RIFT J. Head, Ed. Internet-Draft T. Przygienda Intended status: Standards Track Juniper Networks Expires: 24 March 2022 20 September 2021 RIFT Keys Structure and Well-Known Registry in Key Value TIE draft-ietf-rift-kv-registry-00 Abstract Routing in Fat-Trees RIFT [RIFT] allows for key/value pairs to be advertised within Key-Value Topology Information Elements (KV TIEs). The data contained within these KV TIEs can be used for any imaginable purpose. This document defines the various Key Types (i.e. Well-Known, OUI, and Experimental) and a method to structure corresponding values. 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 RFC 2119 [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 24 March 2022. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. Head & Przygienda Expires 24 March 2022 [Page 1] Internet-Draft draft-ietf-rift-kv-registry-00 September 2021 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. Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2. Key-Value Pair Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2.1. Well-Known Key Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.2. OUI Key Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.3. Experimental Key Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3.1. Key Type Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.1.1. Requested Entries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.2. Experimental Key Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.2.1. Requested Entries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.3. Well-Known Key Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.3.1. Requested Entries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.4. OUI Key Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.4.1. Requested Entries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4. Operational Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 7. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 1. Description Routing in Fat-Trees (RIFT [RIFT]) allows for key/value pairs to be advertised within Key-Value Topology Information Elements (KV TIEs). There are no restrictions placed on the type of data that is contained in KV TIEs nor what the data is used for. This document defines a Key Type Registry to maintain Well-Known and vendor specific Key Types in order to simplify interoperability between implementations and eliminate the risk of collision for future implementations. An Experimental Key Type is additionally defined. 2. Key-Value Pair Structure Figure 1 illustrates the generic Key-Value Pair structure. Head & Przygienda Expires 24 March 2022 [Page 2] Internet-Draft draft-ietf-rift-kv-registry-00 September 2021 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Key-Type | Key Identifier | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Values (variable) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Figure 1: Generic Key-Value Structure where: Key-Type: A 1-byte value that identifies the Key Type. It MUST be a reserved value from the Key Value Type Registry that is defined later in this document. Key Identifier: A 3-byte value that identifies the specific Key and describes the structure of the contained values. Values: A variable length value that contains data associated with the Key. It SHOULD contain 1 or more elements. Whether the collection of elements allows duplicates and/or is ordered is governed by the particular key identifier. 2.1. Well-Known Key Type This section reserves a value in the Key Type Registry to indicate Well-Known Key Types that all implementations SHOULD support. As shown in Figure 2, the Key-Type will be used to identify that the Key Type is Well-Known. The Key Identifier will be used to identify the specific Key and describe the structure of the contained values. 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | TBD2 | Well-Known Key Identifier | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Well-Known Values (variable) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Figure 2: Well-Known Key Type Head & Przygienda Expires 24 March 2022 [Page 3] Internet-Draft draft-ietf-rift-kv-registry-00 September 2021 2.2. OUI Key Type This section reserves a value in the Key Type Registry to indicate an OUI (vendor-specific) Key Type that any implementation MAY support. As shown in Figure 3, the Key-Type will be used to identify the Key Type as OUI. The Key Identifier MUST use an organization's reserved OUI space to indicate the Key and value structure. 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | TBD3 | Organizationally Unique Identifier | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Vendor Specific Values (variable) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Figure 3: OUI Key Type 2.3. Experimental Key Type This section reserves a value in the Key Type Registry to indicate an Experimental Key Type. As shown in Figure 4, the Key-Type will be used to identify the Key Type as Experimental. The Key Identifier will be used to identify the specific experimental Key and describe the structure of the contained values. 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | TBD1 | Experimental Key Identifier | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Experimental Values (variable) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Figure 4: Experimental Key Type 3. IANA Considerations This section requests that IANA help govern Key Types via the usual IANA registry procedures as per [RFC8126]. All values not suggested are available for assignment. The allocation of new values MUST be done via "Expert Review" procedures. Head & Przygienda Expires 24 March 2022 [Page 4] Internet-Draft draft-ietf-rift-kv-registry-00 September 2021 3.1. Key Type Registry This section defines the Key Type Registry that is used to identify a specific Key Type. It also suggests values for Experimental, Well- Known, and OUI Key Types. The range of valid values is 1 - 255. 0 is an illegal value and MUST NOT be allocated to or used by any implementation. It MUST be ignored on reception. 3.1.1. Requested Entries +==============+=======+=========================================+ | Key Type | Value | Description | +==============+=======+=========================================+ | Experimental | TBD1 | Indicates that the Key is Experimental. | +--------------+-------+-----------------------------------------+ | Well-Known | TBD2 | Indicates that the Key is Well-Known. | +--------------+-------+-----------------------------------------+ | OUI | TBD3 | Indicates that the Key is OUI. | +--------------+-------+-----------------------------------------+ Table 1 3.2. Experimental Key Type This value indicates that a specific key is Experimental. The range of valid values is 1 - 16777215 (2^24-1). 0 is an illegal value and MUST NOT be allocated to or used by any implementation. It MUST be ignored on reception. 3.2.1. Requested Entries +==================+============+==============+ | Experimental Key | Identifier | Description | +==================+============+==============+ | Illegal | 0 | Not allowed. | +------------------+------------+--------------+ Table 2 3.3. Well-Known Key Type This value indicates that a specific key is Well-Known. Head & Przygienda Expires 24 March 2022 [Page 5] Internet-Draft draft-ietf-rift-kv-registry-00 September 2021 The range of valid values is 1 - 16777215 (2^24-1). 0 is an illegal value and MUST NOT be allocated to or used by any implementation. It MUST be ignored on reception. 3.3.1. Requested Entries +============================+============+================+ | Well-Known Key | Identifier | Description | +============================+============+================+ | Illegal | 0 | Not allowed. | +----------------------------+------------+----------------+ | MAC/IP Binding | TBD1 | To be defined. | +----------------------------+------------+----------------+ | FAM Security Roll-Over Key | TBD2 | To be defined. | +----------------------------+------------+----------------+ Table 3 3.4. OUI Key Type This value indicates a specific OUI Key using an organization's reserved OUI space. The range of valid values is 1 - 16777215 (2^24-1). 0 is an illegal value and MUST NOT be allocated to or used by any implementation. It MUST be ignored on reception. 3.4.1. Requested Entries +=========+============+==============+ | OUI Key | Identifier | Description | +=========+============+==============+ | Illegal | 0 | Not allowed. | +---------+------------+--------------+ Table 4 4. Operational Considerations While no restrictions are placed on Key-Value data or what it is used for, it is RECOMMENDED that a serialized Thrift model be used for simpler interoperability. RIFT Auto-EVPN [RIFT-AUTO-EVPN] is an example of this type of implementation. Key-Value elements SHOULD NOT be used to carry topology information used by RIFT itself to perform distributed computations. Head & Przygienda Expires 24 March 2022 [Page 6] Internet-Draft draft-ietf-rift-kv-registry-00 September 2021 In cases where Key-Value TIEs are flooded from north to south, policies SHOULD be implemented in order to avoid network-wide flooding. For networks with more than one ToF node, it is RECOMMENDED that those ToF nodes contain identical Key-Value TIE information when being distributed from north to south as the Key-Value tie breaking rules in RIFT [RIFT] ultimately mention that only one Key-Value TIE can be selected from multiple northbound neighbors. If this is not considered, nodes receiving varying Key-Value TIEs might select a suboptimal Key-Value TIE. 5. Security Considerations This document introduces no new security concerns to RIFT or other specifications referenced in this document given that the TIEs that carry KV pairs are already extensively secured by the RIFT [RIFT] specification itself. 6. Acknowledgements To be provided. 7. Normative References [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, . [RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", June 2017, . [RIFT] Przygienda, T., Sharma, A., Thubert, P., Rijsman, B., and D. Afanasiev, "RIFT: Routing in Fat Trees", Work in Progress, draft-ietf-rift-rift-13, July 2021. [RIFT-AUTO-EVPN] Head, J., Przygienda, T., and W. Lin, "RIFT Auto-EVPN", Work in Progress, draft-head-rift-auto-evpn-01, July 2021. Authors' Addresses Head & Przygienda Expires 24 March 2022 [Page 7] Internet-Draft draft-ietf-rift-kv-registry-00 September 2021 Jordan Head (editor) Juniper Networks 1137 Innovation Way Sunnyvale, CA United States of America Email: jhead@juniper.net Tony Przygienda Juniper Networks 1137 Innovation Way Sunnyvale, CA United States of America Email: prz@juniper.net Head & Przygienda Expires 24 March 2022 [Page 8]