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

Versions: (draft-raggarwa-mpls-seamless-mcast) 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14

Network Working Group                                         Y. Rekhter
Internet Draft                                          Juniper Networks
Intended status: Standards Track
Expiration Date: December 2014
                                                             R. Aggarwal


                                                                T. Morin
                                                          France Telecom

                                                           I. Grosclaude
                                                          France Telecom

                                                              N. Leymann
                                                     Deutsche Telekom AG

                                                                 S. Saad
                                                                    AT&T

                                                            June 30 2014


                     Inter-Area P2MP Segmented LSPs


                 draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt

Abstract

   This document describes procedures for building inter-area point-to-
   multipoint (P2MP) segmented service LSPs by partitioning such LSPs
   into intra-area segments and using BGP as the inter-area routing and
   label distribution protocol. Within each IGP area the intra-area
   segments are either carried over intra-area P2MP LSPs, using P2MP LSP
   hierarchy, or instantiated using ingress replication.  The intra-area
   P2MP LSPs may be signaled using P2MP RSVP-TE or P2MP mLDP. If ingress
   replication is used within an IGP area, then (multipoint-to-point)
   LDP LSPs or (point-to-point) RSVP-TE LSPs may be used in the IGP
   area. The applications/services that use such inter-area service LSPs
   may be BGP Multicast VPN, VPLS multicast, or global table multicast
   over MPLS.










Rekhter                                                         [Page 1]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


Status of this Memo

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

Copyright and License Notice

   Copyright (c) 2014 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
   (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.

   This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF
   Contributions published or made publicly available before November
   10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this
   material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow
   modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process.
   Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling
   the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified
   outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may
   not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format
   it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other
   than English.





Rekhter                                                         [Page 2]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


Table of Contents

 1          Introduction  ..........................................   4
 2          Specification of requirements  .........................   5
 3          General Assumptions and Terminology  ...................   5
 4          Inter-area P2MP Segmented Next-Hop Extended Community  .   7
 5          Discovering P2MP FEC of Inter-Area P2MP Service LSP  ...   8
 5.1        BGP MVPN  ..............................................   8
 5.1.1      Routes originated by PE or ASBR  .......................   8
 5.1.2      Routes re-avertise by PE or ASBR  ......................   9
 5.1.3      Inter-area routes  .....................................   9
 5.2        LDP VPLS with BGP auto-discovery or BGP VPLS  ..........  10
 5.2.1      Routes originated by PE or ASBR  .......................  10
 5.2.2      Routes re-avertise by PE or ASBR  ......................  10
 5.2.3      Inter-area routes  .....................................  11
 5.3        Global Table Multicast over MPLS  ......................  12
 6          Egress PE/ASBR Signaling Procedures  ...................  12
 6.1        Determining the Upstream ABR/PE/ASBR (Upstream Node)  ..  13
 6.1.1      Upstream Node for MVPN or VPLS  ........................  13
 6.1.2      Upstream Node for Global Table Multicast  ..............  13
 6.2        Originating a Leaf A-D Route  ..........................  14
 6.2.1      Leaf A-D Route for MVPN and VPLS  ......................  14
 6.2.2      Leaf A-D Route for Global Table Multicast  .............  15
 6.2.3      Constructing the Rest of the Leaf A-D Route  ...........  17
 6.3        PIM-SM in ASM mode for Global Table Multicast  .........  17
 6.3.1      Option 1  ..............................................  17
 6.3.1.1    Originating Source Active A-D Routes  ..................  18
 6.3.1.2    Receiving BGP Source Active A-D Route by PE  ...........  18
 6.3.1.3    Handling (S, G, rpt) state  ............................  19
 6.3.2      Option 2  ..............................................  19
 6.3.2.1    Originating Source Active A-D Routes  ..................  19
 6.3.2.2    Receiving BGP Source Active A-D Route  .................  20
 6.3.2.3    Pruning Sources off the Shared Tree  ...................  20
 6.3.2.4    More on handling (S, G, rpt) state  ....................  21
 7          Egress ABR Procedures  .................................  21
 7.1        Handling Leaf A-D route on Egress ABR  .................  21
 7.2        P2MP LSP as the Intra-Area LSP in the Egress Area  .....  23
 7.2.1      Received Leaf A-D route is for MVPN or VPLS  ...........  23
 7.2.2      Received Leaf A-D route is for global table multicast  .  24
 7.2.2.1    Global Table Multicast and S-PMSI A-D Routes  ..........  24
 7.2.2.2    Global Table Multicast and Wildcard S-PMSI A-D Routes  .  24
 7.2.3      Global Table Multicast and the Expected Upstream Node  .  25
 7.2.4      P2MP LDP LSP as the Intra-Area P2MP LSP  ...............  26



Rekhter                                                         [Page 3]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


 7.2.5      P2MP RSVP-TE LSP as the Intra-Area P2MP LSP  ...........  26
 7.3        Ingress Replication in the Egress Area  ................  26
 8          Ingress ABR Procedures  ................................  27
 8.1        P2MP LSP as the Intra-Area LSP in the Backbone Area  ...  27
 8.2        Ingress Replication in the Backbone Area  ..............  27
 9          Ingress PE/ASBR Procedures  ............................  28
 9.1        P2MP LSP as the Intra-Area LSP in the Ingress Area  ....  28
 9.2        Ingress Replication in the Ingress Area  ...............  29
10          Common Tunnel Type in the Ingress and Egress Areas  ....  30
11          Placement of Ingress and Egress PEs  ...................  30
12          MVPN with Virtual Hub-and-Spoke  .......................  31
13          Data Plane  ............................................  31
13.1        Data Plane Procedures on ABRs  .........................  31
13.2        Data Plane Procedures on Egress PEs  ...................  32
13.3        Data Plane Procedures on Ingress PEs  ..................  33
13.4        Data Plane Procedures on Transit Routers  ..............  33
14          Support for Inter-Area Transport LSPs  .................  33
14.1        Transport Tunnel Tunnel Type  ..........................  34
14.2        Discovering Leaves of the Inter-Area P2MP Service LSP  .  34
14.3        Discovering P2MP FEC of P2MP Transport LSP  ............  34
14.4        Egress PE Procedures for P2MP Transport LSP  ...........  35
14.5        ABRs and Ingress PE procedures for P2MP Transport LSP  .  36
14.6        Discussion  ............................................  37
15          IANA Considerations  ...................................  39
16          Security Considerations  ...............................  39
17          Acknowledgements  ......................................  39
18          References  ............................................  39
18.1        Normative References  ..................................  39
18.2        Informative References  ................................  41
19          Author's Address  ......................................  41






1. Introduction

   This document describes procedures for building inter-area point-to-
   multipoint (P2MP) segmented service LSPs by partitioning such LSPs
   into intra-area segments and using BGP as the inter-area routing and
   label distribution protocol. Within each IGP area the intra-area
   segments are either carried over intra-area P2MP LSPs, potentially
   using P2MP LSP hierarchy, or instantiated using ingress replication.
   The intra-area P2MP LSPs may be signaled using P2MP RSVP-TE [RFC4875]
   or P2MP mLDP [RFC6388]. If ingress replication is used in an IGP area
   then (multipoint-to-point) LDP LSPs [RFC5036] or (point-to-point)
   RSVP-TE LSPs [RFC3209] may be used within the IGP area.  The



Rekhter                                                         [Page 4]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


   applications/services that use such inter-area service LSPs may be
   BGP Multicast VPN (BGP MVPN), VPLS multicast, or global table
   multicast over MPLS.

   The primary use case of such segmented P2MP service LSPs is when the
   PEs are in different areas but in the same AS and thousands or more
   of PEs require P2MP connectivity. For instance this may be the case
   when MPLS is pushed further to the metro edge and the metros are in
   different IGP areas. This may also be the case when a Service
   Provider's network comprises multiple IGP areas in a single
   Autonomous System, with a large number of PEs. Seamless MPLS is the
   industry term to address this case [SEAMLESS-MPLS]. Thus one of the
   applicabilities of this document is that it describes the multicast
   procedures for seamless MPLS.

   It is to be noted that [RFC6514] and [RFC7117] already specify
   procedures for building segmented inter-AS P2MP service LSPs. This
   document complements those procedures, as it extends the segmented
   P2MP LSP model such that it is applicable to inter-area P2MP service
   LSPs as well. In fact an inter-AS deployment could use inter-AS
   segmented P2MP LSPs as specified in [RFC6514, RFC7117] where each
   intra-AS segment is constructed using inter-area segmented P2MP LSPs
   as specified in this document.


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. General Assumptions and Terminology

   The reader is suppose to be familiar with MVPN procedures and
   terminology [RFC6513, RFC6514] and VPLS procedures and terminology
   [RFC7117].

   This document allows ABRs, acting as Route Reflectors, to follow the
   procedures specified in [SEAMLESS-MPLS] when handling BGP Next Hop of
   the routes to the PEs. Specifically, when reflecting such routes from
   the non-backbone areas into the backbone area, the ABRs MUST set BGP
   Next Hop to their own loopback addresses (next-hop-self), while when
   reflecting such routes from the backbone area into the non-backbone
   areas, the ABRs SHOULD NOT change the BGP Next Hop addresses (next-
   hop-unchanged).

   While this document allows ABRs to follow the procedures specified in



Rekhter                                                         [Page 5]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


   [SEAMLESS-MPLS], procedures specified in this document are applicable
   even when ABRs do not follow the procedures specified in [SEAMLESS-
   MPLS].

   One possible way to support the global table multicast service is by
   relying on the MVPN procedures, as specified in [RFC6514], in which
   case the MVPN procedures specified in this document would be used to
   support the global table multicast service. This document specifies
   an alternative approach to support the global table multicast
   service. This document refers to this approach as "global table
   multicast" (although this by no means imply that this alternative
   approach is the only way to support the global table multicast
   service).

   This document assumes that in the context of global table multicast
   ABRs do not carry routes to the destinations external to their own
   AS.  Furthermore, in the context of global table multicast this
   document assumes that an ASBR, when re-advertising into IBGP routes
   received from an external speaker (received via EBGP) may not change
   BGP Next Hop to self.

   Within an AS a P2MP service LSP is partitioned into 3 segments:
   ingress area segment, backbone area segment, and egress area segment.
   Within each area a segment is carried over an intra-area P2MP LSP or
   instantiated using ingress replication.

   When intra-area P2MP LSPs are used to instantiate the intra-area
   segments there could be either 1:1 or n:1 mapping between intra-area
   segments of the inter-area P2MP service LSP and a given intra-area
   P2MP LSP. The latter is realized using P2MP LSP hierarchy with
   upstream-assigned labels [RFC5331]. For simplicity of presentation we
   assume that P2MP LSP hierarchy is used even with 1:1 mapping, in
   which case an Implicit NULL is used as the upstream-assigned label.

   When intra-area segments of the inter-area P2MP service LSP are
   instantiated using ingress replication, then multiple such segments
   may be carried in the same P2P RSVP-TE or MP2P LDP LSP. This can be
   achieved using downstream-assigned labels alone.

   The ingress area segment of a P2MP service LSP is rooted at a PE (or
   at an ASBR in the case where the P2MP service LSP spans multiple
   ASes). The leaves of this segment are other PEs/ASBRs and ABRs in the
   same area as the root PE.

   The backbone area segment is rooted at an ABR that is connected to
   the ingress area (ingress ABR), or at an ASBR if the ASBR is present
   in the backbone area, or at a PE if the PE is present in the backbone
   area. The backbone area segment has its leaves ABRs that are



Rekhter                                                         [Page 6]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


   connected to the egress area(s) or PEs in the backbone area, or ASBRs
   in the backbone area.

   The egress area segment is rooted at an ABR in the egress area
   (egress ABR), and has its leaves PEs and ASBR in that egress area
   (the latter covers the case where the P2MP service LSP spans multiple
   ASes).  Note that for a given P2MP service LSP there may be more than
   one backbone segment, each rooted at its own ingress ABR, and more
   than one egress area segment, each rooted at its own egress ABR.

   This document uses the term "A-D routes" for "auto-discovery routes".

   An implementation that supports this document MUST implement the
   procedures described in the following sections to support inter-area
   point-to-multipoint (P2MP) segmented service LSPs.


4. Inter-area P2MP Segmented Next-Hop Extended Community

   This document defines a new BGP Extended Community "Inter-area P2MP
   Next-Hop" Extended Community. This is an IP-address specific Extended
   Community of an extended type and is transitive across AS boundaries
   [RFC4360].

   A PE or an ABR or an ASBR constructs the Inter-area P2MP Segmented
   Next-Hop Extended Community as follows:

     -  The Global Administrator field MUST be set to an IP address of
       the PE or ASBR or ABR that originates or advertises the route,
       which carries the P2MP Next-Hop Extended Community. For example
       this address may be the loopback address or the PE, ASBR or ABR
       that advertises the route.

     -  The Local Administrator field MUST be set to 0.


   The detailed usage of this Extended Community is described in the
   following sections.













Rekhter                                                         [Page 7]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


5. Discovering P2MP FEC of Inter-Area P2MP Service LSP

   Each inter-area P2MP service LSP has associated with it P2MP FEC.
   The egress PEs need to learn this P2MP FEC in order to initiate the
   creation of the egress area segment of the P2MP inter-area service
   LSP.

   The P2MP FEC of the inter-area P2MP LSP is learned by the egress PEs
   either by configuration, or based on the application-specific
   procedures (e.g., MVPN-specific procedures, VPLS-specific
   procedures).


5.1. BGP MVPN

   Egress PEs and/or ASBRs discover the P2MP FEC of the service LSPs
   used by BGP MVPN using the I-PMSI or S-PMSI A-D routes that are
   originated by the ingress PEs or ASBRs following the procedures of
   [RFC6514], along with modifications as described in this document.
   The NLRI of such routes encodes the P2MP FEC.

   The procedures in this document require that at least one ABR in a
   given IGP area acts as a Route Reflector for MVPN A-D routes. Such a
   Router Reflector is responsible for re-advertising MVPN A-D routes
   across area's boundaries. When re-advertising these routes across
   area's boundaries, this Route Reflector MUST follow the procedures in
   this document. Note that such a Route Reflector may also re-advertise
   MVPN A-D routes within the same area, in which case it follows the
   plain BGP Route Reflector procedures [RFC4456].


5.1.1. Routes originated by PE or ASBR

   The "Leaf Information Required" flag MUST be set in the PMSI Tunnel
   attribute carried in the MVPN A-D routes, when originated by the
   ingress PEs or ASBRs, except for the case where (a) as a matter of
   policy (provisioned on the ingress PEs or ASBRs) there is no
   aggregation of ingress area segments of the service LSPs, and (b)
   mLDP is used as the protocol to establish intra-area transport LSPs
   in the ingress area. Before any Leaf A-D route is advertised by a PE
   or ABR in the same area, as described in the following sections, an
   I-PMSI/S-PMSI A-D route is advertised either with an explicit Tunnel
   Type and Tunnel Identifier in the PMSI Tunnel Attribute, if the
   Tunnel Identifier has already been assigned, or with a special Tunnel
   Type of "No tunnel information present" otherwise.






Rekhter                                                         [Page 8]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


5.1.2. Routes re-avertise by PE or ASBR

   When the I-PMSI/S-PMSI A-D routes are re-advertised by an ingress
   ABR, the "Leaf Information Required" flag MUST be set in the P-Tunnel
   attribute present in the routes, except for the case where (a) as a
   matter of policy (provisioned on the ingress ABR) there is no
   aggregation of backbone area segments of the service LSPs, and (b)
   mLDP is used as the protocol to establish intra-area transport LSPs
   in the backbone area. Likewise, when the I-PMSI/S-PMSI A-D routes are
   re-advertised by an egress ABR, the "Leaf Information Required" flag
   MUST be set in the P-Tunnel attribute present in the routes, except
   for the case where (a) as a matter of policy (provisioned on the
   egress ABR) there is no aggregation of egress area segments of the
   service LSPs, and (b) mLDP is used as the protocol to establish
   intra-area transport LSPs in the egress area.

   Note that the procedures in the above paragraph apply when intra-area
   segments are realized by either intra-area P2MP LSPs or by ingress
   replication.


5.1.3. Inter-area routes

   When BGP MVPN I-PMSI or S-PMSI A-D routes are advertised or
   propagated to signal Inter-area P2MP service LSPs, to indicate that
   these LSPs should be segmented using the procedures specified in this
   document, these routes MUST carry the Inter-area P2MP Segmented Next-
   Hop Extended Community. This Extended Community MUST be included in
   the I-PMSI/S-PMSI A-D route by the PE that originates such a route,
   or an ASBR that re-advertises such a route into its own AS.  The
   Global Administrator field in this Extended Community MUST be set to
   the advertising PE or ASBR's IP address. This Extended Community MUST
   also be included by ABRs as they re-advertise such routes. An ABR
   MUST set the Global Administrator field of the P2MP Segmented Next-
   Hop Extended Community to its own IP address. Presence of this
   community in the I-PMSI/S-PMSI A-D routes indicates to ABRs and
   PEs/ASBRs that they have to follow the procedures in this document
   when these procedures differ from those in [RFC6514].

   If an ASBR receives from an IBGP peer an I-PMSI or S-PMSI A-D route
   that carries the Inter-area P2MP Segmented Next-Hop Extended
   Community, then before re-advertising this route to an EBGP peer the
   ASBR SHOULD remove this Community from the route.

   If an ASBR receives an I-PMSI/S-PMSI A-D route from an EBGP peer, and
   this route does carry the Inter-area P2MP Segmented Next-Hop Extended
   Community, if the inter-area P2MP service LSP signalled by this route
   should not be segmented, then before re-advertising this route to its



Rekhter                                                         [Page 9]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


   IBGP peers the ASBR MUST remove this community from the route.

   To avoid requiring ABRs to participate in the propagation of C-
   multicast routes, this document requires ABRs NOT to modify BGP Next
   Hop when re-advertising Inter-AS I-PMSI A-D routes. For consistency
   this document requires ABRs to NOT modify BGP Next Hop when re-
   advertising both Intra-AS and Inter-AS I-PMSI/S-PMSI A-D routes. The
   egress PEs may advertise the C-multicast routes to RRs that are
   different than the ABRs. However ABRs still can be configured to be
   the Route Reflectors for C-multicast routes, in which case they will
   participate in the propagation of C-multicast routes.


5.2. LDP VPLS with BGP auto-discovery or BGP VPLS

   Egress PEs discover the P2MP FEC of the service LSPs used by VPLS,
   using the VPLS A-D routes that are originated by the ingress PEs
   [RFC4761, RFC6074], or VPLS S-PMSI A-D routes that are originated by
   the ingress PEs [RFC7117]. The NLRI of such routes encodes the P2MP
   FEC.


5.2.1. Routes originated by PE or ASBR

   The "Leaf Information Required" flag MUST be set in the P-Tunnel
   attribute carried in the VPLS A-D routes or VPLS S-PMSI A-D routes,
   when originated by the ingress PEs or ASBRs, except for the case
   where (a) as a matter of policy (provisioned on the ingress PEs or
   ASBRs) there is no aggregation of ingress area segments of the
   service LSPs, and (b) mLDP is used as the protocol to establish
   intra-area transport LSPs in the ingress area. Before any Leaf A-D
   route is advertised by a PE or ABR in the same area, as described in
   the following sections, an VPLS/S-PMSI A-D route is advertised either
   with an explicit Tunnel Type and Tunnel Identifier in the PMSI Tunnel
   Attribute, if the Tunnel Identifier has already been assigned, or
   with a special Tunnel Type of "No tunnel information present"
   otherwise.


5.2.2. Routes re-avertise by PE or ASBR

   When the VPLS/S-PMSI A-D routes are re-advertised by an ingress ABR,
   the "Leaf Information Required" flag MUST be set in the P-Tunnel
   attribute present in the routes, except for the case where (a) as a
   matter of policy (provisioned on the ingress ABR) there is no
   aggregation of backbone area segments of the service LSPs, and (b)
   mLDP is used as the protocol to establish intra-area transport LSPs
   in the backbone area. Likewise, when the VPLS/S-PMSI A-D routes are



Rekhter                                                        [Page 10]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


   re-advertised by an egress ABR, the "Leaf Information Required" flag
   MUST be set in the P-Tunnel attribute present in the routes, except
   for the case where (a) as a matter of policy (provisioned on the
   egress ABR) there is no aggregation of egress area segments of the
   service LSPs, and (b) mLDP is used as the protocol to establish
   intra-area transport LSPs in the egress area.


5.2.3. Inter-area routes

   When VPLS A-D routes or S-PMSI A-D routes are advertised or
   propagated to signal Inter-area P2MP service LSPs, to indicate that
   these LSPs should be segmented using the procedures specified in this
   document, these routes MUST carry the Inter-area P2MP Segmented Next-
   Hop Extended Community. This Extended Community MUST be included in
   the A-D route by the PE or ASBR that originates such a route and the
   Global Administrator field MUST be set to the advertising PE or
   ASBR's IP address. This Extended Community MUST also be included by
   ABRs as they re-advertise such routes. An ABR MUST set the Global
   Administrator field of the P2MP Segmented Next-Hop Extended Community
   to its own IP address. Presence of this community in the I-PMSI/S-
   PMSI A-D routes indicates to ABRs and PEs/ASBRs that they have to
   follow the procedures in this document when these procedures differ
   from those in [RFC7117].

   Note that the procedures in the above paragraph apply when intra-area
   segments are realized by either intra-area P2MP LSPs or by ingress
   replication.

   The procedures in this document require that at least one ABR in a
   given area acts as a Route Reflector for VPLS A-D routes.  Such a
   Router Reflector is responsible for re-advertising VPLS A-D routes
   across area's boundaries. When re-advertising these routes across
   area's boundaries, this Route Reflector MUST follow the procedures in
   this document. Note that such a Route Reflector may also re-advertise
   VPLS A-D routes within the same area, in which case it follows plain
   BGP Route Reflector procedures [RFC4456].

   When re-advertising VPLS A-D routes a Route Reflector MUST NOT modify
   BGP Next Hop of these routes.











Rekhter                                                        [Page 11]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


5.3. Global Table Multicast over MPLS

   This section describes how the egress PEs discover the P2MP FEC when
   the application is global table multicast over an MPLS-capable
   infrastructure. In the rest of the document we will refer to this
   application as "global table multicast".

   When PIM-SM is used for non-bidirectional ASM ("Any Source
   Multicast") group addresses, this document refers to this as "PIM-SM
   in ASM mode".

   In the case where global table multicast uses PIM-SM in ASM mode the
   following assumes that an inter-area P2MP service LSP could be used
   to either carry traffic on a shared (*,G), or a source (S,G) tree.

   An egress PE learns the (S/*, G) of a multicast stream as a result of
   receiving IGMP or PIM messages on one of its IP multicast interfaces.
   This (S/*, G) forms the P2MP FEC of the inter-area P2MP service LSP.
   For each such P2MP FEC there MAY exist a distinct inter-area P2MP
   service LSP, or multiple such FECs MAY be carried over a single P2MP
   service LSP using a wildcard (*, *) S-PMSI [RFC6625].

   Note that this document does not require the use of (*, G) Inter-area
   P2MP service LSPs when global table multicast uses PIM-SM in ASM
   mode. In fact, PIM-SM in ASM mode may be supported entirely by using
   only (S, G) inter-area P2MP service LSPs.


6. Egress PE/ASBR Signaling Procedures

   This section describes egress PE/ASBR procedures for constructing
   segmented inter-area P2MP LSP. The procedures in this section apply
   irrespective of whether the egress PE/ASBR is in a leaf IGP area, or
   the backbone area, or even in the same IGP area as the ingress
   PE/ASBR.

   An egress PE/ASBR applies procedures specified in this section to
   MVPN I-PMSI or S-PMSI A-D routes only if these routes carry the
   Inter-area P2MP Segmented Next-Hop Extended Community. An egress PE
   applies procedures specified in this section to VPLS A-D routes or
   VPLS S-PMSI A-D routes only if these routes carry the Inter-area P2MP
   Segmented Next-Hop Extended Community.

   In order to support global table multicast an egress PE MUST be auto-
   configured to import routes that carry AS-specific Route Target
   Extended Community ([RFC4360]) with the Global Administrator field
   set to the AS of the PE and the Local Administrator field set to 0.




Rekhter                                                        [Page 12]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


   Once an egress PE/ASBR discovers the P2MP FEC of an inter-area
   segmented P2MP service LSP, it MUST propagate this P2MP FEC in BGP in
   order to construct the segmented inter-area P2MP service LSP. This
   propagation uses BGP Leaf A-D routes.


6.1. Determining the Upstream ABR/PE/ASBR (Upstream Node)

   An egress PE/ASBR discovers the P2MP FEC of an inter-area P2MP
   Segmented Service LSP as described in section 5 ("Discovering P2MP
   FEC of the Inter-Area P2MP Service LSP"). Once the egress PE/ASBR
   discovers this P2MP FEC, it MUST determine the upstream node to reach
   such a FEC. If the egress PE/ASBR and the ingress PE/ASBR are not in
   the same area, and the egress PE/ASBR is not in the backbone IGP
   area, then this upstream node would be an egress ABR. If the egress
   PE/ASBR is in the backbone area and the ingress PE/ASBR is not in the
   backbone area, then this upstream node would be an ingress ABR. If
   the egress PE/ASBR is in the same area as the ingress PE/ASBR, then
   this upstream node would be the ingress PE/ASBR.


6.1.1. Upstream Node for MVPN or VPLS

   If the application is MVPN or VPLS, then the upstream node's IP
   address is the IP address determined from the Global Administrator
   field of the Inter-area P2MP Segmented Next-Hop Extended Community.
   As described in section 5 ("Discovering P2MP FEC of the Inter-Area
   P2MP Service LSP"), this Extended Community MUST be carried in the
   MVPN or VPLS A-D route from which the P2MP FEC of the inter-area P2MP
   Segmented Service LSP is determined.


6.1.2. Upstream Node for Global Table Multicast

   If the application is global table multicast, then the unicast routes
   to multicast sources/RPs SHOULD carry the "VRF Route Import" Extended
   Community [RFC6514] where the IP address in the Global Administrator
   field is set to the IP address of the PE or ASBR advertising the
   unicast route. The Local Administrator field of this community MUST
   be set to 0 (note, that this is in contrast to the case of MVPN,
   where the Global Administrator field carries a non-zero value that
   identifies a particular VRF on a PE that originates VPN-IP routes).
   If it is not desirable to advertise the VRF Route Import Extended
   Community in unicast routes, then unicast routes to multicast
   sources/RPs MUST be advertised using the multicast SAFI i.e. SAFI 2,
   and such routes MUST carry the VRF Route Import Extended Community.

   Further, if the application is global table multicast, then the BGP



Rekhter                                                        [Page 13]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


   unicast routes that advertise the routes to the IP addresses of
   PEs/ASBRs/ABRs SHOULD carry the Inter-area P2MP Segmented Next-Hop
   Extended Community. The IP address in the Global Administrator field
   of this community MUST be set to the IP address of the PE or ASBR or
   ABR advertising the unicast route. The Local Administrator field of
   this community MUST be set to 0. If it is not desirable to advertise
   the P2MP Segmented Next-Hop Extended Community in BGP unicast routes,
   then the BGP unicast routes to the IP addresses of PEs/ASBRs/ABRs
   MUST be advertised using the multicast SAFI i.e.  SAFI 2, and such
   routes MUST carry the Inter-area P2MP Segmented Next-Hop Extended
   Community. The procedures for handling the BGP Next Hop attribute of
   SAFI 2 routes are the same as those of handling regular Unicast
   routes and MAY follow [SEAMLESS-MPLS].

   If the application is global table multicast, then in order to
   determine the upstream node address the egress PE first determines
   the ingress PE. In order to determine the ingress PE, the egress PE
   determines the best route to reach S/RP. The ingress PE address is
   the IP address determined from the Global Administrator field of the
   VRF Route Import Extended Community that is carried in this route.
   The egress PE then finds the best unicast route to reach the ingress
   PE. The upstream node address is the IP address determined from the
   Global Administrator field of the Inter-area P2MP Segmented Next-Hop
   Extended Community that is carried in this route.


6.2. Originating a Leaf A-D Route

   If the P2MP FEC was derived from a MVPN or VPLS A-D route then the
   egress PE MUST originate a Leaf A-D route if the MVPN or VPLS A-D
   route carries a P-Tunnel Attribute with the "Leaf Information
   Required" flag set.

   If the P2MP FEC was derived from a global table multicast (S/*, G),
   and the upstream node's address is not the same as the egress PE,
   then the egress PE MUST originate a Leaf A-D route.


6.2.1. Leaf A-D Route for MVPN and VPLS

   If the P2MP FEC was derived from MVPN or VPLS A-D routes then the
   Route Key field of the Leaf A-D route contains the NLRI of the A-D
   route from which the P2MP FEC was derived. This follows procedures
   for constructing Leaf A-D routes described in [RFC6514, RFC7117].







Rekhter                                                        [Page 14]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


6.2.2. Leaf A-D Route for Global Table Multicast

   If the application is global table multicast, then the MCAST-VPN NLRI
   of the Leaf A-D route is constructed as follows:

   The Route Key field of MCAST-VPN NLRI has the following format:

                   +-----------------------------------+
                   |      RD   (8 octets)              |
                   +-----------------------------------+
                   | Multicast Source Length (1 octet) |
                   +-----------------------------------+
                   |  Multicast Source (Variable)      |
                   +-----------------------------------+
                   |  Multicast Group Length (1 octet) |
                   +-----------------------------------+
                   |  Multicast Group   (Variable)     |
                   +-----------------------------------+
                   |  Ingress PE's IP address          |
                   +-----------------------------------+


   RD is set to 0 for (S,G) state and all 1s for (*,G) state, Multicast
   Source is set to S for (S,G) state or RP for (*,G) state, Multicast
   Group is set to G, Multicast Source Length and Multicast Group Length
   is set to either 4 or 16 (depending on whether S/RP and G are IPv4 or
   IPv6 addresses).

   The Ingress PE's IP address is determined as described in the section
   6.1 ("Determining the Upstream ABR/PE/ASBR (Upstream Node)").

   The Originating Router's IP address field of MCAST-VPN NLRI is set to
   the address of the local PE (PE that originates the route).

   Thus the entire MCAST-VPN NLRI of the route has the following format:

                   +-----------------------------------+
                   |      Route Type = 4 (1 octet)     |
                   +-----------------------------------+
                   |         Length (1 octet)          |
                   +-----------------------------------+
                   |          RD   (8 octets)          |
                   +-----------------------------------+
                   | Multicast Source Length (1 octet) |
                   +-----------------------------------+
                   |  Multicast Source (Variable)      |
                   +-----------------------------------+
                   |  Multicast Group Length (1 octet) |



Rekhter                                                        [Page 15]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


                   +-----------------------------------+
                   |  Multicast Group   (Variable)     |
                   +-----------------------------------+
                   |  Ingress PE's IP address          |
                   +-----------------------------------+
                   |  Originating Router's IP address  |
                   +-----------------------------------+

   Note that the encoding of MCAST-VPN NLRI for the Leaf A-D routes used
   for global table multicast is different from the encoding used by the
   Leaf A-D routes originated in response to S-PMSI or I-PMSI A-D
   routes. A router that receives a Leaf A-D route can distinguish
   between these two cases by examining the third octet of the MCAST-VPN
   NLRI of the route. If the value of this octet is 0x01 or 0x02, or
   0x03 then this Leaf A-D route was originated in response to an S-PMSI
   or I-PMSI A-D route. If the value of this octet is either 0x00 or
   0xff, and octets 3 through 10 contain either all 0x00, or all 0xff
   then this is a Leaf A-D route used for global table multicast.

   When the PE deletes (S,G)/(*,G) state that was created as a result of
   receiving PIM or IGMP messages on one of its IP multicast interfaces,
   if the PE previously originated a Leaf A-D route for that state, then
   the PE SHOULD withdraw that route.

   An Autonomous System with an IPv4 network may provide global table
   multicast service for customers that use IPv6, and an Autonomous
   System with an IPv6 network may provide global table multicast
   service for customers that use IPv4. Therefore the address family of
   the Ingress PE's IP address and Originating Router's IP address in
   the Leaf A-D routes used for global table multicast MUST NOT be
   inferred from the AFI field of the associated
   MP_REACH_NLRI/MP_UNREACH_NLRI attribute of these routes. The address
   family is determined from the length of the address (a length of 4
   octets for IPv4 addresses, a length of 16 octets for IPv6 addresses).

   For example if an Autonomous System with an IPv4 network is providing
   IPv6 multicast service to a customer, the Ingress PE's IP address and
   Originating Router's IP address in the Leaf A-D routes used for IPv6
   global table multicast will be a four-octet IPv4 address, even though
   the AFI of those routes will have the value 2.

   Note that the Ingress PE's IP address and the Originating Router's IP
   address must be either both IPv4 or both IPv6 addresses, and thus
   must be of the same length. Since the two variable length fields
   (Multicast Source and Multicast Group) in the Leaf A-D routes used
   for global table multicast have their own length field, from these
   two length fields, and the Length field of the MCAST-VPN NLRI, one
   can compute length of the Ingress PE's IP address and the Originating



Rekhter                                                        [Page 16]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


   Router's IP address fields. If the computed length of these fields is
   neither 4 nor 16, the MP_REACH_NLRI attribute MUST be considered to
   be "incorrect", and MUST be handled as specified in section 7 of
   [RFC4760].


6.2.3. Constructing the Rest of the Leaf A-D Route

   The Next Hop field of the MP_REACH_NLRI attribute of the route SHOULD
   be set to the same IP address as the one carried in the Originating
   Router's IP Address field of the route.

   When Ingress Replication is used to instantiate the egress area
   segment then the Leaf A-D route MUST carry a downstream assigned
   label in the P-Tunnel Attribute where the P-Tunnel type is set to
   Ingress Replication. A PE MUST assign a distinct MPLS label for each
   Leaf A-D route originated by the PE.

   To constrain distribution of this route, the originating PE
   constructs an IP-based Route Target community by placing the IP
   address of the upstream node in the Global Administrator field of the
   community, with the Local Administrator field of this community set
   to 0. The originating PE then adds this Route Target Extended
   Community to this Leaf A-D route. The upstream node's address is
   determined as specified in section 6.1 ("Determining the Upstream
   ABR/PE/ASBR (Upstream Node)").

   The PE then advertises this route to the upstream node.


6.3. PIM-SM in ASM mode for Global Table Multicast

   This specification allows two options for supporting global table
   multicast with PIM-SM in ASM mode. The first option does not transit
   IP multicast shared trees over the MPLS network. The second option
   does transit shared trees over the MPLS network and relies on shared
   tree to source tree switchover.


6.3.1. Option 1

   This option does not transit IP multicast shared trees over the MPLS
   network. Therefore, when an (egress) PE creates (*, G) state (as a
   result of receiving PIM or IGMP messages on one of its IP multicast
   interfaces), the PE does not propagate this state using Leaf A-D
   routes.





Rekhter                                                        [Page 17]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


6.3.1.1. Originating Source Active A-D Routes

   Whenever as a result of receiving PIM Register or MSDP messages an RP
   that is co-located with a PE discovers a new multicast source, the
   RP/PE SHOULD originate a BGP Source Active A-D route. Similarly
   whenever as a result of receiving MSDP messages, a PE that is not
   configured as a RP, discovers a new multicast source the PE SHOULD
   originate a BGP Source Active A-D route. The BGP Source Active A-D
   route carries a single MCAST-VPN NLRI constructed as follows:

        + The RD in this NLRI is set to 0.

        + The Multicast Source field MUST be set to S. The Multicast
          Source Length field is set appropriately to reflect this.

        + The Multicast Group field MUST be set to G. The Multicast
          Group Length field is set appropriately to reflect this.

   The Route Target of this Source Active A-D route is an AS-specific
   Route Target Extended Community with the Global Administrator field
   set to the AS of the advertising RP/PE, and the Local Administrator
   field is set to 0.

   To constrain distribution of the Source Active A-D route to the AS of
   the advertising RP this route SHOULD carry the NO_EXPORT Community
   ([RFC1997]).

   Using the normal BGP procedures the Source Active A-D route is
   propagated to all other PEs within the AS.

   Whenever the RP/PE discovers that the source is no longer active, the
   RP MUST withdraw the Source Active A-D route, if such a route was
   previously advertised by the RP.


6.3.1.2. Receiving BGP Source Active A-D Route by PE

   When as a result of receiving PIM or IGMP messages on one of its IP
   multicast interfaces an egress PE creates in its Tree Information
   Base (TIB) a new (*, G) entry with a non-empty outgoing interface
   list that contains one or more IP multicast interfaces, the PE MUST
   check if it has any Source Active A-D routes for that G. If there is
   such a route, S of that route is reachable via an MPLS interface, and
   the PE does not have (S, G) state in its TIB for (S, G) carried in
   the route, then the PE originates a Leaf A-D route carrying that (S,
   G), as specified in section 6.2.2 ("Leaf A-D Route for Global Table
   Multicast").




Rekhter                                                        [Page 18]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


   When an egress PE receives a new Source Active A-D route, the PE MUST
   check if its TIB contains an (*, G) entry with the same G as carried
   in the Source Active A-D route. If such an entry is found, S is
   reachable via an MPLS interface, and the PE does not have (S, G)
   state in its TIB for (S, G) carried in the route, then the PE
   originates a Leaf A-D route carrying that (S, G), as specified in
   section 6.2.2 ("Leaf A-D Route for Global Table Multicast").


6.3.1.3. Handling (S, G, rpt) state

   Creation and deletion of (S, G, rpt) state on a PE that resulted from
   receiving PIM messages on one of its IP multicast interfaces does not
   result in any BGP actions by the PE.


6.3.2. Option 2

   This option does transit IP multicast shared trees over the MPLS
   network. Therefore, when an egress PE creates (*, G) state (as a
   result of receiving PIM or IGMP messages on one of its IP multicast
   interfaces), the PE does propagate this state using Leaf A-D routes.


6.3.2.1. Originating Source Active A-D Routes

   Whenever a PE creates an (S, G) state as a result of receiving Leaf
   A-D routes associated with the global table multicast service, if S
   is reachable via one of the IP multicast capable interfaces, and the
   PE determines that G is in the PIM-SM in ASM mode range, the PE MUST
   originate a BGP Source Active A-D route. The route carries a single
   MCAST-VPN NLRI constructed as follows:

        + The RD in this NLRI is set to 0.

        + The Multicast Source field MUST be set to S. The Multicast
          Source Length field is set appropriately to reflect this.

        + The Multicast Group field MUST be set to G. The Multicast
          Group Length field is set appropriately to reflect this.

   The Route Target of this Source Active A-D route is an AS-specific
   Route Target Extended Community with the Global Administrator field
   set to the AS of the advertising PE, and the Local Administrator
   field is set to 0.

   To constrain distribution of the Source Active A-D route to the AS of
   the advertising PE this route SHOULD carry the NO_EXPORT Community



Rekhter                                                        [Page 19]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


   ([RFC1997]).

   Using the normal BGP procedures the Source Active A-D route is
   propagated to all other PEs within the AS.

   Whenever the PE deletes the (S, G) state that was previously created
   as a result of receiving a Leaf A-D route for (S, G), the PE that
   deletes the state MUST also withdraw the Source Active A-D route, if
   such a route was advertised when the state was created.


6.3.2.2. Receiving BGP Source Active A-D Route

   Procedures for receiving BGP Source Active A-D routes are the same as
   with Option 1.


6.3.2.3. Pruning Sources off the Shared Tree

   If after receiving a new Source Active A-D route for (S,G) a PE
   determines that (a) it has the (*, G) entry in its TIB, (b) the
   incoming interface list (iif) for that entry contains one of the IP
   interfaces, (c) a MPLS LSP is in the outgoing interface list (oif)
   for that entry, and (d) the PE does not originate a Leaf A-D route
   for (S,G), then the PE MUST transition the (S,G,rpt) downstream state
   to the Prune state. [Conceptually the PIM state machine on the PE
   will act "as if" it had received Prune(S,G,Rpt) from some other PE,
   without actually having received one.] Depending on the (S,G,rpt)
   state on the iifs, this may result in the PE using PIM procedures to
   prune S off the Shared (*,G) tree.

   Transitioning the state machine to the Prune state SHOULD be done
   after a delay that is controlled by a timer. The value of the timer
   MUST be configurable. The purpose of this timer is to ensure that S
   is not pruned off the shared tree until all PEs have had time to
   receive the Source Active A-D route for (S,G).

   The PE MUST keep the (S,G,rpt) downstream state machine in the Prune
   state for as long as (a) the outgoing interface list (oif) for (*, G)
   contains a MPLS LSP, and (b) the PE has at least one Source Active A-
   D route for (S,G), and (c) the PE does not originate the Leaf A-D
   route for (S,G). Once either of these conditions become no longer
   valid, the PE MUST transition the (S,G,rpt) downstream state machine
   to the NoInfo state.

   Note that except for the scenario described in the first paragraph of
   this section, in all other scenarios relying solely on PIM procedures
   on the PE is sufficient to ensure the correct behavior when pruning



Rekhter                                                        [Page 20]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


   sources off the shared tree.


6.3.2.4. More on handling (S, G, rpt) state

   Creation and deletion of (S, G, rpt) state on a PE that resulted from
   receiving PIM messages on one of its IP multicast interfaces does not
   result in any BGP actions by the PE.


7. Egress ABR Procedures

   This section describes Egress ABR Procedures for constructing
   segmented inter-area P2MP LSP.


7.1. Handling Leaf A-D route on Egress ABR

   When an egress ABR receives a Leaf A-D route and the Route Target
   Extended Community carried by the route contains the IP address of
   this ABR, then the following procedures will be executed.

   If the value of the third octet of the MCAST-VPN NLRI of the received
   Leaf A-D route is either 0x01, or 0x02, or 0x03, this indicates that
   the Leaf A-D route was originated in response to an S-PMSI or I-PMSI
   A-D route (see section "Leaf A-D Route for Global Table Multicast").
   In this case the egress ABR MUST find a S-PMSI or I-PMSI route whose
   NLRI has the same value as the Route Key field of the received Leaf
   A-D route. If such a matching route is found then the Leaf A-D route
   MUST be accepted.  If the Leaf A-D route is accepted and if it is the
   first Leaf A-D route update for the Route Key field in the route, or
   the withdrawal of the last Leaf A-D route for the Route Key field
   then the following procedures will be executed.

   If the RD of the received Leaf A-D route is set to all 0s or all 1s
   then the received Leaf A-D route is for the global table multicast
   service.

   If the received Leaf A-D route is the first Leaf A-D route update for
   the Route Key field carried in the route, then the egress ABR
   originates a Leaf A-D route, whose MCAST-VPN NLRI is constructed as
   follows.

   The Route Key field of MCAST-VPN NLRI is the same as the Route Key
   field of MCAST-VPN NLRI of the received Leaf A-D route. The
   Originating Router's IP address field of MCAST-VPN NLRI is set to the
   address of the local ABR (the ABR that originates the route).




Rekhter                                                        [Page 21]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


   The Next Hop field of the MP_REACH_NLRI attribute of the route SHOULD
   be set to the same IP address as the one carried in the Originating
   Router's IP Address field of the route.

   To constrain distribution of this route the originating egress ABR
   constructs an IP-based Route Target Extended Community by placing the
   IP address of the upstream node in the Global Administrator field of
   the community, with the Local Administrator field of this community
   set to 0, and sets the Extended Communities attribute of this Leaf A-
   D route to that community.

   The upstream node's IP address is the IP address determined from the
   Global Administrator field of the Inter-area P2MP Segmented Next-Hop
   Extended Community, where this Extended Community is obtained as
   follows. When the Leaf A-D route is for MVPN or VPLS, then this
   Extended Community is the one carried in the I-PMSI/S-PMSI A-D route
   that matches the Leaf A-D route. When the Leaf A-D route is for
   global table multicast, then this Extended Community is the one
   carried in the best unicast route to the Ingress PE. The Ingress PE
   address is determined from the received Leaf A-D route. The best
   unicast route MUST first be determined from multicast SAFI i.e., SAFI
   2 routes, if present.

   The ABR then advertises this Leaf A-D route to the upstream node in
   the backbone area.

   Mechanisms specific in [RFC4684] for constrained BGP route
   distribution can be used along with this specification to ensure that
   only the needed PE/ABR will have to process a said Leaf A-D route.

   When Ingress Replication is used to instantiate the backbone area
   segment then the Leaf A-D route originated by the egress ABR MUST
   carry a downstream assigned label in the P-Tunnel Attribute where the
   P-Tunnel type is set to Ingress Replication. The ABR MUST assign a
   distinct MPLS label for each Leaf A-D route that it originates.

   In order to support global table multicast an egress ABR MUST auto-
   configure an import AS-based Route Target Extended Community with the
   Global Administrator field set to the AS of the ABR and the Local
   Administrator field set to 0.


   If the received Leaf A-D route is the withdrawal of the last Leaf A-D
   route for the Route Key carried in the route, then the egress ABR
   must withdraw the Leaf A-D route associated with that Route Key that
   has been previously advertised by the egress ABR in the backbone
   area.




Rekhter                                                        [Page 22]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


7.2. P2MP LSP as the Intra-Area LSP in the Egress Area

   This section describes procedures for using intra-area P2MP LSPs in
   the egress area. The procedures that are common to both P2MP RSVP-TE
   and P2MP LDP are described first, followed by procedures that are
   specific to the signaling protocol.

   When P2MP LSPs are used as the intra-area LSPs, note that an existing
   intra-area P2MP LSP may be used solely for a particular inter-area
   P2MP service LSP, or for other inter-area P2MP service LSPs as well.
   The choice between the two options is purely local to the egress ABR.
   The first option provides one-to-one mapping between inter-area P2MP
   service LSPs and intra-area P2MP LSPs; the second option provides
   many-to-one mapping, thus allowing to aggregate forwarding state.


7.2.1. Received Leaf A-D route is for MVPN or VPLS

   If the value of the third octet of the MCAST-VPN NLRI of the received
   Leaf A-D route is either 0x01, or 0x02, or 0x03, this indicates that
   the Leaf A-D route was originated in response to an MVPN or VPLS S-
   PMSI or I-PMSI A-D route (see section "Leaf A-D Route for Global
   Table Multicast"). In this case the ABR MUST re-advertise in the
   egress area the MVPN/VPLS A-D route that matches the Leaf A-D route
   to signal the binding of the intra-area P2MP LSP to the inter-area
   P2MP service LSP. This must be done if and only if (a) such a binding
   hasn't already been advertised, or (b) the binding has changed. The
   re-advertised route MUST carry the Inter-area P2MP Segmented Next-Hop
   Extended Community.

   The PMSI Tunnel attribute of the re-advertised route specifies either
   an intra-area P2MP RSVP-TE LSP or an intra-area P2MP LDP LSP rooted
   at the ABR and MUST also carry an upstream assigned MPLS label. The
   upstream-assigned MPLS label MUST be set to implicit NULL if the
   mapping between the inter-area P2MP service LSP and the intra-area
   P2MP LSP is one-to-one. If the mapping is many-to-one the intra-area
   segment of the inter-area P2MP service LSP (referred to as the
   "inner" P2MP LSP) is constructed by nesting the inter-area P2MP
   service LSP in an intra-area P2MP LSP (referred to as the "outer"
   intra-area P2MP LSP), by using P2MP LSP hierarchy based on upstream-
   assigned MPLS labels [RFC5332].

   If segments of multiple MVPN or VPLS S-PMSI service LSPs are carried
   over a given intra-area P2MP LSP, each of these segments MUST carry a
   distinct upstream-assigned label, even if all these service LSPs are
   for (C-S/*, C-G/*)s from the same MVPN/VPLS.  Therefore, an ABR
   maintains an LFIB state for each such S-PMSI traversing the ABR (that
   applies to both the ingress and the egress ABRs).



Rekhter                                                        [Page 23]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


7.2.2. Received Leaf A-D route is for global table multicast

   When the RD of the received Leaf A-D route is set to all 0s or all
   1s, then this is the case of inter-area P2MP service LSP being
   associated with the global table multicast service. The procedures
   for this are described below.


7.2.2.1. Global Table Multicast and S-PMSI A-D Routes

   This section applies only if it is desirable to send a particular (S,
   G) or (*, G) global table multicast flow only to those egress PEs
   that have receivers for that multicast flow.

   If the egress ABR have not previously received (and re-advertised) an
   S-PMSI A-D route for (S, G) or (*, G) that has been originated by an
   ingress PE/ASBR (see section "P2MP LSP as the Intra-Area LSP in the
   Ingress Area"), then the egress ABR MUST originate a S-PMSI A-D
   route. The PMSI Tunnel attribute of the route MUST contain the
   identity of the intra-area P2MP LSP and an upstream assigned MPLS
   label (although this label may be an Implicit NULL - see section
   "General Assumptions and Terminology"). The RD, Multicast Source
   Length, Multicast Source, Multicast Group Length (1 octet), and
   Multicast Group fields of the NLRI of this route are the same as of
   the received Leaf A-D route. The Originating Router's IP address
   field in the S-PMSI A-D route is the same as the Ingress PE's IP
   address field in the received Leaf A-D route. The Route Target of
   this route is an AS-specific Route Target Extended Community with the
   Global Administrator field set to the AS of the advertising ABR, and
   the Local Administrator field is set to 0. The route MUST carry the
   Inter-area P2MP Segmented Next-Hop Extended Community.  This
   community is constructed following the procedures in section 4
   ("Inter-area P2MP Segmented Next-Hop Extended Community").

   The egress ABR MUST advertise this route into the egress area. PEs in
   the egress area that participate in the global table multicast will
   import this route based on the Route Target carried by the route.

   A PE in the egress area that originated the Leaf A-D route SHOULD
   join the P2MP LSP advertised in the PMSI Tunnel attribute of the S-
   PMSI A-D route.


7.2.2.2. Global Table Multicast and Wildcard S-PMSI A-D Routes

   It may be desirable for an ingress PE to carry multiple multicast
   flows associated with the global table multicast over the same inter-
   area P2MP service LSP. This can be achieved using wildcard, i.e.,



Rekhter                                                        [Page 24]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


   (*,*) S-PMSI A-D routes [RFC6625]. An ingress PE MAY advertise a
   wildcard S-PMSI A-D route as described in section 9 ("Ingress PE/ASBR
   Procedures").

   If the ingress PE originates a wildcard S-PMSI A-D route, and the
   egress ABR receives this route from the ingress ABR, then the egress
   ABR either (a) MUST re-advertise this route into the egress area with
   the PMSI Tunnel Attribute containing the identifier of the intra-area
   P2MP LSP in the egress area and an upstream assigned label (note that
   this label may be an Implicit NULL - see section "General Assumptions
   and Terminology") assigned to the inter-area wildcard S-PMSI, or (b)
   MUST be able to disaggregate traffic carried over the wildcard S-PMSI
   onto the egress area (S, G) or (*, G) S-PMSIs. The procedures for
   such disaggregation require IP processing on the egress ABRs.

   If the egress ABR advertises a wildcard S-PMSI A-D route into the
   egress area, this route MUST carry AS-specific Route Target Extended
   Community with the Global Administrator field set to the AS of the
   advertising ABR, and the Local Administrator field set to 0. PEs in
   the egress area that participate in the global table multicast will
   import this route.

   A PE in the egress area SHOULD join the P2MP LSP advertised in the
   PMSI Tunnel attribute of the wildcard S-PMSI A-D route if (a) the
   Originating Router's IP Address field in the S-PMSI A-D route has the
   same value as the Ingress PE's IP address in at least one of the Leaf
   A-D routes for global table multicast originated by the PE, and (b)
   the upstream ABR for the Ingress PE's IP address in that Leaf A-D
   route is the egress ABR that advertises the wildcard S-PMSI A-D
   route.


7.2.3. Global Table Multicast and the Expected Upstream Node

   If the mapping between the inter-area P2MP service LSP for global
   table multicast service and the intra-area P2MP LSP is many-to-one
   then an egress PE must be able to determine whether a given multicast
   packet for a particular (S, G) is received from the "expected"
   upstream node. The expected node is the node towards which the Leaf
   A-D route is sent by the egress PE. Packets received from another
   upstream node for that (S, G) MUST be dropped. To allow the egress PE
   to determine the sender upstream node, the intra-area P2MP LSP must
   be signaled with no PHP, when the mapping between the inter-area P2MP
   service LSP for global table multicast service and the intra-area
   P2MP LSP is many-to-one.

   Further the egress ABR MUST first push onto the label stack the
   upstream assigned label advertised in the S-PMSI A-D route, if the



Rekhter                                                        [Page 25]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


   label is not the Implicit NULL.


7.2.4. P2MP LDP LSP as the Intra-Area P2MP LSP

   The above procedures are sufficient if P2MP LDP LSPs are used as the
   Intra-area P2MP LSP in the Egress area.


7.2.5. P2MP RSVP-TE LSP as the Intra-Area P2MP LSP

   If P2MP RSVP-TE LSP is used as the intra-area LSP in the egress area,
   then the egress ABR can either (a) graft the leaf (whose IP address
   is specified in the received Leaf A-D route) into an existing P2MP
   LSP rooted at the egress ABR, and use that LSP for carrying traffic
   for the inter-area segmented P2MP service LSP, or (b) originate a new
   P2MP LSP to be used for carrying (S,G).

   When the RD of the received Leaf A-D route is all 0s or all 1s, then
   the procedures are as described in section "Received Leaf A-D route
   is for global table multicast".

   Note also that the SESSION object that the egress ABR would use for
   the intra-area P2MP LSP need not encode the P2MP FEC from the
   received Leaf A-D route.


7.3. Ingress Replication in the Egress Area

   When Ingress Replication is used to instantiate the egress area
   segment then the Leaf A-D route advertised by the egress PE MUST
   carry a downstream assigned label in the P-Tunnel Attribute where the
   P-Tunnel type is set to Ingress Replication. We will call this label
   the egress PE downstream assigned label.

   The egress ABR MUST forward packets received from the backbone area
   intra-area segment, for a particular inter-area P2MP LSP, to all the
   egress PEs from which the egress ABR has imported a Leaf A-D route
   for the inter-area P2MP LSP. A packet to a particular egress PE is
   encapsulated, by the egress ABR, using a MPLS label stack the bottom
   label of which is the egress PE downstream assigned label.  The top
   label is the P2P RSVP-TE or the MP2P LDP label to reach the egress
   PE.

   Note that these procedures ensures that an egress PE always receives
   packets only from the upstream node expected by the egress PE.





Rekhter                                                        [Page 26]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


8. Ingress ABR Procedures

   When an ingress ABR receives a Leaf A-D route and the Route Target
   Extended Community carried by the route contains the IP address of
   this ABR, then the ingress ABR follows the same procedures as in
   section 7 ("Egress ABR Procedures"), with egress ABR replaced by
   ingress ABR, backbone area replaced by ingress area, and backbone
   area segment replaced by ingress area segment.

   In order to support global table multicast the ingress ABR MUST be
   auto-configured with an import AS-based Route Target Extended
   Community whose Global Administrator field is set to the AS of the
   ABR and the Local Administrator field is set to 0.


8.1. P2MP LSP as the Intra-Area LSP in the Backbone Area

   The procedures for binding the backbone area segment of an inter-area
   P2MP LSP to the intra-area P2MP LSP in the backbone area are the same
   as in section "Egress ABR Procedures" and sub-section "P2MP LSP as
   the Intra-Area LSP in the Egress Area", with egress PE being replace
   by egress ABR, egress ABR being replaced by ingress ABR, and egress
   area being replaced by backbone area. This applies to the inter-area
   P2MP LSPs associated with either MVPN, or VPLS, or global table
   multicast.

   It is to be noted that in the case of global table multicast, if the
   backbone area uses wildcard S-PMSI, then the egress area also SHOULD
   use wildcard S-PMSI for global table multicast, or the egress ABRs
   MUST be able to disaggregate traffic carried over the wildcard S-PMSI
   onto the egress area (S, G) or (*, G) S-PMSIs. The procedures for
   such disaggregation require IP processing on the egress ABRs.


8.2. Ingress Replication in the Backbone Area

   When Ingress Replication is used to instantiate the backbone area
   segment then the Leaf A-D route advertised by the egress ABR MUST
   carry a downstream assigned label in the P-Tunnel Attribute where the
   P-Tunnel type is set to Ingress Replication. We will call this the
   egress ABR downstream assigned label. The egress ABR MUST assign a
   distinct MPLS label for each Leaf A-D route originated by the ABR.

   The ingress ABR MUST forward packets received from the ingress area
   intra-area segment, for a particular inter-area P2MP LSP, to all the
   egress ABRs from which the ingress ABR has imported a Leaf A-D route
   for the inter-area P2MP LSP. A packet to a particular egress ABR is
   encapsulated, by the ingress ABR, using a MPLS label stack the bottom



Rekhter                                                        [Page 27]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


   label of which is the egress ABR downstream assigned label. The top
   label is the P2P RSVP-TE or the MP2P LDP label to reach the egress
   ABR.


9. Ingress PE/ASBR Procedures

   This section describes Ingress PE/ASBR procedures for constructing
   segmented inter-area P2MP LSP.

   When an ingress PE/ASBR receives a Leaf A-D route and the Route
   Target Extended Community carried by the route contains the IP
   address of this PE/ASBR, then the following procedures will be
   executed.

   If the value of the third octet of the MCAST-VPN NLRI of the received
   Leaf A-D route is either 0x01, or 0x02, or 0x03, this indicates that
   the Leaf A-D route was originated in response to an S-PMSI or I-PMSI
   A-D route (see section "Leaf A-D Route for Global Table Multicast").
   In this case the ingress PE/ASBR MUST find a S-PMSI or I-PMSI route
   whose NLRI has the same value as the Route Key field of the received
   Leaf A-D route. If such a matching route is found then the Leaf A-D
   route MUST be accepted else it MUST be discarded.  If the Leaf A-D
   route is accepted then it MUST be processed as per MVPN or VPLS
   procedures.

   If the RD of the received A-D route is set to all 0s or all 1s, then
   the received Leaf A-D route is for the global table multicast
   service.  If this is the first Leaf A-D route for the Route Key
   carried in the route, the PIM implementation MUST set its upstream
   (S/RP,G) state machine to Joined state for the (S/RP, G) received via
   a Leaf A-D route update. Likewise, if this is the withdrawal of the
   last Leaf A-D route whose Route Key matches a particular (S/RP, G)
   state, the PIM implementation MUST set its upstream (S/RP, G) state
   machine to Pruned state for the (S/RP, G).


9.1. P2MP LSP as the Intra-Area LSP in the Ingress Area

   If the value of the third octet of the MCAST-VPN NLRI of the received
   Leaf A-D route is either 0x01, or 0x02, or 0x03 (which indicates that
   the Leaf A-D route was originated in response to an S-PMSI or I-PMSI
   A-D route), and P2MP LSP is used as the intra-area LSP in the ingress
   area, then the procedures for binding the ingress area segment of the
   inter-area P2MP LSP to the intra-area P2MP LSP in the ingress area,
   are the same as in section "Egress ABR Procedures" and sub-section
   "P2MP LSP as the Intra-Area LSP in the Egress Area".




Rekhter                                                        [Page 28]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


   When the RD of the received Leaf A-D route is all 0s or all 1s, as is
   the case where the inter-area service P2MP LSP is associated with the
   global table multicast service, then the ingress PE MAY originate a
   S-PMSI A-D route with the RD, multicast source, multicast group
   fields being the same as those in the received Leaf A-D route.

   Further in the case of global table multicast an ingress PE MAY
   originate a wildcard S-PMSI A-D route as per the procedures in
   [RFC6625] with the RD set to 0. This route may be originated by the
   ingress PE based on configuration or based on the import of a Leaf A-
   D route with RD set to 0. If an ingress PE originates such a route,
   then the ingress PE MAY decide not to originate (S, G) or (*, G) S-
   PMSI A-D routes.

   The wildcard S-PMSI A-D route MUST carry the Inter-area P2MP
   Segmented Next-Hop Extended Community. This community is constructed
   following the procedures in section 4 ("Inter-area P2MP Segmented
   Next-Hop Extended Community").

   It is to be noted that in the case of global table multicast, if the
   ingress area uses wildcard S-PMSI, then the backbone area also SHOULD
   use wildcard S-PMSI for global table multicast, or the ingress ABRs
   MUST be able to disaggregate traffic carried over the wildcard S-PMSI
   onto the backbone area (S, G) or (*, G) S-PMSIs. The procedures for
   such disaggregation require IP processing on the ingress ABRs.


9.2. Ingress Replication in the Ingress Area

   When Ingress Replication is used to instantiate the ingress area
   segment then the Leaf A-D route advertised by the ingress ABR MUST
   carry a downstream assigned label in the P-Tunnel Attribute where the
   P-Tunnel type is set to Ingress Replication. We will call this the
   ingress ABR downstream assigned label. The ingress ABR MUST assign a
   distinct MPLS label for each Leaf A-D route originated by the ABR.

   The ingress PE/ASBR MUST forward packets received from the CE, for a
   particular inter-area P2MP LSP, to all the ingress ABRs from which
   the ingress PE/ASBR has imported a Leaf A-D route for the inter-area
   P2MP LSP. A packet to a particular ingress ABR is encapsulated, by
   the ingress PE/ASBR, using a MPLS label stack the bottom label of
   which is the ingress ABR downstream assigned label. The top label is
   the P2P RSVP-TE or the MP2P LDP label to reach the ingress ABR.








Rekhter                                                        [Page 29]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


10. Common Tunnel Type in the Ingress and Egress Areas

   For a given inter-area service P2MP LSP, the PE/ASBR that is the root
   of that LSP controls the tunnel type of the intra-area P-tunnel that
   carries the ingress area segment of that LSP. However, the tunnel
   type of the intra-area P-tunnel that carries the backbone area
   segment of that LSP may be different from the tunnel type of the
   intra-area P-tunnels that carry the ingress area segment and the
   egress area segment of that LSP. In that situation if for a given
   inter-area P2MP LSP it is desirable/necessary to use the same tunnel
   type for the intra-area P-tunnels that carry the ingress area segment
   and the egress area segment of that LSP, then the following
   procedures on the ingress ABR and egress ABR provide this
   functionality.

   When an ingress ABR re-advertises into the backbone area a BGP MVPN
   I-PMSI, or S-PMSI A-D route, or VPLS A-D route, the ingress ABR
   places the PMSI Tunnel attribute of this route into the ATTR_SET BGP
   Attribute [RFC6368], adds this attribute to the re-advertised route,
   and then replaces the original PMSI Tunnel attribute with a new one
   (note, that the Tunnel type of the new attribute may be different
   from the Tunnel type of the original attribute).

   When an egress ABR re-advertises into the egress area a BGP MVPN I-
   PMSI or S-PMSI A-D route, or VPLS A-D route, if the route carries the
   ATTR_SET BGP attribute [RFC6368], then the ABR sets the Tunnel type
   of the PMSI Tunnel attribute in the re-advertised route to the Tunnel
   type of the PMSI Tunnel attribute carried in the ATTR_SET BGP
   attribute, and removes the ATTR_SET from the route.


11. Placement of Ingress and Egress PEs

   As described in the earlier sections, procedures in this document
   allow the placement of ingress and egress PEs in the backbone area.
   They also allow the placement of egress PEs in the ingress area or
   the placement of ingress PEs in the egress area.

   For instance, ABRs in the backbone area may act as ingress and egress
   PEs for global table multicast, as per the ingress and egress PE
   definition in this document. This may be the case if the service is
   global table multicast and relies on global table multicast in the
   ingress and egress areas and its desirable to carry global table
   multicast over MPLS in the backbone area. This may also be the case
   if the service is MVPN and the P-tunnel technology in the ingress and
   egress areas uses PIM based IP/GRE P-tunnels. As far as the ABRs are
   concerned PIM signaling for such P-Tunnels is handled as per the
   ingress/egress PE global table multicast procedures specified in this



Rekhter                                                        [Page 30]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


   document. To facilitate this the ABRs may advertise their loopback
   addresses in BGP using multicast-SAFI i.e., SAFI 2, if non-congruence
   between unicast and multicast is desired.


12. MVPN with Virtual Hub-and-Spoke

   Procedures described in this document could be used in conjunction
   with the Virtual Hub-and-Spoke procedures [RFC7024].

   This document does not place any restrictions on the placement of
   Virtual Hubs and Virtual Spokes.

   In addition to I-PMSI/S-PMSI A-D routes, the procedures described in
   this document are applicable to Associated-V-spoke-only I-PMSI A-D
   routes.

   In the scenario where a V-hub, as a result of importing an S-PMSI A-D
   route in its VRF, originates an S-PMSI A-D route targeted to its V-
   spokes (as specified in section "Case 2" of [RFC7024]), the V-hub
   SHOULD be able to control via configuration whether the Inter-area
   P2MP Segmented Next-Hop Extended Community, if present in the
   received S-PMSI A-D route, be also carried in the originated S-PMSI
   A-D route. By default if the received S-PMSI A-D route carries the
   Inter-area P2MP Segmented Next-Hop Extended Community, then the
   originated S-PMSI A-D route SHOULD also carry this community.


13. Data Plane

   This section describes the data plane procedures on the ABRs, ingress
   PEs, egress PEs and transit routers.


13.1. Data Plane Procedures on ABRs

   When procedures in this document are followed to signal inter-area
   P2MP Segmented LSPs, then ABRs are required to perform only MPLS
   switching. When an ABR receives a MPLS packet from an "incoming"
   intra-area segment of the inter-area P2MP Segmented LSP, it forwards
   the packet, based on MPLS switching, onto another "outgoing" intra-
   area segment of the inter-area P2MP Segmented LSP.

   If the outgoing intra-area segment is instantiated using a P2MP LSP,
   and if there is a one-to-one mapping between the outgoing intra-area
   segment and the P2MP LSP, then the ABR MUST pop the incoming
   segment's label stack and push the label stack of the outgoing P2MP
   LSP. If there is a many-to-one mapping between outgoing intra-area



Rekhter                                                        [Page 31]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


   segments and the P2MP LSP then the ABR MUST pop the incoming
   segment's label stack and first push the upstream assigned label
   corresponding to the outgoing intra-area segment, if such a label has
   been assigned, and then push the label stack of the outgoing P2MP
   LSP.

   If the outgoing intra-area segment is instantiated using ingress
   replication then the ABR must pop the incoming segment's label stack
   and replicate the packet once to each leaf ABR or PE of the outgoing
   intra-area segment. The label stack of the packet sent to each such
   leaf MUST first include a downstream assigned label assigned by the
   leaf to the segment, followed by the label stack of the P2P or MP2P
   LSP to the leaf.


13.2. Data Plane Procedures on Egress PEs

   An egress PE must first identify the inter-area P2MP segmented LSP
   based on the incoming label stack. After this identification the
   egress PE must forward the packet using the application that is bound
   to the inter-area P2MP segmented LSP.

   Note that the application specific forwarding for MVPN service may
   require the egress PE to determine whether the packets were received
   from the expected sender PE. When the application is MVPN then the
   FEC of an inter-area P2MP Segmented LSP is at the granularity of the
   sender PE. Note that MVPN intra-AS I-PMSI A-D routes and S-PMSI A-D
   routes both carry the Originating Router IP Address. Thus an egress
   PE could associate the data arriving on P-tunnels advertised by these
   routes with the Originating Router IP Address carried by these routes
   which is the same as the ingress PE. Since a unique label stack is
   associated with each such FEC, the egress PE can determine the sender
   PE from the label stack.

   Likewise for VPLS service for the purposes of MAC learning the egress
   PE must be able to determine the "VE-ID" from which the packets have
   been received. The FEC of the VPLS A-D routes carries the VE-ID. Thus
   an egress PE could associate the data arriving on P-tunnels
   advertised by these routes with the VE-ID carried by these routes.
   Since a unique label stack is associated with each such FEC, the
   egress PE can perform MAC learning for packets received from a given
   VE-ID.

   When the application is global table multicast it is sufficient for
   the label stack to include identification of the sender upstream
   node. When P2MP LSPs are used this requires that PHP MUST be turned
   off. When Ingress Replication is used the egress PE knows the
   incoming downstream assigned label to which it has bound a particular



Rekhter                                                        [Page 32]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


   (S/*, G) and must accept packets with only that label for that (S/*,
   G).


13.3. Data Plane Procedures on Ingress PEs

   An Ingress PE must perform application specific forwarding procedures
   to identify the outgoing intra-area segment of an incoming packet.

   If the outgoing intra-area segment is instantiated using a P2MP LSP,
   and if there is a one-to-one mapping between the outgoing intra-area
   segment and the P2MP LSP, then the ingress PE MUST encapsulate the
   packet in the label stack of the outgoing P2MP LSP.  If there is a
   many-to-one mapping between outgoing intra-area segments and the P2MP
   LSP then the PE MUST first push the upstream assigned label
   corresponding to the outgoing intra-area segment, if such a label has
   been assigned, and then push the label stack of the outgoing P2MP
   LSP.

   If the outgoing intra-area segment is instantiated using ingress
   replication then the PE must replicate the packet once to each leaf
   ABR or PE of the outgoing intra-area segment. The label stack of the
   packet sent to each such leaf MUST first include a downstream
   assigned label assigned by the leaf to the segment, followed by the
   label stack of the P2P or MP2P LSP to the leaf.


13.4. Data Plane Procedures on Transit Routers

   When procedures in this document are followed to signal inter-area
   P2MP Segmented LSPs then transit routers in each area perform only
   MPLS switching.


14. Support for Inter-Area Transport LSPs

   This section describes OPTIONAL procedures that allow to aggregate
   multiple (inter-area) P2MP service LSPs into a single inter-area P2MP
   transport LSP, and then apply the segmentation procedures, as
   specified in this document, to these inter-area P2MP transport LSPs
   (rather than applying these procedures directly to the inter-area
   P2MP service LSPs).









Rekhter                                                        [Page 33]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


14.1. Transport Tunnel Tunnel Type

   For the PMSI Tunnel Attribute we define a new Tunnel type, called
   "Transport Tunnel", whose Tunnel Identifier is a tuple <Source PE
   Address, Local Number>. This Tunnel type is assigned a value of 8.
   The Source PE Address is the address of the PE that originates the
   (service) A-D route that carries this attribute, and the Local Number
   is a number that is unique to the Source PE. The length of the Local
   Number part is the same as the length of the Source PE Address. Thus
   if the Source PE Address is an IPv4 address, then the Local Number
   part is 4 octets, and if the Source PE Address is an IPv6 address,
   then the Local Number part is 16 octets.


14.2. Discovering Leaves of the Inter-Area P2MP Service LSP

   When aggregating multiple P2MP LSPs using P2MP LSP hierarchy,
   determining the leaf nodes of the LSPs being aggregated is essential
   for being able to tradeoff the overhead due to the P2MP LSPs vs
   suboptimal use of bandwidth due to the partial congruency of the LSPs
   being aggregated.

   Therefore, if a PE that is a root of a given service P2MP LSP wants
   to aggregate this LSP with other (service) P2MP LSPs rooted at the
   same PE into an inter-area P2MP transport LSP, the PE should first
   determine all the leaf nodes of that service LSP, as well as those of
   the other service LSPs being aggregated).

   To accomplish this the PE sets the PMSI Tunnel attribute of the
   service A-D route (an I-PMSI or S-PMSI A-D route for MVPN or VPLS
   service) associated with that LSP as follows. The Tunnel Type is set
   to "No tunnel information present", Leaf Information Required flag is
   set to 1, the route MUST NOT carry the P2MP Segmented Next-Hop
   Extended Community. In contrast to the procedures for the MVPN and
   VPLS A-D routes described so far, the Route Reflectors that
   participate in the distribution of this route need not be ABRs.


14.3. Discovering P2MP FEC of P2MP Transport LSP

   Once the ingress PE determines all the leaves of a given P2MP service
   LSP, the PE (using some local to the PE criteria) selects a
   particular inter-area transport P2MP LSP to be used for carrying the
   (inter-area) service P2MP LSP.

   Once the PE selects the transport P2MP LSP, the PE (re)originates the
   service A-D route. The PMSI Tunnel attribute of this route now
   carries the Tunnel Identifier of the selected transport LSP, with the



Rekhter                                                        [Page 34]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


   Tunnel Type set to "Transport Tunnel". If the transport LSP carries
   multiple P2MP service LSPs, then the MPLS Label field in the
   attribute carries an upstream-assigned label assigned by the PE that
   is bound to the P2MP FEC of the inter-area P2MP service LSP.
   Otherwise, this field is set to Implicit NULL.

   Just as described earlier, this service A-D route MUST NOT carry the
   P2MP Segmented Next-Hop Extended Community. Just as described
   earlier, the Route Reflectors that participate in the distribution of
   this route need not be ABRs.


14.4. Egress PE Procedures for P2MP Transport LSP

   When an egress PE receives and accepts an MVPN or VPLS service A-D
   route, if the Leaf Information Required flag in the PMSI Tunnel
   attribute of the received A-D route is set to 1, and the route does
   not carry the P2MP Segmented Next-Hop Extended Community, then the
   egress PE, following the "regular" MVPN or VPLS procedures associated
   with the received A-D route (as specified in [RFC6514] and
   [RFC7117]), originates a Leaf A-D route.

   In addition, if the Tunnel Type in the PMSI Tunnel attribute of the
   received service A-D route is set to "Transport Tunnel", the egress
   PE originates yet another Leaf A-D route.

   The format of the Route Key field of MCAST-VPN NLRI of this
   additional Leaf A-D route is the same as defined in section 6.2.2
   ("Leaf A-D Route for Global Table Multicast"). The Route Key field of
   MCAST-VPN NLRI of this route is constructed as follows:


       RD (8 octets) - set to 0

       Multicast Source Length, Multicast Source - constructed from
          the Source PE address part of the Tunnel Identifier carried
          in the PMSI Tunnel attribute of the received service S-PMSI
          A-D route.

       Multicast Group Length, Multicast Group - constructed from
          Local Number part of the Tunnel Identifier carried in the
          PMSI Tunnel attribute of the received service S-PMSI A-D
          route.

       Ingress PE IP Address is set to the Source PE address part
          of the Tunnel Identifier carried in the PMSI Tunnel attribute
          of the received service S-PMSI A-D route.




Rekhter                                                        [Page 35]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


   The egress PE, when determining the upstream ABR, follows the
   procedures specified in section 6.1 ("Determining the Upstream
   ABR/PE/ASBR (Upstream Node)") for global table multicast.

   The egress PE constructs the rest of the Leaf A-D route following the
   procedures specified in section 6.2.3 ("Constructing the Rest of the
   Leaf A-D Route").

   From that point on we follow the procedures used for the Leaf A-D
   routes for global table multicast, as outlined below.


14.5. ABRs and Ingress PE procedures for P2MP Transport LSP

   In this section we specify ingress and egress ABRs, as well as
   ingress PE procedures for P2MP transport LSPs.

   When an egress ABR receives the Leaf A-D route, and P2MP LSP is used
   to instantiate the egress area segment of the inter-area transport
   LSP, the egress ABR will advertise into the egress area an S-PMSI A-D
   route. This route is constructed following the procedures in section
   "Global Table Multicast and S-PMSI A-D Routes". The egress PE(s) will
   import this route.

   The egress ABR will also propagate, with appropriate modifications,
   the received Leaf A-D route into the backbone area. This is
   irrespective of whether the egress area segment is instantiated using
   P2MP LSP or ingress replication.

   If P2MP LSP is used to instantiate the backbone area segment of the
   inter-area transport LSP, then an ingress ABR will advertise into the
   backbone area an S-PMSI A-D route. This route is constructed
   following the procedures in section 7.1.2.1 ("Global Table Multicast
   and S-PMSI A-D Routes"). The egress ABR(s) will import this route.

   The ingress ABR will also propagate, with appropriate modifications,
   the received Leaf A-D route into the ingress area towards the
   ingress/root PE. This is irrespective of whether the backbone area
   segment is instantiated using P2MP LSP or ingress replication.

   Finally, if P2MP LSP is used to instantiate the ingress area segment,
   the ingress PE will advertise into the ingress area an S-PMSI A-D
   route with the RD, multicast source, and multicast group fields being
   the same as those in the received Leaf A-D route. The PMSI Tunnel
   attribute of this route contains the identity of the intra-area P2MP
   LSP used to instantiate the ingress area segment, and an upstream-
   assigned MPLS label. The ingress ABR(s) and other PE(s) in the
   ingress area, if any, will import this route. The ingress PE will use



Rekhter                                                        [Page 36]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


   the (intra-area) P2MP LSP advertised in this route for carrying
   traffic associated with the original service A-D route advertised by
   the PE.



14.6. Discussion

   Use of inter-area transport P2MP LSPs, as described in this section,
   creates a level of indirection between (inter-area) P2MP service
   LSPs, and intra-area transport LSPs that carry the service LSPs.
   Rather than segmenting (inter-area) service P2MP LSPs, and then
   aggregating (intra-area) segments of these service LSPs into intra-
   area transport LSPs, this approach first aggregates multiple (inter-
   area) service P2MP LSPs into a single inter-area transport P2MP LSP,
   then segments such inter-area transport P2MP LSPs, and then
   aggregates (intra-area) segments of these inter-area transport LSPs
   into intra-area transport LSPs.

   On one hand this approach could result in reducing the state (and the
   overhead associated with maintaining the state) on ABRs. This is
   because instead of requiring ABRs to maintain state for individual
   P2MP service LSPs, ABRs would need to maintain state only for the
   inter-area P2MP transport LSPs. Note however, that this reduction is
   possible only if a single inter-area P2MP transport LSP aggregates
   more than one (inter-area) service LSP. In the absence of such
   aggregation, use of inter-area transport LSPs provides no benefits,
   yet results in extra overhead. And while such aggregation does allow
   to reduce state on ABRs, it comes at a price, as described below.

   As we mentioned before, aggregating multiple P2MP service LSPs into a
   single inter-area P2MP transport LSP requires the PE rooted at these
   LSPs to determine all the leaf nodes of the service LSPs to be
   aggregated. This means that the root PE has to track all the leaf PEs
   of these LSPs. In contrast, when one applies segmentation procedures
   directly to the P2MP service LSPs, the root PE has to track only the
   leaf PEs in its own IGP area, plus the ingress ABR(s).  Likewise, an
   ingress ABR has to track only the egress ABRs. Finally, an egress ABR
   has to track only the leaf PEs in its own area.  Therefore, while the
   total overhead of leaf tracking due to the P2MP service LSPs is about
   the same in both approaches, the distribution of this overhead is
   different. Specifically, when one uses inter-area P2MP transport
   LSPs, this overhead is concentrated on the ingress PE. When one
   applies segmentation procedures directly to the P2MP service LSPs,
   this overhead is distributed among ingress PE and ABRs.

   Moreover, when one uses inter-area P2MP transport LSPs, ABRs have to
   bear the overhead of leaf tracking for inter-area P2MP transport



Rekhter                                                        [Page 37]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


   LSPs. In contrast, when one applies segmentation procedures directly
   to the P2MP service LSPs, there is no such overhead (as there are no
   inter-area P2MP transport LSPs).

   Use of inter-area P2MP transport LSPs may also result in more
   bandwidth inefficiency, as compared to applying segmentation
   procedures directly to the P2MP service LSPs. This is because with
   inter-area P2MP transport LSPs the ABRs aggregate segments of inter-
   area P2MP transport LSPs, rather than segments of (inter-area) P2MP
   service LSPs. To illustrate this consider the following example.

   Assume PE1 in Area 1 is an ingress PE, with two multicast streams,
   (C-S1, C-G1) and (C-S2, C-G2), originated by an MVPN site connected
   to PE1. Assume that PE2 in Area 2 has an MVPN site with receivers for
   (C-S1, C-G1), PE3 and PE4 in Area 3 have an MVPN site with receivers
   both for (C-S1, C-G1) and for (C-S2, C-G2). Finally, assume that PE5
   in Area 4 has an MVPN site with receivers for (C-S2, C-G2).

   When segmentation applies directly to the P2MP service LSPs then Area
   2 would have just one intra-area transport LSP which would carry the
   egress area segment of the P2MP service LSP for (C-S1, C-G1); Area 3
   would have just one intra-area transport LSP which would carry the
   egress area segments of both the P2MP service LSP for (C-S1, C-G1)
   and the P2MP service LSP for (C-S2, C-G2); Area 4 would have just one
   intra-area transport LSP which would carry the egress area segment of
   the P2MP service LSP for (C-S2, C-G2). Note that there is no
   bandwidth inefficiency in this case at all.

   When using inter-area P2MP transport LSPs, to achieve the same state
   overhead on the routers within each of the egress areas (except for
   egress ABRs), PE1 would need to aggregate the P2MP service LSP for
   (C-S1, C-G1) and the P2MP service LSP for (C-S2, C-G2) into the same
   inter-area P2MP transport LSP. While such aggregation would reduce
   state on ABRs, it would also result in bandwidth inefficiency, as (C-
   S1, C-G1) will be delivered not just to PE2, PE3, and PE4, but also
   to PE5, which has no receivers for this stream. Likewise, (C-S2, C-
   G2) will be delivered not just to PE3, PE4, and PE5, but also to PE2,
   which has no receivers for this stream.













Rekhter                                                        [Page 38]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


15. IANA Considerations

   This document defines a new BGP Extended Community called "Inter-area
   P2MP Segmented Next-Hop" (see section "Inter-area P2MP Segmented
   Next-Hop Extended Community").  This may be either a Transitive
   IPv4-Address-Specific Extended Community or a Transitive
   IPv6-Address-Specific Extended Community.  IANA has assigned the
   value 0x12 in the Transitive IPv4-Address-Specific Extended Community
   Sub-Types registry, and IANA has assigned the value 0x0012 in the
   Transitive IPv6-Address-Specific Extended Community Types registry.
   This document is the reference for both codepoints.  IANA is
   requested to change in these registries the reference to the RFC
   number as soon as this document is published as an RFC.

   IANA is requested to assign a value from the PMSI Tunnel Types
   registry [pmsi-registry] for "Transport Tunnel" (see section
   "Transport Tunnel Type").  The value 0x08 is requested.


16. Security Considerations

   Procedures described in this document are subject to similar security
   threats as any MPLS deployment.  It is recommended that baseline
   security measures are considered as described in Security Framework
   for MPLS and GMPLS networks [RFC5920], in the mLDP specification
   [RFC6388] and in P2MP RSVP-TE specification [RFC3209].



17. Acknowledgements

   We would like to thank Eric Rosen for his comments.  We also would
   like to thank Loa Andersson and Qin Wu for their review and comments.


18. References

18.1. Normative References

   [RFC1997] "BGP Communities Attribute", Ravi Chandra, et al., RFC
   1997, August 1996

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

   [RFC3209] "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP Tunnels", D. Awduche,
   et al., RFC 3209, December 2001




Rekhter                                                        [Page 39]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


   [RFC4360] S. Sangle et. al., "BGP Extended Communities Attribute",
   RFC 4360, February 2006

   [RFC4456] T. Bates et. al., "BGP Route Reflection: An Alternative to
   Full Mesh Internal BGP (IBGP)", RFC 4456, April 2006

   [RFC4684] P. Marques et. al., "Constrained Route Distribution for
   Border Gateway Protocol/MultiProtocol Label Switching (BGP/MPLS)
   Internet Protocol (IP) Virtual Private Networks (VPNs)", RFC 4684,
   November 2006

   [RFC4760] Bates, T., Rekhter, Y., Chandra, R., and D. Katz,
   "Multiprotocol Extensions for BGP-4", RFC 4760, January 2007.

   [RFC4761] Kompella, K., Rekhter, Y., "Virtual Private LAN Service
   (VPLS) Using BGP for Auto-Discovery and Signaling", RFC 4761, January
   2007

   [RFC4875] Aggarwal, R., Ed., Papadimitriou, D., Ed., and S.
   Yasukawa, Ed., "Extensions to Resource Reservation Protocol - Traffic
   Engineering (RSVP-TE) for Point-to-Multipoint TE Label Switched Paths
   (LSPs)", RFC 4875, May 2007

   [RFC5036] "LDP Specification", Loa Andersson, et al., RFC 5036,
   October 2007

   [RFC5331] "MPLS Upstream Label Assignment and Context-Specific Label
   Space", Rahul Aggarwal, et al., RFC 5331, August 2008

   [RFC5332] "MPLS Multicast Encapsulations", T. Eckert, E. Rosen, R.
   Aggarwal, Y. Rekhter, RFC 5332, August 2008

   [RFC6368] "Internal BGP as PE-CE protocol", Pedro Marques, et al.,
   RFC 6368, September 2011

   [RFC6513] "Multicast in MPLS/BGP IP VPNs", Eric Rosen, et al., RFC
   6513, February 2012

   [RFC6514] "BGP Encodings and Procedures for Multicast in MPLS/BGP IP
   VPNs", R. Aggarwal, E. Rosen, T. Morin, Y. Rekhter, RFC 6514,
   February 2012

   [RFC6074] "Provisioning, Auto-Discovery, and Signaling in Layer 2
   Virtual Private Networks (L2VPNs)", E. Rosen, B. Davie, V. Radoaca,
   W. Luo, RFC 6074, January 2011

   [RFC6388] "Label Distribution Protocol Extensions for Point-to-
   Multipoint and Multipoint-to-Multipoint Label Switched Paths",



Rekhter                                                        [Page 40]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


   Wijnands, IJ., Ed., Minei, I., Ed., Kompella, K., and B.  Thomas, RFC
   6388, November 2011

   [RFC6625] "Wildcards in Multicast VPN Auto-Discovery Routes", Eric
   Rosen, et al., RFC 6625, May 2012

   [RFC7117] "Multicast in VPLS", R. Aggarwal, Y. Kamite, L. Fang, RFC
   7117, February 2014

   [pmsi-registry] L. Andersson, et al., "IANA registry for PMSI Tunnel
   Type code points", draft-ietf-l3vpn-pmsi-registry, work in progress


18.2. Informative References

   [SEAMLESS-MPLS] "Seamless MPLS Architecture", N. Leymann et. al.,
   draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mpls, work in progress

   [RFC5920] "Security Framework for MPLS and GMPLS Networks", L. Fang,
   et al., RFC 5920, July 2010

   [RFC7024] "Virtual Hub-and-Spoke in BGP/MPLS VPNs", Huajin Jeng et.
   al., RFC 7024, October 2013


19. Author's Address

   Yakov Rekhter
   Juniper Networks
   1194 North Mathilda Ave.
   Sunnyvale, CA 94089
   Email: yakov@juniper.net

   Rahul Aggarwal
   Email: raggarwa_1@yahoo.com

   Thomas Morin
   France Telecom R & D
   2, avenue Pierre-Marzin
   22307 Lannion Cedex
   France
   Email: thomas.morin@orange-ftgroup.com

   Irene Grosclaude
   France Telecom R & D
   2, avenue Pierre-Marzin
   22307 Lannion Cedex
   France



Rekhter                                                        [Page 41]

Internet Draft    draft-ietf-mpls-seamless-mcast-14.txt        June 2014


   Email: irene.grosclaude@orange-ftgroup.com

   Nicolai Leymann
   Deutsche Telekom AG
   Winterfeldtstrasse 21
   Berlin 10781
   DE
   Email: n.leymann@telekom.de

   Samir Saad
   AT&T
   Email: samirsaad1@outlook.com







































Rekhter                                                        [Page 42]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.107, available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/