wdiff rfc7506.original rfc7506.txt

MPLS Working Group
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) K. Raza
Internet-Draft N. Akiya
Request for Comments: 7506 Cisco Systems, Inc.
Updates: 4379 (if approved) C. Pignataro
Intended status: N. Akiya
Category: Standards Track Big Switch Networks
ISSN: 2070-1721 C. Pignataro
Cisco Systems, Inc.
Expires: August 8, 2015 February 4,
April 2015

IPv6 Router Alert Option
for MPLS OAM
draft-ietf-mpls-oam-ipv6-rao-03 Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM)

Abstract

RFC 4379 defines the MPLS LSP Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping/Traceroute mechanism,
mechanism in which the Router Alert Option (RAO) MUST be set in the
IP header of the MPLS Echo Request messages, messages and may conditionally be
set in the IP header of the MPLS Echo Reply messages depending on the
Reply Mode used. While a generic "Router shall examine packet"
Option Value is used for the IPv4 Router Alert Option (RAO), RAO, there is no generic Router Alert
Option Value RAO value
defined for IPv6 that can be used. This document allocates a new new,
generic IPv6 Router Alert Option Value RAO value that can be used by MPLS OAM Operations,
Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) tools, including the MPLS Echo
Request and MPLS Echo Reply messages for MPLS in IPv6 environments.
Consequently, it updates RFC 4379.

The initial motivation to request an IPv6 Router Alert Option (RAO)
Value RAO value for MPLS OAM
comes from the MPLS LSP Ping/Traceroute. However, this Value value is
applicable to all MPLS OAM and not limited to MPLS LSP
Ping/Traceroute. Ping/
Traceroute.

Status of This Memo

This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

Internet-Drafts are working documents an Internet Standards Track document.

This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
(IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list It represents the consensus of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid the IETF community. It has
received public review and has been approved for a maximum publication by the
Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on
Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of six months RFC 5741.

Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
and how to provide feedback on it may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents obtained at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

This Internet-Draft will expire on August 8, 2015.
http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7506.

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.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Specification of Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. IPv6 Router Alert Option (RAO) RAO Value for MPLS OAM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. Updates to RFC 4379 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
7. Acknowledgments References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
8.
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . 4
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . 4
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 6
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 6

1. Introduction

A commonly deployed MPLS OAM tool is specified in [RFC4379],
"Detecting Multi-Protocol Label Switched (MPLS) Data Plane Failures",
which is used to diagnose MPLS network data planes. This
specification [RFC4379],
specification, often referred to as "MPLS LSP Ping/
Traceroute", Ping/Traceroute"
[RFC4379], requires the use of the Router Alert Option (RAO) in the
IP header. For example, the section Section 4.3 of [RFC4379] states that the IP
Router Alert Option
RAO MUST be set in the IP header of an MPLS Echo Request message.
Similarly, the section Section 4.5 of [RFC4379] states that the IP Router
Alert Option RAO MUST be
set in the IP header of an MPLS Echo Reply message if the Reply Mode
in the echo request Echo Request is set to "Reply via an IPv4/IPv6 UDP packet with
Router Alert".

[RFC2113] defines a generic Option Value 0x0 for IPv4 Router Alert
Option (RAO) RAO that is
used in LSP Ping and LSP Traceroute for MPLS in IPv4 environments.
This IPv4 RAO value of 0x0 is assigned to "Router shall examine
packet". However, currently there is no generic IPV6
Router Alert Option Value RAO value
defined that can be used in LSP Ping and LSP Traceroute for MPLS in
IPv6 environments. Specifically, [RFC2711] defined the router alert Router Alert
for a general IPv6 purpose but required the Value field in the Router Alert Option RAO to
indicate a specific reason for using the Router Alert Option. RAO. Because there is no
defined value for MPLS LSP Ping/Traceroute use or for general use, it
is not possible for MPLS OAM tools to use the IPv6 Router Alert
mechanism.

As vendors are starting to implement MPLS on the IPv6 control plane
(e.g., [I-D.ietf-mpls-ldp-ipv6]), [LDP-IPV6]), there is a need to define and allocate such an
Option Value for IPv6 in order to comply with [RFC4379]. This
document defines a new IPv6 Router Alert Option
Value RAO value that can be used by MPLS OAM
tools, including the MPLS Echo Request and MPLS Echo Reply messages
for MPLS in IPv6 environments.

This document closes the gap discussed in the third paragraph of
Section 3.4.2 in [RFC7439].

2. Specification of Requirements

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. IPv6 Router Alert Option (RAO) RAO Value for MPLS OAM

This document defines a new Option Value (TBD1) (69) for the IPv6 Router
Alert Option (RAO) RAO to
alert transit routers to examine the packet more closely for MPLS OAM
purposes. This Option Value is used by any MPLS OAM application that
requires their packets to be examined by a transit router.

In the scope of this document, this Option Value will be used by the
MPLS Echo Request and MPLS Echo Reply for its IPv6 messages messages, as is
required by [RFC4379].

4. Updates to RFC 4379

[RFC4379] specifies the use of the Router Alert Option RAO in the IP header. Sections
4.3 and 4.5 of [RFC4379] are updated as follows:
for

For every time in which the "Router Alert IP option" Option" is used, the
following text is appended:

In case of an IPv4 header, the generic IPv4 Router Alert Option RAO value 0x0
[RFC2113] SHOULD be used. In case of an IPv6 header, the IPv6 Router Alert Option RAO
value TBD1 (69) allocated through this document for MPLS OAM MUST be
used.

5. IANA Considerations

This document defines a new Value (TBD1) value (69) for the IPv6 Router Alert
Option RAO to alert
transit routers to examine the packet more closely for MPLS OAM
purposes. IANA is requested to assign has assigned a new code point under its "IPv6 Router
Alert Option Values" registry defined by [RFC2711], updated by [RFC5350]
[RFC5350], and maintained in [IANA-IPv6-RAO]. The new code point is
as follows:

Value Description Reference
----- ------------------------------- ---------------
TBD1
69 MPLS OAM [document.this] RFC 7506

6. Security Considerations

This document introduces no new security concerns in addition to what
have already been captured in [RFC4379] and [RFC6398], the latter of
which expands the security considerations of [RFC2113] and [RFC2711].

IPv6 packets containing the MPLS OAM Router Alert Option RAO are encapsulated with an
MPLS Header header and are not expected to be inspected by every label
switched hop within an MPLS LSP. Consequently, this value of the Router Alert Option RAO
will be processed by the appropriate router and is not subject to the
problem of being ignored ignored, as described in Section 2.2 of [RFC7045].

7. Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank George Swallow, Ole Troan, Bob
Hinden, Faisal Iqbal, Mathew Janelle, and Gregory Mirsky for their
useful input.

8. References

8.1.

7.1. Normative References

[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 1997,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

[RFC2711] Partridge, C. and A. Jackson, "IPv6 Router Alert Option",
RFC 2711, October 1999. 1999,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2711>.

[RFC4379] Kompella, K. and G. Swallow, "Detecting Multi-Protocol
Label Switched (MPLS) Data Plane Failures", RFC 4379,
February 2006. 2006, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4379>.

[RFC5350] Manner, J. and A. McDonald, "IANA Considerations for the
IPv4 and IPv6 Router Alert Options", RFC 5350, September
2008.
2008, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5350>.

[RFC6398] Le Faucheur, F., Ed., "IP Router Alert Considerations and
Usage", BCP 168, RFC 6398, October 2011.

8.2. 2011,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6398>.

7.2. Informative References

[I-D.ietf-mpls-ldp-ipv6]

[IANA-IPv6-RAO]
IANA, "IPv6 Router Alert Option Values",
<http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv6-routeralert-values>.

[LDP-IPV6]
Asati, R., Pignataro, C., Raza, K., Manral, V., Papneja, R., and K.
Raza, R.
Papneja, "Updates to LDP for IPv6", draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-
ipv6-14 (work Work in progress), October 2014.

[IANA-IPv6-RAO]
IANA, "IPv6 Router Alert Option Values",
<http://www.iana.org/assignments/ipv6-routeralert-values>. Progress,
draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-ipv6-17, February 2015.

[RFC2113] Katz, D., "IP Router Alert Option", RFC 2113, February
1997.
1997, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2113>.

[RFC7045] Carpenter, B. and S. Jiang, "Transmission and Processing
of IPv6 Extension Headers", RFC 7045, December 2013. 2013,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7045>.

[RFC7439] George, W., Ed. and C. Pignataro, Ed., "Gap Analysis for
Operating IPv6-Only MPLS Networks", RFC 7439, January
2015, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7439>.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank George Swallow, Ole Troan, Bob
Hinden, Faisal Iqbal, Mathew Janelle, and Gregory Mirsky for their
useful input.

Authors' Addresses

Kamran Raza
Cisco Systems, Inc.
2000 Innovation Drive
Kanata, ON K2K-3E8
CA

Email:
Canada

EMail: skraza@cisco.com

Nobo Akiya
Cisco Systems, Inc.
2000 Innovation Drive
Kanata, ON K2K-3E8
CA

Email: nobo@cisco.com
Big Switch Networks

EMail: nobo.akiya.dev@gmail.com

Carlos Pignataro
Cisco Systems, Inc.
7200-12 Kit Creek Road
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
USA

Email:
United States

EMail: cpignata@cisco.com