idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-mpls-oam-ipv6-rao-03.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 (Using the creation date from RFC4379, updated by this document, for RFC5378 checks: 2002-03-27) -- The document seems to lack a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, but may have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008. If you have contacted all the original authors and they are all willing to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust, then this is fine, and you can ignore this comment. If not, you may need to add the pre-RFC5378 disclaimer. (See the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.) -- The document date (February 4, 2015) is 3361 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references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 4379 (Obsoleted by RFC 8029) == Outdated reference: A later version (-17) exists of draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-ipv6-14 Summary: 1 error (**), 0 flaws (~~), 2 warnings (==), 2 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 MPLS Working Group K. Raza 3 Internet-Draft N. Akiya 4 Updates: 4379 (if approved) C. Pignataro 5 Intended status: Standards Track Cisco Systems, Inc. 6 Expires: August 8, 2015 February 4, 2015 8 IPv6 Router Alert Option for MPLS OAM 9 draft-ietf-mpls-oam-ipv6-rao-03 11 Abstract 13 RFC 4379 defines the MPLS LSP Ping/Traceroute mechanism, in which the 14 Router Alert Option MUST be set in the IP header of the MPLS Echo 15 Request messages, and may conditionally be set in the IP header of 16 the MPLS Echo Reply messages depending on the Reply Mode used. While 17 a generic "Router shall examine packet" Option Value is used for the 18 IPv4 Router Alert Option (RAO), there is no generic Router Alert 19 Option Value defined for IPv6 that can be used. This document 20 allocates a new generic IPv6 Router Alert Option Value that can be 21 used by MPLS OAM tools, including the MPLS Echo Request and MPLS Echo 22 Reply messages for MPLS in IPv6 environments. Consequently, it 23 updates RFC 4379. 25 The initial motivation to request an IPv6 Router Alert Option (RAO) 26 Value for MPLS OAM comes from MPLS LSP Ping/Traceroute. However, 27 this Value is applicable to all MPLS OAM and not limited to MPLS LSP 28 Ping/Traceroute. 30 Status of This Memo 32 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 33 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 35 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 36 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 37 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 38 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 40 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 41 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 42 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 43 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 45 This Internet-Draft will expire on August 8, 2015. 47 Copyright Notice 49 Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 50 document authors. All rights reserved. 52 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 53 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 54 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 55 publication of this document. Please review these documents 56 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 57 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 58 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 59 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 60 described in the Simplified BSD License. 62 Table of Contents 64 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 65 2. Specification of Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 66 3. IPv6 Router Alert Option (RAO) Value for MPLS OAM . . . . . . 3 67 4. Updates to RFC 4379 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 68 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 69 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 70 7. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 71 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 72 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 73 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 74 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 76 1. Introduction 78 A commonly deployed MPLS OAM tool is specified in [RFC4379], 79 "Detecting Multi-Protocol Label Switched (MPLS) Data Plane Failures", 80 which is used to diagnose MPLS network data planes. This 81 specification [RFC4379], often referred to as "MPLS LSP Ping/ 82 Traceroute", requires the use of Router Alert Option in the IP 83 header. For example, the section 4.3 of [RFC4379] states that IP 84 Router Alert Option MUST be set in the IP header of an MPLS Echo 85 Request message. Similarly, the section 4.5 states that IP Router 86 Alert Option MUST be set in the IP header of an MPLS Echo Reply 87 message if the Reply Mode in the echo request is set to "Reply via an 88 IPv4/IPv6 UDP packet with Router Alert". 90 [RFC2113] defines a generic Option Value 0x0 for IPv4 Router Alert 91 Option (RAO) that is used in LSP Ping and LSP Traceroute for MPLS in 92 IPv4 environments. However, currently there is no generic IPV6 93 Router Alert Option Value defined that can be used in LSP Ping and 94 LSP Traceroute for MPLS in IPv6 environments. Specifically, 96 [RFC2711] defined the router alert for a general IPv6 purpose but 97 required the Value field in the Router Alert Option to indicate a 98 specific reason for using the Router Alert Option. Because there is 99 no defined value for MPLS LSP Ping/Traceroute use or for general use, 100 it is not possible for MPLS OAM tools to use the IPv6 Router Alert 101 mechanism. 103 As vendors are starting to implement MPLS on IPv6 control plane 104 (e.g., [I-D.ietf-mpls-ldp-ipv6]), there is a need to define and 105 allocate such an Option Value for IPv6 in order to comply with 106 [RFC4379]. This document defines a new IPv6 Router Alert Option 107 Value that can be used by MPLS OAM tools, including the MPLS Echo 108 Request and MPLS Echo Reply messages for MPLS in IPv6 environments. 110 2. Specification of Requirements 112 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 113 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 114 document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. 116 3. IPv6 Router Alert Option (RAO) Value for MPLS OAM 118 This document defines a new Option Value (TBD1) for the IPv6 Router 119 Alert Option (RAO) to alert transit routers to examine the packet 120 more closely for MPLS OAM purposes. This Option Value is used by any 121 MPLS OAM application that requires their packets to be examined by a 122 transit router. 124 In the scope of this document, this Option Value will be used by the 125 MPLS Echo Request and MPLS Echo Reply for its IPv6 messages as 126 required by [RFC4379]. 128 4. Updates to RFC 4379 130 [RFC4379] specifies the use of the Router Alert Option in the IP 131 header. Sections 4.3 and 4.5 of [RFC4379] are updated as follows: 132 for every time in which the "Router Alert IP option" is used, the 133 following text is appended: 135 In case of an IPv4 header, the generic IPv4 Router Alert Option 136 value 0x0 [RFC2113] SHOULD be used. In case of an IPv6 header, 137 the IPv6 Router Alert Option value TBD1 allocated through this 138 document for MPLS OAM MUST be used. 140 5. IANA Considerations 142 This document defines a new Value (TBD1) for the IPv6 Router Alert 143 Option to alert transit routers to examine the packet more closely 144 for MPLS OAM purposes. IANA is requested to assign a new code point 145 under its "IPv6 Router Alert Option Values" registry defined by 146 [RFC2711], updated by [RFC5350] and maintained in [IANA-IPv6-RAO]. 147 The new code point is as follows: 149 Value Description Reference 150 ----- ------------------------------- --------------- 151 TBD1 MPLS OAM [document.this] 153 6. Security Considerations 155 This document introduces no new security concerns in addition to what 156 have already been captured in [RFC4379] and [RFC6398], the latter of 157 which expands the security considerations of [RFC2113] and [RFC2711]. 159 IPv6 packets containing the MPLS OAM Router Alert Option are 160 encapsulated with an MPLS Header and not expected to be inspected by 161 every label switched hop within an MPLS LSP. Consequently, this 162 value of the Router Alert Option will be processed by the appropriate 163 router and is not subject to the problem of being ignored as 164 described in Section 2.2 of [RFC7045]. 166 7. Acknowledgments 168 The authors would like to thank George Swallow, Ole Troan, Bob 169 Hinden, Faisal Iqbal, Mathew Janelle, and Gregory Mirsky for their 170 useful input. 172 8. References 174 8.1. Normative References 176 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 177 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 179 [RFC2711] Partridge, C. and A. Jackson, "IPv6 Router Alert Option", 180 RFC 2711, October 1999. 182 [RFC4379] Kompella, K. and G. Swallow, "Detecting Multi-Protocol 183 Label Switched (MPLS) Data Plane Failures", RFC 4379, 184 February 2006. 186 [RFC5350] Manner, J. and A. McDonald, "IANA Considerations for the 187 IPv4 and IPv6 Router Alert Options", RFC 5350, September 188 2008. 190 [RFC6398] Le Faucheur, F., "IP Router Alert Considerations and 191 Usage", BCP 168, RFC 6398, October 2011. 193 8.2. Informative References 195 [I-D.ietf-mpls-ldp-ipv6] 196 Asati, R., Pignataro, C., Manral, V., Papneja, R., and K. 197 Raza, "Updates to LDP for IPv6", draft-ietf-mpls-ldp- 198 ipv6-14 (work in progress), October 2014. 200 [IANA-IPv6-RAO] 201 IANA, "IPv6 Router Alert Option Values", 202 . 204 [RFC2113] Katz, D., "IP Router Alert Option", RFC 2113, February 205 1997. 207 [RFC7045] Carpenter, B. and S. Jiang, "Transmission and Processing 208 of IPv6 Extension Headers", RFC 7045, December 2013. 210 Authors' Addresses 212 Kamran Raza 213 Cisco Systems, Inc. 214 2000 Innovation Drive 215 Kanata, ON K2K-3E8 216 CA 218 Email: skraza@cisco.com 220 Nobo Akiya 221 Cisco Systems, Inc. 222 2000 Innovation Drive 223 Kanata, ON K2K-3E8 224 CA 226 Email: nobo@cisco.com 227 Carlos Pignataro 228 Cisco Systems, Inc. 229 7200-12 Kit Creek Road 230 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 231 USA 233 Email: cpignata@cisco.com