Requirements for the extension of the IGMP/MLD proxy functionality to support multiple upstream interfaces
draft-ietf-pim-multiple-upstreams-reqs-02

The information below is for an old version of the document
Document Type Active Internet-Draft (pim WG)
Last updated 2016-07-07
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats pdf htmlized bibtex
Stream WG state WG Document
Document shepherd No shepherd assigned
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
PIM Working Group                                          LM. Contreras
Internet-Draft                                                Telefonica
Intended status: Experimental                              CJ. Bernardos
Expires: January 8, 2017                Universidad Carlos III de Madrid
                                                               H. Asaeda
                                                                    NICT
                                                            July 7, 2016

 Requirements for the extension of the IGMP/MLD proxy functionality to
                  support multiple upstream interfaces
               draft-ietf-pim-multiple-upstreams-reqs-02

Abstract

   The purpose of this document is to define the requirements for a MLD
   (for IPv6) or IGMP (for IPv4) proxy with multiple interfaces covering
   a variety of applicability scenarios.

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 http://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 January 8, 2017.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2016 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
   (http://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

Contreras, et al.        Expires January 8, 2017                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft  Reqs for MLD proxy with multiple upstream      July 2016

   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   3.  Problem statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   4.  Scenarios of applicability  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     4.1.  Fixed network scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
       4.1.1.  Multicast wholesale offer for residential services  .   5
         4.1.1.1.  Requirements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
       4.1.2.  Multicast resiliency  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
         4.1.2.1.  Requirements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
       4.1.3.  Load balancing for multicast traffic in the metro
               segment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
         4.1.3.1.  Requirements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
       4.1.4.  Network merging with different multicast services . .   6
         4.1.4.1.  Requirements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
       4.1.5.  Summary of the requirements needed for fixed network
               scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     4.2.  Mobile network scenarios  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   5.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   6.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   7.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   8.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     8.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     8.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9

1.  Introduction

   The aim of this document is to define the functionality that an IGMP/
   MLD proxy with multiple upstream interfaces should have in order to
   support different scenarios of applicability in both fixed and mobile
   networks.  This compatibility is needed in order to simplify node
   functionality and to ensure an easier deployment of multicast
   capabilities in all the use cases described in this document.

2.  Terminology

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in RFC2119 [RFC2119].

   This document uses the terminology defined in RFC4605 [RFC4605].
   Specifically, the definition of Upstream and Downstream interfaces,
Show full document text