MPLS Working Group Pranjal Kumar Dutta
Internet Draft Alcatel-Lucent
Intended status: Standards Track
Expires: September 2009 Giles Heron
Thomas Nadeau
BT
March 3, 2009
Targeted LDP Hello Reduction
draft-pdutta-mpls-tldp-hello-reduce-00.txt
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. This document may not be modified,
and derivative works of it may not be created, and it may not be
published except as an Internet-Draft.
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
This Internet-Draft will expire on September 3, 2009.
Abstract
Targeted LDP Hellos are used for establishing adjacencies with non-
directly connected peers. After an LDP session is established to a
targeted peer, the session Keepalives are sufficient to notify the
intent of an LSR to maintain its adjacency with the peer. This
document proposes a mechanism to turn off Targeted LDP Hellos after
LDP session is established to a peer.
Dutta, et. al. Expires September 3, 2009 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft T-LDP Hello Reduction March 2009
Table of Contents
1. Introduction...................................................2
2. Conventions used in this document..............................3
3. Terminology....................................................3
4. Targeted LDP Hello Reduction Procedure.........................3
5. Security Considerations........................................4
6. IANA Considerations............................................4
7. Conclusion.....................................................5
8. References.....................................................5
8.1. Normative References......................................5
8.2. Informative References....................................5
9. Acknowledgments................................................5
1. Introduction
LDP Hello messages are exchanged as part of the LDP discovery
mechanism [RFC5036]. There are two types of LDP discovery mechanism
described in [RFC5036] - Basic Discovery and Extended Discovery.
To engage in LDP Basic Discovery on an interface, an LSR periodically
sends LDP Link Hellos out the interface to the well-known LDP
discovery port for the "all routers on this subnet" group multicast
address. Receipt of an LDP Link Hello on an interface, identifies a
hello adjacency with a potential LDP peer reachable at the link level
on the interface. Thus an LSR may establish hello adjacency with
multiple peers discovered over a single interface and must continue
to transmit hellos at regular intervals even after hello adjacency is
established to a peer.
Extended discovery is used to support LDP sessions between non-
directly connected LSRs. An LDP Targeted Hello is sent to a specific
address rather than to the "all routers" group multicast address for
the ongoing interface. Receipt of a LDP Targeted Hello indentifies a
hello adjacency with a potential LDP peer at network level.
In Extended discovery there can be only one Targeted Hello Adjacency
between two peers. Note that throughout this document "peer" means
the LDP LSR designated by a unique LDP Identifier. Once the LDP
session is operational between two targeted LDP peers, periodic
session Keepalives are used to maintain the LDP session. After the
session is operational the periodic Targeted Hellos between the LSRs
become redundant, as session Keepalives in turn serves the intent of
each LSR to maintain its adjacency to its peer. When an LSR maintains
a large number of LDP sessions (in thousands) to targeted peers, it
Dutta, et. al. Expires September 3, 2009 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft T-LDP Hello Reduction March 2009
is an additional burden to send and receive Targeted Hellos for all
peers at periodic intervals.
This document proposes an optional mechanism to turn off Targeted LDP
Hellos after a LDP session is established to a targeted peer.
2. Conventions used in this document
INFO (REMOVE): INCLUDE THIS SECTION OR PORTIONS THEREOF IF DESIRED
In examples, "C:" and "S:" indicate lines sent by the client and
server respectively.
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].
3. Terminology
This document uses the terminology defined in [RFC3031] and
[RFC5036].
4. Targeted LDP Hello Reduction Procedure
The Targeted LDP Hello Reduction procedure uses the existing Common
Hello Parameters TLV defined in [RFC5036]. Figure 1. shows the
encoding of the TLV from [RFC5036] for reference.
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0|0| Common Hello Parms(0x0400)| Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Hold Time |T|R| Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 1. Common Hello Parameters TLV.
By definition in [RFC5036], a value of 0 means use the default,
which is 45 seconds for Targeted Hellos. A value of 0xffff means
infinite.
Dutta, et. al. Expires September 3, 2009 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft T-LDP Hello Reduction March 2009
The procedure to be followed for Targeted LDP Hello Reduction
between a pair of LSRs is as follows:
1. An LSR starts transmitting periodic targeted hellos to its peer in
order to establish the targeted hello adjacency. Each LSR proposes
its configured hello hold time in the Common Hello Parameters TLV
in its hello message to the peer. The hold time used between a
pair of LSRs is the minimum of the hold times proposed in their
Hellos.
2. If the Hello is acceptable by receiving LSR it establishes
targeted hello adjacency with the source LSR. Establishment of
Hello adjacency establishes the LDP session between peering LSRs.
3. After the LDP session is ESTABLISHED [RFC5036], each LSR SHOULD
advertise hello holdtime value of 0xffff in the Common Hello
Parameters TLV. Thus after the session is ESTABLISHED, the hello
hold time between the LSRs gets negotiated to infinite. An LSR MAY
implement a locally configurable "tolerance" - the number of
Targeted LDP Hellos to be advertised with infinite hold time after
the LDP session is ESTABLISHED.
4. If the LDP session between two LSRs fails leading to tearing down
of adjacency, then each LSR reverts to advertising their
configured hello hold time and repeats procedure 1 to 3.
It is RECOMMENDED that each peering LSR implements the Targeted LDP
Hello Reduction procedure; otherwise negotiated hello hold time
between the LSRs does not fall back to the infinite hold time in step
3.
5. Security Considerations
- Control plane aspects
- LDP security (authentication) methods as described in [RFC5036]
is applicable here.
- Data plane aspects
- This specification does not have any impact on the MPLS
forwarding plane setup by LDP.
6. IANA Considerations
This document does not require any IANA consideration.
Dutta, et. al. Expires September 3, 2009 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft T-LDP Hello Reduction March 2009
7. Conclusion
The method proposed in the document reduces significant burden on an
LDP LSR that maintains Targeted LDP sessions to a large number (in
thousands) of peers. Further, if BFD [BFD][BFD-MHOP] is used for
tracking connectivity to peers it is desirable to turn off Targeted
LDP hellos after the LDP session is setup.
8. References
8.1. Normative References
[RFC5036] Andersson, L., et al. "LDP Specification", RFC5036,
October 2007.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
8.2. Informative References
[RFC3031] Rosen, E., et al. "Multiprotocol Label Switching
Architecture", RFC 3031, January 2001.
[BFD] Katz, D., et al. "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection",
draft-ietf-bfd-base-09.txt, February 2009.
[BFD-MHOP] Katz, D., et al. "BFD for Multihop Paths",
draft-ietf-bfd-multihop-07.txt, February 2009.
9. Acknowledgments
The authors would like acknowledge the comments and suggestions from
Wim Henderickx, Vach Kompella, Florin Balus, Mustapha Aissaoui,
Mathew Bocci and Paul Kwok.
This document was prepared using 2-Word-v2.0.template.dot.
Dutta, et. al. Expires September 3, 2009 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft T-LDP Hello Reduction March 2009
Authors' Addresses
Pranjal Kumar Dutta
701 E Middlefield Road,
Mountain View, CA 94043.
USA.
Email: pdutta@alcatel-lucent.com
Giles Heron
BT
Email: giles.heron@gmail.com
Thomas D. Nadeau
BT
BT Centre
81 Newgate Street
London EC1A 7AJ
United Kingdom
EMail: tom.nadeau@bt.com
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2009 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 in effect on the date of
publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
and restrictions with respect to this document.
Dutta, et. al. Expires September 3, 2009 [Page 6]