BIER Z. Zhang Internet-Draft A. Przygienda Intended status: Standards Track Juniper Networks Expires: April 19, 2019 A. Dolganow H. Bidgoli Nokia I. Wijnands Cisco Systems A. Gulko Thomson Reuters October 16, 2018 BIER Underlay Path Calculation Algorithm and Contraints draft-ietf-bier-bar-ipa-02 Abstract This document specifies general rules for interaction between the BAR and IPA fields defined in [RFC8401] and [I-D.ietf-bier-ospf-bier-extensions]. 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. 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 of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 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." This Internet-Draft will expire on April 19, 2019. Zhang, et al. Expires April 19, 2019 [Page 1] Internet-Draft bier-bar-ipa October 2018 Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2018 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 (https://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. Terminologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3. General Rules for the BAR and IPA fields . . . . . . . . . . 3 3.1. When BAR Is Not Used . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3.2. Exceptions/Extensions to the General Rules . . . . . . . 4 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 5. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 1. Terminologies Familiarity with BIER protocols and procedures is assumed. Some terminologies are listed below for convenience. [To be added]. 2. Introduction In the BIER architecture, packets with a BIER encapsulation header are forwarded to the neighbors on the underlay paths towards the BFERs. For each sub-domain, the paths are calculated in the underlay topology for the sub-domain, following a calculation algorithm specific to the sub-domain. The could be congruent or incongruent with unicast. The topology could be a default topology, a multi-topology [RFC5120] topology. The algorithm could be a generic IGP algorithm (e.g. SPF) or could be a BIER specific one defined in the future. Zhang, et al. Expires April 19, 2019 [Page 2] Internet-Draft bier-bar-ipa October 2018 In [RFC8401] and [I-D.ietf-bier-ospf-bier-extensions], an 8-bit BAR field and 8-bit IPA field are defined to signal the BIER specific algorithm and generic IGP Algorithm respectively and only value 0 is allowed for both fields currently. This document specifies the general rules for the two fields and their interaction when either or both fields are not 0. 3. General Rules for the BAR and IPA fields For a particular sub-domain, all routers SHOULD be provisioned with and signal the same BAR and IPA values. When a BFR discovers another BFR advertising different BAR or IPA value from its own provisioned, it MUST treat the advertising BFR as incapable of supporting BIER for the sub-domain. How incapable routers are handled is outside the scope of this document. It is expected that both the BAR and IPA values could have both algorithm and constraints semantics. To generalize, we introduce the following terms: o BC: BIER-specific Constraints o BA: BIER-specific Algorithm o RC: Generic Routing Constraints o RA: Generic Routing Algorithm o BCBA: BC + BA o RCRA: RC + RA A BAR value corresponds to a BCBA, and a IPA value corresponds to a RCRA. Any of the RC/BC/BA could be "NULL", which means there are no corresponding constraints or algorithm. For a particular topology X (which could be a default topology or multit-topolgy topology) that a sub-domain is associated with, a router calculates the underlay paths according to its provisioned BCBA and RCRA the following way: 1. Apply the BIER constraints, resulting in BC(X). 2. Apply the routing constraints, resulting in RC(BC(X)). 3. Select the algorithm AG as following: A. If BA is NULL, AG is set to RA. Zhang, et al. Expires April 19, 2019 [Page 3] Internet-Draft bier-bar-ipa October 2018 B. If BA is not NULL, AG is set to BA. 4. Run AG on RC(BC(X)). 3.1. When BAR Is Not Used The BIER Algorithm registry established by [RFC8401] and also used in [I-D.ietf-bier-ospf-bier-extensions] has value 0 for "No BIER specific algorithm is used". That translates to NULL BA and NULL BC. Following the rules defined above, the IPA value alone identifies the calculation algorithm and constraints to be used for a particular sub-domain when BAR is 0. 3.2. Exceptions/Extensions to the General Rules Exceptions or extensions to the above general rules may be specified in the future for specific BAR and/or IPA values. When that happens, compatibility with defined BAR and/or IPA values and semantics need to be specified. 4. IANA Considerations No IANA Consideration is requested in this document. 5. Acknowledgements The authors thanks Alia Atlas, Eric Rosen, Senthil Dhanaraj and many others for their suggestions and comments. In particular, the BCBA/ RCRA representation for the interaction rules is based on Alia's write-up. 6. References 6.1. Normative References [I-D.ietf-bier-ospf-bier-extensions] Psenak, P., Kumar, N., Wijnands, I., Dolganow, A., Przygienda, T., Zhang, Z., and S. Aldrin, "OSPFv2 Extensions for BIER", draft-ietf-bier-ospf-bier- extensions-18 (work in progress), June 2018. [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, . Zhang, et al. Expires April 19, 2019 [Page 4] Internet-Draft bier-bar-ipa October 2018 [RFC8279] Wijnands, IJ., Ed., Rosen, E., Ed., Dolganow, A., Przygienda, T., and S. Aldrin, "Multicast Using Bit Index Explicit Replication (BIER)", RFC 8279, DOI 10.17487/RFC8279, November 2017, . [RFC8401] Ginsberg, L., Ed., Przygienda, T., Aldrin, S., and Z. Zhang, "Bit Index Explicit Replication (BIER) Support via IS-IS", RFC 8401, DOI 10.17487/RFC8401, June 2018, . 6.2. Informative References [RFC5120] Przygienda, T., Shen, N., and N. Sheth, "M-ISIS: Multi Topology (MT) Routing in Intermediate System to Intermediate Systems (IS-ISs)", RFC 5120, DOI 10.17487/RFC5120, February 2008, . Authors' Addresses Zhaohui Zhang Juniper Networks EMail: zzhang@juniper.net Antoni Przygienda Juniper Networks EMail: prz@juniper.net Andrew Dolganow Nokia EMail: andrew.dolganow@nokia.com Hooman Bidgoli Nokia EMail: hooman.bidgoli@nokia.com Zhang, et al. Expires April 19, 2019 [Page 5] Internet-Draft bier-bar-ipa October 2018 IJsbrand Wijnands Cisco Systems EMail: ice@cisco.com Arkadiy Gulko Thomson Reuters EMail: arkadiy.gulko@thomsonreuters.com Zhang, et al. Expires April 19, 2019 [Page 6]