idnits 2.17.1 draft-chen-bier-te-ospf-00.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (April 14, 2021) is 1080 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) -- Looks like a reference, but probably isn't: '1' on line 106 -- Looks like a reference, but probably isn't: '65535' on line 106 == Unused Reference: 'RFC5226' is defined on line 249, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC8279' is defined on line 263, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC8362' is defined on line 269, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC5250' is defined on line 276, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC8296' is defined on line 280, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC8444' is defined on line 291, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC8556' is defined on line 297, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Outdated reference: A later version (-13) exists of draft-ietf-bier-te-arch-09 ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 5226 (Obsoleted by RFC 8126) Summary: 1 error (**), 0 flaws (~~), 9 warnings (==), 3 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group H. Chen 3 Internet-Draft M. McBride 4 Intended status: Standards Track Futurewei 5 Expires: October 16, 2021 A. Wang 6 China Telecom 7 G. Mishra 8 Verizon Inc. 9 Y. Fan 10 Casa Systems 11 L. Liu 12 Fujitsu 13 X. Liu 14 Volta Networks 15 April 14, 2021 17 OSPF Extensions for BIER-TE 18 draft-chen-bier-te-ospf-00 20 Abstract 22 This document describes OSPF extensions for distributing BitPositions 23 configured on the links in "Bit Index Explicit Replication Traffic 24 Engineering" (BIER-TE) domain. 26 Requirements Language 28 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 29 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 30 document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119] [RFC8174] 31 when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here. 33 Status of This Memo 35 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 36 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 38 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 39 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 40 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 41 Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 43 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 44 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 45 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 46 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 48 This Internet-Draft will expire on October 16, 2021. 50 Copyright Notice 52 Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 53 document authors. All rights reserved. 55 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 56 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 57 (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 58 publication of this document. Please review these documents 59 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 60 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 61 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 62 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 63 described in the Simplified BSD License. 65 Table of Contents 67 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 68 1.1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 69 2. Extensions to OSPFv2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 70 3. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 71 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 72 5. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 73 6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 74 6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 75 6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 76 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 78 1. Introduction 80 [I-D.ietf-bier-te-arch] introduces Bit Index Explicit Replication 81 (BIER) Traffic/Tree Engineering (BIER-TE). It is an architecture for 82 per-packet stateless explicit point to multipoint (P2MP) multicast 83 path/tree. A link in a BIER-TE domain has its BitPositions. For a 84 link between two nodes X and Y, there are two BitPositions for two 85 forward connected adjacencies. These two adjacency BitPositions 86 could be configured on nodes X and Y respectively. The BitPosition 87 configured on X is the forward connected adjacency of Y. The 88 BitPosition configured on Y is the forward connected adjacency of X. 90 This document proposes OSPF extensions for distributing BitPositions 91 configured on the links in "Bit Index Explicit Replication Traffic 92 Engineering" (BIER-TE) domain. 94 1.1. Terminology 96 BIER: Bit Index Explicit Replication. 98 BIER-TE: BIER Traffic Engineering. 100 BFR: Bit-Forwarding Router. 102 BFIR: Bit-Forwarding Ingress Router. 104 BFER: Bit-Forwarding Egress Router. 106 BFR-id: BFR Identifier. It is a number in the range [1,65535]. 108 BFR-NBR: BFR Neighbor. 110 LSA: Link State Advertisement. 112 OSPF: Open Shortest Path First. 114 2. Extensions to OSPFv2 116 This section describes protocol extensions to OSPFv2 for distributing 117 BIER-TE information such as the BitPositions configured on the links 118 in a BIER-TE domain. 120 [RFC7684] defines the OSPFv2 Extended Link TLV to advertise the 121 information about a link. Multiple Link TLVs for the links of a 122 router are included in the OSPFv2 Extended Link Opaque LSA of the 123 router. The OSPFv2 Extended Link TLV has the following format: 125 0 1 2 3 126 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 1 127 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 128 | Type (1) | Length (Variable) | 129 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 130 | Link Type | Reserved | 131 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 132 | Link ID | 133 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 134 | Link Data | 135 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 136 | Sub-TLVs (variable) | 137 ~ ~ 138 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 140 Figure 1: OSPFv2 Extended Link TLV 142 Type: 1. 144 Length: Variable, dependent on Sub-TLVs. 146 Link Type, Link ID and Link Data: They are defined in Section A.4.2 147 of [RFC2328]. 149 Reserved: SHOULD be set to 0 on transmission and MUST be ignored on 150 reception. 152 Under the OSPFv2 Extended Link TLV for a link, a Sub-TLV, called 153 BIER-TE Sub-TLV, is defined for distributing BIER-TE information 154 about the link. A BIER-TE Sub-TLV is included in the Link TLV for a 155 link of Link Type Point-to-Point or Broadcast (or say LAN or Transit 156 Network). The BIER-TE Sub-TLV has the following format: 158 0 1 2 3 159 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 1 160 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 161 | Type (TBD1) | Length | 162 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 163 | sub-domain-id | MT-ID | BAR | IPA | 164 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 165 | BitPosition | DrEndBitPosition | 166 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 167 | Sub-Sub-TLVs (variable) | 168 ~ ~ 169 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 171 Figure 2: BIER-TE Sub-TLV 173 Type: TBD1 is to be assigned by IANA. 175 Length: Variable, dependent on Sub-Sub-TLVs. 177 sub-domain-id: Unique value identifying a BIER-TE sub-domain. 179 MT-ID: Multi-Topology ID identifying the topology that is associated 180 with the BIER-TE sub-domain. 182 BAR: Single-octet BIER Algorithm used to calculate underlay paths to 183 reach other BFRs. Values are allocated from the "BIER 184 Algorithm" registry defined in [RFC8401]. 186 IPA: Single-octet IGP Algorithm used to either modify, enhance, or 187 replace the calculation of underlay paths to reach other BFRs 188 as defined by the BAR value. Values are defined in the "IGP 189 Algorithm Types" registry. 191 BitPosition: A 2-octet field encoding the BitPosition locally 192 configured on the link/interface when the Link Type of the link 193 in the OSPFv2 Extended Link TLV containing this Sub-TLV is 1 194 (i.e., Point-to-Point connection to another router) or 2 (i.e., 195 connection to Transit Network or say LAN). 197 DrEndBitPosition: A 2-octet field encoding the BitPosition of the 198 connection on the designated router (DR) end. This field is 199 valid when the Link Type in the OSPFv2 Extended Link TLV 200 containing this Sub-TLV is 2 (i.e., Transit Network or LAN). 201 For the other value of the Link Type, this field MUST be 202 ignored. The DrEndBitPosition may be configured on the link/ 203 interface to a transit network (i.e., broadcast link or say 204 LAN). 206 No Sub-Sub-TLV is defined so far. Note that if each of BitPosition 207 and DrEndBitPosition uses more than 2 octets, we use 4 or more octets 208 for each of them. 210 3. Security Considerations 212 TBD. 214 4. IANA Considerations 216 Under "OSPFv2 Extended Link TLV Sub-TLV registry" as defined in 217 [RFC7684], IANA is requested to assign a new registry type for BIER- 218 TE Sub-TLV as follows: 220 +==============+===================+=====================+ 221 | Sub-TLV Type | Sub-TLV Name | reference | 222 +==============+===================+=====================+ 223 | TBD1 | BIER-TE | This document | 224 +--------------+-------------------+---------------------+ 226 5. Acknowledgements 228 The authors would like to thank people for their comments to this 229 work. 231 6. References 233 6.1. Normative References 235 [I-D.ietf-bier-te-arch] 236 Eckert, T., Cauchie, G., and M. Menth, "Tree Engineering 237 for Bit Index Explicit Replication (BIER-TE)", draft-ietf- 238 bier-te-arch-09 (work in progress), October 2020. 240 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 241 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, 242 DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, 243 . 245 [RFC2328] Moy, J., "OSPF Version 2", STD 54, RFC 2328, 246 DOI 10.17487/RFC2328, April 1998, 247 . 249 [RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an 250 IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", RFC 5226, 251 DOI 10.17487/RFC5226, May 2008, 252 . 254 [RFC7684] Psenak, P., Gredler, H., Shakir, R., Henderickx, W., 255 Tantsura, J., and A. Lindem, "OSPFv2 Prefix/Link Attribute 256 Advertisement", RFC 7684, DOI 10.17487/RFC7684, November 257 2015, . 259 [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 260 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, 261 May 2017, . 263 [RFC8279] Wijnands, IJ., Ed., Rosen, E., Ed., Dolganow, A., 264 Przygienda, T., and S. Aldrin, "Multicast Using Bit Index 265 Explicit Replication (BIER)", RFC 8279, 266 DOI 10.17487/RFC8279, November 2017, 267 . 269 [RFC8362] Lindem, A., Roy, A., Goethals, D., Reddy Vallem, V., and 270 F. Baker, "OSPFv3 Link State Advertisement (LSA) 271 Extensibility", RFC 8362, DOI 10.17487/RFC8362, April 272 2018, . 274 6.2. Informative References 276 [RFC5250] Berger, L., Bryskin, I., Zinin, A., and R. Coltun, "The 277 OSPF Opaque LSA Option", RFC 5250, DOI 10.17487/RFC5250, 278 July 2008, . 280 [RFC8296] Wijnands, IJ., Ed., Rosen, E., Ed., Dolganow, A., 281 Tantsura, J., Aldrin, S., and I. Meilik, "Encapsulation 282 for Bit Index Explicit Replication (BIER) in MPLS and Non- 283 MPLS Networks", RFC 8296, DOI 10.17487/RFC8296, January 284 2018, . 286 [RFC8401] Ginsberg, L., Ed., Przygienda, T., Aldrin, S., and Z. 287 Zhang, "Bit Index Explicit Replication (BIER) Support via 288 IS-IS", RFC 8401, DOI 10.17487/RFC8401, June 2018, 289 . 291 [RFC8444] Psenak, P., Ed., Kumar, N., Wijnands, IJ., Dolganow, A., 292 Przygienda, T., Zhang, J., and S. Aldrin, "OSPFv2 293 Extensions for Bit Index Explicit Replication (BIER)", 294 RFC 8444, DOI 10.17487/RFC8444, November 2018, 295 . 297 [RFC8556] Rosen, E., Ed., Sivakumar, M., Przygienda, T., Aldrin, S., 298 and A. Dolganow, "Multicast VPN Using Bit Index Explicit 299 Replication (BIER)", RFC 8556, DOI 10.17487/RFC8556, April 300 2019, . 302 Authors' Addresses 304 Huaimo Chen 305 Futurewei 306 Boston, MA 307 USA 309 Email: Huaimo.chen@futurewei.com 311 Mike McBride 312 Futurewei 314 Email: michael.mcbride@futurewei.com 316 Aijun Wang 317 China Telecom 318 Beiqijia Town, Changping District 319 Beijing, 102209 320 China 322 Email: wangaj3@chinatelecom.cn 323 Gyan S. Mishra 324 Verizon Inc. 325 13101 Columbia Pike 326 Silver Spring MD 20904 327 USA 329 Phone: 301 502-1347 330 Email: gyan.s.mishra@verizon.com 332 Yanhe Fan 333 Casa Systems 334 USA 336 Email: yfan@casa-systems.com 338 Lei Liu 339 Fujitsu 341 USA 343 Email: liulei.kddi@gmail.com 345 Xufeng Liu 346 Volta Networks 348 McLean, VA 349 USA 351 Email: xufeng.liu.ietf@gmail.com