Skip to main content

Multicast Router State Synchronization in EVPN Networks
draft-jot-bess-evpn-mcast-router-sync-00

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Authors Jorge Rabadan , Olivier Dornon , Tanmoy Kundu , Nitsan Dolev Elfassy
Last updated 2026-07-06
RFC stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date (None)
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
draft-jot-bess-evpn-mcast-router-sync-00
BGP Enabled ServiceS                                     J. Rabadan, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                                 O. Dornon
Intended status: Standards Track                                T. Kundu
Expires: 7 January 2027                                            Nokia
                                                                N. Dolev
                                                                  Ribbon
                                                             6 July 2026

        Multicast Router State Synchronization in EVPN Networks
                draft-jot-bess-evpn-mcast-router-sync-00

Abstract

   Ethernet VPN (EVPN) networks support multicast applications in which
   multicast routers and multicast hosts are attached to the same
   tenant.  Existing specifications define how Provider Edge (PE)
   devices synchronize the Internet Group Management Protocol (IGMP) and
   Multicast Listener Discovery (MLD) membership state of multihomed
   multicast hosts, and how Optimized Inter-Subnet Multicast (OISM)
   forwarding interacts with multicast routers via PIM EVPN Gateways.
   However, none of the existing specifications addresses the
   synchronization of the state associated with a multicast router (an
   IGMP/MLD Querier or a Protocol Independent Multicast (PIM) router)
   when that router is multihomed to a set of EVPN PEs.  This document
   specifies a new EVPN route, the Multicast Router Discovery (MRD)
   route, and the procedures to synchronize multicast router state
   across the PEs of an Ethernet Segment, for routers attached to
   multicast Broadcast Domains or to Layer 3 interfaces.

About This Document

   This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC.

   The latest revision of this draft can be found at
   https://jorabada.github.io/draft-evpn-mcast-router-synch/draft-jot-
   bess-evpn-mcast-router-sync.html.  Status information for this
   document may be found at https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-jot-
   bess-evpn-mcast-router-sync/.

   Discussion of this document takes place on the BGP Enabled ServiceS
   Working Group mailing list (mailto:bess@ietf.org), which is archived
   at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/bess/.  Subscribe at
   https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bess/.

   Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at
   https://github.com/jorabada/draft-evpn-mcast-router-synch.

Rabadan, et al.          Expires 7 January 2027                 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft            EVPN Multicast Router                July 2026

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 7 January 2027.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2026 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 Revised BSD License text as
   described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
   provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     1.1.  Terminology and Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     1.2.  Problem Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     1.3.  Solution  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   2.  The EVPN Multicast Router Discovery (MRD) Route . . . . . . .   6
     2.1.  MRD Route Encoding  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     2.2.  PIM Hello Options Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     2.3.  Route Targets and Advertisement Modes . . . . . . . . . .  10
     2.4.  Procedures for Advertising the MRD Route  . . . . . . . .  11
     2.5.  Procedures for Receiving and Processing the MRD Route . .  12
   3.  Synchronization of PIM State on Ethernet Segments . . . . . .  14
     3.1.  P Flag in the EVPN Route Types 7 and 8  . . . . . . . . .  15
   4.  Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
     4.1.  EVPN-based IGMP/MLD Proxy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
     4.2.  EVPN Multihoming for Layer 3 Interfaces . . . . . . . . .  16

Rabadan, et al.          Expires 7 January 2027                 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft            EVPN Multicast Router                July 2026

     4.3.  EVPN Multihoming for EVPN Multicast (OISM)  . . . . . . .  17
   5.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
   6.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
   7.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
     7.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
     7.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  21
   Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  21
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  22

1.  Introduction

   EVPN [RFC7432] is widely deployed to provide Layer 2 and Layer 3
   connectivity to tenant systems that may be either multicast hosts or
   multicast routers.  EVPN includes mechanisms to reduce the flooding
   of control messages and to make the distribution of multicast state
   efficient.  In particular, [RFC9251] specifies how IGMP and MLD
   membership reports are signaled across the EVPN network using the
   Selective Multicast Ethernet Tag (SMET) route, and how the membership
   state of a multihomed host is synchronized across the PEs of an
   Ethernet Segment (ES) by means of the IGMP/MLD Join Synch and Leave
   Synch routes (EVPN route types 7 and 8).

   The synchronization procedures in [RFC9251] are defined for
   multihomed multicast _hosts_. They do not cover the case in which the
   device multihomed to the EVPN PEs is a multicast _router_ that uses
   IGMP, MLD, or PIM, and whose router-level state (for example, its
   role as an IGMP/MLD Querier, or its PIM neighbor adjacency and
   Designated Router (DR) attributes) needs to be consistently presented
   by all the PEs of the ES.

   This document specifies a solution that extends the EVPN multihoming
   state synchronization model from multicast hosts to multicast
   routers.  The solution introduces a new EVPN route, the Multicast
   Router Discovery (MRD) route, that carries the information required
   to synchronize the multicast router state across the PEs attached to
   the same ES.  The MRD route applies to multicast routers attached to
   multicast Broadcast Domains (BDs), as in [RFC9251] and [RFC9625], and
   to multicast routers attached to Layer 3 interfaces, as in
   [I-D.ietf-bess-evpn-l3mh-proto].

1.1.  Terminology and Conventions

   This document uses the following acronyms and terms, listed in
   alphabetical order:

   AC:  Attachment Circuit, as defined in [RFC7432].

   BD:  Broadcast Domain.  A set of EVPN Attachment Circuits and

Rabadan, et al.          Expires 7 January 2027                 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft            EVPN Multicast Router                July 2026

      emulated segments that belong to the same Layer 2 forwarding
      domain, as used in [RFC9625].

   BGP:  Border Gateway Protocol.

   DF:  Designated Forwarder, as defined in [RFC7432].

   DR:  Designated Router, as defined in [RFC7761].

   ES:  Ethernet Segment, as defined in [RFC7432].

   ESI:  Ethernet Segment Identifier, as defined in [RFC7432].

   EVI:  EVPN Instance, as defined in [RFC7432].

   EVPN:  Ethernet VPN, as defined in [RFC7432].

   GenID:  Generation Identifier, as defined for PIM in [RFC7761].

   IGMP:  Internet Group Management Protocol [RFC3376].

   IRB:  Integrated Routing and Bridging, as used in [RFC9135] and
      [RFC9625].

   MLD:  Multicast Listener Discovery [RFC3810].

   MRD:  Multicast Router Discovery route, the EVPN route defined in
      this document.

   NLRI:  Network Layer Reachability Information.

   OISM:  Optimized Inter-Subnet Multicast, as defined in [RFC9625].

   PE:  Provider Edge device.

   PEG:  PIM EVPN Gateway, as defined in [RFC9625].

   PIM:  Protocol Independent Multicast [RFC7761].

   RD:  Route Distinguisher, as defined in [RFC7432].

   RT:  Route Target.

   SMET:  Selective Multicast Ethernet Tag route, as defined in
      [RFC9251].

Rabadan, et al.          Expires 7 January 2027                 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft            EVPN Multicast Router                July 2026

   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 BCP
   14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
   capitals, as shown here.

1.2.  Problem Statement

   This document considers multicast routers that are multihomed to a
   set of EVPN PEs in an all-active or single-active Ethernet Segment.
   Two attachment models are in scope:

   *  Multicast routers multihomed to multicast Broadcast Domains in
      EVPN PEs, as described in [RFC9251] and [RFC9625].

   *  Multicast routers multihomed to Layer 3 interfaces, as described
      in [I-D.ietf-bess-evpn-l3mh-proto].

   The existing specifications leave the following gaps:

   For IGMP/MLD routers, [RFC9251] assumes that the IGMP/MLD membership
   state of a multihomed host is synchronized across the PEs of an ES by
   means of the EVPN route types 7 and 8, and that the EVPN network acts
   as a distributed IGMP/MLD Querier for the attached hosts.  [RFC9251]
   does not, however, cover the case where the operator wants the
   Querier to be a multicast router attached to a BD, and where the PEs
   of the ES need to present that router's Querier state consistently.
   There is no specification today for synchronizing the IGMP/MLD
   Querier state of a multihomed multicast router across EVPN PEs.

   For PIM routers, [RFC9625] covers the interaction of the EVPN network
   with external multicast routers through PIM EVPN Gateways (PEGs), and
   also addresses single-homed PIM routers connected to OISM BDs.
   [RFC9625] does not, however, specify the synchronization of PIM
   neighbor state when those PIM routers are multihomed to EVPN PEs, be
   it on BDs as in [RFC9625] or on Layer 3 interfaces as in
   [I-D.ietf-bess-evpn-l3mh-proto].  As a consequence, the PIM neighbor
   adjacency, DR Priority, and Generation ID of a multihomed PIM router
   are known only to the PE(s) that received the PIM Hello on a local
   AC, and cannot be presented consistently by all the PEs of the ES.

   This inconsistency breaks PIM operation on the ES.  A PE that did not
   receive the PIM Hello has no PIM neighbor adjacency for the
   multihomed router, and per [RFC7761] it SHOULD discard PIM Join/Prune
   messages received from a router from which it has not seen a PIM
   Hello message.  Therefore, when such a PE in the ES exists, Join/
   Prune messages received from the multihomed PIM router are dropped,
   multicast state is not created, and the corresponding multicast flows

Rabadan, et al.          Expires 7 January 2027                 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft            EVPN Multicast Router                July 2026

   are lost.  Synchronizing the PIM neighbor state across all the PEs of
   the ES is therefore required so that any PE, including the DF, can
   process PIM messages from the multihomed router and act on its behalf
   consistently.

1.3.  Solution

   The solution defined in this document is the specification of a new
   EVPN route, the Multicast Router Discovery (MRD) route, that
   synchronizes the multicast router state across the PEs attached to
   the same Ethernet Segment.  The MRD route was originally defined in
   [I-D.skr-bess-evpn-pim-proxy] as part of a specification of PIM proxy
   procedures in EVPN.  This document updates the encoding of the route
   with additional information and specifies its procedures for the
   synchronization of multihomed multicast routers that use IGMP, MLD,
   or PIM.

   A PE that discovers a multicast router on a local AC of a multihomed
   ES advertises an MRD route that encodes the router's IP address, the
   ESI of the AC, and the router's multicast role and protocol version
   in the NLRI.  For PIM routers, the additional PIM Hello options (DR
   Priority, Generation ID, and the secondary address list) are carried
   in a BGP Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute [RFC9012] using a new PIM
   Hello Options Sub-TLV.  The other PEs of the ES import the route and
   install the equivalent Querier or PIM neighbor state, so that any PE
   in the ES has the same multicast state for the multihomed router.

   In addition to synchronizing the multicast router state, this
   document synchronizes the PIM Join/Prune state of receivers reached
   through a multihomed PIM router across the PEs of the ES, by reusing
   the EVPN route types 7 and 8 of [RFC9251], as described in Section 3.

2.  The EVPN Multicast Router Discovery (MRD) Route

   This document defines a new EVPN route, the Multicast Router
   Discovery (MRD) route, and requests IANA to allocate a route type
   value in the EVPN route type registry (see Section 6).

2.1.  MRD Route Encoding

   Inspired by the EVPN NLRIs defined in [RFC7432], the MRD route uses
   the allocated route type and the route-type-specific field shown in
   Figure 1.

Rabadan, et al.          Expires 7 January 2027                 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft            EVPN Multicast Router                July 2026

   +-------------------------------------------------+
   | RD (8 octets)                                   |
   +-------------------------------------------------+
   | Ethernet Segment ID (10 octets)                 |
   +-------------------------------------------------+
   | Ethernet Tag ID (4 octets)                      |
   +-------------------------------------------------+
   | Originator Router Length (1 octet)              |
   +-------------------------------------------------+
   | Originator Router Address (variable)            |
   +-------------------------------------------------+
   | Multicast Router Length (1 octet)               |
   +-------------------------------------------------+
   | Multicast Router Address (variable)             |
   +-------------------------------------------------+
   | Flags (1 octet)                                 |
   +-------------------------------------------------+

              Figure 1: Multicast Router Discovery (MRD) Route

   The encoding of the route is defined as follows:

   *  The RD, ESI, and Ethernet Tag ID are defined as per [RFC7432] for
      MAC/IP routes.  When the route is used to synchronize a multihomed
      multicast router, the ESI encodes the Ethernet Segment of the AC
      on which the router was discovered, and the Ethernet Tag ID
      identifies the BD in VLAN-aware Bundle scenarios or, for Layer 3
      multihoming, the sub-interface, as per
      [I-D.ietf-bess-evpn-l3mh-proto].

   *  The Originator Router Length and Originator Router Address encode
      an IPv4 or IPv6 address that belongs to the advertising PE.  The
      Length is expressed in bits (32 for IPv4 or 128 for IPv6).

   *  The Multicast Router Length and Multicast Router Address encode
      the primary IP address of the discovered multicast router (the
      IGMP/MLD Querier address and/or the PIM neighbor address added to
      the PE's database).

   *  The Flags field is a one-octet field structured as shown in
      Figure 2.  The version flags (v1, v2, and v3) use the same bit
      positions as the EVPN Multicast Join Synch and Leave Synch routes
      in [RFC9251].

Rabadan, et al.          Expires 7 January 2027                 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft            EVPN Multicast Router                July 2026

   The remaining mandatory PIM Hello options of the discovered router
   (DR Priority, Generation ID, and the secondary address list) are not
   encoded in the NLRI.  For PIM routers (P=1), they are carried in the
   PIM Hello Options Sub-TLV of a BGP Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute, as
   described in Section 2.2.

     0  1  2  3  4  5  6  7
    +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
    | MBZ | Q| P| R|v3|v2|v1|
    +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+

                      Figure 2: MRD Route Flags Field

   The bits are defined as follows:

   *  v1 (bit 7, least significant bit): when set, it indicates that the
      encoded router is an IGMPv1 or MLDv1 Querier.

   *  v2 (bit 6): when set, it indicates that the encoded router is an
      IGMPv2 or MLDv2 Querier.

   *  v3 (bit 5): when set, it indicates that the encoded router is an
      IGMPv3 Querier.  For IPv6 (MLD) routes, this bit MUST be set to
      zero, consistent with [RFC9251].

   *  R (bit 4): reserved.  This bit MUST be set to zero on transmission
      and ignored on reception.

   *  P (bit 3): when set, it indicates that the encoded multicast
      router is a PIM router.

   *  Q (bit 2): when set, it indicates that the encoded multicast
      router is an IGMP/MLD Querier.

   *  MBZ (Must Be Zero, bits 0-1): reserved.  These bits MUST be set to
      zero on transmission and ignored on reception.

   The Q and P flags MAY be set simultaneously when the discovered
   router is both an IGMP/MLD Querier and a PIM router.  The version
   bits (v1, v2, v3) are relevant only when Q is set.  For IPv6 (MLD)
   routes, bit 7 indicates MLDv1 support and bit 6 indicates MLDv2
   support, as per [RFC9251].

   For BGP processing purposes, only the RD, the Ethernet Tag ID, the
   Originator Router Length and Address, and the (primary) Multicast
   Router Length and Address are considered part of the route key.  The
   Flags are not part of the route key, consistent with
   [I-D.skr-bess-evpn-pim-proxy].  The PIM Hello options carried in the

Rabadan, et al.          Expires 7 January 2027                 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft            EVPN Multicast Router                July 2026

   Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute (see Section 2.2) are a BGP path
   attribute and are not part of the route key either; a change in those
   options updates the existing route rather than creating a new one.

   Support for this route type is OPTIONAL.  An EVPN implementation that
   does not support this route type MUST ignore the route based on the
   unknown route type value, as specified in Section 5.4 of [RFC7606].

2.2.  PIM Hello Options Sub-TLV

   When the MRD route synchronizes a PIM router (Flags P=1), the PIM
   Hello options of the discovered router are carried in a BGP Tunnel
   Encapsulation Attribute [RFC9012] attached to the MRD route.  The
   Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute carries a Tunnel TLV whose Tunnel Type
   matches the tunnel used by the EVPN BD (for example, VXLAN), and
   within that Tunnel TLV this document defines a new sub-TLV, the PIM
   Hello Options Sub-TLV, shown in Figure 3.

   +-------------------------------------------------+
   | Type (1 octet)                                  |
   +-------------------------------------------------+
   | Length (1 or 2 octets)                          |
   +-------------------------------------------------+
   | PIM Hello Option: DR Priority (Type 19)         |
   +-------------------------------------------------+
   | PIM Hello Option: Generation ID (Type 20)       |
   +-------------------------------------------------+
   | PIM Hello Option: Address List (Type 24)        |
   +-------------------------------------------------+

                    Figure 3: PIM Hello Options Sub-TLV

   The fields of the sub-TLV are defined as follows:

   *  Type: a one-octet sub-TLV type, allocated by IANA from the "BGP
      Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute Sub-TLVs" registry (see Section 6).

   *  Length: the length of the Value field, encoded as a 1-octet field
      when the Type is in the range 0-127 and as a 2-octet field when
      the Type is in the range 128-255, as per [RFC9012].

Rabadan, et al.          Expires 7 January 2027                 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft            EVPN Multicast Router                July 2026

   *  Value: a sequence of PIM Hello options, each encoded with the
      OptionType, OptionLength, and OptionValue format defined in
      Section 4.9.2 of [RFC7761].  This document carries the DR Priority
      option (OptionType 19), the Generation ID option (OptionType 20),
      and the Address List option (OptionType 24), copied verbatim from
      the received PIM Hello.  The Address List option carries the
      secondary addresses of the multicast router and is omitted when
      the router has no secondary addresses.

   A PE originating an MRD route for a PIM router SHOULD include the DR
   Priority and Generation ID options and MUST include the Address List
   option when the router advertises secondary addresses.  A PE that
   receives an MRD route with a PIM Hello Options Sub-TLV processes the
   contained options as if they had been received in a PIM Hello from
   the multicast router on the local AC (see Section 2.5).  Option types
   other than 19, 20, and 24 that may be present in the sub-TLV are
   ignored in this document.

2.3.  Route Targets and Advertisement Modes

   The MRD route MAY be advertised in either of the following two modes,
   depending on the intended distribution of the multicast router
   information:

   *  BD-wide distribution mode: the MRD route is advertised with the
      Route Target of the BD, so that the multicast router information
      is distributed to all the PEs attached to the EVPN BD.  This is
      the mode described in [I-D.skr-bess-evpn-pim-proxy] and is used
      when the objective is to advertise the dynamically discovered
      multicast router to the entire BD (for example, to suppress the
      flooding of PIM Hellos or IGMP/MLD Queries in the BD).

   *  Multihoming synchronization mode: the MRD route is advertised with
      the ES-Import Route Target [RFC7432], together with the EVI Route
      Target carried in an EVI extended community, in the same manner as
      the EVPN route types 7 and 8 in [RFC9251].  In this mode the route
      is imported only by the PEs that share the Ethernet Segment, and
      it is used to synchronize the multicast router state across those
      PEs.  This is the primary mode specified by this document.

   An implementation that supports this document MUST support the
   multihoming synchronization mode and MAY support the BD-wide
   distribution mode.  The two modes are not mutually exclusive; a PE
   MAY advertise both an ES-Import-targeted MRD route (for multihoming
   synchronization) and a BD-targeted MRD route (for BD-wide
   distribution) for the same multicast router.

Rabadan, et al.          Expires 7 January 2027                [Page 10]
Internet-Draft            EVPN Multicast Router                July 2026

2.4.  Procedures for Advertising the MRD Route

   A PE that supports this document and discovers a multicast router on
   a local AC that is part of a multihomed Ethernet Segment generates an
   MRD route as follows:

   1.  The discovery of the multicast router is performed by snooping
       the IGMP/MLD or PIM control messages received on the local AC.
       PIM neighbor discovery follows [RFC7761] and the PIM snooping
       procedures in [RFC8220].  IGMP/MLD Querier discovery follows
       [RFC3376], [RFC3810], and [RFC2236].

   2.  The PE advertises an MRD route encoding:

       *  The Originator Router Address set to an IP address of the
          advertising PE.

       *  The Multicast Router Address set to the primary IP address of
          the discovered router.

       *  The ESI set to the Ethernet Segment of the local AC on which
          the router was discovered, and the Ethernet Tag ID set to the
          BD (in case of VLAN-aware Bundle service) or sub-interface
          identifier.

       *  The Flags set according to the discovered router's
          capabilities: P set if the router is a PIM router, Q set if
          the router is an IGMP/MLD Querier, and the corresponding
          version bit (v1, v2, or v3) set for the Querier protocol
          version.

       *  For PIM routers (P=1), a Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute
          carrying the PIM Hello Options Sub-TLV (see Section 2.2) with
          the DR Priority, Generation ID, and Address List options
          copied from the received PIM Hello.

   3.  The route is advertised with the Route Target(s) corresponding to
       the selected advertisement mode (see Section 2.3).  For the
       multihoming synchronization mode, the route carries the ES-Import
       Route Target and the EVI extended community.

   4.  The PE updates or withdraws the MRD route as the discovered
       router state changes:

       *  If the multicast router is removed from the PE's database (for
          example, the PIM neighbor adjacency expires per [RFC7761], or
          the router is no longer detected on the local AC), the MRD
          route is withdrawn.

Rabadan, et al.          Expires 7 January 2027                [Page 11]
Internet-Draft            EVPN Multicast Router                July 2026

       *  If a router stops being a PIM neighbor but continues to send
          IGMP/MLD Queries, the route is updated with P=0 and Q=1.

       *  Changes in DR Priority, Generation ID, or the secondary
          address list are reflected by re-advertising the MRD route
          with an updated PIM Hello Options Sub-TLV.  Because these
          options are carried in a path attribute and are not part of
          the route key, the re-advertisement updates the existing
          route.

   The PIM Hello timers and other PIM Hello parameters that are
   processed locally are not propagated in the MRD route; only the
   attributes encoded in the route are synchronized.

   A single IGMP/MLD Querier is expected in a given Broadcast Domain.  A
   PE MAY advertise multiple MRD routes for the same BD when more than
   one Querier is discovered, since the Multicast Router Address is part
   of the route key.  In practice, this is typically a transient
   condition, as IGMP/MLD Querier election results in a single Querier
   per Broadcast Domain.  In Integrated Routing and Bridging (IRB)
   deployments, the PEs themselves MAY be IGMP/MLD enabled and
   participate in the Querier election on the BD.

2.5.  Procedures for Receiving and Processing the MRD Route

   A PE that supports this document and receives an MRD route processes
   it as follows:

   1.  The PE imports the route based on its Route Target(s).  In the
       multihoming synchronization mode, only PEs that are attached to
       the Ethernet Segment encoded in the ESI and that import the EVI
       Route Target install the state from the route.

   2.  The PE installs the multicast router state associated with the
       Multicast Router Address on the local AC that belongs to the same
       Ethernet Segment and Ethernet Tag ID encoded in the route.  The
       state is kept associated with the Originator Router Address, the
       ESI, and the Ethernet Tag ID.

   3.  For a route with P=1, the PE adds the encoded router to its PIM
       Neighbor Database for the local AC on the synchronized ES, using
       the DR Priority, Generation ID, and Address List options carried
       in the PIM Hello Options Sub-TLV of the route's Tunnel
       Encapsulation Attribute (see Section 2.2).  This allows the PEs
       of the ES to participate in the PIM DR election as per [RFC7761],
       even on PEs that did not receive the PIM Hello directly.

Rabadan, et al.          Expires 7 January 2027                [Page 12]
Internet-Draft            EVPN Multicast Router                July 2026

   4.  For a route with Q=1, the PE installs the encoded router as an
       IGMP/MLD Querier for the BD or Layer 3 interface identified by
       the ESI and Ethernet Tag ID.  The processing depends on the
       advertisement mode (see Section 2.3):

       *  In BD-wide distribution mode, the MRD route enables a
          transparent Querier behavior.  The DF of the remote ESes
          generates IGMP/MLD Query messages using the Multicast Router
          Address from the route and the protocol version indicated by
          the version flags.  The queries presented to the attached
          hosts therefore use the IP address of the actual multicast
          router, as opposed to a PE-generated or anycast address as in
          [RFC9251].  If more than one Querier exists for the same BD,
          the PE selects the Querier with the lowest IP address, as per
          [RFC2236] and [RFC3810].

       *  In multihoming synchronization mode, the MRD route
          synchronizes the IGMP/MLD Querier state and the Querier
          protocol version (as indicated by the version flags) across
          the PEs that share the Ethernet Segment.  Each importing PE
          installs the same Querier information, allowing a consistent
          Querier representation on all the PEs of the ES.

   5.  Timers (for example, the PIM neighbor hold time and the IGMP/MLD
       Querier timers) and the local PIM Generation ID are handled
       locally by each PE, as per [RFC7761], [RFC3376], and [RFC3810].
       They are not propagated in the MRD route.

   6.  The PIM neighbor hold time is not advertised in the MRD route;
       each PE in the ES maintains its own hold time for the
       synchronized PIM neighbor.  When a PE creates a PIM neighbor in
       its database based on a received MRD route (as opposed to a PIM
       Hello received directly on a local AC), the hold time for that
       neighbor does not expire as long as the MRD route is not
       withdrawn.

       When the MRD route is withdrawn, the PE MUST NOT remove the PIM
       neighbor immediately; instead, it starts the locally configured
       hold time for the neighbor and removes it only when that hold
       time expires.  If, before that hold time expires, a PIM Hello for
       the neighbor is received directly on a local AC, the PE updates
       the neighbor's hold time to the value carried in the received
       Hello without resetting the neighbor (that is, without treating
       it as a new adjacency), and the PE advertises an MRD route for
       the neighbor.

Rabadan, et al.          Expires 7 January 2027                [Page 13]
Internet-Draft            EVPN Multicast Router                July 2026

       When a PIM Hello from the multihomed router is received on a
       local AC in this case, the PE SHOULD NOT send a triggered PIM
       Hello immediately; instead, it sends its Hello at the next
       scheduled periodic interval, in order to avoid unnecessary
       triggered Hellos on the synchronized ES.

   7.  In BD-wide distribution mode, a PE that is not part of the
       Ethernet Segment normally receives a single MRD route per
       multicast router.  In transient situations a PE MAY receive more
       than one MRD route for the same multicast router (for example,
       from multiple PEs of the ES).  The PE MUST recognize this
       condition and MUST NOT generate duplicate IGMP/MLD Query messages
       towards the local ACs for the same router.

3.  Synchronization of PIM State on Ethernet Segments

   [RFC9251] describes how the IGMP/MLD membership state of a multihomed
   host is synchronized across the PEs of an Ethernet Segment by means
   of the Multicast Membership Report Synch route (EVPN route type 7)
   and the Multicast Leave Synch route (EVPN route type 8).  These
   routes allow all the PEs of the ES to maintain a consistent (x,G)
   membership state, where x is either a wildcard (*) or a specific
   source (S), so that the DF can forward multicast traffic correctly on
   behalf of the multihomed receivers.

   [RFC9251] does not, however, synchronize the PIM Join/Prune state
   that results from PIM messages received from a multihomed PIM router
   (or from receivers reached through a multihomed PIM router).  As a
   consequence, a PE that did not receive the PIM Join/Prune messages
   directly does not have the corresponding (x,G) state and cannot
   forward the multicast traffic consistently when it is the DF for the
   ES.

   This document allows the synchronization of the PIM Join/Prune state
   across all the PEs of the Ethernet Segment by reusing the EVPN route
   types 7 and 8, as follows:

   *  Upon receiving a PIM Join for an (x,G) on a local AC of the ES,
      the PE advertises an EVPN route type 7 (Multicast Membership
      Report Synch) for the corresponding (x,G), so that the PIM Join
      state is synchronized to all the PEs of the ES.

   *  Upon receiving a PIM Prune for an (x,G) on a local AC of the ES,
      the PE advertises an EVPN route type 8 (Multicast Leave Synch) for
      the corresponding (x,G), with the Maximum Response Time set to
      zero so that the synchronized state is removed immediately.

Rabadan, et al.          Expires 7 January 2027                [Page 14]
Internet-Draft            EVPN Multicast Router                July 2026

   *  Upon receiving a PIM Prune(S,G,rpt) from the PIM router, the PE
      withdraws the EVPN route type 7 previously advertised for the
      (_,G), provided that the PE had previously advertised an EVPN
      route type 7 for the (S,G) of the same group.  This reflects that
      the receiver no longer wants the traffic of source S on the shared
      (_,G) tree while it continues to receive the (S,G) traffic on the
      source tree.

   This use of the route types 7 and 8 is in addition to their use for
   IGMP/MLD membership synchronization in [RFC9251]; the two uses are
   distinguished by the P flag described below.

3.1.  P Flag in the EVPN Route Types 7 and 8

   This document updates the Flags field of the EVPN route types 7 and 8
   defined in [RFC9251] to use bit 3 as the P (PIM) flag.  Bit 3 is a
   reserved bit in [RFC9251] and is set to zero by implementations of
   that specification.

   When a route type 7 or route type 8 is triggered as a result of PIM
   Join/Prune messages, as described in this section, the originating PE
   MUST set the P flag (bit 3).  When the route is triggered as a result
   of IGMP/MLD membership reports, as in [RFC9251], the P flag MUST be
   set to zero.  A PE receiving a route type 7 or 8 with the P flag set
   processes the synchronized state as PIM Join/Prune state; otherwise
   it processes the route as the IGMP/MLD membership state defined in
   [RFC9251].

   The use of bit 3 as the P flag in the route types 7 and 8 is
   consistent with the P flag defined for the MRD route in Figure 2.

4.  Use Cases

   This section describes three use cases for the synchronization of
   multihomed multicast routers using the MRD route.  In all three cases
   a multicast router with IP address IP1 is attached to an all-active
   Ethernet Segment ESI-1 that is multihomed to PE1 and PE2, and the MRD
   route is used to synchronize the router state between PE1 and PE2.

4.1.  EVPN-based IGMP/MLD Proxy

   In this use case, depicted in Figure 4, the multicast router is an
   IGMP/MLD Querier multihomed to PE1 and PE2 on a multicast BD, as in
   [RFC9251].  The receiver/source is attached to the same BD on a third
   PE.  PE2 (the NDF) discovers the Querier on its local AC and
   advertises an MRD route encoding the ESI, the multicast router
   address IP1, and the version flags (for example, v2/v3).  PE1 imports
   the route and, as a DF in this example, installs the Querier state so

Rabadan, et al.          Expires 7 January 2027                [Page 15]
Internet-Draft            EVPN Multicast Router                July 2026

   that it can act consistently with PE2.  The DF generates IGMP/MLD
   reports on behalf of the PEs attached to the same ES).

                 IGMP/MLD Querier /
                 Multicast Router
                       (IP1)
                         |
                      +-----+
                      | LAG | ---------+
                      +-----+   GQ/GSQ |
                        | |            |
                +-------+ +-------+    |
                |                 |    |
                |    all-active   |    |
                |      ES-1       |    v
        +---------------+ +---------------+
        |   PE1 (DF)    | |      PE2      |
        |  +--------+   | |  +--------+   |
   +----|  |  BD1   |   | |  |  BD1   |   |----+
   |    |  +--------+   | |  +--------+   |    |
   |    +---------------+ +---------------+    |
   |                      MRD ESI-1,IP1        |
   |             <--------    v2/v3/Q          |
   |                                           |
   |                 +-------+   EVPN proxy    |
   |                 |  PE3  |   RFC9251       |
   |                 | +---+ |                 |
   +-----------------| |BD1| |-----------------+
                     | +---+ |
                     +---+---+
                         |
                   Receiver/Source
                       (IP2)

               Figure 4: EVPN-based IGMP/MLD proxy (RFC 9251)

4.2.  EVPN Multihoming for Layer 3 Interfaces

   In this use case, depicted in Figure 5, the multicast router is a PIM
   router multihomed to PE1 and PE2 on Layer 3 interfaces, as in
   [I-D.ietf-bess-evpn-l3mh-proto].  PE1 and PE2 host the IP-VRF of the
   tenant and run PIM towards the multihomed router over the L3 ES,
   while multicast is distributed across the core using MVPN [RFC6513]
   [RFC6514].  PE2 discovers the PIM neighbor through its PIM Hello and
   advertises an MRD route with P=1, the DR Priority, and the Generation
   ID.  PE1 imports the route, installs the PIM neighbor on its local AC
   of ESI-1, and can generate PIM Hellos and participate in DR election
   for the router.  It is assumed that the PEs attached to the same

Rabadan, et al.          Expires 7 January 2027                [Page 16]
Internet-Draft            EVPN Multicast Router                July 2026

   Ethernet Segment for a given multicast router are configured with
   consistent PIM parameters on the local Attachment Circuits (same IP
   address, DR Priority, and timers), with the exception of the
   Generation ID.

                     PIM Router
                    (L3 multicast)
                       (IP1)
                         |      PIM Hello
                      +-----+   IP1,GenID1
                      | LAG | ---------+
                      +-----+          |
                        | |            |
                +-------+ +-------+    |
                |                 |    |
                |    all-active   |    |
                |      ES-1       |    v
        +-------+-------+ +-------+-------+
        |      PE1      | |      PE2      |
        |  +--------+   | |  +--------+   |
   +-----  | IP-VRF |   | |  | IP-VRF |   |----+
   |    |  +--------+   | |  +--------+   |    |
   |    +---------------+ +---------------+    |
   |                      MRD ESI-1,IP1        |
   |             <--------   P,GenID1          |
   |                                           |
   |                 +-------+    EVPN L3 MH   |
   |                 |  PE3  |                 |
   |                 | +---+ |                 |
   +-----------------| |VRF| |-----------------+
                     | +---+ |
                     +---+---+
                         |
                   Receiver/Source
                       (IP2)

   Figure 5: EVPN MH for L3 interfaces (draft-ietf-bess-evpn-l3mh-proto)

4.3.  EVPN Multihoming for EVPN Multicast (OISM)

   In this use case, depicted in Figure 6, the multicast router is a PIM
   router multihomed to PE1 and PE2 on an OISM BD, as in [RFC9625].  PE1
   and PE2 host the IP-VRF and the OISM BD.  PE2 discovers the PIM
   neighbor on the BD and advertises an MRD route with P=1, the DR
   Priority, and the Generation ID.  PE1 imports the route and installs
   the PIM neighbor for its local AC on ESI-1, synchronizing the PIM
   state across the OISM PEs.  It is assumed that the PEs attached to
   the same Ethernet Segment for a given multicast router are configured

Rabadan, et al.          Expires 7 January 2027                [Page 17]
Internet-Draft            EVPN Multicast Router                July 2026

   with consistent PIM parameters on the local Attachment Circuits (same
   IP address, DR Priority, and timers), with the exception of the
   Generation ID.

                     PIM Router
                      (OISM BD)
                       (IP1)
                         |      PIM Hello
                      +-----+   IP1,GenID1
                      | LAG | ---------+
                      +-----+          |
                        | |            |
                +-------+ +-------+    |
                |                 |    |
                |    all-active   |    |
                |      ES-1       |    v
        +-------+-------+ +-------+-------+
        |   PE1 (DF)    | |      PE2      |
        |  +--------+   | |  +--------+   |
        |  |  BD1   |   | |  |  BD1   |   |
        |  +--------+   | |  +--------+   |
        |  | IP-VRF |   | |  | IP-VRF |   |
        |  +--------+   | |  +--------+   |
   +-----  |  SBD   |   | |  |  SBD   |   |----+
   |    |  +--------+   | |  +--------+   |    |
   |    +---------------+ +---------------+    |
   |                      MRD ESI-1,IP1        |
   |             <--------   P,GenID1          |
   |                                           |
   |                 +-------+   EVPN OISM     |
   |                 |  PE3  |   RFC9625       |
   |                 | +---+ |                 |
   +-----------------| |SBD| |-----------------+
                     | +---+ |
                     +---+---+
                         |
                       Host
                       (IP2)

            Figure 6: EVPN MH for EVPN multicast (RFC 9625 OISM)

5.  Security Considerations

   This document defines a new EVPN route that is advertised, imported,
   and processed using the BGP and EVPN procedures of [RFC7432].  The
   security considerations of [RFC7432], [RFC9251], and [RFC9625]
   therefore apply.

Rabadan, et al.          Expires 7 January 2027                [Page 18]
Internet-Draft            EVPN Multicast Router                July 2026

   The MRD route causes receiving PEs to install multicast router state
   (IGMP/MLD Querier and/or PIM neighbor state) and to generate IGMP/MLD
   Queries on behalf of the encoded router.  A spoofed or maliciously
   crafted MRD route could therefore be used to inject false multicast
   router state, redirect or suppress multicast traffic, or influence
   the PIM DR election.  Implementations MUST rely on the Route Target
   filtering and the BGP control-plane security mechanisms described in
   [RFC7432] to ensure that MRD routes are accepted only from trusted
   PEs that share the Ethernet Segment or the BD.  The transparent
   Querier behavior does not relax any of the IGMP/MLD or PIM security
   checks performed locally by the receiving PE.

6.  IANA Considerations

   This document requests IANA to allocate a new route type from the
   "EVPN Route Types" registry:

    +=======+========================================+===============+
    | Value | Description                            | Reference     |
    +=======+========================================+===============+
    | TBD   | Multicast Router Discovery (MRD) Route | This document |
    +-------+----------------------------------------+---------------+

               Table 1: EVPN Route Type allocation request

   This document also requests IANA to allocate a new sub-TLV type from
   the "BGP Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute Sub-TLVs" registry [RFC9012]:

           +=======+===========================+===============+
           | Value | Description               | Reference     |
           +=======+===========================+===============+
           | TBD   | PIM Hello Options Sub-TLV | This document |
           +-------+---------------------------+---------------+

              Table 2: BGP Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute Sub-
                           TLV allocation request

7.  References

7.1.  Normative References

   [I-D.ietf-bess-evpn-l3mh-proto]
              Brissette, P., MacKenzie, M., Matsushima, S., Lin, W., and
              J. Rabadan, "EVPN multi-homing support for L3 services",
              Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-bess-evpn-
              l3mh-proto-00, 23 February 2026,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-bess-
              evpn-l3mh-proto-00>.

Rabadan, et al.          Expires 7 January 2027                [Page 19]
Internet-Draft            EVPN Multicast Router                July 2026

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2119>.

   [RFC2236]  Fenner, W., "Internet Group Management Protocol, Version
              2", RFC 2236, DOI 10.17487/RFC2236, November 1997,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc2236>.

   [RFC3376]  Cain, B., Deering, S., Kouvelas, I., Fenner, B., and A.
              Thyagarajan, "Internet Group Management Protocol, Version
              3", RFC 3376, DOI 10.17487/RFC3376, October 2002,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3376>.

   [RFC3810]  Vida, R., Ed. and L. Costa, Ed., "Multicast Listener
              Discovery Version 2 (MLDv2) for IPv6", RFC 3810,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC3810, June 2004,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3810>.

   [RFC7432]  Sajassi, A., Ed., Aggarwal, R., Bitar, N., Isaac, A.,
              Uttaro, J., Drake, J., and W. Henderickx, "BGP MPLS-Based
              Ethernet VPN", RFC 7432, DOI 10.17487/RFC7432, February
              2015, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7432>.

   [RFC7606]  Chen, E., Ed., Scudder, J., Ed., Mohapatra, P., and K.
              Patel, "Revised Error Handling for BGP UPDATE Messages",
              RFC 7606, DOI 10.17487/RFC7606, August 2015,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7606>.

   [RFC7761]  Fenner, B., Handley, M., Holbrook, H., Kouvelas, I.,
              Parekh, R., Zhang, Z., and L. Zheng, "Protocol Independent
              Multicast - Sparse Mode (PIM-SM): Protocol Specification
              (Revised)", STD 83, RFC 7761, DOI 10.17487/RFC7761, March
              2016, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7761>.

   [RFC8174]  Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
              2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
              May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8174>.

   [RFC9012]  Patel, K., Van de Velde, G., Sangli, S., and J. Scudder,
              "The BGP Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute", RFC 9012,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC9012, April 2021,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9012>.

Rabadan, et al.          Expires 7 January 2027                [Page 20]
Internet-Draft            EVPN Multicast Router                July 2026

   [RFC9251]  Sajassi, A., Thoria, S., Mishra, M., Patel, K., Drake, J.,
              and W. Lin, "Internet Group Management Protocol (IGMP) and
              Multicast Listener Discovery (MLD) Proxies for Ethernet
              VPN (EVPN)", RFC 9251, DOI 10.17487/RFC9251, June 2022,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9251>.

   [RFC9625]  Lin, W., Zhang, Z., Drake, J., Rosen, E., Ed., Rabadan,
              J., and A. Sajassi, "EVPN Optimized Inter-Subnet Multicast
              (OISM) Forwarding", RFC 9625, DOI 10.17487/RFC9625, August
              2024, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9625>.

7.2.  Informative References

   [I-D.skr-bess-evpn-pim-proxy]
              Rabadan, J., Kotalwar, J., Sathappan, S., Zhang, Z. J.,
              Sajassi, A., and M. P. Mishra, "PIM Proxy in EVPN
              Networks", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-skr-
              bess-evpn-pim-proxy-02, 11 October 2023,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-skr-bess-
              evpn-pim-proxy-02>.

   [RFC6513]  Rosen, E., Ed. and R. Aggarwal, Ed., "Multicast in MPLS/
              BGP IP VPNs", RFC 6513, DOI 10.17487/RFC6513, February
              2012, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6513>.

   [RFC6514]  Aggarwal, R., Rosen, E., Morin, T., and Y. Rekhter, "BGP
              Encodings and Procedures for Multicast in MPLS/BGP IP
              VPNs", RFC 6514, DOI 10.17487/RFC6514, February 2012,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6514>.

   [RFC8220]  Dornon, O., Kotalwar, J., Hemige, V., Qiu, R., and Z.
              Zhang, "Protocol Independent Multicast (PIM) over Virtual
              Private LAN Service (VPLS)", RFC 8220,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC8220, September 2017,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8220>.

   [RFC9135]  Sajassi, A., Salam, S., Thoria, S., Drake, J., and J.
              Rabadan, "Integrated Routing and Bridging in Ethernet VPN
              (EVPN)", RFC 9135, DOI 10.17487/RFC9135, October 2021,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9135>.

Acknowledgments

   The MRD route was originally defined in
   [I-D.skr-bess-evpn-pim-proxy].  The authors thank the authors and
   contributors of that document.

Rabadan, et al.          Expires 7 January 2027                [Page 21]
Internet-Draft            EVPN Multicast Router                July 2026

Authors' Addresses

   Jorge Rabadan (editor)
   Nokia
   United States of America
   Email: jorge.rabadan@nokia.com

   Olivier Dornon
   Nokia
   Belgium
   Email: olivier.dornon@nokia.com

   Tanmoy Kundu
   Nokia
   United States of America
   Email: tanmoy.kundu@nokia.com

   Nitsan Dolev
   Ribbon
   Email: nitsan.dolev@rbbn.com

Rabadan, et al.          Expires 7 January 2027                [Page 22]