Internet DRAFT - draft-dong-idr-ls-ip-tunnel
draft-dong-idr-ls-ip-tunnel
Network Working Group J. Dong
Internet-Draft Z. Li
Intended status: Standards Track Huawei Technologies
Expires: September 17, 2016 J. Tantsura
Ericsson
H. Gredler
Private Contributor
March 16, 2016
BGP Link-State Extension for Distribution of IP Tunnel Information
draft-dong-idr-ls-ip-tunnel-00
Abstract
This document specifies extensions to BGP-LS for the collection and
distribution of IP tunnel information. Such information can be
distributed to external components for service mapping and tunnel
selection.
Requirements Language
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].
Status of This Memo
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 September 17, 2016.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
Dong, et al. Expires September 17, 2016 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft BGP-LS for IP Tunnel Distribution March 2016
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.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Carrying IP Tunnel Information in BGP-LS . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. IP Tunnel Identifier Information . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2. IP Tunnel Parameters TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3. Operational Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.1. BGP-LS NLRI-Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.2. BGP-LS Protocol-IDs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.3. BGP-LS Attribute TLVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1. Introduction
BGP has been extended to distribute the link-state
[I-D.ietf-idr-ls-distribution] and TE-LSP information
[I-D.ietf-idr-te-lsp-distribution] to external components. When IP
tunnel technologies, such as Generic Routing Encapsulation (GRE),
Layer Two Tunneling Protocol - Version 3 (L2TPv3), VxLAN, NVGRE,
etc., are used in the network, it is necessary to collect the
information of IP tunnels in the network and share with the external
components. Such information can be distributed to external
components for service mapping and tunnel selection. One typical use
case of IP tunnel information is described in
[I-D.hao-idr-flowspec-redirect-tunnel] . This document specifies
extensions to BGP-LS for the collection and distribution of IP tunnel
information.
Dong, et al. Expires September 17, 2016 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft BGP-LS for IP Tunnel Distribution March 2016
2. Carrying IP Tunnel Information in BGP-LS
2.1. IP Tunnel Identifier Information
The IP tunnel Identifier information is advertised in BGP UPDATE
messages using the MP_REACH_NLRI and MP_UNREACH_NLRI attributes
[RFC4760]. The "Link-State NLRI" defined in
[I-D.ietf-idr-ls-distribution] is extended to carry the IP Tunnel
information. BGP speakers that wish to exchange IP Tunnel
information MUST use the BGP Multiprotocol Extensions Capability Code
(1) to advertise the corresponding (AFI, SAFI) pair, as specified in
[RFC4760].
The format of "Link-State NLRI" is defined in
[I-D.ietf-idr-ls-distribution]. A new "NLRI Type" is defined for IP
Tunnel Identifier Information as following:
o NLRI Type = TBA: IPv4/IPv6 Tunnel NLRI
The IPv4/IPv6 Tunnel NLRI is shown in the following figure:
0 1 2 3
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Protocol-ID |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Identifier |
| (64 bits) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
// IP Tunnel Descriptors (variable) //
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 1. IPv4/IPv6 Tunnel NLRI
Where
The 'Protocol-ID' field is used to identify the source of the
advertised NLRI. For IPv4/IPv6 Tunnel NLRI, according to the method
of tunnel establishment, the Protocol-ID field can be set to either
"Static configuration" or the specific signaling protocol of the IP
tunnel. Several new Protocol-IDs are defined as below:
+-------------+----------------------------------+
| Protocol-ID | NLRI information source protocol |
+-------------+----------------------------------+
| TBD | L2TPv3 |
+-------------+----------------------------------+
| TBD | GTPv2-C |
+-------------+----------------------------------+
Dong, et al. Expires September 17, 2016 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft BGP-LS for IP Tunnel Distribution March 2016
As defined in [I-D.ietf-idr-ls-distribution], the 64-Bit 'Identifier'
field is used to identify the "routing universe" where the NLRI
belongs.
The "IP Tunnel Descriptors" field consists of a set of Descriptor
TLVs which together identifies the IP tunnel. The following
Descriptor TLVs as defined in [I-D.ietf-idr-te-lsp-distribution] are
reused for IPv4/IPv6 Tunnel NLRI:
o Tunnel ID
The Tunnel Identifier TLV contains the Tunnel ID defined in
[RFC3209] and has the following format:
0 1 2 3
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Tunnel ID |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
where:
+ Type: To be assigned by IANA (suggested value: 267)
+ Length: 2 octets.
+ Tunnel ID: 2 octets as defined in [RFC3209].
o IPv4/6 Tunnel Head-end address
The IPv4/IPv6 Tunnel Head-End Address TLV contains the Tunnel
Head- End Address defined in [RFC3209] and has following
format:
Dong, et al. Expires September 17, 2016 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft BGP-LS for IP Tunnel Distribution March 2016
0 1 2 3
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
// IPv4/IPv6 Tunnel Head-End Address (variable) //
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
where:
+ Type: To be assigned by IANA (suggested value: 269)
+ Length: 4 or 16 octets.
When the IPv4/IPv6 Tunnel Head-end Address TLV contains an IPv4
address, its length is 4 (octets).
When the IPv4/IPv6 Tunnel Head-end Address TLV contains an IPv6
address, its length is 16 (octets).
o IPv4/6 Tunnel Tail-end address
The IPv4/IPv6 Tunnel Tail-End Address TLV contains the Tunnel
Tail- End Address defined in [RFC3209] and has following
format:
0 1 2 3
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
// IPv4/IPv6 Tunnel Tail-End Address (variable) //
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
where:
+ Type: To be assigned by IANA (suggested value: 270)
+ Length: 4 or 16 octets.
Dong, et al. Expires September 17, 2016 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft BGP-LS for IP Tunnel Distribution March 2016
When the IPv4/IPv6 Tunnel Tail-end Address TLV contains an IPv4
address, its length is 4 (octets).
When the IPv4/IPv6 Tunnel Tail-end Address TLV contains an IPv6
address, its length is 16 (octets).
In addition, a new descriptor TLV called "Tunnel Type TLV" is defined
for IP Tunnel as below:
0 1 2 3
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Tunnel Type |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 2. Tunnel Type TLV
o Type: TBA.
o Length: 2 octets.
o Value: The 2-octet Tunnel Type identifies the type of tunneling
technology as defined in the "BGP Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute
Tunnel Types" registry [RFC5512].
The IPv4/6 Tunnel Head-end address TLV, IPv4/6 Tunnel Tail-end
address, Tunnel-type TLV and the Tunnel ID TLV together uniquely
identify the IP tunnel.
2.2. IP Tunnel Parameters TLV
A new TLV called "IP Tunnel Parameters TLV" is defined to describe
the detailed information of the IP tunnels, which is carried in the
optional non-transitive BGP Attribute "LINK_STATE Attribute" defined
in [I-D.ietf-idr-ls-distribution]. The IP Tunnel Parameters TLV
SHOULD only be used with IPv4/IPv6 Tunnel NLRI.
0 1 2 3
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
~ Tunnel Parameter Sub-TLVs ~
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 3. IP Tunnel Parameters TLV
Dong, et al. Expires September 17, 2016 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft BGP-LS for IP Tunnel Distribution March 2016
The "Value" field of the IP Tunnel Parameters TLV is composed of a
set of sub-TLVs. The sub-TLV is structured as below:
+-----------------------------------+
| Sub-TLV Type (1 Octet) |
+-----------------------------------+
| Sub-TLV Length (1 Octet) |
+-----------------------------------+
~ Sub-TLV Value (Variable) ~
+-----------------------------------+
The following sub-TLVs defined in this document can be carried in the
Value field of the IP Tunnel Parameters TLV:
o Tunnel Name sub-TLV:
Type: TBA
Length: Variable
Value: A string identifies the name of the IP tunnel.
o Description sub-TLV
Type: TBA
Length: Variable
Value: A string which contains the textual description of the
IP tunnel.
o Status sub-TLV:
Type: TBA
Length: 1 octet
Value: 8-bit flags which indicate the status of the IP tunnel.
Bit 0 is defined as the Up/Down bit, which SHOULD be set to 1
if there is no available route for the tunnel destination. The
other bits are reserved which MUST be set to 0 on transmission
and ignored on receipt.
o Encapsulation sub-TLV:
Type: TBA
Length: Variable
Dong, et al. Expires September 17, 2016 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft BGP-LS for IP Tunnel Distribution March 2016
Value: The encapsulation information of the IP tunnel, syntax
and semantics of which are determined by the Tunnel Type. The
format of Encapsulation sub-TLVs are defined in [RFC5512] and
[I-D.ietf-idr-tunnel-encaps].
o CoS Sub-TLV:
Type: TBA
Length: 1 octet
Value: the class of differentiated services that can be
provided by the tunnel. The format is same as the DS field as
defined in [RFC2474].
o MTU sub-TLV:
Type: TBA
Length: 2 octets
Value: the Maximum Transmission Unit (MTU) of the IP tunnel.
3. Operational Considerations
The Existing BGP operational procedures apply to this document. No
new operation procedures are defined in this document. The
operational considerations as specified in
[I-D.ietf-idr-ls-distribution] apply to this document.
In general the ingress nodes of the IP Tunnels are responsible for
the distribution of the IP tunnel information, while the egress nodes
of the IP tunnels MAY report the IP tunnel information if needed.
4. IANA Considerations
IANA is requested to administer the assignment of new values defined
in this document and summarized in this section.
4.1. BGP-LS NLRI-Types
IANA maintains a registry called "Border Gateway Protocol - Link
State (BGP-LS) Parameters" with a sub-registry called "BGP-LS NLRI-
Types".
IANA is requested to assign two new NLRI-Types:
Dong, et al. Expires September 17, 2016 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft BGP-LS for IP Tunnel Distribution March 2016
+------+---------------------------+---------------+
| Type | NLRI Type | Reference |
+------+---------------------------+---------------+
| TBD | IPv4/v6 Tunnel NLRI | this document |
+------+---------------------------+---------------+
4.2. BGP-LS Protocol-IDs
IANA maintains a registry called "Border Gateway Protocol - Link
State (BGP-LS) Parameters" with a sub-registry called "BGP-LS
Protocol-IDs".
IANA is requested to assign two new Protocol-IDs:
+-------------+----------------------------------+---------------+
| Protocol-ID | NLRI information source protocol | Reference |
+-------------+----------------------------------+---------------+
| TBD | L2TPv3 | this document |
+-------------+----------------------------------+---------------+
| TBD | GTPv2-C | this document |
+-------------+----------------------------------+---------------+
4.3. BGP-LS Attribute TLVs
IANA maintains a registry called "Border Gateway Protocol - Link
State (BGP-LS) Parameters" with a sub-registry called "Node Anchor,
Link Descriptor and Link Attribute TLVs".
IANA is requested to assign one new TLV code point:
+-----------+-------------------------+---------------+-----------------+
| TLV Code | Description | IS-IS TLV/ | Value defined |
| Point | | Sub-TLV | in: |
+-----------+-------------------------+---------------+-----------------+
| TBD |IP Tunnel Parameters TLV | --- | this document |
+-----------+-------------------------+---------------+-----------------+
5. Security Considerations
Procedures and protocol extensions defined in this document do not
affect the BGP security model. See the 'Security Considerations'
section of [RFC4271] for a discussion of BGP security. Also refer to
[RFC4272] and [RFC6952] for analysis of security issues for BGP.
Dong, et al. Expires September 17, 2016 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft BGP-LS for IP Tunnel Distribution March 2016
6. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Nan Wu, Shunwan Zhuang and Xia Chen
for their review and valuable comments.
7. References
7.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-idr-ls-distribution]
Gredler, H., Medved, J., Previdi, S., Farrel, A., and S.
Ray, "North-Bound Distribution of Link-State and TE
Information using BGP", draft-ietf-idr-ls-distribution-13
(work in progress), October 2015.
[I-D.ietf-idr-te-lsp-distribution]
Dong, J., Chen, M., Gredler, H., Previdi, S., and J.
Tantsura, "Distribution of MPLS Traffic Engineering (TE)
LSP State using BGP", draft-ietf-idr-te-lsp-
distribution-04 (work in progress), December 2015.
[I-D.ietf-idr-tunnel-encaps]
Rosen, E., Patel, K., and G. Velde, "The BGP Tunnel
Encapsulation Attribute", draft-ietf-idr-tunnel-encaps-01
(work in progress), December 2015.
[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>.
[RFC3209] Awduche, D., Berger, L., Gan, D., Li, T., Srinivasan, V.,
and G. Swallow, "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP
Tunnels", RFC 3209, DOI 10.17487/RFC3209, December 2001,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3209>.
[RFC4271] Rekhter, Y., Ed., Li, T., Ed., and S. Hares, Ed., "A
Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", RFC 4271,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4271, January 2006,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4271>.
[RFC4760] Bates, T., Chandra, R., Katz, D., and Y. Rekhter,
"Multiprotocol Extensions for BGP-4", RFC 4760,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4760, January 2007,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4760>.
Dong, et al. Expires September 17, 2016 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft BGP-LS for IP Tunnel Distribution March 2016
7.2. Informative References
[I-D.hao-idr-flowspec-redirect-tunnel]
Weiguo, H., Li, Z., and L. Yong, "BGP Flow-Spec Redirect
to Tunnel action", draft-hao-idr-flowspec-redirect-
tunnel-00 (work in progress), October 2015.
[RFC2474] Nichols, K., Blake, S., Baker, F., and D. Black,
"Definition of the Differentiated Services Field (DS
Field) in the IPv4 and IPv6 Headers", RFC 2474,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2474, December 1998,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2474>.
[RFC4272] Murphy, S., "BGP Security Vulnerabilities Analysis",
RFC 4272, DOI 10.17487/RFC4272, January 2006,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4272>.
[RFC5342] Eastlake 3rd, D., "IANA Considerations and IETF Protocol
Usage for IEEE 802 Parameters", RFC 5342,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5342, September 2008,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5342>.
[RFC5512] Mohapatra, P. and E. Rosen, "The BGP Encapsulation
Subsequent Address Family Identifier (SAFI) and the BGP
Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute", RFC 5512,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5512, April 2009,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5512>.
[RFC6952] Jethanandani, M., Patel, K., and L. Zheng, "Analysis of
BGP, LDP, PCEP, and MSDP Issues According to the Keying
and Authentication for Routing Protocols (KARP) Design
Guide", RFC 6952, DOI 10.17487/RFC6952, May 2013,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6952>.
Authors' Addresses
Jie Dong
Huawei Technologies
Huawei Campus, No.156 Beiqing Rd.
Beijing 100095
China
Email: jie.dong@huawei.com
Dong, et al. Expires September 17, 2016 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft BGP-LS for IP Tunnel Distribution March 2016
Zhenbin Li
Huawei Technologies
Huawei Building, No.156 Beiqing Rd.
Beijing 100095
China
Email: lizhenbin@huawei.com
Jeff Tantsura
Ericsson
300 Holger Way
San Jose, CA 95134
US
Email: jeff.tantsura@ericsson.com
Hannes Gredler
Private Contributor
Email: hannes@gredler.at
Dong, et al. Expires September 17, 2016 [Page 12]
