[Search] [txt|pdf|bibtex] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: 00 01 02                                                      
Internet Engineering Task Force       A. Bansal, T. Przygienda, A. Patel
INTERNET DRAFT                                    Fore, Bell Labs/Lucent
                                                                May 1998

                            IS-IS over IPv4
                  <draft-ietf-isis-wg-over-ip-01.txt>

Status of This Memo
   This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
   all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note
   that other groups may also distribute working documents as
   Internet-Drafts.
   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."

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt
   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.

Abstract
   This draft describes an optional implementation technique within
   IS-IS [ISO90, Cal90a, Cal90b] used today by several ISPs for routing
   within their clouds.  IS-IS is an interior gateway routing protocol
   developed originally by OSI and used with IP extensions as IGP. This
   draft describes how to encapsulate IS-IS packets in IPv4 [Pos81]
   format.  Such an encapsulation has many advantages, one of those
   being the possibility to run integrated IS-IS on anything that
   understands IPv4, including avian carriers [Wai90].  Encapsulation of
   IS-IS PDUs in IPv6 is outside the scope of this document.

1. Introduction
   Encapsulation of IS-IS as defined in ISO 10589 [ISO90, Cal90a,
   Cal90b] uses directly over Link Layer protocols as opposed to IP
   routing protocols [Moy97] that are encapsulated over IP directly.

Bansal et al.                 Expires Nov 1999                  [Page 1]


Internet Draft                 IS-IS over IPv4                  May 1998

   By defining an encapsulation of IS-IS in IP, we save on special OSI
   encapsulation on several media types.  Such an encapsulation would
   solve fragmentation problems of large LSPs and remove the necessity
   for OSI PPP extensions [Kat92] when IS-IS is run over negotiated
   PPP links.  Additionally, on certain media, such as P2P ATM links,
   no LLC/SNAP encapsulation is necessary to provide multi-protocol
   routing, allowing for gains in efficiency.

2. Encapsulation of IS-IS and ISO 9542 packets over IP
   IS-IS is encapsulated directly over the Internet Protocol's network
   layer.  IS-IS packets are therefore encapsulated by IP and local
   data-link headers.  Within this encapsulation, IS-IS packets are
   propagated as usual, however without the appropriate link-layer
   fields but starting at NLPI.

   IS-IS does not normally provide a way to transmit packets larger
   than MTU size.  This proposal allows to use IP fragmentation when
   transmitting such packets.  If necessary, the length of IS-IS packets
   over IP can be up to 65,535 bytes (including the IP header).  The
   IS-IS packet types that are likely to be large (LSPs, CSNPs, PSNPs)
   can usually be split into several separate protocol packets, without
   loss of functionality.  This is recommended; IP fragmentation SHOULD
   be avoided whenever possible since it can lead to different problems,
   such as loss of fragments causing the retransmission of complete IP
   packets.  Following rules apply:
    -  IIHs MUST not exceed the size of [InterfaceMTU  - IP headersize]
        (1) and have the DF bit set.  MTU size padding rules should be
       followed as described in ISO 10589.

    -  SNPs MUST NOT be larger than the respective originatingLSPBufferSize.

    -  SNPs MUST be sent allowing IP fragmentation (DF bit not set).

    -  SNPs SHOULD NOT be larger than the minimum of [InterfaceMTU   -
       IPheadersize] and respective originatingLSPBufferSize.

    -  LSP fragments MAY BE built with a size up to the value of
       corresponding originatingLSPBufferSize.

___________________________________________
1. not of maximum of Buffer and DataLinkSize used normally

Bansal et al.                 Expires Nov 1999                  [Page 2]


Internet Draft                 IS-IS over IPv4                  May 1998

    -  LSP fragments MUST NOT be larger than the respective
       originatingLSPBufferSize.

    -  LSPs MUST be sent allowing IP fragmentation (DF bit not set).

    -  LSP fragments SHOULD NOT exceed the size of the minimum of
       dataLinkBlockSize and respective originatingLSPBufferSize.

   This set of rules allows to configure a network with respective
   originatingLSPBufferSize larger than some interfaces' MTUs.
   In a mixed environment, care must be taken that respective
   originatingLSPBufferSize does net exceed the MTU size of interfaces
   without IP encapsulation.
   The other important features of IS-IS in IP's IP encapsulation are:

    -  Use of IP multicast.  Some IS-IS in IP messages are multicast,
       when sent over broadcast networks.  Three distinct IP multicast
       addresses are used.  Packets sent to these multicast addresses
       should never be forwarded; they are meant to travel a single hop
       only.  To ensure that these packets will not travel multiple
       hops, their IP TTL must be set to 1.

          IPAllL1ISs

             OSI multicast value of this address was O1-80-C2-00-00-14.
             This multicast address has been assigned the IP address
             value 224.0.0.?  for IP encapsulated IS-IS. All routers
             running L1 IS-IS in IP should be prepared to receive
             packets sent to this address.  Hello packets are always
             sent to this destination.  Also, certain IS-IS in IP
             protocol packets are sent to this address during the
             flooding procedure.

          IPAllL2ISs

             OSI multicast value of this address was O1-80-C2-00-00-15.
             This multicast address has been assigned the IP address
             value 224.0.0.?  for IP encapsulated IS-IS. All routers
             running L2 IS-IS in IP should be prepared to receive
             packets sent to this address.  Hello packets are always
             sent to this destination.  Also, certain IS-IS in IP
             protocol packets are sent to this address during the
             flooding procedure.

Bansal et al.                 Expires Nov 1999                  [Page 3]


Internet Draft                 IS-IS over IPv4                  May 1998

          IPAllIntermediateSystems

             OSI multicast value of this address was 09-00-2B-0O-00-05.
             This multicast address has been assigned the IP address
             value 224.0.0.?  for IP encapsulated IS-IS. All routers
             running IS-IS in IP should be prepared to receive packets
             sent to this address.  ISO 9542 is using this address.

    -  IS-IS in IP is IP protocol number ??.  This number has been
       requested with the Network Information Center.  IP protocol
       number assignments are documented in [RP94].

       Note:  For development purposes, IP Protocol number 9 (Private
       IGP protocol number) [RP94] will be used until an official number
       is granted.

    -  All IS-IS in IP routing protocol packets are sent using the
       normal service TOS value of binary 0000 defined in [Alm92].

    -  Routing protocol packets are sent with IP precedence set to
       Internetwork Control.  IS-IS in IP protocol packets should be
       given precedence over regular IP data traffic, in both sending
       and receiving.  Setting the IP precedence field in the IP
       header to Internetwork Control [Pos81] may help implement this
       objective.

3. Internal Encapsulation
   On point-to-point links no MAC addresses are used by IS-IS. Therefore
   the Intradomain Routeing Protocol Discriminator or ISO 9542 Network
   Layer Protocol Identifier starts directly after the IP header.  For
   P2P link running PPP, the Payload format will consist of PPP header,
   followed by the IP header and NLPID as indicated in figure 1.

           +------------+-----------+----------------+
           | PPP Header | IP Header | NLPID|ISIS PDU |
           +------------+-----------+----------------+

            Figure 1: Encapsulation of ISIS frames over PPP

Bansal et al.                 Expires Nov 1999                  [Page 4]


Internet Draft                 IS-IS over IPv4                  May 1998

   For P2P ATM links using VC muxing, the payload format must not
   include the PPP header as indicated in figure 2.

           +-------------+-----------+-----------------+
           | AAL5 Header | IP Header | NLPID|ISIS  PDU |
           +-------------+-----------+-----------------+

            Figure 2: Encapsulation of ISIS frames over ATM

   In the case of broadcast media, MAC addresses are used for adjacency
   identification.  It is rather painful from the implementation
   perspective to assume that an IS-IS must have access to MAC headers
   when receiving frames.  However, based on the observation that
   ethernets have at least one IP address assigned, MAC address
   necessary for adjacency maintenance can be built algorithmically
   using the source address of the IP packet received.  To prevent
   collisions with universally administered addresses, the addresses
   are designated by having bit one in byte zero of the MAC set to 1 to
   indicate locally administered address as specified by the according
   IEEE standard.  When receiving an IP encapsulated ISIS PDU, the
   artificial MAC address is assumed to consist (in network order) of
   4 bytes of source IP address aligned as least significant bytes,
   ``locally administered'' bit being set and all remaining bits being
   zero.  Figure 3 visualizes such an address for a source IP address
   128.127.128.1.

         0 2 4 6  0 2 4 6  0 2 4 6  0 2 4 6  0 2 4 6  0 2 4 6
        +--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+
        |01000000|00000000|10000000|01111111|10000000|00000001|
        +--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+

         Figure 3: Artificial MAC for IP address 128.127.128.1

   When operating on an interface encapsulating IS-IS within IP,
   encapsulated PDUs MUST be sent with a constant IP source address.
   Any change of the IP address on the interface MUST be considered

Bansal et al.                 Expires Nov 1999                  [Page 5]


Internet Draft                 IS-IS over IPv4                  May 1998

   equivalent to change of MAC address in ISO mode.  In all places in
   which MAC addresses are being used in ISO mode, source IP address
   MUST be used to compute artificial MACs when sending and parsing
   received PDUs.

   Any PDU received on IP encapsulated broadcast interface and
   containing MACs with either the ``locally administered'' bit not
   being set or any of the remaining bits in the first two bytes being
   set SHOULD be discarded.  Any configuration in which an interface
   uses a MAC that would be equivalent to such an algorithmic MAC being
   generated on another interface within the same system SHOULD be
   considered a misconfiguration.

4. Interoperability with Devices without IP Encapsulation

   An interoperability solution for devices using IP encapsulation and
   OSI encapsulation of ISIS frames would be only useful if it could
   significantly ease the migration path in the existing networks.
   Given the fact that graceful migration is not a paramount issue for
   existing networks and any solution would invariable lead to the
   problem of partitioning of broadcast media, such a solution is not
   defined.

5. Acknowledgments

   The encapsulation description part has been "borrowed" from a
   well-known RFC [Moy97] with the author's consent.  Tony Li, Dave
   Katz, Mike Shand, Henk Smit, Rajesh Varadarajan, Jeff Swinton, Stacy
   Smith provided constructive comments.

6. Security Consideration

   ISIS security applies to the work presented.  No specific security
   issues with the proposed solutions are known.  Things like IPSec may
   influence the work in strange and unknown ways ;-)

References

   [Alm92]  P. Almquist.  Type of Service in the Internet Protocol
            Suite.  INTERNET-RFC, Internet Engineering Task Force, July
            1992.

Bansal et al.                 Expires Nov 1999                  [Page 6]


Internet Draft                 IS-IS over IPv4                  May 1998

   [Cal90a] R. Callon.  OSI ISIS Intradomain Routing Protocol.
            INTERNET-RFC, Internet Engineering Task Force, February
            1990.

   [Cal90b] R. Callon.  Use of OSI ISIS for Routing in TCP/IP and Dual
            Environments.  INTERNET-RFC, Internet Engineering Task
            Force, December 1990.

   [ISO90]  ISO.  Information Technology - Telecommunications and
            Information Exchange between Systems - Intermediate System
            to Intermediate System Routing Exchange Protocol for
            Use in Conjunction with the Protocol for Providing the
            Connectionless-Mode Network Service.  ISO, 1990.

   [Kat92]  D. Katz.  Rfc 1377, The PPP OSI Network Layer Control
            Protocol (OSINLCP).  Internet Engineering Task Force,
            November 1992.

   [Moy97]  J. Moy.  OSPFv2, RFC 2178.  Internet Engineering Task Force,
            July 1997.

   [Pos81]  J. Postel.  Rfc 791, rfc Internet Protocol.  Internet
            Engineering Task Force, September 1981.

   [RP94]   J. Reynolds and J. Postel.  Rfc 1700, Assigned Numbers.
            Internet Engineering Task Force, October 1994.

   [Wai90]  D. Waitzman.  Rfc 1149, standard for the Transmission of
            IP Datagrams on Avian Carriers.  Internet Engineering Task
            Force, April 1990.

Authors' Addresses

Tony Przygienda
Bell Labs, Lucent Technologies
101 Crawfords Corner Road
Holmdel, NJ 07733-3030
prz@dnrc.bell-labs.com

Ajay Patel
Bell Labs, Lucent Technologies
101 Crawfords Corner Road

Bansal et al.                 Expires Nov 1999                  [Page 7]


Internet Draft                 IS-IS over IPv4                  May 1998

Holmdel, NJ 07733-3030
ajayp@dnrc.bell-labs.com

Atul Bansal
FORE Systems,
1595 Spring Hill Rd
Vienna, VA 22181
bansal@fore.com

Bansal et al.                 Expires Nov 1999                  [Page 8]