[Docs] [txt|pdf] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 RFC 5308

Internet Engineering Task Force                       Christian E. Hopps
INTERNET-DRAFT                                              Cisco System
Expires April 2006                                       21 October 2005




                        Routing IPv6 with IS-IS
                     <draft-ietf-isis-ipv6-06.txt>






Status of this Memo

   By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
   applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
   have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
   aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that
   other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
   Drafts.

   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."

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.

   This Internet-Draft will expire on April 2, 2006.


Abstract

   This draft specifies a method for exchanging IPv6 routing information
   using the IS-IS routing protocol.  The described method utilizes 2


Expires April 2006                                              [Page 1]

Draft                    Routing IPv6 with IS-IS            October 2005


   new TLVs, a reachability TLV and an interface address TLV to
   distribute the necessary IPv6 information throughout a routing
   domain.  Using this method one can route IPv6 along with IPv4 and OSI
   using a single intra-domain routing protocol.


1.  Terms

   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.


2.  Overview

   IS-IS [0] is an extendible intra-domain routing protocol.  Each
   router in the routing domain issues an LSP that contains information
   pertaining to that router.  The LSP contains typed variable length
   data often referred to as TLVs (type-length-values).  We extend the
   protocol with 2 new TLVs to carry information required to perform
   IPv6 routing.

   In [1] a method is described to route both OSI and IPv4. We utilize
   this same method with some minor changes to allow for IPv6.  To do so
   we must define 2 new TLVs, namely "IPv6 Reachability" and "IPv6
   Interface Address" and a new IPv6 protocol identifier.  In our new
   TLVs we utilize the extended metrics and up/down semantics of [2].


3.  IPv6 Reachability TLV

   The "IPv6 Reachability" TLV is TLV type 236 (0xEC).

   [1] defines 2 Reachability TLVs, "IP Internal Reachability
   Information" and "IP External Reachability Information".  We provide
   the equivalent IPv6 data with the "IPv6 Reachability" TLV and an
   "external" bit.

   The "IPv6 Reachability" TLV describes network reachability through
   the specification of a routing prefix, metric information, a bit to
   indicate if the prefix is being advertised down from a higher level,
   a bit to indicate if the prefix is being distributed from another
   routing protocol and OPTIONALLY the existence of sub-TLVs to allow
   for later extension.  This data is represented by the following
   structure:


Expires April 2006                                              [Page 2]

Draft                    Routing IPv6 with IS-IS            October 2005


   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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |  Type = 236   |    Length     |          Metric ..            |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |          .. Metric            |U|X|S| Reserve |  Prefix Len   |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |  Prefix ...
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |Sub-TLV Len(*) | Sub-TLVs(*) ...
   * - if present

   U - up/down bit
   X - external original bit
   S - subtlv present bit

   This structure MAY appear any number of times (including none) within
   the TLV.

   As is described in [2], "the up/down bit is set to 0 when a prefix is
   first injected into IS-IS.  If a prefix is redistributed from a
   higher level to a lower level (e.g., level two to level one), the bit
   SHALL be set to 1 to indicate that the prefix has travelled down the
   hierarchy.  If a prefix is redistributed from an area to another area
   at the same level then the up/down bit SHALL be set to 1."

   If the prefix was distributed into IS-IS from another routing
   protocol the external bit SHALL be set to 1.  This information is
   useful when distributing prefixes from IS-IS to other protocols.

   If the sub-TLV bit is set to 0 then the octets of sub-TLVs are not
   present.  Otherwise the bit is 1 and the octet following the prefix
   will contain the length of the sub-TLV portion of the structure.

   The prefix is "packed" in the data structure.  That is, only the
   required number of octets of prefix are present.  This number can be
   computed from the prefix length octet as follows:

        prefix octets = integer of ((prefix length + 7) / 8)

   Just as in [2], if a prefix is advertised with a metric larger than
   MAX_V6_PATH_METRIC (0xFE000000), this prefix MUST not be considered
   during the normal SPF computation.  This will allow advertisement of
   a prefix for purposes other than building the normal IPv6 routing
   table.


Expires April 2006                                              [Page 3]

Draft                    Routing IPv6 with IS-IS            October 2005


   If sub-TLVs are present they have the same form as normal TLVs as
   shown 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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |      Type     |    Length     |         Value(*) ..
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   * - if present

   Length indicates how many octets of value are present and can be 0.


4.  IPv6 Interface Address TLV

   The "IPv6 Interface Address" TLV is TLV type 232 (0xE8).

   This TLV maps directly to [1]'s "IP Interface Address" TLV.  We
   necessarily modify the contents to be 0-15 16 octet IPv6 interface
   addresses instead of 0-63 4 octet IPv4 interface address.

   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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |  Type = 232   |    Length     |   Interface Address 1(*) ..   |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                  .. Interface Address 1(*) ..                 |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                  .. Interface Address 1(*) ..                 |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                  .. Interface Address 1(*) ..                 |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   Interface Address 1(*) ..   |   Interface Address 2(*) ..
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   * - if present

   We further restrict the semantics of this TLV depending on where it
   is advertised.  For Hello PDUs the "Interfaces Address" TLV MUST
   contain only the link-local IPv6 addresses assigned to the interface
   which is sending the Hello.  For LSPs the "Interfaces Address" TLVs
   MUST contain only the non-link-local IPv6 addresses assigned to the
   IS.





Expires April 2006                                              [Page 4]

Draft                    Routing IPv6 with IS-IS            October 2005


5.  IPv6 NLPID

   The value of the IPv6 NLPID is 142 (0x8E).

   As with [1] and IPv4, if the IS supports IPv6 routing using IS-IS, it
   MUST advertise this in the "NLPID" TLV by adding the IPv6 NLPID.


6.  Operation

   We utilize the same changes to [1] as made in [2] for the processing
   of prefix information.  These changes are both related to the SPF
   calculation.

   Since the metric space has been extended we need to redefine the
   MAX_PATH_METRIC (1023) from the original specification in [1].  This
   new value MAX_V6_PATH_METRIC is the same as in [2] (0xFE000000).  If
   during the SPF a path metric would exceed MAX_V6_PATH_METRIC it SHALL
   be considered to be MAX_V6_PATH_METRIC.

   The order of preference between paths for a given prefix MUST be
   modified to consider the up/down bit.  The new order of preference is
   as follows (from best to worst).

        1. Level 1 up prefix
        2. Level 2 up prefix
        3. Level 2 down prefix
        4. Level 1 down prefix

   If multiple paths have the same best preference then selection occurs
   based on metric.  Any remaining multiple paths SHOULD be considered
   for equal-cost multi-path routing if the router supports this,
   otherwise the router can select any one of the multiple paths.


7.  IANA Considerations

   IANA is requested to update the IS-IS codepoint registry
   (http://www.iana.org/assignments/isis-tlv-codepoints) so that TLV
   codes 232 and 236 refer to this document's RFC number.

   Note to the RFC editor: this paragraph and the above paragraph may be
   removed or edited on publication as an RFC.




Expires April 2006                                              [Page 5]

Draft                    Routing IPv6 with IS-IS            October 2005


8.  Security Considerations

   This document raises no new security considerations.


9.  Normative References

[0]  "Intermediate System to Intermediate System Intra-Domain Routeing
     Exchange Protocol for use in Conjunction with the Protocol for
     Providing the Connectionless-mode Network Service (ISO 8473)", ISO
     10589, 1992.

[1]  Callon, R., "Use of OSI IS-IS for Routing in TCP/IP and Dual
     Environments", RFC 1195, December 1990.

[2]  Smit, H., and T. Li, "IS-IS extensions for Traffic Engineering",
     Work in Progress, August 2005.


10.  Author's Address

     Christian E. Hopps
     Cisco Systems
     170 W. Tasman Dr.
     San Jose, CA  95134
     USA
     Phone: +1 525 1684
     Email: chopps@cisco.com


Intellectual Property Statement

   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
   Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
   pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
   this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
   might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
   made any independent effort to identify any such rights.  Information
   on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
   found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
   assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
   attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
   such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this


Expires April 2006                                              [Page 6]

Draft                    Routing IPv6 with IS-IS            October 2005


   specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
   http://www.ietf.org/ipr.

   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
   rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
   this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-
   ipr@ietf.org.


Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005).  This document is subject
   to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and
   except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.

   This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
   "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
   OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
   ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
   INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
   INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
   WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
























Expires April 2006                                              [Page 7]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.109, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/