LDP Extensions for Optimized MAC Address Withdrawal in a Hierarchical Virtual Private LAN Service (H-VPLS)
RFC 7361
| Document | Type | RFC - Proposed Standard (September 2014) Errata IPR | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Pranjal Dutta , Florin Balus , Olen Stokes , Don Fedyk , Geraldine Calvginac | ||
| Last updated | 2020-01-21 | ||
| Replaces | draft-pdutta-l2vpn-vpls-ldp-mac-opt | ||
| RFC stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Reviews |
OPSDIR Telechat review
(of
-12)
Not Ready
OPSDIR Last Call review
(of
-11)
Serious Issues
GENART Last Call review
(of
-11)
Ready with Issues
|
||
| Additional resources | Mailing list discussion | ||
| Stream | WG state | Submitted to IESG for Publication | |
| Document shepherd | Dr. Nabil N. Bitar | ||
| Shepherd write-up | Show Last changed 2014-03-11 | ||
| IESG | IESG state | RFC 7361 (Proposed Standard) | |
| Action Holders |
(None)
|
||
| Consensus boilerplate | Yes | ||
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | Adrian Farrel | ||
| Send notices to | (None) | ||
| IANA | IANA review state | Version Changed - Review Needed | |
| IANA action state | RFC-Ed-Ack |
RFC 7361
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) P. Dutta
Request for Comments: 7361 F. Balus
Category: Standards Track Alcatel-Lucent
ISSN: 2070-1721 O. Stokes
Extreme Networks
G. Calvignac
Orange
D. Fedyk
Hewlett-Packard
September 2014
LDP Extensions for Optimized MAC Address Withdrawal
in a Hierarchical Virtual Private LAN Service (H-VPLS)
Abstract
RFC 4762 describes a mechanism to remove or unlearn Media Access
Control (MAC) addresses that have been dynamically learned in a
Virtual Private LAN Service (VPLS) instance for faster convergence on
topology changes. The procedure also removes MAC addresses in the
VPLS that do not require relearning due to such topology changes.
This document defines an enhancement to the MAC address withdraw
procedure with an empty MAC list (RFC 4762); this enhancement enables
a Provider Edge (PE) device to remove only the MAC addresses that
need to be relearned. Additional extensions to RFC 4762 MAC withdraw
procedures are specified to provide an optimized MAC flushing for the
Provider Backbone Bridging (PBB) VPLS specified in RFC 7041.
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/rfc7361.
Dutta, et al. Standards Track [Page 1]
RFC 7361 Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS September 2014
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2014 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.
Dutta, et al. Standards Track [Page 2]
RFC 7361 Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS September 2014
Table of Contents
1. Introduction ....................................................4
2. Terminology .....................................................6
2.1. Requirements Language ......................................6
3. Overview ........................................................6
3.1. MAC Flushing on Activation of Backup Spoke PW ..............8
3.1.1. MAC Flushing Initiated by PE-rs .....................8
3.1.2. MAC Flushing Initiated by MTU-s .....................8
3.2. MAC Flushing on Failure ....................................9
3.3. MAC Flushing in PBB-VPLS ..................................10
4. Problem Description ............................................10
4.1. MAC Flushing Optimization in VPLS Resiliency ..............10
4.1.1. MAC Flushing Optimization for Regular H-VPLS .......11
4.1.2. MAC Flushing Optimization for Native Ethernet
Access .............................................13
4.2. Black-Holing Issue in PBB-VPLS ............................13
5. Solution Description ...........................................14
5.1. MAC Flushing Optimization for VPLS Resiliency .............14
5.1.1. MAC Flush Parameters TLV ...........................15
5.1.2. Application of the MAC Flush TLV in
Optimized MAC Flushing .............................16
5.1.3. MAC Flush TLV Processing Rules for Regular VPLS ....17
5.1.4. Optimized MAC Flush Procedures .....................18
5.2. LDP MAC Flush Extensions for PBB-VPLS .....................19
5.2.1. MAC Flush TLV Processing Rules for PBB-VPLS ........20
5.2.2. Applicability of the MAC Flush Parameters TLV ......22
6. Operational Considerations .....................................23
7. IANA Considerations ............................................24
7.1. New LDP TLV ...............................................24
7.2. New Registry for MAC Flush Flags ..........................24
8. Security Considerations ........................................24
9. Contributing Author ............................................25
10. Acknowledgements ..............................................25
11. References ....................................................25
11.1. Normative References .....................................25
11.2. Informative References ...................................25
Dutta, et al. Standards Track [Page 3]
RFC 7361 Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS September 2014
1. Introduction
A method of Virtual Private LAN Service (VPLS), also known as
Transparent LAN Services (TLS), is described in [RFC4762]. A VPLS is
created using a collection of one or more point-to-point pseudowires
(PWs) [RFC4664] configured in a flat, full-mesh topology. The mesh
topology provides a LAN segment or broadcast domain that is fully
capable of learning and forwarding on Ethernet Media Access Control
(MAC) addresses at the Provider Edge (PE) devices.
This VPLS full-mesh core configuration can be augmented with
additional non-meshed spoke nodes to provide a Hierarchical VPLS
(H-VPLS) service [RFC4762]. Throughout this document, this
configuration is referred to as "regular" H-VPLS.
[RFC7041] describes how Provider Backbone Bridging (PBB) can be
integrated with VPLS to allow for useful PBB capabilities while
continuing to avoid the use of the Multiple Spanning Tree Protocol
(MSTP) in the backbone. The combined solution, referred to as
"PBB-VPLS", results in better scalability in terms of number of
service instances, PWs, and C-MAC (Customer MAC) addresses that need
to be handled in the VPLS PEs, depending on the location of the
I-component in the PBB-VPLS topology.
A MAC address withdrawal mechanism for VPLS is described in [RFC4762]
to remove or unlearn MAC addresses for faster convergence on topology
changes in resilient H-VPLS topologies. Note that the H-VPLS
topology discussed in [RFC4762] describes the two-tier hierarchy in
VPLS as the basic building block of H-VPLS, but it is possible to
have a multi-tier hierarchy in an H-VPLS.
Dutta, et al. Standards Track [Page 4]
RFC 7361 Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS September 2014
Figure 1 is reproduced from [RFC4762] and illustrates dual-homing
in H-VPLS.
PE2-rs
+--------+
| |
| -- |
| / \ |
CE-1 | \S / |
\ | -- |
\ +--------+
\ MTU-s PE1-rs / |
+--------+ +--------+ / |
| | | | / |
| -- | Primary PW | -- |---/ |
| / \ |- - - - - - - - - - - | / \ | |
| \S / | | \S / | |
| -- | | -- |---\ |
+--------+ +--------+ \ |
/ \ \ |
/ \ +--------+
/ \ | |
CE-2 \ | -- |
\ Secondary PW | / \ |
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - | \S / |
| -- |
+--------+
PE3-rs
Figure 1: An Example of a Dual-Homed MTU-s
An example usage of the MAC flushing mechanism is the dual-homed
H-VPLS where an edge device called the Multi-Tenant Unit switch
(MTU-s) [RFC4762] is connected to two PE devices via a primary spoke
PW and backup spoke PW, respectively. Such redundancy is designed to
protect against the failure of the primary spoke PW or primary PE
device. There could be multiple methods of dual-homing in H-VPLS
that are not described in [RFC4762]. For example, note the following
statement from Section 10.2.1 of [RFC4762].
How a spoke is designated primary or secondary is outside the
scope of this document. For example, a spanning tree instance
running between only the MTU-s and the two PE-rs nodes is one
possible method. Another method could be configuration.
This document intends to clarify several H-VPLS dual-homing models
that are deployed in practice and various use cases of LDP-based MAC
flushing in these models.
Dutta, et al. Standards Track [Page 5]
RFC 7361 Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS September 2014
2. Terminology
This document uses the terminology defined in [RFC7041], [RFC5036],
[RFC4447], and [RFC4762].
Throughout this document, "Virtual Private LAN Service" (VPLS) refers
to the emulated bridged LAN service offered to a customer. "H-VPLS"
refers to the hierarchical connectivity or layout of the MTU-s and
the Provider Edge routing- and switching-capable (PE-rs) devices
offering the VPLS [RFC4762].
The terms "spoke node" and "MTU-s" in H-VPLS are used
interchangeably.
"Spoke PW" refers to the Pseudowire (PW) that provides connectivity
between MTU-s and PE-rs nodes.
"Mesh PW" refers to the PW that provides connectivity between PE-rs
nodes in a VPLS full-mesh core.
"MAC flush message" refers to a Label Distribution Protocol (LDP)
address withdraw message without a MAC List TLV.
A MAC flush message "in the context of a PW" refers to the message
that has been received over the LDP session that is used to set up
the PW used to provide connectivity in VPLS. The MAC flush message
carries the context of the PW in terms of the Forwarding Equivalence
Class (FEC) TLV associated with the PW [RFC4762] [RFC4447].
In general, "MAC flushing" refers to the method of initiating and
processing MAC flush messages across a VPLS instance.
2.1. 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].
3. Overview
When the MTU-s switches over to the backup PW, the requirement is to
flush the MAC addresses learned in the corresponding Virtual Switch
Instance (VSI) in peer PE devices participating in the full mesh, to
avoid the black-holing of frames to those addresses. This is
accomplished by sending an LDP address withdraw message -- a new
message defined in this document -- from the PE that is no longer
Dutta, et al. Standards Track [Page 6]
RFC 7361 Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS September 2014
connected to the MTU-s with the primary PW. The new message contains
a list of MAC addresses to be removed and is sent to all other PEs
over the corresponding LDP sessions.
In order to minimize the impact on LDP convergence time and
scalability when a MAC List TLV contains a large number of MAC
addresses, many implementations use an LDP address withdraw message
with an empty MAC list. When a PE-rs switch in the full mesh of
H-VPLS receives this message, it also flushes MAC addresses that are
not affected due to the topology change, thus leading to unnecessary
flooding and relearning. Throughout this document, the term "MAC
flush message" is used to specify an LDP address withdraw message
with an empty MAC list as described in [RFC4762]. The solutions
described in this document are applicable only to LDP address
withdraw messages with empty MAC lists.
In a VPLS topology, the core PWs remain active and learning happens
on the PE-rs nodes. However, when the VPLS topology changes, the
PE-rs must relearn using MAC address withdrawal or flushing. As per
the MAC address withdrawal processing rules in [RFC4762], a PE
device, on receiving a MAC flush message, removes all MAC addresses
associated with the specified VPLS instance (as indicated in the FEC
TLV) except the MAC addresses learned over the PW associated with
this signaling session over which the message was received.
Throughout this document, we use the terminology "positive" MAC
flushing or "flush-all-but-mine" for this type of MAC flush message
and its actions.
This document introduces an optimized "negative" MAC flush message,
described in Section 3.2, that can be configured to improve the
response to topology changes in a number of Ethernet topologies where
the Service Level Agreement (SLA) is dependent on minimal disruption
and fast restoration of affected traffic. This new message is used
in the case of Provider Backbone Bridging (PBB) topologies to
restrict the flushing to a set of service instances (I-SIDs). It is
also important to note that the MAC flush message described in
[RFC4762], which is called "a positive MAC flush message" in this
document, MUST always be handled for Backbone MACs (B-MACs) in cases
where the core nodes change or fail. In dual-homed or multi-homed
edge topologies, the procedures in this document augment [RFC4762]
messages and provide less disruption for those cases.
Dutta, et al. Standards Track [Page 7]
RFC 7361 Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS September 2014
3.1. MAC Flushing on Activation of Backup Spoke PW
This section describes scenarios where MAC flush withdrawal is
initiated on activation of a backup PW in H-VPLS.
3.1.1. MAC Flushing Initiated by PE-rs
[RFC4762] specifies that on failure of the primary PW it is PE3-rs
(Figure 1) that initiates MAC flushing towards the core. However,
note that PE3-rs can initiate MAC flushing only when PE3-rs is
dual-homing "aware" -- that is, there is some redundancy management
protocol running between the MTU-s and its host PE-rs devices. The
scope of this document is applicable to several dual-homing or
multi-homing protocols. This document illustrates that multi-homing
can be improved with negative MAC flushing. One example is BGP-based
multi-homing in LDP-based VPLS, which uses the procedures defined in
[VPLS-MH]. In this method of dual-homing, PE3-rs would neither
forward any traffic to the MTU-s nor receive any traffic from the
MTU-s while PE1-rs is acting as a primary (or designated forwarder).
3.1.2. MAC Flushing Initiated by MTU-s
When dual-homing is achieved by manual configuration in the MTU-s,
the hosting PE-rs devices are dual-homing "agnostic", and PE3-rs
cannot initiate MAC flush messages. PE3-rs can send or receive
traffic over the backup PW, since the dual-homing control is with the
MTU-s only. When the backup PW is made active by the MTU-s, the
MTU-s triggers a MAC flush message. The message is sent over the LDP
session associated with the newly activated PW. On receiving the MAC
flush message from the MTU-s, PE3-rs (the PE-rs device with a
now-active PW) would flush all the MAC addresses it has learned,
except the ones learned over the newly activated spoke PW. PE3-rs
further initiates a MAC flush message to all other PE devices in the
core. Note that a forced switchover to the backup PW can also be
invoked by the MTU-s due to maintenance or administrative activities
on the former primary spoke PW.
The method of MAC flushing initiated by the MTU-s is modeled after
Topology Change Notification (TCN) in the Rapid Spanning Tree
Protocol (RSTP) [IEEE.802.1Q-2011]. When a bridge switches from a
failed link to the backup link, the bridge sends out a TCN message
over the newly activated link. Upon receiving this message, the
upstream bridge flushes its entire list of MAC addresses, except the
ones received over this link. The upstream bridge then sends the TCN
message out of its other ports in that spanning tree instance. The
message is further relayed along the spanning tree by the other
bridges.
Dutta, et al. Standards Track [Page 8]
RFC 7361 Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS September 2014
The MAC flushing information is propagated in the control plane. The
control-plane message propagation is associated with the data path
and hence follows propagation rules similar to those used for
forwarding in the LDP data plane. For example, PE-rs nodes follow
the data-plane "split-horizon" forwarding rules in H-VPLS (refer to
Section 4.4 of [RFC4762]). Therefore, a MAC flush message is
propagated in the context of mesh PW(s) when it is received in the
context of a spoke PW. When a PE-rs node receives a MAC flush
message in the context of a mesh PW, then it is not propagated to
other mesh PWs.
3.2. MAC Flushing on Failure
MAC flushing on failure, or "negative" MAC flushing, is introduced in
this document. Negative MAC flushing is an improvement on the
current practice of sending a MAC flush message with an empty MAC
list as described in Section 3.1.1. We use the term "negative" MAC
flushing or "flush-all-from-me" for this kind of flushing action as
opposed to the "positive" MAC flush action in [RFC4762]. In negative
MAC flushing, the MAC flushing is initiated by PE1-rs (Figure 1) on
detection of failure of the primary spoke PW. The MAC flush message
is sent to all participating PE-rs devices in the VPLS full mesh.
PE1-rs should initiate MAC flushing only if PE1-rs is dual-homing
aware. (If PE1-rs is dual-homing agnostic, the policy is to not
initiate MAC flushing on failure, since that could cause unnecessary
flushing in the case of a single-homed MTU-s.) The specific dual-
homing protocols for this scenario are outside the scope of this
document, but the operator can choose to use the optimized MAC
flushing described in this document or the [RFC4762] procedures.
The procedure for negative MAC flushing is beneficial and results in
less disruption than the [RFC4762] procedures, including when the
MTU-s is dual-homed with a variety of Ethernet technologies, not just
LDP. The negative MAC flush message is a more targeted MAC flush,
and the other PE-rs nodes will flush only the specified MACs. This
targeted MAC flush cannot be achieved with the MAC address withdraw
message defined in [RFC4762]. Negative MAC flushing typically
results in a smaller set of MACs to be flushed and results in less
disruption for these topologies.
Note that in the case of negative MAC flushing the list SHOULD be
only the MACs for the affected MTU-s. If the list is empty, then the
negative MAC flush procedures will result in flushing and relearning
all attached MTU-s devices for the originating PE-rs.
Dutta, et al. Standards Track [Page 9]
RFC 7361 Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS September 2014
3.3. MAC Flushing in PBB-VPLS
[RFC7041] describes how PBB can be integrated with VPLS to allow for
useful PBB capabilities while continuing to avoid the use of MSTP in
the backbone. The combined solution, referred to as "PBB-VPLS",
results in better scalability in terms of the number of service
instances, PWs, and C-MACs that need to be handled in the VPLS PE-rs
devices. This document describes extensions to LDP MAC flushing
procedures described in [RFC4762] that are required to build
desirable capabilities for the PBB-VPLS solution.
The solution proposed in this document is generic and is applicable
when Multi-Segment Pseudowires (MS-PWs) [RFC6073] are used in
interconnecting PE devices in H-VPLS. There could be other H-VPLS
models not defined in this document where the solution may be
applicable.
4. Problem Description
This section describes the problems in detail with respect to various
MAC flushing actions described in Section 3.
4.1. MAC Flushing Optimization in VPLS Resiliency
This section describes the optimizations required in MAC flushing
procedures when H-VPLS resiliency is provided by primary and backup
spoke PWs.
Dutta, et al. Standards Track [Page 10]
RFC 7361 Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS September 2014
4.1.1. MAC Flushing Optimization for Regular H-VPLS
Figure 2 shows a dual-homed H-VPLS scenario for a VPLS instance,
where the problem with the existing MAC flushing method is as
explained in Section 3.
PE1-rs PE3-rs
+--------+ +--------+
| | | |
| -- | | -- |
Customer Site 1 | / \ |------------------| / \ |->Z
X->CE-1 /-----| \s / | | \s / |
\ primary spoke PW | -- | /------| -- |
\ / +--------+ / +--------+
\ (MTU-s)/ | \ / |
+--------+/ | \ / |
| | | \ / |
| -- | | \ / |
| / \ | | H-VPLS Full-Mesh Core|
| \s / | | / \ |
| -- | | / \ |
/+--------+\ | / \ |
/ backup spoke PW | / \ |
/ \ +--------+ \--------+--------+
Y->CE-2 \ | | | |
Customer Site 2 \------| -- | | -- |
| / \ |------------------| / \ |->
| \s / | | \s / |
| -- | | -- |
+--------+ +--------+
PE2-rs PE4-rs
Figure 2: Dual-Homed MTU-s in Two-Tier Hierarchy H-VPLS
In Figure 2, the MTU-s is dual-homed to PE1-rs and PE2-rs. Only the
primary spoke PW is active at the MTU-s; thus, PE1-rs is acting as
the active device (designated forwarder) to reach the full mesh in
the VPLS instance. The MAC addresses of nodes located at access
sites (behind CE-1 and CE-2) are learned at PE1-rs over the primary
spoke PW. Let's say X represents a set of such MAC addresses located
behind CE-1. MAC Z represents one of a possible set of other
destination MACs. As packets flow from X to other MACs in the VPLS
network, PE2-rs, PE3-rs, and PE4-rs learn about X on their respective
mesh PWs terminating at PE1-rs. When the MTU-s switches to the
backup spoke PW and activates it, PE2-rs becomes the active device
(designated forwarder) to reach the full-mesh core for the MTU-s.
Traffic entering the H-VPLS from CE-1 and CE-2 is diverted by the
MTU-s to the spoke PW to PE2-rs. Traffic destined from PE2-rs,
Dutta, et al. Standards Track [Page 11]
RFC 7361 Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS September 2014
PE3-rs, and PE4-rs to X will be black-holed until the MAC address
aging timer expires (the default is 5 minutes) or a packet flows from
X to other addresses through PE2-rs.
For example, if a packet flows from MAC Z to MAC X after the backup
spoke PW is active, packets from MAC Z travel from PE3-rs to PE1-rs
and are dropped. However, if a packet with MAC X as source and MAC Z
as destination arrives at PE2-rs, PE2-rs will now learn that MAC X is
on the backup spoke PW and will forward to MAC Z. At this point,
traffic from PE3-rs to MAC X will go to PE2-rs, since PE3-rs has also
learned about MAC X. Therefore, a mechanism is required to make this
learning more timely in cases where traffic is not bidirectional.
To avoid traffic black-holing, the MAC addresses that have been
learned in the upstream VPLS full mesh through PE1-rs must be
relearned or removed from the MAC Forwarding Information Bases (FIBs)
in the VSIs at PE2-rs, PE3-rs, and PE4-rs. If PE1-rs and PE2-rs are
dual-homing agnostic, then on activation of the standby PW from the
MTU-s, a MAC flush message will be sent by the MTU-s to PE2-rs that
will flush all the MAC addresses learned in the VPLS instance at
PE2-rs from all other PWs except the PW connected to the MTU-s.
PE2-rs further relays the MAC flush messages to all other PE-rs
devices in the full mesh. The same processing rule applies for all
those PE-rs devices: all the MAC addresses are flushed except the
ones learned on the PW connected to PE2-rs. For example, at PE3-rs
all of the MAC addresses learned from the PWs connected to PE1-rs and
PE4-rs are flushed and relearned subsequently. Before the relearning
happens, flooding of unknown destination MAC addresses takes place
throughout the network. As the number of PE-rs devices in the full
mesh increases, the number of unaffected MAC addresses flushed in a
VPLS instance also increases, thus leading to unnecessary flooding
and relearning. With a large number of VPLS instances provisioned in
the H-VPLS network topology, the amount of unnecessary flooding and
relearning increases. An optimization, described below, is required
that will flush only the MAC addresses learned from the respective
PWs between PE1-rs and other PE devices in the full mesh, to minimize
the relearning and flooding in the network. In the example above,
only the MAC addresses in sets X and Y (shown in Figure 2) need to be
flushed across the core.
The same case is applicable when PE1-rs and PE2-rs are dual-homing
aware and participate in a designated forwarder election. When
PE2-rs becomes the active device for the MTU-s, then PE2-rs MAY
initiate MAC flushing towards the core. The receiving action of the
MAC flush message in other PE-rs devices is the same as in MAC
flushing initiated by the MTU-s. This is the behavior specified in
[RFC4762].
Dutta, et al. Standards Track [Page 12]
RFC 7361 Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS September 2014
4.1.2. MAC Flushing Optimization for Native Ethernet Access
The analysis in Section 4.1.1 applies also to the native Ethernet
access into a VPLS. In such a scenario, one active endpoint and one
or more standby endpoints terminate into two or more VPLS or H-VPLS
PE-rs devices. Examples of this dual-homed access are ITU-T
[ITU.G8032] access rings or any proprietary multi-chassis Link
Aggregation Group (LAG) emulations. Upon failure of the active
native Ethernet endpoint on PE1-rs, an optimized MAC flush message is
required to be initiated by PE1-rs to ensure that on PE2-rs, PE3-rs,
and PE4-rs only the MAC addresses learned from the respective PWs
connected to PE1-rs are being flushed.
4.2. Black-Holing Issue in PBB-VPLS
In a PBB-VPLS deployment, a B-component VPLS (B-VPLS) may be used as
infrastructure to support one or more I-component instances. The
B-VPLS control plane (LDP Signaling) and learning of Backbone MACs
(B-MACs) replace the I-component control plane and learning of
Customer MACs (C-MACs) throughout the MPLS core. This raises an
additional challenge related to black-hole avoidance in the
I-component domain as described in this section. Figure 3 describes
the case of a Customer Edge (CE) device (node A) dual-homed to two
I-component instances located on two PBB-VPLS PEs (PE1-rs and
PE2-rs).
IP/MPLS Core
+--------------+
|PE2-rs |
+----+ |
|PBB | |
|VPLS| +-+ |
|(B2)|---|P| |
Stby/+----+ /+-+\ |PE3-rs
/ +----+ / \+----+
+---+/ |PBB |/ +-+ |PBB | +---+
C-MAC X--|CE |---|VPLS|---|P|--|VPLS|---|CE |--C-MAC Y
| |Act|(B1)| +-+ | | | |
+---+ +----+ +----+ +---+
A |PE1-rs | B
| |
+--------------+
Figure 3: PBB Black-Holing Issue - CE Dual-Homing Use Case
The link between PE1-rs and CE-A is active (marked with A), while the
link between CE-A and PE2-rs is in standby/blocked status. In the
network diagram, C-MAC X is one of the MAC addresses located behind
Dutta, et al. Standards Track [Page 13]
RFC 7361 Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS September 2014
CE-A in the customer domain, C-MAC Y is behind CE-B, and the B-VPLS
instances on PE1-rs are associated with B-MAC B1 and PE2-rs with
B-MAC B2.
As the packets flow from C-MAC X to C-MAC Y through PE1-rs with
B-MAC B1, the remote PE-rs devices participating in the B-VPLS with
the same I-SID (for example, PE3-rs) will learn the C-MAC X
associated with B-MAC B1 on PE1-rs. Under a failure condition of the
link between CE-A and PE1-rs and on activation of the link to PE2-rs,
the remote PE-rs devices (for example, PE3-rs) will forward the
traffic destined for C-MAC X to B-MAC B1, resulting in PE1-rs black-
holing that traffic until the aging timer expires or a packet flows
from X to Y through PE2-rs (B-MAC B2). This may take a long time
(the default aging timer is 5 minutes) and may affect a large number
of flows across multiple I-components.
A possible solution to this issue is to use the existing LDP MAC
flushing method as specified in [RFC4762] to flush the B-MAC
associated with the PE-rs in the B-VPLS domain where the failure
occurred. This will automatically flush the C-MAC-to-B-MAC
association in the remote PE-rs devices. This solution has the
disadvantage of producing a lot of unnecessary MAC flushing in the
B-VPLS domain as there was no failure or topology change affecting
the Backbone domain.
A better solution -- one that would propagate the I-component events
through the backbone infrastructure (B-VPLS) -- is required in order
to flush only the C-MAC-to-B-MAC associations in the remote PBB-VPLS-
capable PE-rs devices. Since there are no I-component control-plane
exchanges across the PBB backbone, extensions to the B-VPLS control
plane are required to propagate the I-component MAC flushing events
across the B-VPLS.
5. Solution Description
This section describes the solution for the problem space described
in Section 4.
5.1. MAC Flushing Optimization for VPLS Resiliency
The basic principle of the optimized MAC flush mechanism is explained
with reference to Figure 2. The optimization is achieved by
initiating MAC flushing on failure as described in Section 3.2.
PE1-rs would initiate MAC flushing towards the core on detection of
failure of the primary spoke PW between the MTU-s and PE1-rs (or
status change from active to standby [RFC6718]). This method is
referred to as "MAC flushing on failure" throughout this document.
Dutta, et al. Standards Track [Page 14]
RFC 7361 Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS September 2014
The MAC flush message would indicate to receiving PE-rs devices to
flush all MACs learned over the PW in the context of the VPLS for
which the MAC flush message is received. Each PE-rs device in the
full mesh that receives the message identifies the VPLS instance and
its respective PW that terminates in PE1-rs from the FEC TLV received
in the message and/or LDP session. Thus, the PE-rs device flushes
only the MAC addresses learned from that PW connected to PE1-rs,
minimizing the required relearning and the flooding throughout the
VPLS domain.
This section defines a generic MAC Flush Parameters TLV for LDP
[RFC5036]. Throughout this document, the MAC Flush Parameters TLV is
also referred to as the "MAC Flush TLV". A MAC Flush TLV carries
information on the desired action at the PE-rs device receiving the
message and is used for optimized MAC flushing in VPLS. The MAC
Flush TLV can also be used for the [RFC4762] style of MAC flushing as
explained in Section 3.
5.1.1. MAC Flush Parameters TLV
The MAC Flush Parameters TLV is described below:
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|1|1| MAC Flush TLV (0x0406) | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Flags | Sub-TLV Type | Sub-TLV Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Sub-TLV Variable-Length Value |
| " |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
The U-bit and F-bit [RFC5036] are set to forward if unknown so that
potential intermediate VPLS PE-rs devices unaware of the new TLV can
just propagate it transparently. In the case of a B-VPLS network
that has PBB-VPLS in the core with no I-components attached, this
message can still be useful to edge B-VPLS devices that do have the
I-components with the I-SIDs and understand the message. The MAC
Flush Parameters TLV type is 0x0406, as assigned by IANA. The
encoding of the TLV follows the standard LDP TLV encoding described
in [RFC5036].
The TLV value field contains a 1-byte Flag field used as described
below. Further, the TLV value MAY carry one or more sub-TLVs. Any
sub-TLV definition for the above TLV MUST address the actions in
combination with other existing sub-TLVs.
Dutta, et al. Standards Track [Page 15]
RFC 7361 Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS September 2014
The detailed format for the Flags bit vector is described below:
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|C|N| MBZ | (MBZ = MUST Be Zero)
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
The 1-byte Flag field is mandatory. The following flags are
defined:
C-flag: Used to indicate the context of the PBB-VPLS component in
which MAC flushing is required. For PBB-VPLS, there are two
contexts of MAC flushing -- the Backbone VPLS (B-component
VPLS) and the Customer VPLS (I-component VPLS). The C-flag
MUST be ZERO (C = 0) when a MAC flush action for the B-VPLS is
required and MUST be set (C = 1) when the MAC flush action for
the I-component is required. In the regular H-VPLS case, the
C-flag MUST be ZERO (C = 0) to indicate that the flush applies
to the current VPLS context.
N-flag: Used to indicate whether a positive (N = 0,
flush-all-but-mine) or negative (N = 1, flush-all-from-me) MAC
flush action is required. The source (mine/me) is defined as
the PW associated with either the LDP session on which the LDP
MAC withdraw was received or the B-MAC(s) listed in the B-MAC
Sub-TLV. For the optimized MAC flush procedure described in
this section, the flag MUST be set (N = 1).
Detailed usage in the context of PBB-VPLS is explained in
Section 5.2.
MBZ flags: The rest of the flags SHOULD be set to zero on
transmission and ignored on reception.
The MAC Flush TLV SHOULD be placed after the existing TLVs in the
[RFC4762] MAC flush message.
5.1.2. Application of the MAC Flush TLV in Optimized MAC Flushing
When optimized MAC flushing is supported, the MAC Flush TLV MUST be
sent in an existing LDP address withdraw message with an empty MAC
list but from the core PE-rs on detection of failure of its
local/primary spoke PW. The N-bit in the TLV MUST be set to 1 to
indicate flush-all-from-me. If the optimized MAC flush procedure is
used in a Backbone VPLS or regular VPLS/H-VPLS context, the C-bit
MUST be ZERO (C = 0). If it is used in an I-component context, the
C-bit MUST be set (C = 1). See Section 5.2 for details of its usage
in the context of PBB-VPLS.
Dutta, et al. Standards Track [Page 16]
RFC 7361 Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS September 2014
Note that the assumption is that the MAC Flush TLV is understood by
all devices before it is turned on in any network. See Section 6
("Operational Considerations").
When optimized MAC flushing is not supported, the MAC withdraw
procedures defined in [RFC4762], where either the MTU-s or PE2-rs
sends the MAC withdraw message, SHOULD be used. This includes the
case where the network is being changed to support optimized MAC
flushing but not all devices are capable of understanding optimized
MAC flush messages.
In the case of B-VPLS devices, the optimized MAC flush message SHOULD
be supported.
5.1.3. MAC Flush TLV Processing Rules for Regular VPLS
This section describes the processing rules of the MAC Flush TLV that
MUST be followed in the context of optimized MAC flush procedures
in VPLS.
When optimized MAC flushing is supported, a multi-homing PE-rs
initiates a MAC flush message towards the other related VPLS PE-rs
devices when it detects a transition (failure or a change to standby)
in its active spoke PW. In such a case the MAC Flush TLV MUST be
sent with N = 1. A PE-rs device receiving the MAC Flush TLV SHOULD
follow the same processing rules as those described in this section.
Note that if a Multi-Segment Pseudowire (MS-PW) is used in VPLS, then
a MAC flush message is processed only at the PW Terminating Provider
Edge (T-PE) nodes, since PW Switching Provider Edge S-PE(s) traversed
by the MS-PW propagates the MAC flush messages without any action.
In this section, a PE-rs device signifies only a T-PE in the MS-PW
case.
When a PE-rs device receives a MAC Flush TLV with N = 1, it SHOULD
flush all the MAC addresses learned from the PW in the VPLS in the
context on which the MAC flush message is received. It is assumed
that when these procedures are used all nodes support the MAC flush
message. See Section 6 ("Operational Considerations") for details.
When optimized MAC flushing is not supported, a MAC Flush TLV is
received with N = 0 in the MAC flush message; in such a case, the
receiving PE-rs SHOULD flush the MAC addresses learned from all PWs
in the VPLS instance, except the ones learned over the PW on which
the message is received.
Dutta, et al. Standards Track [Page 17]
RFC 7361 Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS September 2014
Regardless of whether optimized MAC flushing is supported, if a PE-rs
device receives a MAC flush message with a MAC Flush TLV option
(N = 0 or N = 1) and a valid MAC address list, it SHOULD ignore the
option and deal with MAC addresses explicitly as per [RFC4762].
5.1.4. Optimized MAC Flush Procedures
This section expands on the optimized MAC flush procedure in the
scenario shown in Figure 2.
When optimized MAC flushing is being used, a PE-rs that is dual-
homing aware SHOULD send MAC address messages with a MAC Flush TLV
and N = 1, provided the other PEs understand the new messages. Upon
receipt of the MAC flush message, PE2-rs identifies the VPLS instance
that requires MAC flushing from the FEC element in the FEC TLV. On
receiving N = 1, PE2-rs removes all MAC addresses learned from that
PW over which the message is received. The same action is performed
by PE3-rs and PE4-rs.
Figure 4 shows another redundant H-VPLS topology to protect against
failure of the MTU-s device. In this case, since there is more than
a single MTU-S, a protocol such as provider RSTP [IEEE.802.1Q-2011]
may be used as the selection algorithm for active and backup PWs in
order to maintain the connectivity between MTU-s devices and PE-rs
devices at the edge. It is assumed that PE-rs devices can detect
failure on PWs in either direction through OAM mechanisms (for
instance, Virtual Circuit Connectivity Verification (VCCV)
procedures).
MTU-1================PE1-rs==============PE3-rs
|| || \ /||
|| Redundancy || \ / ||
|| Provider RSTP || Full Mesh . ||
|| || / \ ||
|| || / \||
MTU-2----------------PE2-rs==============PE4-rs
Backup PW
Figure 4: Redundancy with Provider RSTP
MTU-1, MTU-2, PE1-rs, and PE2-rs participate in provider RSTP.
Configuration using RSTP ensures that the PW between MTU-1 and PE1-rs
is active and the PW between MTU-2 and PE2-rs is blocked (made
backup) at the MTU-2 end. When the active PW failure is detected by
RSTP, it activates the PW between MTU-2 and PE2-rs. When PE1-rs
detects the failing PW to MTU-1, it MAY trigger MAC flushing into the
full mesh with a MAC Flush TLV that carries N = 1. Other PE-rs
Dutta, et al. Standards Track [Page 18]
RFC 7361 Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS September 2014
devices in the full mesh that receive the MAC flush message identify
their respective PWs terminating on PE1-rs and flush all the MAC
addresses learned from it.
[RFC4762] describes a multi-domain VPLS service where fully meshed
VPLS networks (domains) are connected together by a single spoke PW
per VPLS service between the VPLS "border" PE-rs devices. To provide
redundancy against failure of the inter-domain spoke, full mesh of
inter-domain spokes can be set up between border PE-rs devices, and
provider RSTP may be used for selection of the active inter-domain
spoke. In the case of inter-domain spoke PW failure, MAC withdrawal
initiated by PE-rs MAY be used for optimized MAC flush procedures
within individual domains.
Further, the procedures are applicable to any native Ethernet access
topologies multi-homed to two or more VPLS PE-rs devices. The text
in this section applies for the native Ethernet case where
active/standby PWs are replaced with the active/standby Ethernet
endpoints. An optimized MAC flush message can be generated by the
VPLS PE-rs that detects the failure in the primary Ethernet access.
5.2. LDP MAC Flush Extensions for PBB-VPLS
The use of an address withdraw message with a MAC List TLV is
proposed in [RFC4762] as a way to expedite removal of MAC addresses
as the result of a topology change (e.g., failure of a primary link
of a VPLS PE-rs device and, implicitly, the activation of an
alternate link in a dual-homing use case). These existing procedures
apply individually to B-VPLS and I-component domains.
When it comes to reflecting topology changes in access networks
connected to I-components across the B-VPLS domain, certain additions
should be considered, as described below.
MAC switching in PBB is based on the mapping of Customer MACs
(C-MACs) to one or more Backbone MACs (B-MACs). A topology change in
the access (I-component domain) should just invoke the flushing of
C-MAC entries in the PBB PEs' FIB(s) associated with the
I-component(s) impacted by the failure. There is a need to indicate
the PBB PE (B-MAC source) that originated the MAC flush message to
selectively flush only the MACs that are affected.
These goals can be achieved by including the MAC Flush Parameters TLV
in the LDP address withdraw message to indicate the particular
domain(s) requiring MAC flushing. On the other end, the receiving
PEs SHOULD use the information from the new TLV to flush only the
related FIB entry/entries in the I-component instance(s).
Dutta, et al. Standards Track [Page 19]
RFC 7361 Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS September 2014
At least one of the following sub-TLVs MUST be included in the MAC
Flush Parameters TLV if the C-flag is set to 1:
o PBB B-MAC List Sub-TLV:
Type: 0x0407
Length: Value length in octets. At least one B-MAC address MUST
be present in the list.
Value: One or a list of 48-bit B-MAC addresses. These are the
source B-MAC addresses associated with the B-VPLS instance that
originated the MAC withdraw message. It will be used to identify
the C-MAC(s) mapped to the B-MAC(s) listed in the sub-TLV.
o PBB I-SID List Sub-TLV:
Type: 0x0408
Length: Value length in octets. Zero indicates an empty I-SID
list. An empty I-SID list means that the flushing applies to all
the I-SIDs mapped to the B-VPLS indicated by the FEC TLV.
Value: One or a list of 24-bit I-SIDs that represent the
I-component FIB(s) where the MAC flushing needs to take place.
5.2.1. MAC Flush TLV Processing Rules for PBB-VPLS
The following steps describe the details of the processing rules for
the MAC Flush TLV in the context of PBB-VPLS. In general, these
procedures are similar to the VPLS case but are tailored to PBB,
which may have a large number of MAC addresses. In PBB, there are
two sets of MAC addresses: Backbone (outer) MACs (B-MACs) and
Customer (inner) MACs (C-MACs). C-MACs are associated to remote
B-MACs by learning. There are also I-SIDs in PBB; I-SIDs are similar
to VLANs for the purposes of the discussion in this section. In
order to achieve behavior that is similar to the Regular VPLS case,
there are some differences in the interpretation of the optimized MAC
flush message.
1. Positive flush of C-MACs. This is equivalent to [RFC4762] MAC
flushing in a PBB context. In this case, the N-bit is set to 0;
the C-bit is set to 1, and C-MACs are to be flushed. However,
since C-MACs are related to B-MACs in an I-SID context, further
refinement of the flushing scope is possible.
Dutta, et al. Standards Track [Page 20]
RFC 7361 Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS September 2014
- If an I-SID needs to be flushed (all C-MACs within that I-SID),
then I-SIDs are listed in the appropriate TLV. If all I-SIDs
are to have the C-MACs flushed, then the I-SID TLV can be empty.
It is typical to flush a single I-SID only, since each I-SID is
associated with one or more interfaces (typically one, in the
case of dual-homing). In the PBB case, flushing the I-SID is
equivalent to the empty MAC list discussed in [RFC4762].
- If only a set of B-MAC-to-C-MAC associations needs to be
flushed, then a B-MAC list can be included to further refine the
list. This can be the case if an I-SID component has more than
one interface and a B-MAC is used to refine the granularity.
Since this is a positive MAC flush message, the intended
behavior is to flush all C-MACs except those that are associated
with B-MACs in the list.
Positive flush of B-MACs is also useful for propagating flush
from other protocols such as RSTP.
2. Negative flush of C-MACs. This is equivalent to optimized MAC
flushing. In this case, the N-bit is set to 1; the C-bit is set
to 1, and a list of B-MACs is provided so that the respective
C-MACs can be flushed.
- The I-SID list SHOULD be specified. If it is absent, then all
I-SIDs require that the C-MACs be flushed.
- A set of B-MACs SHOULD be listed, since B-MAC-to-C-MAC
associations need to be flushed and listing B-MACs scopes the
flush to just those B-MACs. Again, this is typical usage,
because a PBB VPLS I-component interface will have one
associated I-SID and typically one (but possibly more than one)
B-MAC, each with multiple remotely learned C-MACs. The B-MAC
list is included to further refine the list for the remote
receiver. Since this is a negative MAC flush message, the
intended behavior is to flush all remote C-MACs that are
associated with any B-MACs in the list (in other words, from the
affected interface).
The processing rules on reception of the MAC flush message are:
- On Backbone Core Bridges (BCBs), if the C-bit is set to 1, then the
PBB-VPLS SHOULD NOT flush their B-MAC FIBs. The B-VPLS control
plane SHOULD propagate the MAC flush message following the data-
plane split-horizon rules to the established B-VPLS topology.
Dutta, et al. Standards Track [Page 21]
RFC 7361 Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS September 2014
- On Backbone Edge Bridges (BEBs), the following actions apply:
- The PBB I-SID list is used to determine the particular I-SID
FIBs (I-component) that need to be considered for flushing
action. If the PBB I-SID List Sub-TLV is not included in a
received message, then all the I-SID FIBs associated with the
receiving B-VPLS SHOULD be considered for flushing action.
- The PBB B-MAC list is used to identify from the I-SID FIBs in
the previous step to selectively flush B-MAC-to-C-MAC
associations, depending on the N-flag specified below. If the
PBB B-MAC List Sub-TLV is not included in a received message,
then all B-MAC-to-C-MAC associations in all I-SID FIBs
(I-component) as specified by the I-SID List are considered for
required flushing action, again depending on the N-flag
specified below.
- Next, depending on the N-flag value, the following actions
apply:
- N = 0: all the C-MACs in the selected I-SID FIBs SHOULD be
flushed, with the exception of the resultant C-MAC list from
the B-MAC list mentioned in the message ("flush all but the
C-MACs associated with the B-MAC(s) in the B-MAC List Sub-TLV
from the FIBs associated with the I-SID list").
- N = 1: all the resultant C-MACs SHOULD be flushed ("flush all
the C-MACs associated with the B-MAC(s) in the B-MAC List
Sub-TLV from the FIBs associated with the I-SID list").
5.2.2. Applicability of the MAC Flush Parameters TLV
If the MAC Flush Parameters TLV is received by a Backbone Edge Bridge
(BEB) in a PBB-VPLS that does not understand the TLV, then an
undesirable MAC flushing action may result. It is RECOMMENDED that
all PE-rs devices participating in PBB-VPLS support the MAC Flush
Parameters TLV. If this is not possible, the MAC Flush Parameters
TLV SHOULD be disabled, as mentioned in Section 6 ("Operational
Considerations").
"Mac Flush TLV" and its formal name -- "MAC Flush Parameters TLV" --
are synonymous. The MAC Flush TLV is applicable to the regular VPLS
context as well, as explained in Section 3.1.1. To achieve negative
MAC flushing (flush-all-from-me) in a regular VPLS context, the MAC
Flush Parameters TLV SHOULD be encoded with C = 0 and N = 1 without
Dutta, et al. Standards Track [Page 22]
RFC 7361 Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS September 2014
inclusion of any Sub-TLVs. A negative MAC flush message is highly
desirable in scenarios where VPLS access redundancy is provided by
Ethernet ring protection as specified in the ITU-T G.8032 [ITU.G8032]
specification.
6. Operational Considerations
As mentioned earlier, if the MAC Flush Parameters TLV is not
understood by a receiver, then an undesirable MAC flushing action
would result. To avoid this, one possible solution is to develop an
LDP-based capability negotiation mechanism to negotiate support of
various MAC flushing capabilities between PE-rs devices in a VPLS
instance. A negotiation mechanism was discussed previously and was
considered outside the scope of this document. Negotiation is not
required to deploy this optimized MAC flushing as described in this
document.
VPLS may be used with or without the optimization. If an operator
wants the optimization for VPLS, it is the operator's responsibility
to make sure that the VPLS devices that are capable of supporting the
optimization are properly configured. From an operational
standpoint, it is RECOMMENDED that implementations of the solution
provide administrative control to select the desired MAC flushing
action towards a PE-rs device in the VPLS. Thus, in the topology
described in Figure 2, an implementation could support PE1-rs,
sending optimized MAC flush messages towards the PE-rs devices that
support the solution and the PE2-rs device initiating the [RFC4762]
style of MAC flush messages towards the PE-rs devices that do not
support the optimized solution during upgrades. The PE-rs that
supports the MAC Flush Parameters TLV MUST support the RFC 4762 MAC
flushing procedures, since this document only augments them.
In the case of PBB-VPLS, this operation is the only method supported
for specifying I-SIDs, and the optimization is assumed to be
supported or should be turned off, reverting to flushing using
[RFC4762] at the Backbone MAC level.
Dutta, et al. Standards Track [Page 23]
RFC 7361 Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS September 2014
7. IANA Considerations
7.1. New LDP TLV
IANA maintains a registry called "Label Distribution Protocol (LDP)
Parameters" with a sub-registry called "TLV Type Name Space".
IANA has allocated three new code points as follows:
Value | Description | Reference | Notes
-------+---------------------------+------------+-----------
0x0406 | MAC Flush Parameters TLV | [RFC7361] |
0x0407 | PBB B-MAC List Sub-TLV | [RFC7361] |
0x0408 | PBB I-SID List Sub-TLV | [RFC7361] |
7.2. New Registry for MAC Flush Flags
IANA has created a new sub-registry under "Label Distribution
Protocol (LDP) Parameters" called "MAC Flush Flags".
IANA has populated the registry as follows:
Bit Number | Hex | Abbreviation | Description | Reference
-----------+------+--------------+-----------------------+-----------
0 | 0x80 | C | Context | [RFC7361]
1 | 0x40 | N | Negative MAC flushing | [RFC7361]
2-7 | | | Unassigned |
Other new bits are to be assigned by Standards Action [RFC5226].
8. Security Considerations
Control-plane aspects:
LDP security (authentication) methods as described in [RFC5036]
are applicable here. Further, this document implements security
considerations as discussed in [RFC4447] and [RFC4762]. The
extensions defined here optimize the MAC flushing action, and so
the risk of security attacks is reduced. However, in the event
that the configuration of support for the new TLV can be spoofed,
sub-optimal behavior will be seen.
Data-plane aspects:
This specification does not have any impact on the VPLS forwarding
plane but can improve MAC flushing behavior.
Dutta, et al. Standards Track [Page 24]
RFC 7361 Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS September 2014
9. Contributing Author
The authors would like to thank Marc Lasserre, who made a major
contribution to the development of this document.
Marc Lasserre
Alcatel-Lucent
EMail: marc.lasserre@alcatel-lucent.com
10. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the following people who have
provided valuable comments, feedback, and review on the topics
discussed in this document: Dimitri Papadimitriou, Jorge Rabadan,
Prashanth Ishwar, Vipin Jain, John Rigby, Ali Sajassi, Wim
Henderickx, Paul Kwok, Maarten Vissers, Daniel Cohn, Nabil Bitar,
Giles Heron, Adrian Farrel, Ben Niven-Jenkins, Robert Sparks, Susan
Hares, and Stephen Farrell.
11. References
11.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC4447] Martini, L., Ed., Rosen, E., El-Aawar, N., Smith, T., and
G. Heron, "Pseudowire Setup and Maintenance Using the
Label Distribution Protocol (LDP)", RFC 4447, April 2006.
[RFC4762] Lasserre, M., Ed., and V. Kompella, Ed., "Virtual Private
LAN Service (VPLS) Using Label Distribution Protocol
(LDP) Signaling", RFC 4762, January 2007.
[RFC5036] Andersson, L., Ed., Minei, I., Ed., and B. Thomas, Ed.,
"LDP Specification", RFC 5036, October 2007.
11.2. Informative References
[IEEE.802.1Q-2011]
IEEE, "IEEE Standard for Local and metropolitan area
networks -- Media Access Control (MAC) Bridges and
Virtual Bridged Local Area Networks", IEEE Std 802.1Q,
2011.
[ITU.G8032] International Telecommunication Union, "Ethernet ring
protection switching", ITU-T Recommendation G.8032,
February 2012.
Dutta, et al. Standards Track [Page 25]
RFC 7361 Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS September 2014
[RFC4664] Andersson, L., Ed., and E. Rosen, Ed., "Framework for
Layer 2 Virtual Private Networks (L2VPNs)", RFC 4664,
September 2006.
[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
May 2008.
[RFC6073] Martini, L., Metz, C., Nadeau, T., Bocci, M., and M.
Aissaoui, "Segmented Pseudowire", RFC 6073, January 2011.
[RFC6718] Muley, P., Aissaoui, M., and M. Bocci, "Pseudowire
Redundancy", RFC 6718, August 2012.
[RFC7041] Balus, F., Ed., Sajassi, A., Ed., and N. Bitar, Ed.,
"Extensions to the Virtual Private LAN Service (VPLS)
Provider Edge (PE) Model for Provider Backbone Bridging",
RFC 7041, November 2013.
[VPLS-MH] Kothari, B., Kompella, K., Henderickx, W., Balus, F.,
Uttaro, J., Palislamovic, S., and W. Lin, "BGP based
Multi-homing in Virtual Private LAN Service", Work in
Progress, July 2014.
Dutta, et al. Standards Track [Page 26]
RFC 7361 Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS September 2014
Authors' Addresses
Pranjal Kumar Dutta
Alcatel-Lucent
701 E Middlefield Road
Mountain View, CA 94043
USA
EMail: pranjal.dutta@alcatel-lucent.com
Florin Balus
Alcatel-Lucent
701 E Middlefield Road
Mountain View, CA 94043
USA
EMail: florin.balus@alcatel-lucent.com
Olen Stokes
Extreme Networks
2121 RDU Center Drive
Suite 300
Morrisville, NC 27650
USA
EMail: ostokes@extremenetworks.com
Geraldine Calvignac
Orange
2, avenue Pierre-Marzin
Lannion Cedex, 22307
France
EMail: geraldine.calvignac@orange.com
Don Fedyk
Hewlett-Packard Company
USA
EMail: don.fedyk@hp.com
Dutta, et al. Standards Track [Page 27]