diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/rfc/rfc7885.txt')
-rw-r--r-- | doc/rfc/rfc7885.txt | 619 |
1 files changed, 619 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc7885.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc7885.txt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..bebb5dc --- /dev/null +++ b/doc/rfc/rfc7885.txt @@ -0,0 +1,619 @@ + + + + + + +Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) V. Govindan +Request for Comments: 7885 C. Pignataro +Updates: 5885 Cisco +Category: Standards Track July 2016 +ISSN: 2070-1721 + + + Seamless Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (S-BFD) + for Virtual Circuit Connectivity Verification (VCCV) + +Abstract + + This document defines Seamless BFD (S-BFD) for VCCV by extending the + procedures and Connectivity Verification (CV) types already defined + for Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) for Virtual Circuit + Connectivity Verification (VCCV). + + This document updates RFC 5885 by extending the CV Type values and + the capability selection. + +Status of This Memo + + This is an Internet Standards Track document. + + This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force + (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has + received public review and has been approved for publication by the + Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on + Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 7841. + + Information about the current status of this document, any errata, + and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at + http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7885. + +Copyright Notice + + Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the + document authors. All rights reserved. + + This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal + Provisions Relating to IETF Documents + (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of + publication of this document. Please review these documents + carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect + to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must + include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of + the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as + described in the Simplified BSD License. + + + +Govindan & Pignataro Standards Track [Page 1] + +RFC 7885 Seamless BFD for VCCV July 2016 + + +Table of Contents + + 1. Background ......................................................3 + 2. S-BFD Connectivity Verification .................................3 + 2.1. Co-existence of S-BFD and BFD Capabilities .................4 + 2.2. S-BFD CV Operation .........................................4 + 2.2.1. S-BFD Initiator Operation ...........................4 + 2.2.2. S-BFD Reflector Operation ...........................5 + 2.2.2.1. Demultiplexing .............................5 + 2.2.2.2. Transmission of Control Packets ............5 + 2.2.2.3. Advertisement of Target + Discriminators Using LDP ...................5 + 2.2.2.4. Advertisement of Target + Discriminators Using L2TP ..................6 + 2.2.2.5. Provisioning of Target Discriminators ......6 + 2.3. S-BFD Encapsulation ........................................6 + 3. Capability Selection ............................................7 + 4. Security Considerations .........................................7 + 5. IANA Considerations .............................................8 + 5.1. MPLS CV Types for the VCCV Interface Parameters Sub-TLV ....8 + 5.2. L2TPv3 CV Types for the VCCV Capability AVP ................8 + 5.3. PW Associated Channel Type .................................9 + 6. References ......................................................9 + 6.1. Normative References .......................................9 + 6.2. Informative References ....................................10 + Acknowledgements ..................................................11 + Contributors ......................................................11 + Authors' Addresses ................................................11 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Govindan & Pignataro Standards Track [Page 2] + +RFC 7885 Seamless BFD for VCCV July 2016 + + +1. Background + + Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) for Virtual Circuit + Connectivity Verification (VCCV) [RFC5885] defines the CV Types for + BFD using VCCV, protocol operation, and the required packet + encapsulation formats. This document extends those procedures and + CV Type values to enable Seamless BFD (S-BFD) [RFC7880] operation + for VCCV. + + The new S-BFD CV Types are Pseudowire (PW) demultiplexer agnostic and + hence are applicable for both MPLS and Layer Two Tunneling Protocol + version 3 (L2TPv3) PW demultiplexers. This document concerns itself + with the S-BFD VCCV operation over Single-Segment PWs (SS-PWs). The + scope of this document is as follows: + + o This specification describes procedures for S-BFD asynchronous + mode only. + + o S-BFD Echo mode is outside the scope of this specification. + + o S-BFD operation for fault detection and status signaling is + outside the scope of this specification. + + This document specifies the use of a single S-BFD Discriminator per + PW. There are cases where multiple S-BFD Discriminators per PW can + be useful. One such case involves using different S-BFD + Discriminators per Flow within a Flow-Aware Transport (FAT) PW + [RFC6391]; however, the mapping between Flows and discriminators is a + prerequisite. FAT PWs can be supported as described in Section 7 of + [RFC6391], which details Operations, Administration, and Maintenance + (OAM) considerations for FAT PWs. + + The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", + "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and + "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in + [RFC2119]. + +2. S-BFD Connectivity Verification + + The S-BFD protocol provides continuity check services by monitoring + the S-BFD Control packets sent and received over the VCCV channel of + the PW. The term "Connectivity Verification" (CV) is used throughout + this document to be consistent with [RFC5885]. + + This section defines the CV Types to be used for S-BFD. It also + defines the procedures for the S-BFD reflector and S-BFD initiator + operation. + + + + +Govindan & Pignataro Standards Track [Page 3] + +RFC 7885 Seamless BFD for VCCV July 2016 + + + Two CV Types are defined for S-BFD. Table 1 summarizes the S-BFD + CV Types, grouping them by encapsulation (i.e., with IP/UDP headers, + without IP/UDP headers) for fault detection only. S-BFD for fault + detection and status signaling is outside the scope of this + specification. + + +-----------------------------------------+-----------+-------------+ + | | Fault | Fault | + | | Detection | Detection | + | | Only | and Status | + | | | Signaling | + +-----------------------------------------+-----------+-------------+ + | S-BFD IP/UDP encapsulation (with IP/UDP | 0x40 | N/A | + | headers) | | | + | | | | + | S-BFD PW-ACH encapsulation when using | 0x80 | N/A | + | MPLS PW or S-BFD L2-Specific Sublayer | | | + | (L2SS) encapsulation when using L2TP PW | | | + | (without IP/UDP headers) | | | + +-----------------------------------------+-----------+-------------+ + + Table 1: Bitmask Values for S-BFD CV Types + + IANA has assigned two new bits to indicate S-BFD operation. + +2.1. Co-existence of S-BFD and BFD Capabilities + + Since the CV Types for S-BFD and BFD are unique, BFD and S-BFD + capabilities can be advertised concurrently. + +2.2. S-BFD CV Operation + +2.2.1. S-BFD Initiator Operation + + The S-BFD initiator SHOULD bootstrap S-BFD sessions after it learns + the discriminator of the remote target identifier. This can be + achieved, for example, through one or more of the following methods. + (This list is not exhaustive.) + + 1. Advertisements of S-BFD Discriminators made through a + PW signaling protocol -- for example, AVPs/TLVs defined in + L2TP/LDP. + + 2. Provisioning of S-BFD Discriminators by manual configuration of + the Provider Edge (PE) or L2TP Control Connection Endpoints + (LCCEs). + + + + + +Govindan & Pignataro Standards Track [Page 4] + +RFC 7885 Seamless BFD for VCCV July 2016 + + + 3. Assignment of S-BFD Discriminators by a controller. + + 4. Probing remote S-BFD Discriminators through a mechanism such as + S-BFD Alert Discriminators [SBFD-ALERT-DISCRIM]. + + The S-BFD initiator operation MUST be done as specified in + Section 7.3 of [RFC7880]. + +2.2.2. S-BFD Reflector Operation + + When a PW signaling protocol such as LDP or L2TPv3 is in use, the + S-BFD reflector can advertise its target discriminators using that + signaling protocol. When static PWs are in use, the target + discriminator of S-BFD needs to be provisioned on the S-BFD + initiator nodes. + + All point-to-point PWs are bidirectional; the S-BFD reflector + therefore reflects the S-BFD packet back to the initiator using the + VCCV channel of the reverse direction of the PW on which it was + received. + + The reflector has enough information to reflect the S-BFD Async + packet received by it back to the S-BFD initiator using the PW + context (e.g., fields of the L2TPv3 headers). + + The S-BFD reflector operation for BFD protocol fields MUST be + performed as specified in [RFC7880]. + +2.2.2.1. Demultiplexing + + Demultiplexing of S-BFD is achieved using the PW context, following + the procedures in Section 7.1 of [RFC7880]. + +2.2.2.2. Transmission of Control Packets + + S-BFD reflector procedures as described in [RFC7880] apply for S-BFD + using VCCV. + +2.2.2.3. Advertisement of Target Discriminators Using LDP + + The advertisement of the target discriminator using LDP is left for + further study. It should be noted that S-BFD can still be used with + signaled PWs over an MPLS Packet Switched Network (PSN) by + provisioning the S-BFD Discriminators or by learning the S-BFD + Discriminators via some other means. + + + + + + +Govindan & Pignataro Standards Track [Page 5] + +RFC 7885 Seamless BFD for VCCV July 2016 + + +2.2.2.4. Advertisement of Target Discriminators Using L2TP + + The S-BFD reflector MUST use the AVP defined in [RFC7886] for + advertising its target discriminators using L2TP. + +2.2.2.5. Provisioning of Target Discriminators + + S-BFD target discriminators MAY be provisioned when static PWs + are used. + +2.3. S-BFD Encapsulation + + Unless specified differently below, the encapsulation of S-BFD + packets is identical to the method specified in Section 3.2 of + [RFC5885] and in [RFC5880] for the encapsulation of BFD packets. + + o IP/UDP BFD encapsulation (BFD with IP/UDP headers): + + * The destination UDP port for the IP-encapsulated S-BFD packet + MUST be 7784 [RFC7881]. + + * The contents of the S-BFD Control packets MUST be set according + to Section 7.3.2 of [RFC7880]. + + * The Time to Live (TTL) (IPv4) or Hop Limit (IPv6) is set + to 255. + + o PW-ACH/L2SS BFD encapsulation (BFD without IP/UDP headers): + + * The encapsulation of S-BFD packets using this format MUST be + performed according to Section 3.2 of [RFC5885], with the + exception of the value for the PW-ACH/L2SS type. + + * When VCCV carries PW-ACH/L2SS-encapsulated S-BFD (i.e., "raw" + S-BFD), the Channel Type of PW-ACH (the PW Control Word (CW)) + or L2SS MUST be set to 0x0008 to indicate "S-BFD Control, + PW-ACH/L2SS-encapsulated" (i.e., S-BFD without IP/UDP headers; + see Section 5.3). This is done to allow the identification of + the encapsulated S-BFD payload when demultiplexing the VCCV + control channel. + + + + + + + + + + + +Govindan & Pignataro Standards Track [Page 6] + +RFC 7885 Seamless BFD for VCCV July 2016 + + +3. Capability Selection + + When multiple S-BFD CV Types are advertised, and after applying the + rules in [RFC5885], the set that both ends of the PW have in common + is determined. If the two ends have more than one S-BFD CV Type in + common, the following list of S-BFD CV Types is considered in order, + from the lowest list number CV Type to the highest list number + CV Type, and the CV Type with the lowest list number is used: + + 1. 0x40 - S-BFD IP/UDP-encapsulated, for PW Fault Detection only. + + 2. 0x80 - S-BFD PW-ACH/L2SS-encapsulated (without IP/UDP headers), + for PW Fault Detection only. + + The order of capability selection between S-BFD and BFD is defined as + follows: + + +---------------------------+---------+-----------+-----------------+ + | Advertised capabilities | BFD | S-BFD | Both S-BFD and | + | of PE1/PE2 | Only | Only | BFD | + +---------------------------+---------+-----------+-----------------+ + | BFD Only | BFD | None | BFD Only | + | | | | | + | S-BFD Only | None | S-BFD | S-BFD Only | + | | | | | + | Both S-BFD and BFD | BFD | S-BFD | Both S-BFD and | + | | Only | Only | BFD | + +---------------------------+---------+-----------+-----------------+ + + Table 2: Capability Selection Matrix for BFD and S-BFD + +4. Security Considerations + + Security considerations for VCCV are addressed in Section 10 of + [RFC5085]. The introduction of the S-BFD CV Types does not present + any new security risks for VCCV. Implementations of the additional + CV Types defined herein are subject to the same security + considerations as those defined in [RFC5085] as well as [RFC7880]. + + The IP/UDP encapsulation of S-BFD makes use of the TTL / Hop Limit + procedures described in the Generalized TTL Security Mechanism (GTSM) + specification [RFC5082] as a security mechanism. + + This specification does not raise any additional security issues + beyond these. + + + + + + +Govindan & Pignataro Standards Track [Page 7] + +RFC 7885 Seamless BFD for VCCV July 2016 + + +5. IANA Considerations + +5.1. MPLS CV Types for the VCCV Interface Parameters Sub-TLV + + The VCCV Interface Parameters Sub-TLV codepoint is defined in + [RFC4446], and the "MPLS VCCV Connectivity Verification (CV) Types" + registry is defined in [RFC5085]. + + This section lists the new S-BFD CV Types. + + IANA has augmented the "MPLS VCCV Connectivity Verification (CV) + Types" registry in the "Pseudowire Name Spaces (PWE3)" registry + [IANA-PWE3]. These are bitfield values. CV Type values are + specified in Section 2 of this document. + + MPLS VCCV Connectivity Verification (CV) Types: + + Bit (Value) Description Reference + =========== =========== ============== + 6 (0x40) S-BFD IP/UDP-encapsulated, RFC 7885 + for PW Fault Detection only + + 7 (0x80) S-BFD PW-ACH-encapsulated, RFC 7885 + for PW Fault Detection only + +5.2. L2TPv3 CV Types for the VCCV Capability AVP + + This section lists the new S-BFD "L2TPv3 Connectivity Verification + (CV) Types" that have been added to the existing "VCCV Capability AVP + (Attribute Type 96) Values" registry in the "Layer Two Tunneling + Protocol 'L2TP'" registry [IANA-L2TP]. IANA has assigned the + following L2TPv3 Connectivity Verification (CV) Types in the "VCCV + Capability AVP (Attribute Type 96) Values" registry. + + VCCV Capability AVP (Attribute Type 96) Values + ---------------------------------------------- + + L2TPv3 Connectivity Verification (CV) Types: + + Bit (Value) Description Reference + =========== =========== ============== + 6 (0x40) S-BFD IP/UDP-encapsulated, RFC 7885 + for PW Fault Detection only + + 7 (0x80) S-BFD L2SS-encapsulated, RFC 7885 + for PW Fault Detection only + + + + + +Govindan & Pignataro Standards Track [Page 8] + +RFC 7885 Seamless BFD for VCCV July 2016 + + +5.3. PW Associated Channel Type + + As per the IANA considerations in [RFC5586], IANA has allocated a + Channel Type in the "MPLS Generalized Associated Channel (G-ACh) + Types (including Pseudowire Associated Channel Types)" registry + [IANA-G-ACh]. + + IANA has assigned a new Pseudowire Associated Channel Type value, as + follows: + + Value Description Reference + ------ ---------------------------------- --------------- + 0x0008 S-BFD Control, PW-ACH/L2SS RFC 7885 + encapsulation + (without IP/UDP Headers) + +6. References + +6.1. Normative References + + [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate + Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, + DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, + <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. + + [RFC4446] Martini, L., "IANA Allocations for Pseudowire Edge to Edge + Emulation (PWE3)", BCP 116, RFC 4446, + DOI 10.17487/RFC4446, April 2006, + <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4446>. + + [RFC5082] Gill, V., Heasley, J., Meyer, D., Savola, P., Ed., and C. + Pignataro, "The Generalized TTL Security Mechanism + (GTSM)", RFC 5082, DOI 10.17487/RFC5082, October 2007, + <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5082>. + + [RFC5085] Nadeau, T., Ed., and C. Pignataro, Ed., "Pseudowire + Virtual Circuit Connectivity Verification (VCCV): A + Control Channel for Pseudowires", RFC 5085, + DOI 10.17487/RFC5085, December 2007, + <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5085>. + + [RFC5586] Bocci, M., Ed., Vigoureux, M., Ed., and S. Bryant, Ed., + "MPLS Generic Associated Channel", RFC 5586, + DOI 10.17487/RFC5586, June 2009, + <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5586>. + + + + + + +Govindan & Pignataro Standards Track [Page 9] + +RFC 7885 Seamless BFD for VCCV July 2016 + + + [RFC5880] Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection + (BFD)", RFC 5880, DOI 10.17487/RFC5880, June 2010, + <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5880>. + + [RFC5885] Nadeau, T., Ed., and C. Pignataro, Ed., "Bidirectional + Forwarding Detection (BFD) for the Pseudowire Virtual + Circuit Connectivity Verification (VCCV)", RFC 5885, + DOI 10.17487/RFC5885, June 2010, + <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5885>. + + [RFC7880] Pignataro, C., Ward, D., Akiya, N., Bhatia, M., and S. + Pallagatti, "Seamless Bidirectional Forwarding Detection + (S-BFD)", RFC 7880, DOI 10.17487/RFC7880, July 2016, + <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7880>. + + [RFC7881] Pignataro, C., Ward, D., and N. Akiya, "Seamless + Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (S-BFD) for IPv4, IPv6, + and MPLS", RFC 7881, DOI 10.17487/RFC7881, July 2016, + <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7881>. + + [RFC7886] Govindan, V. and C. Pignataro, "Advertising Seamless + Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (S-BFD) Discriminators + in the Layer Two Tunneling Protocol Version 3 (L2TPv3)", + RFC 7886, DOI 10.17487/RFC7886, July 2016, + <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7886>. + +6.2. Informative References + + [IANA-G-ACh] + Internet Assigned Numbers Authority, "MPLS Generalized + Associated Channel (G-ACh) Types (including Pseudowire + Associated Channel Types)", + <http://www.iana.org/assignments/g-ach-parameters>. + + [IANA-L2TP] + Internet Assigned Numbers Authority, "Layer Two Tunneling + Protocol 'L2TP'", + <http://www.iana.org/assignments/l2tp-parameters>. + + [IANA-PWE3] + Internet Assigned Numbers Authority, "Pseudowire Name + Spaces (PWE3)", + <http://www.iana.org/assignments/pwe3-parameters>. + + + + + + + + +Govindan & Pignataro Standards Track [Page 10] + +RFC 7885 Seamless BFD for VCCV July 2016 + + + [RFC6391] Bryant, S., Ed., Filsfils, C., Drafz, U., Kompella, V., + Regan, J., and S. Amante, "Flow-Aware Transport of + Pseudowires over an MPLS Packet Switched Network", + RFC 6391, DOI 10.17487/RFC6391, November 2011, + <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6391>. + + [SBFD-ALERT-DISCRIM] + Akiya, N., Pignataro, C., and D. Ward, "Seamless + Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (S-BFD) Alert + Discriminator", Work in Progress, + draft-akiya-bfd-seamless-alert-discrim-03, October 2014. + +Acknowledgements + + The authors would like to thank Nobo Akiya, Stewart Bryant, Greg + Mirsky, Pawel Sowinski, Yuanlong Jiang, Andrew Malis, and Alexander + Vainshtein for providing input to this document, performing thorough + reviews, and providing useful comments. + +Contributors + + Mallik Mudigonda + Cisco Systems, Inc. + + Email: mmudigon@cisco.com + +Authors' Addresses + + Vengada Prasad Govindan + Cisco Systems, Inc. + + Email: venggovi@cisco.com + + + Carlos Pignataro + Cisco Systems, Inc. + + Email: cpignata@cisco.com + + + + + + + + + + + + + +Govindan & Pignataro Standards Track [Page 11] + |