| Internet Engineering Task Force | N. Akiya |
| Internet-Draft | C. Pignataro |
| Intended status: Standards Track | D. Ward |
| Expires: March 18, 2015 | Cisco Systems |
| September 14, 2014 |
Seamless Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (S-BFD) for IPv4, IPv6 and MPLS
draft-ietf-bfd-seamless-ip-00
This document defines procedures to use Seamless Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (S-BFD) for IPv4, IPv6 and MPLS environments.
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on March 18, 2015.
Copyright (c) 2014 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.
Seamless Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (S-BFD), [I-D.ietf-bfd-seamless-base], defines a generalized mechanism to allow network nodes to seamlessly perform continuity checks to remote entities. This document defines necessary procedures to use S-BFD on IPv4, IPv6 and MPLS environments.
The reader is expected to be familiar with the IP, MPLS BFD and S-BFD terminologies and protocol constructs.
A new UDP port is defined for the use of the S-BFD on IPv4, IPv6 and MPLS environments: TBD1. SBFDReflector session MUST listen for incoming S-BFD control packets on the port TBD1. SBFDInitiator sessions MUST transmit S-BFD control packets with destination port TBD1. The source port of the S-BFD control packets transmitted by SBFDInitiator sessions can be of any but MUST NOT be TBD1. The same UDP source port number MUST be used for all S-BFD control packets associated with a particular SBFDInitiator session. The source port number MAY be unique among all SBFDInitiator sessions on the system.
A new UDP port is defined for the use of the S-BFD Echo function on IPv4, IPv6 and MPLS environments: TBD2. SBFDInitiator sessions MUST transmit S-BFD echo packets with destination port TBD2. This document defines only the UDP port value for the S-BFD Echo function. The source port and the procedures for the S-BFD Echo function are outside the scope of this document.
Received BFD control packet MUST be demultiplexed with the destination UDP port field. If the port is TBD1, then the packet MUST be looked up to locate a corresponding SBFDReflector session based on the value from the "your discriminator" field in the table describing S-BFD discriminators. If the port is not TBD1, then the packet MUST be looked up to locate a corresponding SBFDInitiator session or classical BFD session based on the value from the "your discriminator" field in the table describing BFD discriminators. If the located session is an SBFDInitiator, then the destination IP address of the packet SHOULD be validated to be for self.
S-BFD control packets are transmitted with IP header, UDP header and BFD control header ([RFC5880]). When S-BFD control packets are explicitly label switched (i.e. not IP routed which happen to go over an LSP, but explicitly sent on a specific LSP), the former is prepended with a label stack. Note that this document does not make a distinction between a single-hop S-BFD scenario and a multi-hop S-BFD scenario, both scenarios are supported.
Necessary values in the BFD control headers are described in [I-D.ietf-bfd-seamless-base]. Section 5.1 describes necessary values in the MPLS header, IP header and UDP header when an SBFDInitiator on the initiator is sending S-BFD control packets.
Typically, an S-BFD control packet will have "your discriminator" field corresponding to an S-BFD discriminator of the remote entity located on the target network node defined by the destination IP address or the label stack. It is, however, possible for an SBFDInitiator to carefully set "your discriminator" and TTL fields to perform a continuity test towards a target but to a transit network node.
Section 5.1 intentionally uses the word "target", instead of "remote entity", to accommodate this possible S-BFD usage through TTL expiry. This also requires S-BFD control packets not be dropped by the responder node due to TTL expiry. Thus implementations on the responder MUST allow received S-BFD control packets taking TTL expiry exception path to reach corresponding reflector BFD session.
S-BFD control packets are IP routed back to the initiator, and will have IP header, UDP header and BFD control header. If an SBFDReflector receives an S-BFD control packet with UDP source port as TBD1, the packet MUST be discarded. Necessary values in the BFD control header are described in [I-D.ietf-bfd-seamless-base]. Section 6.1 describes necessary values in the IP header and UDP header when an SBFDReflector on the responder is sending S-BFD control packets.
Security considerations for S-BFD are discussed in [I-D.ietf-bfd-seamless-base]. Additionally, implementing the following measures will strengthen security aspects of the mechanism described by this document:
A new value TBD1 is requested from the "Service Name and Transport Protocol Port Number Registry". The requested registry entry is:
Service Name (REQUIRED)
s-bfd
Transport Protocol(s) (REQUIRED)
udp
Assignee (REQUIRED)
IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Contact (REQUIRED)
BFD Chairs <bfd-chairs@tools.ietf.org>
Description (REQUIRED)
Seamless Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (S-BFD)
Reference (REQUIRED)
draft-akiya-bfd-seamless-ip
Port Number (OPTIONAL)
TBD1 (Requesting 7784)
A new value TBD2 is requested from the "Service Name and Transport Protocol Port Number Registry". The requested registry entry is:
Service Name (REQUIRED)
s-bfd-echo
Transport Protocol(s) (REQUIRED)
udp
Assignee (REQUIRED)
IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Contact (REQUIRED)
BFD Chairs <bfd-chairs@tools.ietf.org>
Description (REQUIRED)
Seamless Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (S-BFD) Echo Function
Reference (REQUIRED)
draft-akiya-bfd-seamless-ip
Port Number (OPTIONAL)
TBD2 (Requesting 7785)
Authors would like to thank Marc Binderberger from Cisco Systems for providing valuable comments.
Tarek Saad
Cisco Systems
Email: tsaad@cisco.com
Siva Sivabalan
Cisco Systems
Email: msiva@cisco.com
Nagendra Kumar
Cisco Systems
Email: naikumar@cisco.com
| [I-D.ietf-bfd-seamless-base] | Akiya, N., Pignataro, C., Ward, D., Bhatia, M. and J. Networks, "Seamless Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (S-BFD)", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-bfd-seamless-base-03, August 2014. |
| [RFC2119] | Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. |
| [RFC5880] | Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD)", RFC 5880, June 2010. |
| [RFC2827] | Ferguson, P. and D. Senie, "Network Ingress Filtering: Defeating Denial of Service Attacks which employ IP Source Address Spoofing", BCP 38, RFC 2827, May 2000. |