draft-ietf-ospf-cap-09.txt   draft-ietf-ospf-cap-10.txt 
Network Working Group A. Lindem (Editor) Network Working Group A. Lindem (Editor)
Internet-Draft N. Shen Internet-Draft Redback Networks
Intended status: Standards Track J. Vasseur Intended status: Standards Track N. Shen
Expires: April 23, 2007 Cisco Systems Expires: August 13, 2007 J. Vasseur
Cisco Systems
R. Aggarwal R. Aggarwal
Juniper Networks Juniper Networks
S. Shaffer S. Shaffer
BridgePort Networks BridgePort Networks
October 20, 2006 February 9, 2007
Extensions to OSPF for Advertising Optional Router Capabilities Extensions to OSPF for Advertising Optional Router Capabilities
draft-ietf-ospf-cap-09.txt draft-ietf-ospf-cap-10.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 40
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 April 23, 2007. This Internet-Draft will expire on August 13, 2007.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006). Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
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
for advertising optional router capabilities. A new Router for advertising optional router capabilities. A new Router
Information (RI) LSA is proposed for this purpose. In OSPFv2, the RI Information (RI) Link State Advertisement (LSA) is proposed for this
LSA will be implemented with a new opaque LSA type ID. In OSPFv3, purpose. In OSPFv2, the RI LSA will be implemented with a new opaque
the RI LSA will be implemented with a new LSA type function code. In LSA type ID. In OSPFv3, the RI LSA will be implemented with a new
both protocols, the RI LSA can be advertised at any of the defined LSA type function code. In both protocols, the RI LSA can be
flooding scopes (link, area, or AS). advertised at any of the defined flooding scopes (link, area, or AS).
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1. Requirements notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.1. Requirements notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. OSPF Router Information (RI) LSA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. OSPF Router Information (RI) LSA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.1. OSPFv2 Router Information (RI) Opaque LSA . . . . . . . . 4 2.1. OSPFv2 Router Information (RI) Opaque LSA . . . . . . . . 4
2.2. OSPFv3 Router Information (RI) Opaque LSA . . . . . . . . 5 2.2. OSPFv3 Router Information (RI) Opaque LSA . . . . . . . . 5
2.3. OSPF Router Informational Capabilities TLV . . . . . . . . 6 2.3. OSPF Router Informational Capabilities TLV . . . . . . . . 6
2.4. Assigned OSPF Router Informational Capability Bits . . . . 7 2.4. Assigned OSPF Router Informational Capability Bits . . . . 7
2.5. Flooding Scope of the Router Information LSA . . . . . . . 7 2.5. Flooding Scope of the Router Information LSA . . . . . . . 7
3. Router Information LSA Opaque Usage and Applicability . . . . 8 3. Router Information LSA Opaque Usage and Applicability . . . . 8
4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Appendix A. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Appendix A. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 14 Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 15
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
It is useful for routers in an OSPFv2 [OSPF] or OSPFv3 [OSPFV3] It is useful for routers in an OSPFv2 [OSPF] or OSPFv3 [OSPFV3]
routing domain to know the capabilities of their neighbors and other routing domain to know the capabilities of their neighbors and other
routers in the routing domain. This can be useful for both the routers in the routing domain. This can be useful for both the
advertisement and discovery of OSPFv2 and OSPFv3 capabilities. advertisement and discovery of OSPFv2 and OSPFv3 capabilities.
Throughout this document, OSPF will be used when the specification is Throughout this document, OSPF will be used when the specification is
applicable to both OSPFv2 and OSPFv3. Similarly, OSPFv2 or OSPFv3 applicable to both OSPFv2 and OSPFv3. Similarly, OSPFv2 or OSPFv3
will be used when the text is protocol specific. will be used when the text is protocol specific.
skipping to change at page 3, line 30 skipping to change at page 3, line 30
new LSAs in OSPFv3. For existing OSPF capabilities, backward new LSAs in OSPFv3. For existing OSPF capabilities, backward
compatibility issues dictate that this advertisement is used compatibility issues dictate that this advertisement is used
primarily for informational purposes. For future OSPF features, this primarily for informational purposes. For future OSPF features, this
advertisement MAY be used as the sole mechanism for advertisement and advertisement MAY be used as the sole mechanism for advertisement and
discovery. discovery.
1.1. Requirements notation 1.1. Requirements notation
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC2119 [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC-KEYWORDS].
2. OSPF Router Information (RI) LSA 2. OSPF Router Information (RI) LSA
OSPF routers MAY optionally advertise their optional capabilities in OSPF routers MAY optionally advertise their optional capabilities in
a link-scoped, area-scoped, or AS-scoped LSA. For existing OSPF a link-scoped, area-scoped, or AS-scoped LSA. For existing OSPF
capabilities, this advertisement will be used primarily for capabilities, this advertisement will be used primarily for
informational purposes. Future OSPF features could use the RI LSA as informational purposes. Future OSPF features could use the RI LSA as
the sole mechanism for advertisement and discovery. The RI LSA will the sole mechanism for advertisement and discovery. The RI LSA will
be originated initially when an OSPF router instance is created and be originated initially when an OSPF router instance is created and
whenever one of the advertised capabilities is configured or changed. whenever one of the advertised capabilities is configured or changed.
skipping to change at page 7, line 18 skipping to change at page 7, line 18
The following informational capability bits assigned: The following informational capability bits assigned:
Bit Capabilities Bit Capabilities
0 OSPF graceful restart capable [GRACE] 0 OSPF graceful restart capable [GRACE]
1 OSPF graceful restart helper [GRACE] 1 OSPF graceful restart helper [GRACE]
2 OSPF Stub Router support [STUB] 2 OSPF Stub Router support [STUB]
3 OSPF Traffic Engineering support [TE] 3 OSPF Traffic Engineering support [TE]
4 OSPF point-to-point over LAN [P2PLAN] 4 OSPF point-to-point over LAN [P2PLAN]
5 OSPF Experimental TE [EXPTE] 5 OSPF Experimental TE [EXP-TE]
6-31 Future assignments 6-31 Future assignments
OSPF Router Informational Capabilities Bits OSPF Router Informational Capabilities Bits
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
S1 and S2 bits in the LSA type determine flooding scope. If AS wide S1 and S2 bits in the LSA type determine flooding scope. If AS wide
skipping to change at page 8, line 15 skipping to change at page 8, line 15
3. Router Information LSA Opaque Usage and Applicability 3. Router Information LSA Opaque Usage and Applicability
The purpose of the Router Information (RI) LSA is to advertise The purpose of the Router Information (RI) LSA is to advertise
information relating to the aggregate OSPF router. Normally, this information relating to the aggregate OSPF router. Normally, this
should be confined to TLVs with a single value or very few values. should be confined to TLVs with a single value or very few values.
It is not meant to be a generic container to carry any and all It is not meant to be a generic container to carry any and all
information. The intent is to both limit the size of the RI LSA to information. The intent is to both limit the size of the RI LSA to
the point where an OSPF router will always be able to contain the the point where an OSPF router will always be able to contain the
TLVs in a single LSA and to keep the task of determining what has TLVs in a single LSA and to keep the task of determining what has
changed between LSA instances reasonably simple. Hence, discretion changed between LSA instances reasonably simple. Hence, discretion
and sound engineering judgment MUST be adhered to when deciding and sound engineering judgment will need to be applied when deciding
whether newly proposed TLV(s) in support of a new application are whether newly proposed TLV(s) in support of a new application are
advertised in the RI LSA or warrant the creation of an application advertised in the RI LSA or warrant the creation of an application
specific LSA. specific LSA.
4. Security Considerations 4. Security Considerations
The function described in this document does not create any new This document describes both a generic mechanism for advertising
security issues for the OSPF protocol. Security considerations for router capabilities and a TLV for advertising informational
the base OSPF protocol are covered in [OSPF] and [OSPFV3]. capability bits. The latter TLV is less critical than the topology
information currently advertised by the base OSPF protocol. The
security considerations for the generic mechanism are dependent on
the future application and, as such, should be described as
additional capabilities are proposed for advertisement. Security
considerations for 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 OSPFv3 LSA type function code 18 will need to be reserved for New registries will need to be defined for the following purposes:
the OSPFv3 RI LSA.
New registries are defined for the following purposes: 1. Registry for OSPFv3 LSA Function Codes - This new top-level
registry will be comprised of the fields Value, LSA function code
name, and Document Reference. The OSPFv3 LSA function code is
defined in section A.4.2.1 of [OSPFV3]. The OSPFv3 LSA function
code 12 will need to be reserved for the OSPFv3 Router
Information (RI) LSA.
1. Registry for OSPF RI TLVs - The value of 1 for the capabilities +-----------+--------------------+
TLV is defined herein. All TLV additions are subject to review | Range | Assignment Policy |
by an expert designated by the IESG. +-----------+--------------------+
| 0 | Not to be assigned |
| | |
| 1-9 | Already assigned |
| | |
| 10-255 | Standards Action |
| | |
| 256-8175 | Reserved |
| | |
| 8176-8183 | Experimentation |
| | |
| 8184-8191 | Vendor Private Use |
+-----------+--------------------+
2. Registry for OSPF Router Informational Capability Bits - The OSPFv3 LSA Function Codes
values defined in Section 2.3. All Router Informational
Capability TLV additions are subject to review by an expert * OSPFv3 LSA function codes in the range 256-8175 are for
designated by the IESG. experimental use; these will not be registered with IANA and
MUST NOT be mentioned by RFCs.
* OSPFv3 LSA function codes in the range 8176-8183 are not to be
assigned at this time. Before any assignments can be made in
this range, there MUST be a Standards Track RFC that specifies
IANA Considerations that covers the range being assigned.
* OSPFv3 LSAs with an LSA Function Code in the Vendor Private
Use range 8184-8191 MUST include the Vendor Enterprise Code as
the first four octets following the 20 octets of LSA header.
* If a new LSA Function Code is documented, the documentation
MUST include the valid combinations of the U, S2 and S1 bits
for the LSA. It SHOULD also describe how the Link State ID is
to be assigned.
2. Registry for OSPF RI TLVs - This top-level registry will be
comprised of the fields Value, TLV Name, and Document Reference.
The value of 1 for the capabilities TLV is defined herein.
+-------------+--------------------+
| Range | Assignment Policy |
+-------------+--------------------+
| 0 | Not to be assigned |
| | |
| 1 | Already assigned |
| | |
| 2-32767 | Standards Action |
| | |
| 32768-32777 | Experimentation |
| | |
| 32778-65535 | Reserved |
+-----------+----------------------+
OSPF RI TLVs
* Types in the range 32768-32777 are for experimental use; these
will not be registered with IANA and MUST NOT be mentioned by
RFCs.
* Types in the range 32778-65535 are not to be assigned at this
time. Before any assignments can be made in this range, there
MUST be a Standards Track RFC that specifies IANA
Considerations that covers the range being assigned.
3. Registry for OSPF Router Informational Capability Bits - This
sub-registry of the OSPF RI TLV registry will be comprised of the
fields Bit Number, Capability Name, and Document Reference. The
values are defined in Section 2.3. All Router Informational
Capability TLV additions are to be assigned through standards
action.
6. References 6. References
6.1. Normative References 6.1. Normative References
[OPAQUE] Coltun, R., "The OSPF Opaque LSA Option", RFC 2370, [OPAQUE] Coltun, R., "The OSPF Opaque LSA Option", RFC 2370,
July 1998. July 1998.
[OSPF] Moy, J., "OSPF Version 2", RFC 2328, April 1998. [OSPF] Moy, J., "OSPF Version 2", RFC 2328, April 1998.
[OSPFV3] Coltun, R., Ferguson, D., and J. Moy, "OSPF for IPv6", [OSPFV3] Coltun, R., Ferguson, D., and J. Moy, "OSPF for IPv6",
RFC 2740, December 1999. RFC 2740, December 1999.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFC's to Indicate [RFC-KEYWORDS]
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 [EXP-TE] Srisuresh, P. and P. Joseph, "OSPF OSPF-TE: An
experimental extension to OSPF for Traffic Engineering", experimental extension to OSPF for Traffic Engineering",
draft-srisuresh-ospf-te-07.txt (work in progress). 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 progress). draft-ietf-isis-igp-p2p-over-lan-05.txt (work in
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.
Appendix A. Acknowledgments Appendix A. Acknowledgments
The idea for this work grew out of a conversation with Andrew Partan The idea for this work grew out of a conversation with Andrew Partan
and we would like to thank him for his contribution. The authors and we would like to thank him for his contribution. The authors
would like to thanks Peter Psenak for his review and helpful comments would like to thanks Peter Psenak for his review and helpful comments
on early versions of the draft. on early versions of the draft.
Comments from Abhay Roy, Vishwas Manral, Vivek Dubey, and Adrian Comments from Abhay Roy, Vishwas Manral, Vivek Dubey, and Adrian
Farrel have been incorporated into later draft versions. Farrel have been incorporated into later draft versions.
The RFC text was produced using Marshall Rose's xml2rfc tool. The RFC text was produced using Marshall Rose's xml2rfc tool.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Acee Lindem Acee Lindem
Cisco Systems Redback Networks
7025 Kit Creek Road 102 Carric Bend Court
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 Cary, NC 27519
USA USA
Email: acee@cisco.com Email: acee@redback.com
Naiming Shen Naiming Shen
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
225 West Tasman Drive 225 West Tasman Drive
San Jose, CA 95134 San Jose, CA 95134
USA USA
Email: naiming@cisco.com Email: naiming@cisco.com
Jean-Philippe Vasseur Jean-Philippe Vasseur
skipping to change at page 14, line 7 skipping to change at page 15, line 7
Scott Shaffer Scott Shaffer
BridgePort Networks BridgePort Networks
One Main Street, 7th Floor One Main Street, 7th Floor
Cambridge, MA 02142 Cambridge, MA 02142
USA USA
Email: sshafferl@bridgeport-networks.com Email: sshafferl@bridgeport-networks.com
Full Copyright Statement Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006). Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
retain all their rights. retain all their rights.
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND
ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF
INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Intellectual Property Intellectual Property
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
this document or the extent to which any license under such rights this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
 End of changes. 22 change blocks. 
46 lines changed or deleted 122 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.33. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/