MPLS S. Boutros
Internet-Draft S. Bryant, Ed.
Intended status: Standards Track S. Sivabalan
Expires: September 6, 2010 G . Swallow
Cisco Systems
D. Ward
Juniper Networks
V. Manral
IP Infusion Inc.
March 5, 2010
Definition of ACH TLV Structure
draft-ietf-mpls-tp-ach-tlv-02
Abstract
In some application of the associated channel header (ACH), it is
necessary to have the ability to include a set of TLVs to provide
additional context information for the ACH payload. This document
defines a number of TLV types.
This document is a product of a joint Internet Engineering Task Force
(IETF) / International Telecommunications Union Telecommunications
Standardization Sector (ITU-T) effort to include an MPLS Transport
Profile within the IETF MPLS and PWE3 architectures to support the
capabilities and functionalities of a packet transport network as
defined by the ITU-T.
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 RFC2119 [1].
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
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
Boutros, et al. Expires September 6, 2010 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft ACH TLV March 2010
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.
This Internet-Draft will expire on September 6, 2010.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2010 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
(http://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 BSD License.
Boutros, et al. Expires September 6, 2010 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft ACH TLV March 2010
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2. ACH TLV Object Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.1. The Null TLV Object . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.2. IPv4 Source Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.3. IPv6 Source Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.4. ITU-T Carrier Code . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.5. Global Identifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.6. Network Interface Identifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.7. Authentication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Boutros, et al. Expires September 6, 2010 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft ACH TLV March 2010
1. Introduction
The MPLS generic associated channel header specification [6] (GACH)
describes a TLV structure that is used to provide additional context
information for the ACH payload. This document defines a number of
TLVs that are required by the MPLS-TP design [7], [8].
2. ACH TLV Object Definitions
This section provides the definition for a number of ACH TLV objects.
In each case the length in the TLV header is the length of only the
value component.
2.1. The Null TLV Object
The Null TLV provides an OPTIONAL mechanism of restoring 32bit
alignment of the following element in the packet and also provides an
OPTIONAL mechanism to reserve space in the packet to be used by TLV
objects that will be written by LSR that perform some operation on
the packet at a later time. For security reasons the value must be
zero.
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AchTlvType = 0 | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
~ Value = 0 ~
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 1: Null TLV Object
2.2. IPv4 Source Address
This TLV specifies the IPv4 [2] source address (SAv4) of an ACH
packet.
Where the packet is associated with a maintenance request/response
operation it refers to the requester of the operation, i.e. It is
the address of the Maintenance End Point that initiated the operation
being either requested, or is being responded to.
Boutros, et al. Expires September 6, 2010 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft ACH TLV March 2010
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AchTlvType = 1 | Length = 4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| IPv4 Address |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 2: IPv4 Source Address
2.3. IPv6 Source Address
This TLV specifies the IPv6 [3] source address (SAv6) of an ACH
packet.
Where the packet is associated with a maintenance request/response
operation it refers to the requester of the operation, i.e. It is
the address of the Maintenance End Point that initiated the operation
being either requested, or is being responded to.
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AchTlvType = 2 | Length = 16 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
~ IPv6 Address |
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 3: IPv4 Source Address
2.4. ITU-T Carrier Code
This TLV is used to carry an ITU-T Carrier Code Identifier (ICC) as
defined in M.1400 [4].
Boutros, et al. Expires September 6, 2010 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft ACH TLV March 2010
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AchTlvType = 3 | Length = 16 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ICC |
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 4: ITU-T Carrier Code
The ICC is encoded in ASCII in a fixed format 6 byte field, with
unused trailing bytes set to NULL (0).
2.5. Global Identifier
This TLV is used to carry a Global Identifier (Global_ID) [5] .
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AchTlvType = 4 | Length = 4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Global ID |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 5: Global_ID TLV
2.6. Network Interface Identifier
This TLV is used to carry Network Interface ID (IF_ID) [5] . As
defined in [5], an IF_ID consists of a node identifier (Node_ID) and
a Logical Interface Handle (LIH), both or which are 32 bit
identifiers.
Boutros, et al. Expires September 6, 2010 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft ACH TLV March 2010
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AchTlvType = 5 | Length = 8 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Node_ID |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| LIH |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 6: IF_ID TLV
2.7. Authentication
The structure of the ACH authentication (auth) TLV is as follows:
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AchTlvType = 6 | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Auth Type | Auth Len | Authentication Data... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
The authentication proceedures and data format used is the same as
that defined in Sections 4.1, 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4 of [9] .
Each document which defines a channel type needs to define whether an
authentication TLV is required, permitted, or disallowed, and the
actions to be taken in normal and error situations.
An application not supporting data origin authentication MAY use this
mechanism instead of defining its own proprietery mechanism.
3. Security Considerations
This specification defines a mechanism to identify a set of protocol
parameters. The necessary security considerations will be described
in the definition of the protocols that uses these parameters.
4. IANA Considerations
IANA is requested to create a new registry in the pseudowire name
spaces: the ACH TLV Registry.
The ACH TLV Registry should be initialized with the following
Boutros, et al. Expires September 6, 2010 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft ACH TLV March 2010
entries. The allocation policy for this registry is IETF consensus.
Name Type Length Description Reference
(octets)
Null 0 3 Null TLV This Draft
SAv4 1 4 IPv4 Source Address This Draft
SAv6 2 16 IPv6 Source Address This Draft
ICC 3 6 ITU-T Carrier Code This Draft
Global_ID 4 4 Global Identifier This Draft
IF_ID 5 8 Network Interface ID This Draft
Auth 6 var Authentication This Draft
5. References
5.1. Normative References
[1] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement
Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[2] Postel, J., "Internet Protocol", STD 5, RFC 791, September 1981.
[3] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6)
Specification", RFC 2460, December 1998.
[4] "ITU-T Recommendation M.1400, "Designations for interconnections
among operators' networks"", 2006.
[5] Bocci, M. and G. Swallow, "MPLS-TP Identifiers",
draft-ietf-mpls-tp-identifiers-00 (work in progress),
November 2009.
5.2. Informative References
[6] Bocci, M., Vigoureux, M., and S. Bryant, "MPLS Generic
Associated Channel", RFC 5586, June 2009.
[7] Niven-Jenkins, B., Brungard, D., Betts, M., Sprecher, N., and S.
Ueno, "Requirements of an MPLS Transport Profile", RFC 5654,
September 2009.
[8] Bocci, M., Bryant, S., Frost, D., Levrau, L., and L. Berger, "A
Framework for MPLS in Transport Networks",
draft-ietf-mpls-tp-framework-10 (work in progress),
February 2010.
[9] Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection",
draft-ietf-bfd-base-11 (work in progress), January 2010.
Boutros, et al. Expires September 6, 2010 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft ACH TLV March 2010
Authors' Addresses
Sami Boutros
Cisco Systems
Email: sboutros@cisco.com
Stewart Bryant (editor)
Cisco Systems
Email: stbryant@cisco.com
Siva Sivabalan
Cisco Systems
Email: msiva@cisco.com
George Swallow
Cisco Systems
Email: swallow@cisco.com
David Ward
Juniper Networks
Email: dward@Juniper.net
Vishwas Manral
IP Infusion Inc.
Bamankhola,
Bansgali,, Almora, Uttaranchal 263601
India
Email: vishwas.ietf@gmail.com
Boutros, et al. Expires September 6, 2010 [Page 9]