Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) on Multi-chassis Link Aggregation Group (MC-LAG) Interfaces
draft-mtm-rtgwg-bfd-mc-lag-00
The information below is for an old version of the document.
| Document | Type | Active Internet-Draft (individual) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Greg Mirsky , Jeff Tantsura , Gyan Mishra | ||
| Last updated | 2020-10-29 | ||
| Stream | (None) | ||
| Formats | plain text xml htmlized pdfized bibtex | ||
| 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-mtm-rtgwg-bfd-mc-lag-00
RTG Working Group G. Mirsky
Internet-Draft ZTE Corp.
Intended status: Standards Track J. Tantsura
Expires: May 1, 2021 Apstra
G. Mishra
Verizon Inc.
October 28, 2020
Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) on Multi-chassis Link
Aggregation Group (MC-LAG) Interfaces
draft-mtm-rtgwg-bfd-mc-lag-00
Abstract
This document describes the use of Bidirectional Forwarding Detection
for Multi-chassis Link Aggregation Group to provide faster than Link
Aggregation Control Protocol convergence. This specification
enhances RFC 7130 "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) on Link
Aggregation Group (LAG) Interfaces".
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 1, 2021.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2020 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
Mirsky, et al. Expires May 1, 2021 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft BFD for MC-LAG October 2020
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. Conventions used in this document . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1.1. Acronyms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1.2. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Problem Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. BFD on MC-LAG with IP-only Data Plane . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. BFD on MC-LAG with IP/MPLS Data Plane . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8.2. Informative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1. Introduction
The [RFC7130] defines the use of Bidirectional Forwarding Detection
(BFD) on Link Aggregation Group (LAG) interfaces. A multi-chassis
LAG (MC-LAG) is a type of LAG [IEEE.802.1AX.2008] with member links
terminated on separate chassis. [IEEE.802.1AX.2008] does not specify
MC-LAG but doesn't preclude it either. Link Aggregation Control
Protocol (LACP), also defined in [IEEE.802.1AX.2008], can work with
MC-LAG but, as in the LAG case, the fastest link failure detection
interval is only in a range of single-digit seconds. This document
defines how the mechanism defined to work on LAG interfaces [RFC7130]
can be adapted to the MC-LAG case to enable sub-second detection of
member link failure.
1.1. Conventions used in this document
1.1.1. Acronyms
ACH: Associated Channel Header
BFD: Bidirectional Forwarding Detection
BoS: Bottom of the Stack
G-ACh: Generic Associated Channel
Mirsky, et al. Expires May 1, 2021 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft BFD for MC-LAG October 2020
GAL: Generic Associated Label
LAG: Link Aggregation Group
LACP: Link Aggregation Control Protocol
MC-LAG: Multi-chassis Link Aggregation Group
MPLS: Multi-Protocol Label Switching
1.1.2. 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 BCP
14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here.
2. Problem Statement
[RFC7130] does not specify the selection of the destination IP
address for the BFD control packet. The only requirement related to
the selection is in Section 2.1, stating that the use of the address
family across all member links of the given LAG MUST be consistent
across all the links. Thus it is implied that the same unicast IP
address will be used on all member links of the LAG as the use of
different destination addresses would defeat the purpose of [RFC7130]
transforming the case into a set of single-hop BFD sessions
[RFC5881]. But a single unicast IP address may not work in the MC-
LAG case as the member links are terminated on the separate chassis.
This document proposes how to overcome this problem if using IP or
Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) data plane encapsulation.
3. BFD on MC-LAG with IP-only Data Plane
As described in [RFC7130], a micro-BFD session on the LAG interfaces
may use IPv4 or IPv6 address family. In some cases, two sessions,
one with IPv4 and one with IPv6 addresses, may run concurrently.
This document doesn't change any of these but specifies the selection
of the destination IP address in the MC-LAG use case:
o if IPv4 address family is used for the micro-BFD session, then an
address from the link-local multicast address 224.0.0.0/24 range
SHOULD be used as the destination IP address. The subnet
broadcast address MAY be used as the destination IP address as
well;
Mirsky, et al. Expires May 1, 2021 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft BFD for MC-LAG October 2020
o if the address family used is IPv6, then the IPv6 All Routers
address with the link scope, as defined in [RFC4291], FF02::2/128
MUST be used as the destination IP address.
4. BFD on MC-LAG with IP/MPLS Data Plane
There are more optional encapsulation formats for the case of micro-
BFD on MC-LAG over IP/MPLS data plane:
o [RFC5586] defined the special-purpose Generic Associated channel
Label (GAL) that MAY be used in MPLS encapsulation of the micro-
BFD control packet over the MPSL data plane. Depending on the
channel type specified in the Associated Channel Header (ACH) that
immediately follows after the GAL, micro-BFD MAY use IP/UDP, as
displayed in Figure 1 or BFD format, i.e., BFD control packet
without IP and UDP headers.
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| GAL | TC |1| TTL |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0 0 0 1|0 0 0 0| Reserved | IPv4 channel (0x0021) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Destination IP address |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Source IP address |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| UDP header |
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
~ BFD Control Packet ~
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 1: BFD on MC-LAG member link on IPv4/MPLS data plane
If the IP/UDP format of BFD over MC-LAG interfaces is used, then the
destination IP address MUST be set to the loopback address
127.0.0.1/32 for IPv4 [RFC1812], or the loopback address ::1/128 for
IPv6 [RFC4291].
Mirsky, et al. Expires May 1, 2021 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft BFD for MC-LAG October 2020
5. IANA Considerations
This document makes no requests for IANA allocations. This section
may be deleted by RFC Editor.
6. Security Considerations
This document does not introduce new security concerns but inherits
all security considerations discussed in [RFC5881] and [RFC7130].
7. Acknowledgements
TBD
8. References
8.1. Normative References
[IEEE.802.1AX.2008]
"IEEE Standard for Local and metropolitan area networks -
Link Aggregation", IEEE 802.1-AX, November 2008.
[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/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC5586] Bocci, M., Ed., Vigoureux, M., Ed., and S. Bryant, Ed.,
"MPLS Generic Associated Channel", RFC 5586,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5586, June 2009,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5586>.
[RFC5881] Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection
(BFD) for IPv4 and IPv6 (Single Hop)", RFC 5881,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5881, June 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5881>.
[RFC7130] Bhatia, M., Ed., Chen, M., Ed., Boutros, S., Ed.,
Binderberger, M., Ed., and J. Haas, Ed., "Bidirectional
Forwarding Detection (BFD) on Link Aggregation Group (LAG)
Interfaces", RFC 7130, DOI 10.17487/RFC7130, February
2014, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7130>.
[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/info/rfc8174>.
Mirsky, et al. Expires May 1, 2021 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft BFD for MC-LAG October 2020
8.2. Informative
[RFC1812] Baker, F., Ed., "Requirements for IP Version 4 Routers",
RFC 1812, DOI 10.17487/RFC1812, June 1995,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1812>.
[RFC4291] Hinden, R. and S. Deering, "IP Version 6 Addressing
Architecture", RFC 4291, DOI 10.17487/RFC4291, February
2006, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4291>.
Authors' Addresses
Greg Mirsky
ZTE Corp.
Email: gregimirsky@gmail.com
Jeff Tantsura
Apstra
Email: jefftant.ietf@gmail.com
Gyan Mishra
Verizon Inc.
Email: gyan.s.mishra@verizon.com
Mirsky, et al. Expires May 1, 2021 [Page 6]