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

Versions: 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 RFC 4591

Network Working Group                                   W. Mark Townsley
Internet-Draft                                             George Wilkie
Category: Standards Track                                     Skip Booth
<draft-ietf-l2tpext-pwe3-fr-03.txt>                              Jed Lau
March 2004                                                Stewart Bryant
                                                           cisco Systems

                        Frame-Relay over L2TPv3

Status of this Memo

   This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
   all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.

   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-

   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

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004).  All Rights Reserved.


   The Layer 2 Tunneling Protocol, Version 3, (L2TPv3) defines a
   protocol for tunneling a variety of data link protocols over IP
   networks.  This document describes the specifics of how to tunnel
   Frame-Relay over L2TPv3, including frame encapsulation, virtual-
   circuit creation, deletion, and line status change notification.

Townsley, et al.            Standards Track                     [Page 1]

INTERNET DRAFT          Frame-Relay over L2TPv3               March 2004


   Status of this Memo..........................................    1

   1. Introduction..............................................    2
      1.1 Abbreviations.........................................    3

   2. Control Connection Establishment..........................    3

   3. PVC Status Notification and Session Establishment.........    3
      3.1 L2TPv3 Session Establishment..........................    3
      3.2 L2TPv3 Session Teardown...............................    5
      3.3 L2TPv3 Session Maintenance............................    5
      3.4 Use of the Circuit Status AVP for Frame-Relay.........    6

   4. Encapsulation.............................................    6
      4.1 Data Packet Encapsulation.............................    6
      4.2 Data Packet Sequencing................................    7

   5. Security Considerations...................................    8

   6. IANA Considerations.......................................    8

   7. Acknowledgments...........................................    8

   8. References................................................    8
      8.1 Normative References..................................    8
      8.2 Informative References................................    8

   9. Contacts..................................................    9

Specification of Requirements

   In this document, several words are used to signify the requirements
   of the specification.  These words are often capitalized.  The key
   "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document
   are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].

1. Introduction

   [L2TPv3] defines a base protocol for Layer 2 Tunneling over IP
   networks. This document defines the specifics necessary for tunneling
   Frame-Relay over L2TPv3. Such emulated circuits are referred to as
   Frame-Relay Pseudowires (FRPWs).

   Protocol specifics defined in this document for L2TPv3 FRPWs include

Townsley, et al.            Standards Track                     [Page 2]

INTERNET DRAFT          Frame-Relay over L2TPv3               March 2004

   those necessary for frame encapsulation, PVC creation, deletion, and
   status change notification.  Support for Switched Virtual Circuits
   (SVCs) and Switched/soft Permanent Virtual Circuits (SPVCs) are
   outside the scope of this document.

   The reader is expected to be very familiar with the terminology and
   protocol constructs defined in [L2TPv3].

1.1 Abbreviations

   FR    Frame-Relay
   FRPW  Frame-Relay Pseudo-Wire
   LCCE  L2TP Control Connection Endpoint (See [L2TPv3])
   PVC   Permanent virtual circuit
   PW    Pseudo-Wire
   VC    Virtual circuit

2. Control Connection Establishment

   In order to tunnel a Frame-Relay circuit over IP using L2TPv3, an
   L2TPv3 Control Connection MUST first be established as described in
   [L2TPv3]. The L2TPv3 SCCRQ Control Message and corresponding SCCRP
   Control Message MUST include the Frame-Relay PW Type of TBD1 (See
   IANA Considerations Section), in the Pseudo Wire Capabilities List as
   defined in 5.4.3 of [L2TPv3]. This identifies the control connection
   as able to establish L2TP sessions to support Frame-Relay Pseudo-
   Wires (FRPWs).

   An LCCE MUST be able to uniquely identify itself in the SCCRQ and
   SCCRP messages via a globally unique value. By default, this is
   advertised via the structured Router ID AVP [L2TPv3], though the
   unstructured Hostname AVP [L2TPv3] MAY be used if both endpoints
   support an application (as defined by the Application Code AVP
   [L2TPv3]) to identify LCCEs via this value.

3. PVC Status Notification and Session Establishment

   This section specifies how the status of a PVC is reported between
   two LCCEs. This includes what should happen when a PVC is created,
   deleted or when it changes state between ACTIVE and INACTIVE.

3.1 L2TPv3 Session Establishment

   PVC creation (provisioning) results in establishment of an L2TP
   session via the standard three-way handshake described in section
   3.4.1 of [L2TPv3]. An LCCE MAY initiate the session immediately upon
   PVC creation, or wait until the PVC state transitions to ACTIVE
   before attempting to establish a session for the PVC. Waiting until

Townsley, et al.            Standards Track                     [Page 3]

INTERNET DRAFT          Frame-Relay over L2TPv3               March 2004

   the PVC transitions to ACTIVE may be preferred as it delays
   allocation of L2TP resources until absolutely necessary.

   The Circuit Status AVP (see Section 4) MUST be present in the ICRQ
   and ICRP messages, and MAY be present in the SLI message for FRPWs.

   Following is an example of the L2TP messages exchanged for an FRPW
   which is initiated after a new PVC is provisioned and becomes ACTIVE.

         LCCE (LAC) A                     LCCE (LAC) B
      ------------------               ------------------
      FR PVC Provisioned
                                       FR PVC Provisioned

                   ICRQ (status = 0x03) ---->

                                       FR PVC ACTIVE

                   <---- ICRP (status = 0x03)

      L2TP session established,
      OK to send data into tunnel

                       ICCN ----->
                                    L2TP session established,
                                    OK to send data into tunnel

   In the example above, an ICRQ is sent after the PVC is created and
   becomes ACTIVE. The Circuit Status AVP indicates that this PVC is
   ACTIVE and New (0x03). The Remote End ID AVP [L2TPv3] must be present
   in the ICRQ in order to identify the PVC (together with the identity
   of the LCCE itself as defined in section 2) to associate the L2TP
   session with. The Remote End ID AVP defined in [L2TPv3] is of opaque
   form and variable length, though one MUST at a minimum support use of
   an unstructured four-octet value that is known to both LCCEs (either
   by direct configuration, or some other means). The exact method of
   how this value is configured, retrieved, discovered, or otherwise
   determined at each LCCE is outside the scope of this document.

   As with the ICRQ, the ICRP is sent only after the FR PVC transitions
   to ACTIVE as well. If LCCE B had not been provisioned for the PVC
   identified in the ICRQ, a CDN would have been immediately returned
   indicating that the circuit was not provisioned or available at this
   LCCE.  LCCE A should then exhibit a periodic retry mechanism. The
   period and maximum number of retries MUST be configurable.

   An Implementation MAY send an ICRQ or ICRP before a PVC is ACTIVE, as

Townsley, et al.            Standards Track                     [Page 4]

INTERNET DRAFT          Frame-Relay over L2TPv3               March 2004

   long as the Circuit Status AVP reflects that the PVC is INACTIVE and
   an SLI is sent when the PVC becomes ACTIVE (see Section 3.3).

   The ICCN is the final stage in the session establishment, confirming
   the receipt of the ICRP with acceptable parameters to allow
   bidirectional traffic.

3.2 L2TPv3 Session Teardown

   In the event a PVC is deleted (unprovisioned) at either LCCE, the
   associated L2TP session MUST be torn down via the CDN message defined
   in Section 3.4.3 of [L2TPv3].

   General Result Codes regarding L2TP session establishment are defined
   in [L2TPv3]. Additional Frame-Relay result codes are defined as

        TBD2: FR PVC was deleted permanently (no longer provisioned)
        TBD3: FR PVC has been INACTIVE for an extended period of time

3.3 L2TPv3 Session Maintenance

   FRPW over L2TP makes use of the Set Link Info (SLI) control message
   defined in [L2TPv3] to signal Frame-Relay link status notifications
   between LCCEs. This includes ACTIVE or INACTIVE notifications of the
   VC, or any other parameters that may need to be shared between the
   tunnel endpoints or LCCEs in order to provide proper PW emulation.
   The SLI message is a single message that is sent over the L2TP
   control channel signaling the state change. Since the message is
   delivered reliably, there is no additional response or action
   required of the PW subsytem to ensure that the state change
   notification was received by the tunnel peer.

   The SLI message MUST be sent any time there is a circuit status
   change which may be reported by any values identified in the Circuit
   Status AVP. The only exception to this is the initial ICRQ, ICRP and
   CDN messages which establish and teardown the L2TP session itself
   when the PVC is created or deleted.  The SLI message may be sent from
   either LCCE at any time after the first ICRQ is sent (and perhaps
   before an ICRP is received, requiring the peer to perform a reverse
   Session ID lookup).

   All sessions established by a given control connection utilize the
   L2TP Hello factility defined in Section 4.4 of [L2TPv3] for session
   keepalive. This gives all sessions basic dead peer and path detection
   between LCCEs.

Townsley, et al.            Standards Track                     [Page 5]

INTERNET DRAFT          Frame-Relay over L2TPv3               March 2004

3.4 Use of the Circuit Status AVP for Frame-Relay

   Frame-relay circuit status is reported via the Circuit Status AVP
   defined in [L2TPv3]. For reference, this AVP is shown below:

    0                   1
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
   |           Reserved        |A|N|

   The Value is a 16 bit mask with the two least significant bits
   defined and the remaining bits reserved for future use. Reserved bits
   MUST be set to 0 when sending, and ignored upon receipt.

   The A (Active) bit indicates whether the FR PVC is ACTIVE (1) or
   INACTIVE (0).

   The N (New) bit indicates whether the circuit status indication is
   for a new FR PVC (1) or an existing FR PVC (0).

4. Encapsulation

4.1 Data Packet Encapsulation

   The FR PDU is transported in its entirety, excluding the opening and
   closing HDLC flags and the FCS. Bit stuffing is undone. The L2TPv3
   Session Header is that as defined in [L2TPv3]. If sequencing or other
   features require presence of an L2-Specific Sublayer, the Default
   format defined in section 4.6 of [L2TPv3] MUST be used.

   The FR header is defined in [Q922], however the notation used differs
   from that used in IETF specifications. For reference the FR header in
   IETF notation is:

    0                   1
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
   | hi dlci   |C|0|lo dlci|F|B|D|1|

   Two-octet FR Header

    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
   | hi dlci   |C|0| dlci  |F|B|D|0|   dlci      |0| dlci_lo   |0|1|

Townsley, et al.            Standards Track                     [Page 6]

INTERNET DRAFT          Frame-Relay over L2TPv3               March 2004

   Four-octet FR  Header

   C/R (bit 6)
   FR frame C/R (command/response) bit [Q922].

   F - FECN (bit 12):
   FR FECN (Forward Explicit Congestion Notification) bit [Q922].

   B - BECN (bit 13):
   FR BECN (Backward Explicit Congestion Notification) bit [Q922].

   D - DE (bit 14)
   FR DE bit indicates the discard eligibility [Q922].

   Usage of the C/R, FECN, BECN and DE bits is as specified in [Q922].

   The C/R bit is conveyed transparently. Its value MUST NOT be changed
   by the LCCE.

   The FECN bit MAY be set by the LCCE to notify the receiving end-user
   that the frames it recieves have encountered congestion. The end-user
   may use this indication for destination controlled transmit rate
   adjustment. The bit must never be cleared by the LCCE. If the LCCE
   does not support FECN it shall pass the bit unchanged.

   The BECN bit MAY be set by the LCCE to notify the receiving end-user
   that frames it transmits may encounter congestion. The end-user may
   use this indication to adjust its transmit rate. The bit must never
   be cleared by the LCCE. If the LCCE does not support BECN it shall
   pass the bit unchanged.

   The DE bit MAY be set by a policing function on the LCCE to indicate
   that this frame SHOULD be discarded in preference to other frames in
   a congestion situation. The bit must never be cleared by the LCCE. If
   the LCCE does not support DE it shall pass the bit unchanged.

4.2 Data Packet Sequencing

   Data Packet Sequencing MAY be enabled for FRPWs. The sequencing
   mechanisms described in [L2TPv3] MUST be used for signaling
   sequencing support. FRPW over L2TP MUST request the presence of the
   L2TPv3 Default L2-Specific Sublayer when sequencing is enabled, and
   MAY request its presence at all times.

   If the FRPW is known to be carrying data which does not require
   packet order to be strictly maintained (such as IP), then packet
   sequencing for the FRPW SHOULD NOT be enabled.

Townsley, et al.            Standards Track                     [Page 7]

INTERNET DRAFT          Frame-Relay over L2TPv3               March 2004

5. Security Considerations

   Frame Relay over L2TPv3 is subject to the security considerations
   defined in [L2TPv3]. There are no additional considerations specific
   to carrying Frame Relay that are not present carrying other data link

6. IANA Considerations

   The following value needs assignment by IANA (number space should be
   created as part of publication of [L2TPv3]):

      TBD1 - Frame Relay Pseudowire Type (see Pseudo Wire Capabilities
      List as defined in 5.4.3 of [L2TPv3]).

   Two new L2TP Result Codes appear in section 3.2 which need assignment
   by IANA as described in section 9.1 of [BCP0068].

      TBD2 - PVC was deleted permanently (no longer provisioned)

      TBD3 - PVC has been INACTIVE for an extended period of time

7. Acknowledgments

   The first Frame Relay over L2TP document was published as "Frame
   Relay Service Type for L2TP," draft-vasavada-l2tpext-fr-svctype-
   00.txt in Feburary of 2001 by Nishit Vasavada, Jim Boyle, Chris
   Garner, Serge Maskalik, and Vijay Gill. This document is
   substantially different, but the basic concept of carrying Frame
   Relay over L2TP is the same.

   Thanks to Lloyd Wood for a razor-sharp review.

8. References

8.1 Normative References

      [L2TPv3]   J. Lau, M. Townsley, I. Goyret, "Layer Two Tunneling
                 Protocol (Version 3)", work in progress,
                 draft-ietf-l2tpext-l2tp-base-10.txt, August 2003.

      [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
                 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

8.2 Informative References

      [BCP0068] Townsley, W., Layer Two Tunneling Protocol (L2TP) Internet
                Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) Considerations Update",

Townsley, et al.            Standards Track                     [Page 8]

INTERNET DRAFT          Frame-Relay over L2TPv3               March 2004

                RFC3438, BCP0068, December 2002

      [Q922]    ITU-T Recommendation Q.922, ISDN Data Link Layer
                Specification for Frame Mode Bearer Services, ITU, Geneva, 1992.

9. Contacts

   W. Mark Townsley
   cisco Systems
   7025 Kit Creek Road
   PO Box 14987
   Research Triangle Park, NC 27709

   George Wilkie
   cisco Systems
   96 Commercial Street
   Edinburgh, EH6 6LX
   United Kingdom

   Jed Lau
   cisco Systems
   170 W. Tasman Drive
   San Jose, CA  95134

   Skip Booth
   cisco Systems
   7025 Kit Creek Road
   PO Box 14987
   Research Triangle Park, NC 27709

   Stewart Bryant
   cisco Systems
   Uxbridge UB11 1BL
   United Kingdom

Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004).  All Rights Reserved.

   This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
   others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it

Townsley, et al.            Standards Track                     [Page 9]

INTERNET DRAFT          Frame-Relay over L2TPv3               March 2004

   or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
   and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
   kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
   included on all such copies and derivative works.  However, this
   document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
   the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
   Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
   developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
   copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
   followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than

   The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
   revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.

   This document and the information contained herein is provided on an

Intellectual Property

   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
   intellectual property 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; neither does it represent that it
   has made any effort to identify any such rights.  Information on the
   IETF's procedures with respect to rights in standards-track and
   standards-related documentation can be found in BCP-11 [RFC2028].
   Copies of claims of rights made available for publication 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 implementors or users of this
   specification can be obtained from the IETF Secretariat.

   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
   rights which may cover technology that may be required to practice
   this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF Executive

Townsley, et al.            Standards Track                    [Page 10]

Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.111, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/