Internet DRAFT - draft-manral-mpls-rsvpte-ipv6
draft-manral-mpls-rsvpte-ipv6
Network Working Group V. Manral
Internet-Draft Hewlett Packard Co.,
Intended status: Standards Track March 30, 2012
Expires: October 6, 2012
RSVP-TE IPv6
draft-manral-mpls-rsvpte-ipv6-02
Abstract
RSVP defined in [RFC2205] defines a resource reservation setup
protocol, designed for an integrated service internet.
RSVP-TE defined in [RFC2205] extends RSVP to establish LSP's in MPLS.
For RSVP-TE hops that cannot allocate Labels cannot exist in the PATH
of the LSP's. It is therefore specified that for IPv6 RSVP-TE LSP's
Path, PathTear and ResvConf Messages should address the messages
directly to an adjacent node control plane IPv6 address.
This document also specfies some other changes required for RSVP-TE
to work over IPv6 transport.
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 October 6, 2012.
Copyright Notice
Manral Expires October 6, 2012 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft RSVP-TE IPv6 Changes March 2012
Copyright (c) 2011 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.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Router Alert Option Details . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Other minor changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Manral Expires October 6, 2012 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft RSVP-TE IPv6 Changes March 2012
1. Introduction
RSVP was designed to allow non RSVP nodes along the PATH to exist.
The restriction does not apply for RSVP-TE for IPv6 as a node that
cannot allocate Labels cannot exist in the PATH of the LSP's.
RSVP-TE for IPv6 has not been widely deployed. It is there fore
reccomended that RSVP-TE signalling over IPv6 not use Router Alert
Option but instead send packet to the Peer control plane address.
Some other details missed out in IPv6 are also explained in detail
2. Router Alert Option Details
RSVP itself does not specify anything about the Router Alert Option
in IPv6, though it explicitly specifies the details of the Router
Alert Option for IPv4. It however specifies extensions for all the
objects for IPv6.
Assuming the Path, PathTear or ResvConf Message use Router Alert in
IPv6 extension in the IPv6 just like in IPv4, the IPv6 Hop-by-Hop
options header is extended for allowing the Router Alert
Functionality [RFC2711].
Besides the known security risks related to DoS atttacks with Router
Alert in operational networks, the option is also not well
implemented in the field in most OS's. It is there fore reccomended
that Path, PathTear or ResvConf messages when transported over IPv6
SHOULD send the packets directly to the neighbor control plane IPv6
address.
3. Other minor changes
Hello Messages need to be sent out with the Hop Limit Field set to 1
for IPv6 based Hellos.
4. IANA Considerations
This document makes no request of IANA.
Note to RFC Editor: this section may be removed on publication as an
RFC.
Manral Expires October 6, 2012 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft RSVP-TE IPv6 Changes March 2012
5. Security Considerations
This document precludes the use of the Router Alert Option, which is
related to possible security risks related to DoS attacks. This
draft thus improves the security of the IPv6 based RSVP-TE.
This draft clarifies the behavior of RSVP-TE for IPv6 which can lead
to better implementations and hence lesser security and other issues.
6. Acknowledgements
7. References
7.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
7.2. Informative References
[RFC2205] Braden, B., "Resource ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP) --
Version 1 Functional Specification", September 1997.
[RFC2711] Partridge, C., "IPv6 Router Alert Option", October 1999.
[RFC3209] Awduche, D., "Extensions to RSVP for LSP Tunnels",
DEcember 2001.
Author's Address
Vishwas Manral (editor)
Hewlett-Packard Co.
19111 Pruneridge Ave.
Cupertino, CA 95014
USA
Phone: 408-447-0000
Fax:
Email: vishwas.manral@hp.com
URI:
Manral Expires October 6, 2012 [Page 4]
