| < draft-ietf-ospf-rfc4970bis-01.txt | draft-ietf-ospf-rfc4970bis-02.txt > | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Network Working Group A. Lindem, Ed. | Network Working Group A. Lindem, Ed. | |||
| Internet-Draft N. Shen | Internet-Draft N. Shen | |||
| Obsoletes: 4970 (if approved) J. Vasseur | Obsoletes: 4970 (if approved) J. Vasseur | |||
| Intended status: Standards Track Cisco Systems | Intended status: Standards Track Cisco Systems | |||
| Expires: February 5, 2016 R. Aggarwal | Expires: February 22, 2016 R. Aggarwal | |||
| Arktan | Arktan | |||
| S. Shaffer | S. Shaffer | |||
| Akamai | Akamai | |||
| August 4, 2015 | August 21, 2015 | |||
| Extensions to OSPF for Advertising Optional Router Capabilities | Extensions to OSPF for Advertising Optional Router Capabilities | |||
| draft-ietf-ospf-rfc4970bis-01.txt | draft-ietf-ospf-rfc4970bis-02.txt | |||
| Abstract | Abstract | |||
| It is useful for routers in an OSPFv2 or OSPFv3 routing domain to | It is useful for routers in an OSPFv2 or OSPFv3 routing domain to | |||
| know the capabilities of their neighbors and other routers in the | know the capabilities of their neighbors and other routers in the | |||
| routing domain. This document proposes extensions to OSPFv2 and | routing domain. This document proposes extensions to OSPFv2 and | |||
| OSPFv3 for advertising optional router capabilities. A new Router | OSPFv3 for advertising optional router capabilities. The Router | |||
| Information (RI) Link State Advertisement (LSA) is proposed for this | Information (RI) Link State Advertisement (LSA) is defined for this | |||
| purpose. In OSPFv2, the RI LSA will be implemented with a new opaque | purpose. In OSPFv2, the RI LSA will be implemented with an opaque | |||
| LSA type ID. In OSPFv3, the RI LSA will be implemented with a new | LSA type ID. In OSPFv3, the RI LSA will be implemented with a unique | |||
| LSA type function code. In both protocols, the RI LSA can be | LSA type function code. In both protocols, the RI LSA can be | |||
| advertised at any of the defined flooding scopes (link, area, or | advertised at any of the defined flooding scopes (link, area, or | |||
| autonomous system (AS)). This document obsoletes RFC 4970 by | autonomous system (AS)). This document obsoletes RFC 4970 by | |||
| providing a revised specification including support for advertisement | providing a revised specification including support for advertisement | |||
| of multiple instances of the RI LSA and a TLV for functional | of multiple instances of the RI LSA and a TLV for functional | |||
| capabilities. | capabilities. | |||
| 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 | |||
| skipping to change at page 1, line 47 ¶ | skipping to change at page 1, line 47 ¶ | |||
| 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 http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. | Drafts is at http://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 February 5, 2016. | This Internet-Draft will expire on February 22, 2016. | |||
| Copyright Notice | Copyright Notice | |||
| Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | Copyright (c) 2015 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 | Provisions Relating to IETF Documents | |||
| (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | |||
| publication of this document. Please review these documents | publication of this document. Please review these documents | |||
| skipping to change at page 2, line 38 ¶ | skipping to change at page 2, line 38 ¶ | |||
| 2.3. OSPF Router Informational Capabilities TLV . . . . . . . 6 | 2.3. OSPF Router Informational Capabilities TLV . . . . . . . 6 | |||
| 2.4. Assigned OSPF Router Informational Capability Bits . . . 7 | 2.4. Assigned OSPF Router Informational Capability Bits . . . 7 | |||
| 2.5. OSPF Router Functional Capabilities TLV . . . . . . . . . 8 | 2.5. OSPF Router Functional Capabilities TLV . . . . . . . . . 8 | |||
| 2.6. Flooding Scope of the Router Information LSA . . . . . . 9 | 2.6. Flooding Scope of the Router Information LSA . . . . . . 9 | |||
| 3. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | 3. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | |||
| 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 | |||
| 5. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | 5. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | |||
| 5.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | 5.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 | |||
| 5.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | 5.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | |||
| Appendix A. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | Appendix A. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | |||
| Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 | Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 | |||
| 1. Introduction | 1. Introduction | |||
| It is useful for routers in an OSPFv2 [OSPF] or OSPFv3 [OSPFV3] | It is useful for routers in an OSPFv2 [OSPF] or OSPFv3 [OSPFV3] | |||
| routing domain to know the capabilities of their neighbors and other | routing domain to know the capabilities of their neighbors and other | |||
| routers in the routing domain. This can be useful for both the | routers in the routing domain. This can be useful for both the | |||
| advertisement and discovery of OSPFv2 and OSPFv3 capabilities. | advertisement and discovery of OSPFv2 and OSPFv3 capabilities. | |||
| Throughout this document, OSPF will be used when the specification is | Throughout this document, OSPF will be used when the specification is | |||
| applicable to both OSPFv2 and OSPFv3. Similarly, OSPFv2 or OSPFv3 | applicable to both OSPFv2 and OSPFv3. Similarly, OSPFv2 or OSPFv3 | |||
| will be used when the text is protocol specific. | will be used when the text is protocol specific. | |||
| OSPF uses the options field in LSAs and hello packets to advertise | OSPF uses the options field in LSAs and hello packets to advertise | |||
| optional router capabilities. In the case of OSPFv2, all the bits in | optional router capabilities. In the case of OSPFv2, all the bits in | |||
| this field have been allocated so new optional capabilities cannot be | this field have been allocated so additional optional capabilities | |||
| advertised. This document proposes extensions to OSPF to advertise | cannot be advertised. This document describes extensions to OSPF to | |||
| these optional capabilities via opaque LSAs in OSPFv2 and new LSAs in | advertise these optional capabilities via opaque LSAs in OSPFv2 and | |||
| OSPFv3. For existing OSPF capabilities, backward-compatibility | LSAs with a unique type in OSPFv3. For existing OSPF capabilities, | |||
| issues dictate that this advertisement is used primarily for | backward-compatibility issues dictate that this advertisement is used | |||
| informational purposes. For future OSPF extensions, this | primarily for informational purposes. For future OSPF extensions, | |||
| advertisement MAY be used as the sole mechanism for advertisement and | this advertisement MAY be used as the sole mechanism for | |||
| discovery. | advertisement and discovery. | |||
| This document obsoletes RFC 4970 by providing a revised specification | This document obsoletes RFC 4970 by providing a revised specification | |||
| including support for advertisement of multiple instances of the RI | including support for advertisement of multiple instances of the RI | |||
| LSA and a TLV for functional capabilities. | LSA and a TLV for functional capabilities. | |||
| 1.1. Requirements Notation | 1.1. Requirements Notation | |||
| The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", | The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", | |||
| "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this | "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this | |||
| document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC-KEYWORDS]. | document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC-KEYWORDS]. | |||
| 1.2. Summary of Changes from RFC 4970 | 1.2. Summary of Changes from RFC 4970 | |||
| This document includes the following changes from RFC 4970 [RFC4970]: | This document includes the following changes from RFC 4970 [RFC4970]: | |||
| 1. The main change is that an OSPF router will be able to advertise | 1. The main change is that an OSPF router will be able to advertise | |||
| multiple instances of the OSPF Router Information LSA. This | multiple instances of the OSPF Router Information LSA. This | |||
| change permeates through much of the document | change permeates through much of the document | |||
| 2. Additionally, Section 2.5 includes a new TLV for functional | 2. Additionally, Section 2.5 includes an additional TLV for | |||
| capabilities. This is constast to the existing TLV which is used | functional capabilities. This is in contrast to the existing TLV | |||
| to advertise capabilities for informational purposes only. | which is used to advertise capabilities for informational | |||
| purposes only. | ||||
| 3. Finally, references have been updated for drafts that have become | 3. Finally, references have been updated for drafts that have become | |||
| RFCs and RFCs that have been obseleted since the publication of | RFCs and RFCs that have been obsoleted since the publication of | |||
| RFC 4970. | RFC 4970. | |||
| 2. OSPF Router Information (RI) LSA | 2. OSPF Router Information (RI) LSA | |||
| OSPFv2 routers will advertise a link scoped, area-scoped, or AS- | OSPFv2 routers will advertise a link scoped, area-scoped, or AS- | |||
| scoped Opaque-LSA [OPAQUE]. The OSPFv2 Router Information LSA has an | scoped Opaque-LSA [OPAQUE]. The OSPFv2 Router Information (RI) LSA | |||
| Opaque type of 4 and Opaque ID is the instance ID. The first | has an Opaque type of 4 and the Opaque ID is the RI LSA instance ID. | |||
| instance ID, i.e., 0, should always contain the Router Informational | The first Opaque ID, i.e., 0, should always contain the Router | |||
| Capabilities TLV and, if advertised, the Router Functional | Informational Capabilities TLV and, if advertised, the Router | |||
| Capabilities TLV. RI Information LSAs subsequence to the first can | Functional Capabilities TLV. RI LSAs subsequence to the first can be | |||
| be used for information which doesn't fit in the first instance. | used for information that doesn't fit in the first instance. | |||
| 2.1. OSPFv2 Router Information (RI) Opaque LSA | 2.1. OSPFv2 Router Information (RI) Opaque LSA | |||
| OSPFv2 routers will advertise a link scoped, area-scoped, or AS- | OSPFv2 routers will advertise a link scoped, area-scoped, or AS- | |||
| scoped Opaque-LSA [OPAQUE]. The OSPFv2 Router Information LSA has an | scoped Opaque-LSA [OPAQUE]. The OSPFv2 Router Information LSA has an | |||
| Opaque type of 4 and Opaque ID specifies the LSA instance ID with the | Opaque type of 4 and Opaque ID specifies the LSA instance ID with the | |||
| first instance always having an Instance ID of 0. | first instance always having an Instance ID of 0. | |||
| 0 1 2 3 | 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 | 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 | |||
| skipping to change at page 5, line 9 ¶ | skipping to change at page 5, line 9 ¶ | |||
| TLV Format | TLV Format | |||
| The Length field defines the length of the value portion in octets | The Length field defines the length of the value portion in octets | |||
| (thus a TLV with no value portion would have a length of 0). The TLV | (thus a TLV with no value portion would have a length of 0). The TLV | |||
| is padded to 4-octet alignment; padding is not included in the length | is padded to 4-octet alignment; padding is not included in the length | |||
| field (so a 3-octet value would have a length of 3, but the total | field (so a 3-octet value would have a length of 3, but the total | |||
| size of the TLV would be 8 octets). Nested TLVs are also 32-bit | size of the TLV would be 8 octets). Nested TLVs are also 32-bit | |||
| aligned. For example, a 1-byte value would have the length field set | aligned. For example, a 1-byte value would have the length field set | |||
| to 1, and 3 octets of padding would be added to the end of the value | to 1, and 3 octets of padding would be added to the end of the value | |||
| portion of the TLV. Unrecognized types are ignored. | portion of the TLV. The padding is composed of zeros. Unrecognized | |||
| types are ignored. | ||||
| 2.2. OSPFv3 Router Information (RI) Opaque LSA | 2.2. OSPFv3 Router Information (RI) Opaque LSA | |||
| The OSPFv3 Router Information LSA has a function code of 12 while the | The OSPFv3 Router Information LSA has a function code of 12 while the | |||
| S1/S2 bits are dependent on the desired flooding scope for the LSA. | S1/S2 bits are dependent on the desired flooding scope for the LSA. | |||
| The U bit will be set indicating that the OSPFv3 RI LSA should be | The U bit will be set indicating that the OSPFv3 RI LSA should be | |||
| flooded even if it is not understood. The Link State ID (LSID) value | flooded even if it is not understood. The Link State ID (LSID) value | |||
| for this LSA is the instance ID. The first instance ID, i.e., 0, | for this LSA is the instance ID. The first instance ID, i.e., 0, | |||
| should always contain the Router Informational Capabilities TLV and, | should always contain the Router Informational Capabilities TLV and, | |||
| if advertised, the Router Functional Capabilities TLV. OSPFv3 Router | if advertised, the Router Functional Capabilities TLV. OSPFv3 Router | |||
| Information LSAs subsequence to the first can be used for information | Information LSAs subsequence to the first can be used for information | |||
| which doesn't fit in the first instance. OSPFv3 routers MAY | that doesn't fit in the first instance. OSPFv3 routers MAY advertise | |||
| advertise multiple RIs LSA per flooding scope. | multiple RIs LSA per flooding scope. | |||
| 0 1 2 3 | 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 | 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 | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| | LS age |1|S12| 12 | | | LS age |1|S12| 12 | | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| | Link State ID (Instance ID) | | | Link State ID (Instance ID) | | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| | Advertising Router | | | Advertising Router | | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| skipping to change at page 8, line 29 ¶ | skipping to change at page 8, line 29 ¶ | |||
| 2.5. OSPF Router Functional Capabilities TLV | 2.5. OSPF Router Functional Capabilities TLV | |||
| This specification also defines the Router Functional Capabilities | This specification also defines the Router Functional Capabilities | |||
| TLV for advertisement within the OSPF Router Information LSA. An | TLV for advertisement within the OSPF Router Information LSA. An | |||
| OSPF router advertising an OSPF RI LSA MAY include the Router | OSPF router advertising an OSPF RI LSA MAY include the Router | |||
| Functional Capabilities TLV. If included, it MUST be the included in | Functional Capabilities TLV. If included, it MUST be the included in | |||
| the first instance of the LSA. Additionally, the TLV MUST be used to | the first instance of the LSA. Additionally, the TLV MUST be used to | |||
| reflect OSPF router functional capabilities. If the TLV is not | reflect OSPF router functional capabilities. If the TLV is not | |||
| included or the length doesn't include the assigned OSPF functional | included or the length doesn't include the assigned OSPF functional | |||
| capability bit, the corresponding OSPF functional capabilty is | capability bit, the corresponding OSPF functional capability is | |||
| implicitly advertised as not being support by the advertising OSPF | implicitly advertised as not being supported by the advertising OSPF | |||
| router. | router. | |||
| The format of the Router Functional Capabilities TLV is as follows: | The format of the Router Functional Capabilities TLV is as follows: | |||
| 0 1 2 3 | 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 | 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 | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| | Type | Length | | | Type | Length | | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| | Functional Capabilities | | | Functional Capabilities | | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| Type A 16-bit field set to 1. | Type A 16-bit field set to IANA TBD. | |||
| Length A 16-bit field that indicates the length of the value | Length A 16-bit field that indicates the length of the value | |||
| portion in octets and will be a multiple of 4 octets | portion in octets and will be a multiple of 4 octets | |||
| dependent on the number of capabilities advertised. | dependent on the number of capabilities advertised. | |||
| Initially, the length will be 4, denoting 4 octets of | Initially, the length will be 4, denoting 4 octets of | |||
| informational capability bits. | informational capability bits. | |||
| Value A variable length sequence of capability bits rounded | Value A variable length sequence of capability bits rounded | |||
| to a multiple of 4 octets padded with undefined bits. | to a multiple of 4 octets padded with undefined bits. | |||
| Initially, there are 4 octets of capability bits. Bits | Initially, there are 4 octets of capability bits. Bits | |||
| are numbered left-to-right starting with the most | are numbered left-to-right starting with the most | |||
| significant bit being bit 0. | significant bit being bit 0. | |||
| OSPF Router Functional Capabilities TLV | OSPF Router Functional Capabilities TLV | |||
| The Router Functional Capabilities TLV MAY be followed by optional | The Router Functional Capabilities TLV MAY be followed by optional | |||
| TLVs that further specify a capability. In contrast to the Router | TLVs that further specify a capability. In contrast to the Router | |||
| Informatioal Capabilities TLV, the OSPF extensions advertised in this | Informational Capabilities TLV, the OSPF extensions advertised in | |||
| TLV MAY be used to by other OSPF routers to dicate protocol | this TLV MAY be used by other OSPF routers to dictate protocol | |||
| operation. The specifications for functional capabilities | operation. The specifications for functional capabilities advertised | |||
| adveritised in this TLV MUST describe protocol behavior and address | in this TLV MUST describe protocol behavior and address backward | |||
| backward compatibility. | compatibility. | |||
| 2.6. Flooding Scope of the Router Information LSA | 2.6. Flooding Scope of the Router Information LSA | |||
| The flooding scope for a Router Information LSA is determined by the | The flooding scope for a Router Information LSA is determined by the | |||
| LSA type. For OSPFv2, type 9 (link-scoped), type 10 (area-scoped), | LSA type. For OSPFv2, type 9 (link-scoped), type 10 (area-scoped), | |||
| or a type 11 (AS-scoped) opaque LSA may be flooded. For OSPFv3, the | or a type 11 (AS-scoped) opaque LSA may be flooded. For OSPFv3, the | |||
| S1 and S2 bits in the LSA type determine the flooding scope. If AS- | S1 and S2 bits in the LSA type determine the flooding scope. If AS- | |||
| wide flooding scope is chosen, the originating router should also | wide flooding scope is chosen, the originating router should also | |||
| advertise area-scoped LSA(s) into any attached Not-So-Stubby Area | advertise area-scoped LSA(s) into any attached Not-So-Stubby Area | |||
| (NSSA) area(s). An OSPF router MAY advertise different capabilities | (NSSA) area(s). An OSPF router MAY advertise different capabilities | |||
| when both NSSA area scoped LSA(s) and an AS-scoped LSA are | when both NSSA area scoped LSA(s) and an AS-scoped LSA are | |||
| advertised. This allows functional capabilities to be limited in | advertised. This allows functional capabilities to be limited in | |||
| scope. For example, a router may be an area border router but only | scope. For example, a router may be an area border router but only | |||
| support traffic engineering (TE) in a subset of its attached areas. | support traffic engineering (TE) in a subset of its attached areas. | |||
| The choice of flooding scope is made by the advertising router and is | The choice of flooding scope is made by the advertising router and is | |||
| a matter of local policy. The originating router MAY advertise | a matter of local policy. The originating router MAY advertise | |||
| multiple RI LSAs as long as the flooding scopes differ. TLV flooding | multiple RI LSAs with the same instance ID as long as the flooding | |||
| scope rules will be specified on a per-TLV basis and MUST be | scopes differ. TLV flooding scope rules will be specified on a per- | |||
| specified in the accompanying specifications for new Router | TLV basis and MUST be specified in the accompanying specifications | |||
| Information LSA TLVs. | for future Router Information LSA TLVs. | |||
| 3. Security Considerations | 3. Security Considerations | |||
| This document describes both a generic mechanism for advertising | This document describes both a generic mechanism for advertising | |||
| router capabilities and a TLV for advertising informational and | router capabilities and a TLV for advertising informational and | |||
| functional capability bits. The capability TLVs are less critical | functional capability bits. The capability TLVs are less critical | |||
| than the topology information currently advertised by the base OSPF | than the topology information currently advertised by the base OSPF | |||
| protocol. The security considerations for the generic mechanism are | protocol. The security considerations for the generic mechanism are | |||
| dependent on the future application and, as such, should be described | dependent on the future application and, as such, should be described | |||
| as additional capabilities are proposed for advertisement. Security | as additional capabilities are proposed for advertisement. Security | |||
| skipping to change at page 10, line 34 ¶ | skipping to change at page 10, line 34 ¶ | |||
| 4. IANA Considerations | 4. IANA Considerations | |||
| The following IANA assignment was made from an existing registry: | The following IANA assignment was made from an existing registry: | |||
| The OSPFv2 opaque LSA type 4 has been reserved for the OSPFv2 RI | The OSPFv2 opaque LSA type 4 has been reserved for the OSPFv2 RI | |||
| opaque LSA. | opaque LSA. | |||
| The following registries have been defined for the following | The following registries have been defined for the following | |||
| purposes: | purposes: | |||
| 1. Registry for OSPFv3 LSA Function Codes - This new top-level | 1. Registry for OSPFv3 LSA Function Codes - This top-level registry | |||
| registry will be comprised of the fields Value, LSA function code | will be comprised of the fields Value, LSA function code name, | |||
| name, and Document Reference. The OSPFv3 LSA function code is | and Document Reference. The OSPFv3 LSA function code is defined | |||
| defined in section A.4.2.1 of [OSPFV3]. The OSPFv3 LSA function | in section A.4.2.1 of [OSPFV3]. The OSPFv3 LSA function code 12 | |||
| code 12 has been reserved for the OSPFv3 Router Information (RI) | has been reserved for the OSPFv3 Router Information (RI) LSA. | |||
| LSA. | ||||
| +-----------+-------------------------------------+ | +-----------+-------------------------------------+ | |||
| | Range | Assignment Policy | | | Range | Assignment Policy | | |||
| +-----------+-------------------------------------+ | +-----------+-------------------------------------+ | |||
| | 0 | Reserved (not to be assigned) | | | 0 | Reserved (not to be assigned) | | |||
| | | | | | | | | |||
| | 1-9 | Already assigned | | | 1-9 | Already assigned | | |||
| | | | | | | | | |||
| | 10-11 | Unassigned (Standards Action) | | | 10-11 | Unassigned (Standards Action) | | |||
| | | | | | | | | |||
| skipping to change at page 11, line 47 ¶ | skipping to change at page 11, line 47 ¶ | |||
| Use range 8184-8191 MUST include the Vendor Enterprise Code as | Use range 8184-8191 MUST include the Vendor Enterprise Code as | |||
| the first 4 octets following the 20 octets of LSA header. | the first 4 octets following the 20 octets of LSA header. | |||
| * If a new LSA Function Code is documented, the documentation | * If a new LSA Function Code is documented, the documentation | |||
| MUST include the valid combinations of the U, S2, and S1 bits | MUST include the valid combinations of the U, S2, and S1 bits | |||
| for the LSA. It SHOULD also describe how the Link State ID is | for the LSA. It SHOULD also describe how the Link State ID is | |||
| to be assigned. | to be assigned. | |||
| 2. Registry for OSPF RI TLVs - This top-level registry will be | 2. Registry for OSPF RI TLVs - This top-level registry will be | |||
| comprised of the fields Value, TLV Name, and Document Reference. | comprised of the fields Value, TLV Name, and Document Reference. | |||
| The value of 1 for the capabilities TLV is defined herein. | The value of 1 for the informational capabilities TLV is defined | |||
| herein. The value IANA TBD for the functional capabilities TLV | ||||
| is also defined herein. | ||||
| +-------------+-----------------------------------+ | +-------------+-----------------------------------+ | |||
| | Range | Assignment Policy | | | Range | Assignment Policy | | |||
| +-------------+-----------------------------------+ | +-------------+-----------------------------------+ | |||
| | 0 | Reserved (not to be assigned) | | | 0 | Reserved (not to be assigned) | | |||
| | | | | | | | | |||
| | 1 | Already assigned | | | 1 | Informational Capabilities | | |||
| | | | | ||||
| | TBD | Functional Capabilities | | ||||
| | | | | | | | | |||
| | 2-32767 | Unassigned (Standards Action) | | | 2-32767 | Unassigned (Standards Action) | | |||
| | | | | | | | | |||
| | 32768-32777 | Experimentation (No assignements) | | | 32768-32777 | Experimentation (No assignments) | | |||
| | | | | | | | | |||
| | 32778-65535 | Reserved (Not to be assigned) | | | 32778-65535 | Reserved (Not to be assigned) | | |||
| +-----------+-------------------------------------+ | +-----------+-------------------------------------+ | |||
| OSPF RI TLVs | OSPF RI TLVs | |||
| * Types in the range 32768-32777 are for experimental use; these | * Types in the range 32768-32777 are for experimental use; these | |||
| will not be registered with IANA and MUST NOT be mentioned by | will not be registered with IANA and MUST NOT be mentioned by | |||
| RFCs. | RFCs. | |||
| skipping to change at page 13, line 45 ¶ | skipping to change at page 13, line 47 ¶ | |||
| Appendix A. Acknowledgments | Appendix A. Acknowledgments | |||
| The idea for this work grew out of a conversation with Andrew Partan | The idea for this work grew out of a conversation with Andrew Partan | |||
| and we would like to thank him for his contribution. The authors | and we would like to thank him for his contribution. The authors | |||
| would like to thanks Peter Psenak for his review and helpful comments | would like to thanks Peter Psenak for his review and helpful comments | |||
| on early versions of the document. | on early versions of the document. | |||
| Comments from Abhay Roy, Vishwas Manral, Vivek Dubey, and Adrian | Comments from Abhay Roy, Vishwas Manral, Vivek Dubey, and Adrian | |||
| Farrel have been incorporated into later versions. | Farrel have been incorporated into later versions. | |||
| Thanks to Chris Bowers for review of the BIS version of the draft. | ||||
| The RFC text was produced using Marshall Rose's xml2rfc tool. | The RFC text was produced using Marshall Rose's xml2rfc tool. | |||
| Authors' Addresses | Authors' Addresses | |||
| Acee Lindem (editor) | Acee Lindem (editor) | |||
| Cisco Systems | Cisco Systems | |||
| 301 Midenhall Way | 301 Midenhall Way | |||
| Cary, NC 27513 | Cary, NC 27513 | |||
| USA | USA | |||
| Email: acee@cisco.com | Email: acee@cisco.com | |||
| Naiming Shen | Naiming Shen | |||
| Cisco Systems | Cisco Systems | |||
| End of changes. 22 change blocks. | ||||
| 51 lines changed or deleted | 59 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/ | ||||