draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-04.txt   draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-05.txt 
LSR Working Group P. Psenak, Ed. LSR Working Group P. Psenak, Ed.
Internet-Draft Cisco Systems, Inc. Internet-Draft Cisco Systems, Inc.
Intended status: Standards Track A. Lindem Intended status: Standards Track A. Lindem
Expires: December 17, 2018 L. Ginsberg Expires: April 20, 2019 L. Ginsberg
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
W. Henderickx W. Henderickx
Nokia Nokia
J. Tantsura J. Tantsura
Nuage Networks Nuage Networks
H. Gredler H. Gredler
RtBrick Inc. RtBrick Inc.
J. Drake J. Drake
Juniper Networks Juniper Networks
June 15, 2018 October 17, 2018
OSPF Link Traffic Engineering (TE) Attribute Reuse OSPF Link Traffic Engineering (TE) Attribute Reuse
draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-04.txt draft-ietf-ospf-te-link-attr-reuse-05.txt
Abstract Abstract
Various link attributes have been defined in OSPF in the context of Various link attributes have been defined in OSPF in the context of
the MPLS Traffic Engineering (TE) and GMPLS. Many of these link the MPLS Traffic Engineering (TE) and GMPLS. Many of these link
attributes can be used for applications other than MPLS Traffic attributes can be used for applications other than MPLS Traffic
Engineering or GMPLS. This document defines how to distribute such Engineering or GMPLS. This document defines how to distribute such
attributes in OSPFv2 and OSPFv3 for applications other than MPLS attributes in OSPFv2 and OSPFv3 for applications other than MPLS
Traffic Engineering or GMPLS. Traffic Engineering or GMPLS.
skipping to change at page 1, line 45 skipping to change at page 1, line 45
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on December 17, 2018. This Internet-Draft will expire on April 20, 2019.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 2, line 35 skipping to change at page 2, line 35
Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling
the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified
outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may
not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format
it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other
than English. than English.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1. Requirements notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.1. Requirements notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. Link attributes examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Link attributes examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Advertising Link Attributes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. Advertising Link Attributes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1. OSPFv2 TE Opaque LSA and OSPFv3 Intra-Area-TE-LSA . . . . 4 3.1. OSPFv2 TE Opaque LSA and OSPFv3 Intra-Area-TE-LSA . . . . 4
3.2. OSPFv2 Extended Link Opaque LSA and OSPFv3 E-Router-LSA . 5 3.2. OSPFv2 Extended Link Opaque LSA and OSPFv3 E-Router-LSA . 5
3.3. Selected Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.3. Selected Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4. Reused TE link attributes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4. Reused TE link attributes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.1. Shared Risk Link Group (SRLG) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4.1. Shared Risk Link Group (SRLG) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.2. Extended Metrics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4.2. Extended Metrics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.3. Administrative Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 4.3. Traffic Engineering Metric . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.4. Administrative Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5. Advertisement of Application Specific Values . . . . . . . . 8 5. Advertisement of Application Specific Values . . . . . . . . 8
6. Maximum Link Bandwidth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 6. Maximum Link Bandwidth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
7. Local Interface IPv6 Address Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 7. Local Interface IPv6 Address Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
8. Remote Interface IPv6 Address Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 8. Remote Interface IPv6 Address Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
9. Deployment Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 9. Deployment Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
10. Attribute Advertisements and Enablement . . . . . . . . . . . 12 10. Attribute Advertisements and Enablement . . . . . . . . . . . 12
11. Backward Compatibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 11. Backward Compatibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
12. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 12. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
13. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 13. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
13.1. OSPFv2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 13.1. OSPFv2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
13.2. OSPFv3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 13.2. OSPFv3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
14. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 14. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
15. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 15. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
15.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 15.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
15.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 15.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
Various link attributes have been defined in OSPFv2 [RFC2328] and Various link attributes have been defined in OSPFv2 [RFC2328] and
OSPFv3 [RFC5340] in the context of the MPLS traffic engineering and OSPFv3 [RFC5340] in the context of the MPLS traffic engineering and
GMPLS. All these attributes are distributed by OSPFv2 as sub-TLVs of GMPLS. All these attributes are distributed by OSPFv2 as sub-TLVs of
the Link-TLV advertised in the OSPFv2 TE Opaque LSA [RFC3630]. In the Link-TLV advertised in the OSPFv2 TE Opaque LSA [RFC3630]. In
OSPFv3, they are distributed as sub-TLVs of the Link-TLV advertised OSPFv3, they are distributed as sub-TLVs of the Link-TLV advertised
in the OSPFv3 Intra-Area-TE-LSA as defined in [RFC5329]. in the OSPFv3 Intra-Area-TE-LSA as defined in [RFC5329].
Many of these link attributes are useful outside of traditional MPLS Many of these link attributes are useful outside of traditional MPLS
Traffic Engineering or GMPLS. This brings its own set of problems, Traffic Engineering or GMPLS. This brings its own set of problems,
in particular how to distribute these link attributes in OSPFv2 and in particular how to distribute these link attributes in OSPFv2 and
OSPFv3 when MPLS TE and GMPLS are not deployed or are deployed in OSPFv3 when MPLS TE and GMPLS are not deployed or are deployed in
skipping to change at page 4, line 23 skipping to change at page 4, line 29
distinguish between parallel links between two OSPFv2 routers. distinguish between parallel links between two OSPFv2 routers.
As a result, the two-way connectivity check performed during SPF As a result, the two-way connectivity check performed during SPF
may succeed when the two routers disagree on which of the links may succeed when the two routers disagree on which of the links
to use for data traffic. to use for data traffic.
2. Link Local/Remote Identifiers - [RFC4203] - Used for the two-way 2. Link Local/Remote Identifiers - [RFC4203] - Used for the two-way
connectivity check for parallel unnumbered links. Also used for connectivity check for parallel unnumbered links. Also used for
identifying adjacencies for unnumbered links in Segment Routing identifying adjacencies for unnumbered links in Segment Routing
traffic engineering. traffic engineering.
3. Shared Risk Link Group (SRLG) [RFC4203] - In IPFRR, the SRLG is 3. Shared Risk Link Group (SRLG) [RFC4203] - In IPFRR, the SRLG is
used to compute diverse backup paths [RFC5714]. used to compute diverse backup paths [RFC5714].
4. Unidirectional Link Delay/Loss Metrics [RFC7471] - Could be used 4. Unidirectional Link Delay/Loss Metrics [RFC7471] - Could be used
for the shortest path first (SPF) computation using alternate for the shortest path first (SPF) computation using alternate
metrics within an OSPF area. metrics within an OSPF area.
3. Advertising Link Attributes 3. Advertising Link Attributes
This section outlines possible approaches for advertising link This section outlines possible approaches for advertising link
attributes originally defined for MPLS Traffic Engineering or GMPLS attributes originally defined for MPLS Traffic Engineering or GMPLS
skipping to change at page 8, line 5 skipping to change at page 8, line 5
TBD12 - Unidirectional Delay Variation TBD12 - Unidirectional Delay Variation
TBD13 - Unidirectional Link Loss TBD13 - Unidirectional Link Loss
TBD14 - Unidirectional Residual Bandwidth TBD14 - Unidirectional Residual Bandwidth
TBD15 - Unidirectional Available Bandwidth TBD15 - Unidirectional Available Bandwidth
TBD16 - Unidirectional Utilized Bandwidth TBD16 - Unidirectional Utilized Bandwidth
4.3. Administrative Group 4.3. Traffic Engineering Metric
[RFC3630] defines Traffic Engineering Metric.
To advertise the Traffic Engineering Metric in the OSPFv2 Extended
Link TLV, the same format for the sub-TLV defined in section 2.5.5 of
[RFC3630] is used and TLV type TBD27 is used. Similarly, for OSPFv3
to advertise the Traffic Engineering Metric in the OSPFv3 Router-Link
TLV, TLV type TBD28 is used.
4.4. Administrative Group
[RFC3630] and [RFC7308] define the Administrative Group and Extended [RFC3630] and [RFC7308] define the Administrative Group and Extended
Administrative Group sub-TLVs respectively. Administrative Group sub-TLVs respectively.
One use case where advertisement of the Extended Administrative One use case where advertisement of the Extended Administrative
Group(s) for a link is required is described in Group(s) for a link is required is described in
[I-D.ietf-lsr-flex-algo]. [I-D.ietf-lsr-flex-algo].
To advertise the Administrative Group and Extended Administrative To advertise the Administrative Group and Extended Administrative
Group in the OSPFv2 Extended Link TLV, the same format for the sub- Group in the OSPFv2 Extended Link TLV, the same format for the sub-
skipping to change at page 9, line 39 skipping to change at page 9, line 47
SABML: Standard Application Bit-Mask Length. If the Standard SABML: Standard Application Bit-Mask Length. If the Standard
Application Bit-Mask is not present, the Standard Application Bit- Application Bit-Mask is not present, the Standard Application Bit-
Mask Length MUST be set to 0. Mask Length MUST be set to 0.
UDABML: User Defined Application Bit-Mask Length. If the User UDABML: User Defined Application Bit-Mask Length. If the User
Defined Application Bit-Mask is not present, the User Defined Defined Application Bit-Mask is not present, the User Defined
Application Bit-Mask Length MUST be set to 0. Application Bit-Mask Length MUST be set to 0.
Standard Application Bit-Mask: Optional set of bits, where each Standard Application Bit-Mask: Optional set of bits, where each
bit represents a single standard application. The following bits bit represents a single standard application. Bits are defined in
are defined by this document: [I-D.ietf-isis-te-app], which also request a new IANA "Link
Attribute Applications" registry under "Interior Gateway Protocol
(IGP) Parameters" for them. The bits are repeated here for
informational purpose:
Bit-0: RSVP Traffic Engineering Bit-0: RSVP Traffic Engineering
Bit-1: Segment Routing Traffic Engineering Bit-1: Segment Routing Traffic Engineering
Bit-2: Loop Free Alternate (LFA). Includes all LFA types. Bit-2: Loop Free Alternate (LFA). Includes all LFA types
Bit-3: Flexible Algorithm as described in Bit-3: Flexible Algorithm
[I-D.ietf-lsr-flex-algo].
User Defined Application Bit-Mask: Optional set of bits, where User Defined Application Bit-Mask: Optional set of bits, where
each bit represents a single user defined application. each bit represents a single user defined application.
Standard Application Bits are defined/sent starting with Bit 0. Standard Application Bits are defined/sent starting with Bit 0.
Additional bit definitions that are defined in the future SHOULD be Additional bit definitions that are defined in the future SHOULD be
assigned in ascending bit order so as to minimize the number of assigned in ascending bit order so as to minimize the number of
octets that will need to be transmitted. octets that will need to be transmitted.
User Defined Application bits have no relationship to Standard User Defined Application bits have no relationship to Standard
skipping to change at page 11, line 28 skipping to change at page 11, line 39
- Unidirectional Residual Bandwidth - Unidirectional Residual Bandwidth
- Unidirectional Available Bandwidth - Unidirectional Available Bandwidth
- Unidirectional Utilized Bandwidth - Unidirectional Utilized Bandwidth
- Administrative Group - Administrative Group
- Extended Administrative Group - Extended Administrative Group
- Traffic Engineering Metric
6. Maximum Link Bandwidth 6. Maximum Link Bandwidth
Maximum link bandwidth is an application independent attribute of the Maximum link bandwidth is an application independent attribute of the
link that is defined in [RFC3630]. Because it is an application link that is defined in [RFC3630]. Because it is an application
independent attribute, it MUST NOT be advertised in ASLA sub-TLV. independent attribute, it MUST NOT be advertised in ASLA sub-TLV.
Instead, it MAY be advertised as a sub-TLV of the Extended Link Instead, it MAY be advertised as a sub-TLV of the Extended Link
Opaque LSA Extended Link TLV in OSPFv2 [RFC7684] or sub-TLV of OSPFv3 Opaque LSA Extended Link TLV in OSPFv2 [RFC7684] or sub-TLV of OSPFv3
E-Router-LSA Router-Link TLV in OSPFv3 [RFC8362]. E-Router-LSA Router-Link TLV in OSPFv3 [RFC8362].
To advertise the Maximum link bandwidth in the OSPFv2 Extended Link To advertise the Maximum link bandwidth in the OSPFv2 Extended Link
skipping to change at page 14, line 38 skipping to change at page 15, line 4
TBD4 (13 Recommended) - Min/Max Unidirectional Link Delay TBD4 (13 Recommended) - Min/Max Unidirectional Link Delay
TBD5 (14 Recommended) - Unidirectional Delay Variation TBD5 (14 Recommended) - Unidirectional Delay Variation
TBD6 (15 Recommended) - Unidirectional Link Loss TBD6 (15 Recommended) - Unidirectional Link Loss
TBD7 (16 Recommended) - Unidirectional Residual Bandwidth TBD7 (16 Recommended) - Unidirectional Residual Bandwidth
TBD8 (17 Recommended) - Unidirectional Available Bandwidth TBD8 (17 Recommended) - Unidirectional Available Bandwidth
TBD9 (18 Recommended) - Unidirectional Utilized Bandwidth TBD9 (18 Recommended) - Unidirectional Utilized Bandwidth
TBD9 (19 Recommended) - Administrative Group TBD9 (19 Recommended) - Administrative Group
TBD17 (20 Recommended) - Extended Administrative Group TBD17 (20 Recommended) - Extended Administrative Group
TBD23 (21 Recommended) - Maximum Link Bandwidth TBD23 (21 Recommended) - Maximum Link Bandwidth
TBD27 (22 Recommended) - Traffic Engineering Metric
13.2. OSPFv3 13.2. OSPFv3
OSPFv3 Extended LSA Sub-TLV Registry [RFC8362] defines sub-TLVs at OSPFv3 Extended LSA Sub-TLV Registry [RFC8362] defines sub-TLVs at
any level of nesting for OSPFv3 Extended LSAs. This specification any level of nesting for OSPFv3 Extended LSAs. This specification
updates OSPFv3 Extended LSA Sub-TLV Registry with the following TLV updates OSPFv3 Extended LSA Sub-TLV Registry with the following TLV
types: types:
TBD22 (9 Recommended) - Application Specific Link Attributes TBD22 (9 Recommended) - Application Specific Link Attributes
TBD2 (10 Recommended) - Shared Risk Link Group TBD2 (10 Recommended) - Shared Risk Link Group
skipping to change at page 15, line 35 skipping to change at page 15, line 49
TBD19 (18 Recommended) - Administrative Group TBD19 (18 Recommended) - Administrative Group
TBD20 (19 Recommended) - Extended Administrative Group TBD20 (19 Recommended) - Extended Administrative Group
TBD24 (20 Recommended) - Maximum Link Bandwidth TBD24 (20 Recommended) - Maximum Link Bandwidth
TBD25 (21 Recommended) - Local Interface IPv6 Address Sub-TLV TBD25 (21 Recommended) - Local Interface IPv6 Address Sub-TLV
TBD26 (22 Recommended) - Local Interface IPv6 Address Sub-TLV TBD26 (22 Recommended) - Local Interface IPv6 Address Sub-TLV
TBD28 (23 Recommended) - Traffic Engineering Metric
14. Acknowledgments 14. Acknowledgments
Thanks to Chris Bowers for his review and comments. Thanks to Chris Bowers for his review and comments.
15. References 15. References
15.1. Normative References 15.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
skipping to change at page 16, line 41 skipping to change at page 17, line 13
2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8362>. 2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8362>.
15.2. Informative References 15.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-idr-ls-distribution] [I-D.ietf-idr-ls-distribution]
Gredler, H., Medved, J., Previdi, S., Farrel, A., and S. Gredler, H., Medved, J., Previdi, S., Farrel, A., and S.
Ray, "North-Bound Distribution of Link-State and TE Ray, "North-Bound Distribution of Link-State and TE
Information using BGP", draft-ietf-idr-ls-distribution-13 Information using BGP", draft-ietf-idr-ls-distribution-13
(work in progress), October 2015. (work in progress), October 2015.
[I-D.ietf-isis-te-app]
Ginsberg, L., Psenak, P., Previdi, S., Henderickx, W., and
J. Drake, "IS-IS TE Attributes per application", draft-
ietf-isis-te-app-05 (work in progress), October 2018.
[I-D.ietf-lsr-flex-algo] [I-D.ietf-lsr-flex-algo]
Psenak, P., Hegde, S., Filsfils, C., Talaulikar, K., and Psenak, P., Hegde, S., Filsfils, C., Talaulikar, K., and
A. Gulko, "IGP Flexible Algorithm", draft-ietf-lsr-flex- A. Gulko, "IGP Flexible Algorithm", draft-ietf-lsr-flex-
algo-00 (work in progress), May 2018. algo-00 (work in progress), May 2018.
[I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions] [I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions]
Psenak, P., Previdi, S., Filsfils, C., Gredler, H., Psenak, P., Previdi, S., Filsfils, C., Gredler, H.,
Shakir, R., Henderickx, W., and J. Tantsura, "OSPF Shakir, R., Henderickx, W., and J. Tantsura, "OSPF
Extensions for Segment Routing", draft-ietf-ospf-segment- Extensions for Segment Routing", draft-ietf-ospf-segment-
routing-extensions-25 (work in progress), April 2018. routing-extensions-25 (work in progress), April 2018.
 End of changes. 19 change blocks. 
21 lines changed or deleted 44 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.47. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/