BIER MTU Discovery
draft-venaas-bier-mtud-01
The information below is for an old version of the document.
| Document | Type | Active Internet-Draft (individual) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Stig Venaas , IJsbrand Wijnands , Les Ginsberg , Mahesh Sivakumar | ||
| Last updated | 2018-06-28 | ||
| 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-venaas-bier-mtud-01
Network Working Group S. Venaas
Internet-Draft IJ. Wijnands
Intended status: Experimental L. Ginsberg
Expires: December 30, 2018 Cisco Systems, Inc.
M. Sivakumar
Juniper Networks
June 28, 2018
BIER MTU Discovery
draft-venaas-bier-mtud-01
Abstract
This document defines an IGP based mechanism for discovering the MTU
of a BIER sub-domain. This document defines extensions to OSPF and
IS-IS, but other protocols could potentially be extended. MTU
discovery is usually done for a given path, while this document
defines it for a sub-domain. This allows the computed MTU to be
independent of the set of receivers. Also, the MTU is independent of
rerouting events within the sub-domain.
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 December 30, 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
Venaas, et al. Expires December 30, 2018 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft BIER MTU Discovery June 2018
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. Conventions used in this document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. MTU discovery procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. IS-IS BIER Sub-Domain MTU Sub-sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. OSPF BIER Sub-Domain MTU Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6. IANA considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1. Introduction
This document defines an IGP based mechanism for discovering the MTU
of a BIER sub-domain. The discovered MTU indicates the largest
possible BIER payload, such as an IP packet, that can be sent across
any link in a BIER sub-domain. This is different from
[I-D.ietf-bier-path-mtu-discovery] which performs Path MTU Discovery
(PMTUD) for a set of receivers. PMTUD is based on probing, and when
there are routing changes, e.g., a link going down, the actual MTU
for a path may become less than was previously discovered, and there
will be some delay until the next probe is performed. Also, the set
of receivers for a flow may change at any time, which may cause the
MTU to change. This document instead discovers a BIER sub-domain
MTU, which is independent of paths and receivers within the sub-
domain.
Discovering the sub-domain MTU is much simpler than discovering the
multicast path MTU, and is more robust with regards to path changes
as discussed above. However, the sub-domain MTU may be a lot smaller
than the path MTU would have been for a given flow. The discovery
mechanisms may be combined, allowing the discovery of the path MTU
for certain flows as needed.
2. Conventions used in this document
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
Venaas, et al. Expires December 30, 2018 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft BIER MTU Discovery June 2018
14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here.
3. MTU discovery procedure
An interface on a router is said to be a BIER interface if the router
has a BIER neighbor on the interface. That is, there is a directly
connected router on that interface that is announcing a BIER prefix.
Further, the BIER interface is said to belong to a given sub-domain
if the router itself announces a prefix tagged with the sub-domain,
and there is BIER neighbor on the interface also announcing a prefix
tagged with the sub-domain.
The BIER MTU of an interface is the largest BIER encapsulated payload
that can be sent out of the interface. Further, the local sub-domain
MTU of a router is the minimum of all the BIER MTUs of the BIER
interfaces in the sub-domain. Note that the local sub-domain MTU of
a router is only defined if it has at least one BIER interface in the
sub-domain.
A BIER router announces a BIER prefix in either IS-IS or OSPF as
specified in [RFC8401] and [I-D.ietf-bier-ospf-bier-extensions].
They both define a BIER Sub-TLV to be included with the prefix.
There is one BIER Sub-TLV included for each sub-domain. This
document defines how a router includes its local sub-domain MTU in
each of the BIER Sub-TLVs it advertizes.
A router can discover the MTU of a BIER sub-domain by identifying all
the prefixes that have a BIER Sub-TLV for the sub-domain. It then
computes the minimum of the advertised MTU values for that sub-
domain. This includes its own local sub-domain MTU. This allows all
the routers in the sub-domain to discover the same sub-domain wide
MTU.
Note that a router should announce a new local MTU for a sub-domain
immediately if the value becomes smaller than what it currently
announces. This would happen if the MTU of an interface is
configured to a smaller value, or the first BIER neighbor for a sub-
domain is detected on an interface, and the MTU of the interface is
less than all the other local BIER interfaces in the sub-domain.
However, if BIER neighbors go away, or if an interface goes down, so
that the local MTU becomes larger, a router SHOULD NOT immediately
announce the larger value. A router MAY after some delay announce
the new larger MTU. The intention is that dynamic events such as a
quick link flap should not cause the announced MTU to be increased.
Venaas, et al. Expires December 30, 2018 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft BIER MTU Discovery June 2018
4. IS-IS BIER Sub-Domain MTU Sub-sub-TLV
A router uses the BIER Sub-Domain MTU Sub-sub-TLV to announce the
minimum BIER MTU of all its BIER enabled interfaces in a sub-domain.
The BIER Sub-Domain MTU is the largest BIER encapsulated payload that
can be sent out of the interfaces in a sub-domain. The Sub-sub-TLV
MUST be ignored if it is included multiple times.
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length | MTU |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Type: TBD
Length: 2
MTU: MTU in octets
5. OSPF BIER Sub-Domain MTU Sub-TLV
A router uses the BIER Sub-Domain MTU Sub-TLV to announce the minimum
BIER MTU of all its BIER enabled interfaces in a sub-domain. The
BIER Sub-Domain MTU is the largest BIER encapsulated payload that can
be sent out of the interfaces in a sub-domain. The Sub-TLV MUST be
ignored if it is included multiple times.
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| MTU | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Type: TBD2
Length: 4
MTU: MTU in octets
Venaas, et al. Expires December 30, 2018 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft BIER MTU Discovery June 2018
6. IANA considerations
An allocation from the "sub-sub-TLVs for BIER Info sub-TLV" registry
as defined in [RFC8401] is requested for the IS-IS BIER Sub-Domain
MTU Sub-sub-TLV. Please replace the string TBD in this document with
the appropriate value.
An allocation from the "OSPF Extended Prefix sub-TLV" registry as
defined in [RFC7684] is requested for the OSPF BIER Sub-Domain MTU
Sub-TLV. Please replace the string TBD2 in this document with the
appropriate value.
7. Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Greg Mirsky in particular for
fruitful discussions and input. Valuable comments were also provided
by Toerless Eckert, Tony Przygienda and Xie Jingrong.
8. References
8.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-bier-ospf-bier-extensions]
Psenak, P., Kumar, N., Wijnands, I., Dolganow, A.,
Przygienda, T., Zhang, Z., and S. Aldrin, "OSPFv2
Extensions for BIER", draft-ietf-bier-ospf-bier-
extensions-18 (work in progress), June 2018.
[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>.
[RFC7684] Psenak, P., Gredler, H., Shakir, R., Henderickx, W.,
Tantsura, J., and A. Lindem, "OSPFv2 Prefix/Link Attribute
Advertisement", RFC 7684, DOI 10.17487/RFC7684, November
2015, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7684>.
[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>.
[RFC8401] Ginsberg, L., Ed., Przygienda, T., Aldrin, S., and Z.
Zhang, "Bit Index Explicit Replication (BIER) Support via
IS-IS", RFC 8401, DOI 10.17487/RFC8401, June 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8401>.
Venaas, et al. Expires December 30, 2018 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft BIER MTU Discovery June 2018
8.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-bier-path-mtu-discovery]
Mirsky, G., Przygienda, T., and A. Dolganow, "Path Maximum
Transmission Unit Discovery (PMTUD) for Bit Index Explicit
Replication (BIER) Layer", draft-ietf-bier-path-mtu-
discovery-04 (work in progress), June 2018.
Authors' Addresses
Stig Venaas
Cisco Systems, Inc.
Tasman Drive
San Jose CA 95134
USA
Email: stig@cisco.com
IJsbrand Wijnands
Cisco Systems, Inc.
De kleetlaan 6a
Diegem 1831
Belgium
Email: ice@cisco.com
Les Ginsberg
Cisco Systems, Inc.
Tasman Drive
San Jose CA 95134
USA
Email: ginsberg@cisco.com
Mahesh Sivakumar
Juniper Networks
1133 Innovation Way
Sunnyvale CA 94089
USA
Email: sivakumar.mahesh@gmail.com
Venaas, et al. Expires December 30, 2018 [Page 6]