draft-ietf-ospf-cap-07.txt   draft-ietf-ospf-cap-08.txt 
Network Working Group A. Lindem (Editor) Network Working Group A. Lindem (Editor)
Internet-Draft N. Shen Internet-Draft N. Shen
Expires: November 20, 2005 J. Vasseur Expires: June 3, 2006 J. Vasseur
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
R. Aggarwal R. Aggarwal
Juniper Networks Juniper Networks
S. Shaffer S. Shaffer
BridgePort Networks BridgePort Networks
May 19, 2005 November 30, 2005
Extensions to OSPF for Advertising Optional Router Capabilities Extensions to OSPF for Advertising Optional Router Capabilities
draft-ietf-ospf-cap-07.txt draft-ietf-ospf-cap-08.txt
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79. aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
skipping to change at page 1, line 39 skipping to change at page 1, line 39
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."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on November 20, 2005. This Internet-Draft will expire on June 3, 2006.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005). Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005).
Abstract Abstract
It is useful for routers in an OSPFv2 or OSPFv3 routing domain to It is useful for routers in an OSPFv2 or OSPFv3 routing domain to
know the capabilities of their neighbors and other routers in the know the capabilities of their neighbors and other routers in the
routing domain. This draft proposes extensions to OSPFv2 and OSPFv3 routing domain. This draft proposes extensions to OSPFv2 and OSPFv3
skipping to change at page 6, line 7 skipping to change at page 6, line 7
When a new Router Information LSA TLV is defined, the specification When a new Router Information LSA TLV is defined, the specification
MUST explicitly state whether the TLV is applicable to OSPFv2 only, MUST explicitly state whether the TLV is applicable to OSPFv2 only,
OSPFv3 only, or both OSPFv2 and OSPFv3. OSPFv3 only, or both OSPFv2 and OSPFv3.
2.3 OSPF Router Informational Capabilities TLV 2.3 OSPF Router Informational Capabilities TLV
The first defined TLV in the body of an RI LSA is the Router The first defined TLV in the body of an RI LSA is the Router
Informational Capabilities TLV. A router advertising an RI LSA MAY Informational Capabilities TLV. A router advertising an RI LSA MAY
include the Router Informational Capabilities TLV. If included, it include the Router Informational Capabilities TLV. If included, it
MUST be the first TLV in the LSA. Additionally, the TLV MUST MUST be the first TLV in the LSA. Additionally, the TLV MUST
accurately reflect the OSPF router's capabilities in the scope it is accurately reflect the OSPF router's capabilities in the scope
advertised. However, the informational capabilities advertised have advertised. However, the informational capabilities advertised have
no impact on the OSPF's operation - they are advertised purely for no impact on the OSPF's operation - they are advertised purely for
informational purposes informational purposes
The format of the Router Informational Capabilities TLV is as The format of the Router Informational Capabilities TLV is as
follows: follows:
0 1 2 3 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 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
skipping to change at page 6, line 47 skipping to change at page 6, line 47
The following informational capability bits assigned: The following informational capability bits assigned:
Bit Capabilities Bit Capabilities
1 OSPF graceful restart capable [GRACE] 1 OSPF graceful restart capable [GRACE]
2 OSPF graceful restart helper [GRACE] 2 OSPF graceful restart helper [GRACE]
3 OSPF Stub Router support [STUB] 3 OSPF Stub Router support [STUB]
4 OSPF Traffic Engineering support [TE] 4 OSPF Traffic Engineering support [TE]
5 OSPF point-to-point over LAN [P2PLAN] 5 OSPF point-to-point over LAN [P2PLAN]
6-31 Future assignments 6 OSPF Experimental TE [EXPTE]
7-31 Future assignments
2.5 Flooding Scope of the Router Information LSA 2.5 Flooding Scope of the Router Information LSA
The flooding scope for a Router Information LSA is determined by the The flooding scope for a Router Information LSA is determined by the
LSA type. For OSPFv2, type 9 (link-scoped), type 10 (area-scoped), LSA type. For OSPFv2, type 9 (link-scoped), type 10 (area-scoped),
or a type 11 (AS-scoped) opaque LSA may be flooded. For OSPFv3, the or a type 11 (AS-scoped) opaque LSA may be flooded. For OSPFv3, the
flooding scope is determined by the S1 and S2 bits in the LSA type. flooding scope is determined by the S1 and S2 bits in the LSA type.
If AS wide flooding scope is chosen, the originating router should If AS wide flooding scope is chosen, the originating router should
also advertise area scoped LSA(s) into any attached NSSA area(s). An also advertise area scoped LSA(s) into any attached NSSA area(s). An
OSPF router MAY advertise different capabilities when both NSSA area OSPF router MAY advertise different capabilities when both NSSA area
scoped LSA(s) and an AS scoped LSA is advertised. This allows scoped LSA(s) and an AS scoped LSA is advertised. This allows
functional capabilities to be limited in scope. For example, a functional capabilities to be limited in scope. For example, a
router may be an area border router but only support traffic router may be an area border router but only support traffic
engineering (TE) in a subset of its attached areas. Another example engineering (TE) in a subset of its attached areas.
relates to the capability of a node to be part of a specific MPLS
Traffic Engineering mesh group. When the mesh group is contained
within an OSPF area, the flooding scope of such capability should be
restricted to the corresponding OSPF area. Conversely, some mesh
groups may require routing domain flooding scope (see [TE-AUTO]).
The choice of flooding scope is made by the advertising router and is The choice of flooding scope is made by the advertising router and is
a matter of local policy. The originating router MAY advertise a matter of local policy. The originating router MAY advertise
multiple RI LSAs as long as the flooding scopes differ. TLV flooding multiple RI LSAs as long as the flooding scopes differ. TLV flooding
scope rules will be specified on a per-TLV basis and MUST be scope rules will be specified on a per-TLV basis and MUST be
specified in the accompanying specifications for new Router specified in the accompanying specifications for new Router
Information LSA TLVs. Information LSA TLVs.
3. Router Information LSA Opaque Usage and Applicability 3. Router Information LSA Opaque Usage and Applicability
skipping to change at page 10, line 13 skipping to change at page 10, line 13
the base OSPF protocol are covered in [OSPF] and [OSPFV3]. the base OSPF protocol are covered in [OSPF] and [OSPFV3].
5. IANA Considerations 5. IANA Considerations
The following IANA assignments are to be made from existing The following IANA assignments are to be made from existing
registries: registries:
1. The OSPFv2 opaque LSA type 4 will need to be reserved for the 1. The OSPFv2 opaque LSA type 4 will need to be reserved for the
OSPFv2 RI opaque LSA. OSPFv2 RI opaque LSA.
2. The OSPFv2 LSA type function code 18 will need to be reserved for 2. The OSPFv3 LSA type function code 18 will need to be reserved for
the OSPFv3 RI LSA. the OSPFv3 RI LSA.
New registries are defined for the following purposes: New registries are defined for the following purposes:
1. Registry for OSPF RI TLVs - The value of 1 for the capabilities 1. Registry for OSPF RI TLVs - The value of 1 for the capabilities
TLV is defined herein. All TLV additions are subject to OSPF WG TLV is defined herein. All TLV additions are subject to OSPF WG
review. review.
2. Registry for OSPF Router Informational Capability Bits - The 2. Registry for OSPF Router Informational Capability Bits - The
values defined in Section 2.3. All Router Informational values defined in Section 2.3. All Router Informational
skipping to change at page 11, line 25 skipping to change at page 11, line 25
RFC 2740, December 1999. RFC 2740, December 1999.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFC's to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFC's to Indicate
Requirement Levels", RFC 2119, March 1997. Requirement Levels", RFC 2119, March 1997.
[TE] Katz, D., Yeung, D., and K. Kompella, "Traffic Engineering [TE] Katz, D., Yeung, D., and K. Kompella, "Traffic Engineering
Extensions to OSPF", RFC 3630, September 2003. Extensions to OSPF", RFC 3630, September 2003.
6.2 Informative References 6.2 Informative References
[EXPTE] Srisuresh, P. and P. Joseph, "OSPF OSPF-TE: An
experimental extension to OSPF for Traffic Engineering",
draft-srisuresh-ospf-te-07.txt (work in progress).
[GRACE] Moy, J., Pillay-Esnault, P., and A. Lindem, "Graceful OSPF [GRACE] Moy, J., Pillay-Esnault, P., and A. Lindem, "Graceful OSPF
Restart", RFC 3623, November 2003. Restart", RFC 3623, November 2003.
[P2PLAN] Shen, N. and A. Zinin, "Point-to-point operation over LAN [P2PLAN] Shen, N. and A. Zinin, "Point-to-point operation over LAN
in link-state routing protocols", in link-state routing protocols",
draft-ietf-isis-igp-p2p-over-lan-05.txt (work in draft-ietf-isis-igp-p2p-over-lan-05.txt (work in progress).
progress).
[STUB] Retana, A., Nguyen, L., White, R., Zinin, A., and D. [STUB] Retana, A., Nguyen, L., White, R., Zinin, A., and D.
McPherson, "OSPF Stub Router Advertisement", RFC 3137, McPherson, "OSPF Stub Router Advertisement", RFC 3137,
June 2001. June 2001.
[TE-AUTO] Vasseur, J. and J. Le Roux, "Routing extensions for
discovery of Multiprotocol (MPLS) Label Switch Router
(LSR) Traffic Engineering (TE) mesh membership",
draft-vasseur-ccamp-automesh-00.txt (work in progress).
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Acee Lindem Acee Lindem
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
7025 Kit Creek Road 7025 Kit Creek Road
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
USA USA
Email: acee@cisco.com Email: acee@cisco.com
Naiming Shen Naiming Shen
 End of changes. 11 change blocks. 
20 lines changed or deleted 14 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.27, available from http://www.levkowetz.com/ietf/tools/rfcdiff/