| < draft-ietf-bfd-v4v6-1hop-10.txt | draft-ietf-bfd-v4v6-1hop-11.txt > | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Network Working Group D. Katz | Network Working Group D. Katz | |||
| Internet Draft Juniper Networks | Internet Draft Juniper Networks | |||
| Intended status: Proposed Standard D. Ward | Intended status: Proposed Standard D. Ward | |||
| Cisco Systems | Juniper Networks | |||
| Expires: April, 2010 October 16, 2009 | Expires: July, 2010 January 5, 2010 | |||
| BFD for IPv4 and IPv6 (Single Hop) | BFD for IPv4 and IPv6 (Single Hop) | |||
| draft-ietf-bfd-v4v6-1hop-10.txt | draft-ietf-bfd-v4v6-1hop-11.txt | |||
| Status of this Memo | Status of this Memo | |||
| This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the | This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the | |||
| provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. | provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. | |||
| Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | |||
| Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that | Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that | |||
| other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- | other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- | |||
| Drafts. | Drafts. | |||
| skipping to change at page 3, line 18 ¶ | skipping to change at page 3, line 18 ¶ | |||
| Echo function, or need make an exception for ingress filtering Echo | Echo function, or need make an exception for ingress filtering Echo | |||
| packets. | packets. | |||
| An implementation of the Echo function also requires Application | An implementation of the Echo function also requires Application | |||
| Programming Interfaces (APIs) that may not exist on all systems. A | Programming Interfaces (APIs) that may not exist on all systems. A | |||
| system implementing the Echo function MUST be capable of sending | system implementing the Echo function MUST be capable of sending | |||
| packets to its own address, which will typically require bypassing | packets to its own address, which will typically require bypassing | |||
| the normal forwarding lookup. This typically requires access to APIs | the normal forwarding lookup. This typically requires access to APIs | |||
| that bypass IP layer functionality. | that bypass IP layer functionality. | |||
| Please note that BFD is intended as a connectivity check/connection | ||||
| verification OAM mechanism. It is applicable for network-based | ||||
| services (e.g. router-to-router, subscriber-to-gateway, LSP/circuit | ||||
| endpoints and service appliance failure detection). In these | ||||
| scenarios it is required that the operator correctly provision the | ||||
| rates at which BFD is transmitted to avoid congestion (e.g link, I/O, | ||||
| CPU) and false failure detection. It is not applicable for | ||||
| application-to-application failure detection across the Internet | ||||
| because it does not have sufficient capability to do necessary | ||||
| congestion detection and avoidance and therefore cannot prevent | ||||
| congestion collapse. Host-to-host or application-to-application | ||||
| deployment across the Internet will require the encapsulation of BFD | ||||
| within a transport that provides "TCP-friendly" [TFRC] behavior. | ||||
| 3. Initialization and Demultiplexing | 3. Initialization and Demultiplexing | |||
| In this application, there will be only a single BFD session between | In this application, there will be only a single BFD session between | |||
| two systems over a given interface (logical or physical) for a | two systems over a given interface (logical or physical) for a | |||
| particular protocol. The BFD session must be bound to this | particular protocol. The BFD session must be bound to this | |||
| interface. As such, both sides of a session MUST take the "Active" | interface. As such, both sides of a session MUST take the "Active" | |||
| role (sending initial BFD Control packets with a zero value of Your | role (sending initial BFD Control packets with a zero value of Your | |||
| Discriminator) and any BFD packet from the remote machine with a zero | Discriminator) and any BFD packet from the remote machine with a zero | |||
| value of Your Discriminator MUST be associated with the session bound | value of Your Discriminator MUST be associated with the session bound | |||
| to the remote system, interface, and protocol. | to the remote system, interface, and protocol. | |||
| skipping to change at page 6, line 33 ¶ | skipping to change at page 7, line 10 ¶ | |||
| unauthorized packets and may be useful in implementations in which | unauthorized packets and may be useful in implementations in which | |||
| cryptographic checksum use is susceptible to denial of service | cryptographic checksum use is susceptible to denial of service | |||
| attacks. The use or non-use of this mechanism does not impact | attacks. The use or non-use of this mechanism does not impact | |||
| interoperability. | interoperability. | |||
| 10. References | 10. References | |||
| 10.1. Normative References | 10.1. Normative References | |||
| [BFD] Katz, D., and Ward, D., "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection", | [BFD] Katz, D., and Ward, D., "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection", | |||
| draft-ietf-bfd-base-10.txt, October, 2009. | draft-ietf-bfd-base-10.txt, January, 2010. | |||
| [BFD-GENERIC] Katz, D., and Ward, D., "Generic Application of BFD", | [BFD-GENERIC] Katz, D., and Ward, D., "Generic Application of BFD", | |||
| draft-ietf-bfd-generic-05.txt, February, 2009. | draft-ietf-bfd-generic-05.txt, February, 2009. | |||
| [GTSM] Gill, V., et al, "The Generalized TTL Security Mechanism | [GTSM] Gill, V., et al, "The Generalized TTL Security Mechanism | |||
| (GTSM)", RFC 5082, October, 2007. | (GTSM)", RFC 5082, October, 2007. | |||
| [KEYWORD] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate | [KEYWORD] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate | |||
| Requirement Levels", RFC 2119, March 1997. | Requirement Levels", RFC 2119, March 1997. | |||
| 10.2. Informative References | 10.2. Informative References | |||
| [BCP38] Ferguson, P, and Senie, D., "Network Ingress Filtering: | [BCP38] Ferguson, P, and Senie, D., "Network Ingress Filtering: | |||
| Defeating Denial of Service Attacks which employ IP Source Address | Defeating Denial of Service Attacks which employ IP Source | |||
| Spoofing", RFC 2827, May 2000. | Address Spoofing", RFC 2827, May 2000. | |||
| [TFRC] Floyd, S., et al, "TCP Friendly Rate Control (TFRC): Protocol | ||||
| Specification", RFC 5348, September, 2008. | ||||
| Authors' Addresses | Authors' Addresses | |||
| Dave Katz | Dave Katz | |||
| Juniper Networks | Juniper Networks | |||
| 1194 N. Mathilda Ave. | 1194 N. Mathilda Ave. | |||
| Sunnyvale, California 94089-1206 USA | Sunnyvale, California 94089-1206 USA | |||
| Phone: +1-408-745-2000 | Phone: +1-408-745-2000 | |||
| Email: dkatz@juniper.net | Email: dkatz@juniper.net | |||
| Dave Ward | Dave Ward | |||
| Cisco Systems | Juniper Networks | |||
| 170 W. Tasman Dr. | 1194 N. Mathilda Ave. | |||
| San Jose, CA 95134 USA | Sunnyvale, California 94089-1206 USA | |||
| Phone: +1-408-526-4000 | Phone: +1-408-745-2000 | |||
| Email: dward@cisco.com | Email: dward@juniper.net | |||
| Changes from the previous draft | Changes from the previous draft | |||
| The Encapsulation section was reorganized, and the details of Echo | The applications section was clarified. | |||
| packet encapsulation and transmission were expanded. The IANA | ||||
| Considerations section was updated to include the port number | ||||
| assignments. | ||||
| This document expires in April, 2010. | This document expires in July, 2010. | |||
| End of changes. 8 change blocks. | ||||
| 15 lines changed or deleted | 29 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/ | ||||