | |||
| Ericsson | Ericsson | |||
| Email: gregimirsky@gmail.com | Email: gregimirsky@gmail.com | |||
| Quan Xiong | Quan Xiong | |||
| ZTE Corporation | ZTE Corporation | |||
| Email: xiong.quan@zte.com.cn | Email: xiong.quan@zte.com.cn | |||
| Yisong Liu | Yisong Liu | |||
| China Mobile | China Mobile | |||
| Email: liuyisong@chinamobile.com | Email: liuyisong@chinamobile.com | |||
| Huanan Li | Huanan Li | |||
| China Telecom | China Telecom | |||
| Email: lihn6@chinatelecom.cn | Email: lihn6@chinatelecom.cn | |||
| End of changes. 21 change blocks. | ||||
| 40 lines changed or deleted | 31 lines changed or added | |||
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/ | ||||