IGP Extensions for Advertising Hop-by-Hop Options Header Processing Action
draft-wang-lsr-hbh-process-00

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Authors Yali Wang  , Tianran Zhou  , Zhibo Hu
Last updated 2020-10-29
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text xml pdf htmlized (tools) htmlized bibtex
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
Link State Routing Working Group                                 Y. Wang
Internet-Draft                                                   T. Zhou
Intended status: Standards Track                                   Z. Hu
Expires: May 2, 2021                                              Huawei
                                                        October 29, 2020

  IGP Extensions for Advertising Hop-by-Hop Options Header Processing
                                 Action
                     draft-wang-lsr-hbh-process-00

Abstract

   This document extends Node and Link attribute TLVs to Interior
   Gateway Protocols (IGP) to advertise the Hop-by-Hop Options header
   processing action and supported services (e.g.  IOAM Trace Option and
   Alternate Marking) at node and link granularity.  Such advertisements
   allow entities (e.g., centralized controllers) to determine whether
   the Hop-by-Hop Options header and specific services can be supported
   in a given network.

Requirements Language

   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 RFC 2119 [RFC2119].

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 2, 2021.

Wang, et al.               Expires May 2, 2021                  [Page 1]
Internet-Draft        draft-wang-lsr-hbh-process-00         October 2020

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
   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.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Hop-by-Hop Options Header Processing Action . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  Signaling Processing Action Using IS-IS . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     4.1.  IS-IS Node Processing-Action Sub-TLV  . . . . . . . . . .   5
     4.2.  IS-IS Link Processing-Action Sub-TLV  . . . . . . . . . .   6
   5.  Signaling Processing Action Using OSPF  . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     5.1.  OSPF Node Processing-Action TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     5.2.  OSPFv2 Link Processing-Action sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . .   7
     5.3.  OSPFv3 Link Processing-Action Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . .   8
   6.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   7.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   8.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   9.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     9.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     9.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10

1.  Introduction

   [RFC8200] specifies IPv6 extension headers, including Hop-by-Hop
   Options header, Destination Options header, Routing header, etc.  An
   IPv6 packet may carry zero, one, or more extension headers that must
   be processed strictly in the order they appear in the packet.  Except
   for the Hop-by-Hop Options header, other extension headers are not
   processed, inserted, or deleted by any transit node along a packet's
   delivery path, until the packet arrives at the Destination node.

   As specified in [RFC8200], although the Hop-by-Hop Options header is
   not inserted or deleted by any transit node along a packet's delivery
   path, it is only examined and processed by nodes along a packet's

Wang, et al.               Expires May 2, 2021                  [Page 2]
Internet-Draft        draft-wang-lsr-hbh-process-00         October 2020

   delivery path if they are explicitly configured to process.  Besides,
Show full document text