Routing Bridges (RBridges): Base Protocol Specification
RFC 6325
|
| Document |
Type |
|
RFC - Proposed Standard
(July 2011; Errata)
|
|
Last updated |
|
2015-10-14
|
|
Replaces |
|
draft-perlman-trill-rbridge-protocol
|
|
Stream |
|
IETF
|
|
Formats |
|
plain text
pdf
html
bibtex
|
|
Reviews |
|
|
| Stream |
WG state
|
|
Submitted to IESG for Publication
|
|
Document shepherd |
|
No shepherd assigned
|
| IESG |
IESG state |
|
RFC 6325 (Proposed Standard)
|
|
Consensus Boilerplate |
|
Unknown
|
|
Telechat date |
|
|
|
Responsible AD |
|
Ralph Droms
|
|
IESG note |
|
Erik Nordmark (erik.nordmark@sun.com) is the Document Shepherd.
|
|
Send notices to |
|
(None)
|
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) R. Perlman
Request for Comments: 6325 Intel Labs
Category: Standards Track D. Eastlake 3rd
ISSN: 2070-1721 Huawei
D. Dutt
S. Gai
Cisco Systems
A. Ghanwani
Brocade
July 2011
Routing Bridges (RBridges): Base Protocol Specification
Abstract
Routing Bridges (RBridges) provide optimal pair-wise forwarding
without configuration, safe forwarding even during periods of
temporary loops, and support for multipathing of both unicast and
multicast traffic. They achieve these goals using IS-IS routing and
encapsulation of traffic with a header that includes a hop count.
RBridges are compatible with previous IEEE 802.1 customer bridges as
well as IPv4 and IPv6 routers and end nodes. They are as invisible
to current IP routers as bridges are and, like routers, they
terminate the bridge spanning tree protocol.
The design supports VLANs and the optimization of the distribution of
multi-destination frames based on VLAN ID and based on IP-derived
multicast groups. It also allows unicast forwarding tables at
transit RBridges to be sized according to the number of RBridges
(rather than the number of end nodes), which allows their forwarding
tables to be substantially smaller than in conventional customer
bridges.
Status of This Memo
This is an Internet Standards Track document.
This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
(IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has
received public review and has been approved for publication by the
Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on
Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 5741.
Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6325.
Perlman, et al. Standards Track [Page 1]
RFC 6325 RBridge Protocol July 2011
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2011 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 Simplified BSD License.
This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF
Contributions published or made publicly available before November
10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this
material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow
modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process.
Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling
the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified
outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may
not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format
it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other
than English.
Perlman, et al. Standards Track [Page 2]
RFC 6325 RBridge Protocol July 2011
Table of Contents
1. Introduction ....................................................6
1.1. Algorhyme V2, by Ray Perlner ...............................7
1.2. Normative Content and Precedence ...........................7
1.3. Terminology and Notation in This Document ..................7
1.4. Categories of Layer 2 Frames ...............................8
1.5. Acronyms ...................................................9
2. RBridges .......................................................11
2.1. General Overview ..........................................11
2.2. End-Station Addresses .....................................12
Show full document text