idnits 2.17.1 draft-liu-lsr-p2poverlan-09.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 (11 May 2022) is 715 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Informational ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Summary: 0 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 1 warning (==), 1 comment (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group D. Liu 3 Internet-Draft J. Halpern 4 Intended status: Informational C. Zhang 5 Expires: 12 November 2022 Ericsson 6 11 May 2022 8 Interface Stack Table Definition and Example for Point-to-Point (P2P) 9 Interface over LAN 10 draft-liu-lsr-p2poverlan-09 12 Abstract 14 RFC 5309 defines the Point-to-Point (P2P) circuit type, one of the 15 two circuit types used in the link state routing protocols, and 16 highlights that it is important to identify the correct circuit type 17 when forming adjacencies, flooding link state database packets, and 18 monitoring the link state. 20 This document provides advice about the ifStack for the P2P interface 21 over LAN ifType to facilitate operational control, maintenance and 22 statistics. 24 Status of This Memo 26 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 27 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 29 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 30 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 31 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 32 Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 34 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 35 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 36 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 37 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 39 This Internet-Draft will expire on 12 November 2022. 41 Copyright Notice 43 Copyright (c) 2022 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 44 document authors. All rights reserved. 46 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 47 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/ 48 license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. 49 Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights 50 and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components 51 extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as 52 described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are 53 provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License. 55 Table of Contents 57 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 58 2. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 59 3. Interface Stack Table for P2P Interface Type . . . . . . . . 3 60 3.1. P2P Interface higher-layer-if and lower-layer-if . . . . 3 61 3.2. P2P Interface Statistics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 62 3.3. P2P Interface Administrative State . . . . . . . . . . . 4 63 4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 64 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 65 6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 66 7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 67 7.1. Normative references . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 68 7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 69 Appendix A. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 70 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 72 1. Introduction 74 [RFC5309] defines the P2P circuit type and highlights that it is 75 important to identify the correct circuit type when forming 76 adjacencies, flooding link state database packets, and monitoring the 77 link state. 79 To simplify configuration and operational control, it is helpful to 80 represent the fact that an interface is to be considered a P2P 81 interface over LAN type explicitly in the interface stack. This 82 enables, for example, routing protocols to automatically inherit the 83 correct operating mode from the interface stack without further 84 configuration (No need to explicitly configure the P2P interface in 85 routing protocols). 87 It is helpful to map the P2P interface over LAN type in the interface 88 management stack table. If no entry specifies the P2P interface 89 lower layer, management tools lose the ability to retrieve and 90 measure properties specific to lower layers. 92 The P2P interface over LAN type is intended to be used solely as a 93 means to signal in standard network management protocols that make 94 use of ifStackTables that the upper layer interface is P2P interface, 95 and thus the upper and lower layers of P2P over LAN type will be 96 expected to apply appropriate semantics: In general, P2P over LAN 97 type higher layer SHOULD always be "ipForward" (Value 142, 98 [Assignment]), and the P2P over LAN type lower layer SHOULD be any 99 appropriate link data layer of "ipForward". 101 The assignment of 303, as the value for p2pOverLan ifType was made by 102 Expert Review [Assignment]. So the purpose of this document is to 103 request IANA to add this document as a reference to ifType 303, as 104 well as suggest how to use ifStackTable for the P2P interface over 105 LAN type, and provide examples. 107 2. Requirements Language 109 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 110 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 111 document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119] [RFC8174]. 113 3. Interface Stack Table for P2P Interface Type 115 3.1. P2P Interface higher-layer-if and lower-layer-if 117 If a device implements the IF-MIB [RFC2863], each entry in the 118 "/interfaces/interface" list (in "Interface Management YANG") in the 119 operational state is typically mapped to one ifEntry as required in 120 [RFC8343]. Therefore the P2P interface over LAN type should also be 121 fully mapped to one ifEntry by defining the "ifStackTable" ("higher- 122 layer-if" and "lower-layer-if", defined in [RFC8343]). 124 In ifStackTable the P2P interface over LAN type higher layer SHALL be 125 network layer "ipForward" to enable IP routing, and the P2P interface 126 over LAN type lower layer SHOULD be any link data layer that can be 127 bound to "ipForward" including "ethernetCsmacd", "ieee8023adLag", 128 "l2vlan", and so on (defined in IANA). 130 The P2P interface over LAN type ifStackTable can be defined along the 131 lines of following example (In the example, "lower-layer-if" takes 132 "ethernetCsmacd" but in fact, "lower-layer-if" can be any other 133 available link data layer. See Appendix A for more examples) which 134 complies with [RFC8343] [RFC6991]: 136 137 138 isis_int 139 ianaift:ipForward 140 142 143 eth1 144 ianaift:ethernetCsmacd 145 147 148 p2p 149 ianaift:p2pOverLan 150 isis_int 151 eth1 152 false 153 down 154 down 155 156 157 2021-04-01T03:00:00+00:00 158 159 160 161 162 164 Figure 1 166 3.2. P2P Interface Statistics 168 Because multiple IP interfaces can be bound to one physical port, the 169 statistics on the physical port SHOULD be a complete set which 170 includes statistics of all upper layer interfaces. Therefore, each 171 p2p interface collects and displays traffic that has been sent to it 172 via higher layers or received from it via lower layers. 174 3.3. P2P Interface Administrative State 176 P2P interface can be shutdown independently of the underlying 177 interface. 179 If P2P interface is administratively up, then the "oper-status", 180 defined in [RFC8343], of the P2P interface SHALL fully reflect state 181 of underlying interface; If the P2P interface is administratively 182 down, the "oper-status" of the P2P interface SHALL be down. Details 183 refer to Appendix A. 185 4. Security Considerations 187 The interface stack table specified in this document is read-only. 188 Read operation to this table should not have a negative effect on 189 network operations. 191 5. IANA Considerations 193 In the Interface Types registry, IANA has assigned a value of 303 for 194 p2pOverLan [Assignment] with a reference of [RFC5309]. IANA is 195 requested to amend the reference for that code point to be to this 196 document and to make a similar amendment in the YANG iana-if-type 197 module (originally specified in [RFC7224]) which currently points to 198 [RFC8561], as this document explains how the ifType is to be used. 200 6. Acknowledgements 202 The authors would like to thank Rob Wilton for his reviews and 203 valuable comments and suggestions. 205 7. References 207 7.1. Normative references 209 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 210 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, 211 DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, 212 . 214 [RFC2863] McCloghrie, K. and F. Kastenholz, "The Interfaces Group 215 MIB", RFC 2863, DOI 10.17487/RFC2863, June 2000, 216 . 218 [RFC5309] Shen, N., Ed. and A. Zinin, Ed., "Point-to-Point Operation 219 over LAN in Link State Routing Protocols", RFC 5309, 220 DOI 10.17487/RFC5309, October 2008, 221 . 223 [RFC7224] Bjorklund, M., "IANA Interface Type YANG Module", 224 RFC 7224, DOI 10.17487/RFC7224, May 2014, 225 . 227 [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 228 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, 229 May 2017, . 231 [RFC8343] Bjorklund, M., "A YANG Data Model for Interface 232 Management", RFC 8343, DOI 10.17487/RFC8343, March 2018, 233 . 235 [RFC8561] Ahlberg, J., Ye, M., Li, X., Spreafico, D., and M. 236 Vaupotic, "A YANG Data Model for Microwave Radio Link", 237 RFC 8561, DOI 10.17487/RFC8561, June 2019, 238 . 240 7.2. Informative References 242 [Assignment] 243 "Interface Types (ifType)", 244 . 247 [RFC6991] Schoenwaelder, J., Ed., "Common YANG Data Types", 248 RFC 6991, DOI 10.17487/RFC6991, July 2013, 249 . 251 Appendix A. Examples 253 In the case of underlying interface is VLAN sub-interface, the 254 ifStackTable should be defined as: 256 257 258 isis_int 259 ianaift:ipForward 260 262 263 eth1_valn1 264 ianaift:l2vlan 265 267 268 p2p 269 ianaift:p2pOverLan 270 isis_int 271 eth1_valn1 272 false 273 down 274 down 275 276 277 2021-04-01T03:00:00+00:00 278 279 280 281 282 284 Figure 2 286 In the case of underlying interface is LAG, the ifStackTable should 287 be defined as: 289 290 291 isis_int 292 ianaift:ipForward 293 295 296 eth1_lag1 297 ianaift:ieee8023adLag 298 300 301 p2p 302 ianaift:p2pOverLan 303 isis_int 304 eth1_lag1 305 false 306 down 307 down 308 309 310 2021-04-01T03:00:00+00:00 311 312 313 314 315 317 Figure 3 319 In the case of P2P interface and underlying interface are both 320 administratively up, and the underlying interface operational status 321 is up: 323 324 325 p2p 326 ianaift:p2pOverLan 327 isis_int 328 eth1 329 up 330 up 331 332 334 Figure 4 336 In the case of P2P interface and underlying interface are 337 administratively up, but the underlying interface operational status 338 is down: 340 341 342 p2p 343 ianaift:p2pOverLan 344 isis_int 345 eth1 346 up 347 down 348 349 351 Figure 5 353 In the case of P2P interface is administratively down: 355 356 357 p2p 358 ianaift:p2pOverLan 359 isis_int 360 eth1 361 down 362 down 363 364 366 Figure 6 368 In the case of P2P interface is administratively up but underlying is 369 administratively down: 371 372 373 p2p 374 ianaift:p2pOverLan 375 isis_int 376 eth1 377 up 378 down 379 380 382 Figure 7 384 Authors' Addresses 386 Daiying Liu 387 Ericsson 388 No.5 Lize East street 389 Beijing 390 100102 391 China 392 Email: harold.liu@ericsson.com 394 Joel Halpern 395 Ericsson 396 Email: joel.halpern@ericsson.com 398 Congjie Zhang 399 Ericsson 400 Email: congjie.zhang@ericsson.com