Explicit Tracking with Wild Card Routes in Multicast VPN
draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-expl-track-12

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (bess WG)
Last updated 2018-10-25 (latest revision 2018-10-09)
Replaces draft-dolganow-bess-mvpn-expl-track
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status Proposed Standard
Formats plain text pdf html bibtex
Reviews SECDIR will not review this version
Stream WG state Submitted to IESG for Publication
Document shepherd Stephane Litkowski
Shepherd write-up Show (last changed 2018-04-20)
IESG IESG state IESG Evaluation::Revised I-D Needed
Consensus Boilerplate Yes
Telechat date
Has 3 DISCUSSes. Needs one more YES or NO OBJECTION position to pass.
Responsible AD Martin Vigoureux
Send notices to (None)
IANA IANA review state IANA OK - Actions Needed
IANA action state None
BESS WG                                                      A. Dolganow
Internet-Draft                                               J. Kotalwar
Updates: 6514 6625 7524 (if approved)                              Nokia
Intended status: Standards Track                           E. Rosen, Ed.
Expires: April 12, 2019                                         Z. Zhang
                                                  Juniper Networks, Inc.
                                                         October 9, 2018

        Explicit Tracking with Wild Card Routes in Multicast VPN
                   draft-ietf-bess-mvpn-expl-track-12

Abstract

   The MVPN specifications provide procedures to allow a multicast
   ingress node to invoke "explicit tracking" for a multicast flow or
   set of flows, thus learning the egress nodes for that flow or set of
   flows.  However, the specifications are not completely clear about
   how the explicit tracking procedures work in certain scenarios.  This
   document provides the necessary clarifications.  It also specifies a
   new, optimized explicit tracking procedure.  This new procedure
   allows an ingress node, by sending a single message, to request
   explicit tracking of each of a set of flows, where the set of flows
   is specified using a wildcard mechanism.  This document updates RFCs
   6514, 6625, and 7524.

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 https://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 April 12, 2019.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

Dolganow, et al.         Expires April 12, 2019                 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft    MVPN: Explicit Tracking and WildCards     October 2018

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (https://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.  The Explicit Tracking Flags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   3.  Match for Tracking vs. Match for Reception  . . . . . . . . .   6
   4.  Ingress Node Initiation of Tracking . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   5.  Egress Node Response to the Match for Tracking  . . . . . . .  10
     5.1.  General Egress Node Procedures  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     5.2.  Responding to the LIR-pF Flag . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     5.3.  When the Egress Node is an ABR or ASBR  . . . . . . . . .  14
   6.  Ingress Node Handling of Received Leaf A-D Routes with
       LIR-pF Set  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
   7.  Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
   8.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
   9.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
   10. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
     10.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
     10.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18

1.  Introduction

   [RFC6513] and [RFC6514] define the "Selective Provider Multicast
   Service Interface Auto-Discovery route" (S-PMSI A-D route).

   Per those RFCs, the S-PMSI A-D route contains a Network Layer
   Reachability Information (NLRI) field that identifies a particular
   multicast flow.  In the terminology of those RFCs, each flow is
   denoted by (C-S,C-G), where C-S is an IP source address and C-G is an
   IP multicast address, both in the address space of a VPN customer.
   The (C-S,C-G) of the multicast flow is encoded into the NLRI field.

   An S-PMSI A-D route also carries a PMSI Tunnel attribute (PTA).
   Typically, the PTA is used to identify a tunnel through the provider
   backbone network (a "P-tunnel").

   By originating an S-PMSI A-D route identifying a particular multicast
Show full document text