OSPF LLS Extensions for Local Interface ID Advertisement
draft-ietf-ospf-lls-interface-id-09

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (lsr WG)
Last updated 2018-11-08 (latest revision 2018-11-04)
Replaces draft-ppsenak-ospf-lls-interface-id
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status Proposed Standard
Formats plain text pdf html bibtex
Reviews
Stream WG state Submitted to IESG for Publication
Document shepherd Yingzhen Qu
Shepherd write-up Show (last changed 2018-07-08)
IESG IESG state RFC Ed Queue
Consensus Boilerplate Yes
Telechat date
Responsible AD Alvaro Retana
Send notices to Yingzhen Qu <yingzhen.ietf@gmail.com>, aretana.ietf@gmail.com
IANA IANA review state IANA OK - Actions Needed
IANA action state RFC-Ed-Ack
RFC Editor RFC Editor state EDIT
Open Shortest Path First IGP                              P. Psenak, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                             K. Talaulikar
Intended status: Standards Track                     Cisco Systems, Inc.
Expires: May 8, 2019                                       W. Henderickx
                                                                   Nokia
                                                       P. Pillay-Esnault
                                                                  Huawei
                                                        November 4, 2018

        OSPF LLS Extensions for Local Interface ID Advertisement
                  draft-ietf-ospf-lls-interface-id-09

Abstract

   Every OSPF interface is assigned an identifier, Interface ID, which
   uniquely identifies the interface on the router.  In some cases it is
   useful to know the assigned Interface ID on the remote side of the
   adjacency (Remote Interface ID).

   This draft describes the extensions to OSPF link-local signalling
   (LLS) to advertise the Local Interface Identifier.

Requirements Language

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
   "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
   BCP14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
   capitals, as shown here.

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 May 8, 2019.

Psenak, et al.             Expires May 8, 2019                  [Page 1]
Internet-DraftOSPF Link Local Signalling (LLS) Extensions fNovember 2018

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2018 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
   (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
     1.1.  Interface ID Exchange using TE Opaque LSA . . . . . . . .   3
   2.  Interface ID Exchange using OSPF LLS  . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.1.  Local Interface Identifier TLV  . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   3.  Backward Compatibility with RFC 4203  . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   5.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   6.  Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   7.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     7.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     7.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6

1.  Introduction

   Every OSPF interface is assigned an Interface ID, which uniquely
   identifies the interface on the router.  [RFC2328] uses this
   Interface ID in the Router-LSA Link Data for unnumbered links and
   uses the value of the MIB-II IfIndex [RFC2863].  [RFC4203] refers to
   these Interface IDs as the Link Local/Remote Identifiers and defines
   a way to advertise and use them for Generalized Multi-Protocol Label
   Switching (GMPLS) purposes.  [RFC7684] defines a way to advertise
   Local/Remote Interface IDs in the OSPFv2 Extended Link LSA.

   There is a known OSPFv2 protocol problem in verifying the bi-
   directional connectivity with parallel unnumbered links.  If there
   are two parallel unnumbered links between a pair of routers and each
   link is only advertised from single direction, such two
   unidirectional parallel links could be considered as a valid single
   bidirectional link during the OSPF route computation on some other
   router.  If each link is advertised with both its Local and Remote

Psenak, et al.             Expires May 8, 2019                  [Page 2]
Show full document text