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

Versions: 00 01 02 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 RFC 7436

   L2VPN Working Group                                  Himanshu Shah
   Intended Status: Informational                          Ciena Corp
   Internet Draft
                                                           Eric Rosen
   Expiration Date: June 10, 2013                Francois Le Faucheur
                                                          Giles Heron
                                                        Cisco Systems


                                                   December  10, 2012







                        IP-Only LAN Service (IPLS)
                       draft-ietf-l2vpn-ipls-11.txt



Status of this Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF), 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/1id-abstracts.html

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

   This Internet-Draft will expire on June 10, 2013



Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2010 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.
   Shah, el              Expires June, 2013                     Page 1


   Internet Draft    draft-ietf-l2vpn-ipls-11.txt



   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.


Abstract

   A Virtual Private LAN Service (VPLS) [VPLS] is used to interconnect
   systems across a wide-area or metropolitan-area network, making it
   appear that they are on a private LAN.  The systems which are
   interconnected may themselves be LAN switches.  If, however, they
   are IP hosts or IP routers, certain simplifications to the operation
   of the VPLS are possible.  We call this simplified type of VPLS an
   "IP-only LAN Service" (IPLS).  In an IPLS, as in a VPLS, LAN
   interfaces are run in promiscuous mode, and frames are forwarded
   based on their destination MAC addresses.  However, the maintenance
   of the MAC forwarding tables is done via signaling, rather than via
   the MAC address learning procedures specified in [IEEE 802.1D].
   This draft specifies the protocol extensions and procedures for
   support of the IPLS service.

Conventions

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC 2119].



Table of Contents


 Copyright Notice .................................................... 1
Abstract.............................................................. 2
1.0 Contributing Authors ............................................. 3
2.0 Overview.......................................................... 4
 2.1 Terminology ..................................................... 7
3.0 Topology.......................................................... 8
4.0 Configuration..................................................... 9
   Shah, et al.          Expires January 2013                     Page 2


   Internet Draft    draft-ietf-l2vpn-ipls-11.txt


5.0 Discovery........................................................ 10
 5.1 CE discovery ................................................... 10
  5.1.1 IPv4 based CE discovery ..................................... 10
  5.1.2 Ipv6 based CE discovery [RFC 2461] .......................... 10
6.0 Pseudowire Creation.............................................. 11
 6.1 Receive Unicast Multipoint-to-point Pseudowire ................. 11
 6.2 Receive Multicast Multipoint-to-point Pseudowire ............... 11
 6.3 Send Multicast Replication tree ................................ 12
7.0 Signaling........................................................ 13
 7.1 IPLS PW Signaling .............................................. 13
 7.2 IPv6 Capability Advertisement .................................. 17
 7.3 Signaling Advertisement Processing ............................. 18
8. IANA Considerations............................................... 19
 8.1. LDP Status messages ........................................... 19
 8.2. Interface Parameters .......................................... 19
9.0 Forwarding....................................................... 19
 9.1 Non-IP or non-ARP traffic ...................................... 19
 9.2 Unicast IP Traffic ............................................. 20
 9.3 Broadcasts and Multicast IP Traffic ............................ 20
 9.4 ARP Traffic .................................................... 20
 9.6 Encapsulation .................................................. 23
10.0   Attaching to IPLS via ATM or FR............................... 23
11.0 VPLS vs IPLS.................................................... 23
12.0 IP Protocols.................................................... 24
13.0 Dual Homing with IPLS........................................... 25
14.0 Proxy ARP function.............................................. 25
 14.1 ARP Proxy - Responder ......................................... 25
 14.2 ARP Proxy - Generator ......................................... 25
15.0 Data Center Applicability ...................................... 25
16.0 Acknowledgements................................................ 26
17.0 Security Considerations......................................... 27
 17.1 Control plane security ........................................ 27
 17.2 Data plane security ........................................... 27
18.0 References...................................................... 28
 18.1 Normative References .......................................... 28
 18.2 Informative References ........................................ 28
19.0 Author's Address................................................ 29

1.0  Contributing Authors

   Shah, et al.          Expires January 2013                     Page 3


   Internet Draft    draft-ietf-l2vpn-ipls-11.txt


   This document is the combined effort of the following individuals
   and many others who have carefully reviewed this document and
   provided the technical clarifications

   K. Arvind                    Fortress
   Vach Kompella/Mathew Bocci   Alcatel/Lucent
   Shane Amante                 Level3



2.0 Overview

   As emphasized in [VPLS], Ethernet has become popular as an access
   technology in Metropolitan and Wide Area Networks. [VPLS] describes
   how geographically dispersed customer LANs can be interconnected
   over a service provider's network. The VPLS service is provided by
   Provider Edge (PE) devices that connect Customer Edge (CE) devices.
   The VPLS architecture provides this service by incorporating
   bridging functions such as MAC address learning in the PE devices.

   Provider Edge platforms are designed primarily to be IP routers,
   rather than to be LAN switches. To add VPLS capability to a PE
   router, one has to add MAC address learning capabilities, along with
   aging and other mechanisms native to Ethernet switches. This may be
   fairly complex to add to the forwarding plane architecture of an IP
   router.  As discussed in [L2VPN-FWK], in scenarios where the CE
   devices are NOT LAN switches, but rather are IP hosts or IP routers,
   it is possible to provide the VPLS service without requiring MAC
   address learning and aging on the PE.  Instead, a PE router has to
   have the capability to match the destination MAC address in a packet
   received from a CE to an outbound pseudowire.  The requirements for
   the IPLS service are described in [L2VPN-REQTS]. The purpose of this
   document is to specify a solution optimized for IPLS.

   IPLS provides a VPLS-like service using PE routers that are not
   designed to perform general LAN bridging functions. One must be
   willing to accept the restriction that an IPLS be used for IP
   traffic only, and not used to interconnect CE devices that are
   themselves LAN switches. This is an acceptable restriction in many
   environments, given that IP is the predominant type of traffic in
   today's networks.

   In IPLS, a PE device implements multi-point LAN connectivity for IP
   traffic using the following key functions:

     1. CE Address Discovery: Each Provider Edge (PE) device discovers
        MAC address of the locally attached Customer Edge (CE) IP
        devices, for each IPLS instance configured on the PE device. In
        some configurations, PE also learns the IP address of the CE
        device (when performing ARP proxy functions, described later in
        the document).
   Shah, et al.          Expires June 2013                       Page 4


   Internet Draft    draft-ietf-l2vpn-ipls-11.txt



     2. Pseudowire (PW) for Unicast Traffic: For each locally attached
        CE device in a given IPLS instance, a PE device sets up a
        pseudowire (PW-LSP) to each of the other PEs that supports the
        same IPLS instance.

        For instance, if PEx and PEy both support IPLS I, and PEy is
        locally attached to CEa and CEb, PEy will initiate the setup of
        two pseudowires between itself and PEx.  One of these will be
        used to carry unicast traffic from any of PEx's CE devices to
        CEa.  The other will be used to carry unicast traffic from any
        of PEx's CE devices to CEb.

        Note that these pseudowires carry traffic only in one
        direction.  Further, while the pseudowire implicitly identifies
        the destination CE of the traffic, it does not identify the
        source CE; packets from different source CEs bound to the same
        destination CE are sent on a single pseudowire.

     3. Pseudowires for Multicast Traffic:  In addition, every PE
        supporting a given IPLS instance will set up a special
        'multicast pseudowire' to every other PE in that IPLS instance.
        If, in the above example, one of PEx's CE devices sends a
        multicast packet, PEx would forward the multicast packet to PEy
        on the special 'multicast' pseudowire.  PEy would then send a
        copy of that packet to CEa and a copy to CEb.

        The 'multicast' pseudowire carries Ethernet frames of
        multicast/broadcast IP, ARP and ICMP (Inverse) Neighbor
        Discovery (ND/IND) packets for IPv6. Thus when a PE sends a
        multicast packet across the network, it sends one copy to each
        remote PE (supporting the given IPLS instance).  If a
        particular remote PE has more than one CE device in that IPLS
        instance, the remote PE must replicate the packet and send one
        copy to each of its local CEs.

        As with the pseudowires that are used for unicast traffic,
        packets travel in only one direction on these pseudowires, and
        packets from different sources may be freely intermixed.

     4. Signaling:  The necessary pseudowires can be set up and
        maintained using the LDP-based signaling procedures described
        in [PWE3-CONTROL].

        A PE may assign the same label to each of the unicast
        pseudowires that lead to a given CE device, in effect creating
        a multipoint-to-point pseudowire.

        Similarly, a PE may assign the same label to each of the
        'multicast' pseudowires for a given IPLS instance, in effect
        creating a multipoint-to-point pseudowire.
   Shah, et al.          Expires January 2013                     Page 5


   Internet Draft    draft-ietf-l2vpn-ipls-11.txt



        When setting up a pseudowire to be used for unicast traffic,
        the PE must also signal the MAC address of the corresponding CE
        device. It should also, optionally, advertise IP address of the
        local CE device, especially when ARP proxy function is
        configured or simply for operational management purposes.
        Similarly, for IPv6 support, PE may optionally advertise the
        IPv6 addresses of the local CE device.

     5. ARP Packet Forwarding: ARP packets [ARP] are forwarded from
        attachment circuit (AC) to 'multicast' pseudowires in the
        Ethernet frame format as described by [PWE3-ETH]. Following
        rules are observed when processing ARP packets,
          a. Both broadcast (request) and unicast (response) ARP
             packets are sent over the 'multicast' pseudowire.
          b. When an ARP packet is received from an AC, the packet is
             copied to control plane for learning MAC address of the
             CE. Optionally, IP address is also learned to record the
             association of IP and MAC address.
          c. All Ethernet packets, including ARP packets, received from
             'multicast' pseudowire are forwarded out to all the ACs
             associated with the IPLS instance. These packets are not
             copied to control plane.

     6. ICMP IPv6 ND/IND related Packet Forwarding: (Inverse) Neighbor
        Discovery (ND/IND) IPv6 packets from an AC are replicated and a
        copy is sent to other ACs and to 'multicast' PWs associated
        with the IPLS instance in the native Ethernet format,
        unchanged. A copy is also submitted to Control Plane to learn
        the MAC address and optionally corresponding IPv6 addresses.

     7. Multicast IP packet forwarding: An IP Ethernet frame received
        from an AC is replicated to other ACs and the 'multicast'
        pseudowires associated with the IPLS instance. An IP Ethernet
        frame received from a 'multicast' pseudowire is replicated to
        all the egress ACs associated with the IPLS instance.

     8. Unicast IP packet forwarding: An IP packet received from the AC
        is forwarded based on the MAC DA lookup in the forwarding
        table. If a match is found, the packet is forwarded to the
        associated egress interface. If the egress interface is unicast
        pseudowire, the packet is sent without MAC header. If the
        egress interface is a local AC the Ethernet frame is forwarded
        as such. An IP packet received from the unicast pseudowire is
        forwarded to egress AC with MAC header prepended. The MAC DA is
        derived from the forwarding table while MAC SA is the MAC
        address of the PE.


   Shah, et al.          Expires January 2013                     Page 6


   Internet Draft    draft-ietf-l2vpn-ipls-11.txt


   Both VPLS [VPLS] and IPLS require the ingress PE to forward a frame
   based on its destination MAC address. However, two key differences
   between VPLS and IPLS can be noted from the above description:

     . In VPLS, MAC entries are placed in the FIB of the ingress PE as
        a result of MAC address learning (which occurs in the data
        plane) while in IPLS MAC entries are placed in the FIB as a
        result of pseudowire signaling operations (control plane).
     . In VPLS, the egress PE looks up a frame's destination MAC
        address to determine the egress AC; in IPLS, the egress AC is
        determined entirely by the ingress PW-label.

   The following sections describe the details of the IPLS scheme.

2.1 Terminology


        IPLS           IP-only LAN service (a type of Virtual Private
                       LAN Service that is restricted to IP traffic
                       only).

        mp2p PW        Multipoint-to-Point Pseudowire. A pseudowire
                       that carries traffic from remote PE devices to
                       a PE device that signals the pseudowire. The
                       signaling PE device advertises the same PW-
                       label to all remote PE devices that participate
                       in the IPLS service instance. In IPLS, for a
                       given IPLS instance, an mp2p PW used for IP
                       unicast traffic is established by a PE for each
                       CE device locally attached to that PE. It is a
                       unidirectional tree whose leaves consist of the
                       remote PE peers (which connect at least one AC
                       associated with the same IPLS instance) and
                       whose root is the signaling PE. Traffic flows
                       from the leaves towards the root.

        Multicast PW   Multicast/broadcast Pseudowire. A special kind
                       of mp2p PW that carries IP multicast/broadcast
                       traffic, all ARP frames and ICMP (I)ND frames
                       for IPv6. In the IPLS architecture, for each
                       IPLS instance supported by a PE, that PE device
                       establishes exactly one multicast PW. Multicast
                       PW uses Ethernet encapsulation.

        Unicast PW     Unicast Pseudowire carries IP unicast packets.
                       A PE creates unicast PW for each locally
                       attached CE. The unicast PW uses IP Layer2
                       transport encapsulation.

   Shah, et al.          Expires January 2013                     Page 7


   Internet Draft    draft-ietf-l2vpn-ipls-11.txt


        CE             Customer Edge device. In this document, a CE is
                       any IP node (host or router) connected to the
                       IPLS LAN service.

        Replication Tree The collection of all multicast PWs and ACs
                        that are members of an IPLS service instance on
                        a given PE. When a PE receives a
                        multicast/broadcast packet from an AC, the PE
                        device sends a copy of the packet to every
                        multicast pseudowire and AC of the replication
                        tree, excluding the AC on which the packet was
                        received. When a PE receives a packet from a
                        multicast PW, the PE device sends a copy of the
                        packet to all the ACs of the replication tree
                        and never to other PWs.

        (I)ND          (Inverse) Neighbor Discovery in IPv6 uses ICMP
                        packets. It is a protocol that uses Neighbor
                        solicitation/Advertisement PDUs.

        RS             Router Solicitation. Hosts generate all router
                        multicast ICMP packet to discover IPv6 router
                        on the local link.

        RA             Router Advertisement. Router generates all
                        multicast ICMP packet to advertise its presence
                        on the link. A unicast response is also sent
                        when RS is received.

        NS             Neighbor Solicitation in IPv6 uses (multicast)
                        ICMP packets to resolve IPv6 interface address
                        to MAC address association.

        NA             Neighbor Advertisement in IPv6 uses (unicast)
                        ICMP packets to respond to NS.



3.0 Topology

   The Customer Edge (CE) devices are IP nodes (hosts or routers) that
   are connected to PE devices either directly, or via an Ethernet
   network. We assume that the PE/CE connection may be regarded by the
   PE as an "interface" to which one or more CEs are attached.  This
   interface may be a physical LAN interface or a VLAN.  The Provider
   Edge (PE) routers are MPLS Label Edge Routers (LERs) that serve as
   pseudowire endpoints.
   Shah, et al.          Expires January 2013                     Page 8


   Internet Draft    draft-ietf-l2vpn-ipls-11.txt



      +----+                                              +----+
      + S1 +---+      ...........................     +---| S2 |
      +----+ | |      .                         .     |   +----+
       IPa   | |   +----+                    +----+   |    IPe
             + +---| PE1|---MPLS and/or IP---| PE2|---+
            / \    +----+         |Network   +----+   |
      +----+   +---+  .           |             .     |   +----+
      + S1 +   | S1|  .         +----+          .     +---| S2 |
      +----+   +---+  ..........| PE3|...........         +----+
       IPb       IPc            +----+                     IPf
                                  |
                                  |
                                +----+
                                | S3 |
                                +----+
                                  IPd


   In the above diagram, an IPLS instance is shown with three sites:
   site S1, site S2 and site S3. In site S3, the CE device is directly
   connected to its PE.  In the other two sites, there are multiple CEs
   connected to a single PE. More precisely, the CEs at these sites are
   on an Ethernet (switched at site 1 and shared at site 2) network (or
   VLAN), and the PE is attached to that same Ethernet network or
   VLAN).  We impose the following restriction:  if one or more CEs
   attach to a PE by virtue of being on a common LAN or VLAN, there
   MUST NOT be more than one PE on that LAN or VLAN.

   PE1, PE2 and PE3 are shown as connected via an MPLS network;
   however, other tunneling technologies, such as GRE, L2TPv3, etc.,
   could also be used to carry the pseudowires.

   An IPLS instance is a single broadcast domain, such that each IP end
   station (e.g., IPa) appears to be co-located with other IP end
   stations (e.g., IPb through IPf) on the same subnet. The IPLS
   service is transparent to the CE devices and requires no changes to
   them.

4.0 Configuration

   Each PE router is configured with one or more IPLS service
   instances, and each IPLS service instance is associated with a
   unique VPN-Id. For a given IPLS service instance, a set of ACs is
   identified. Each AC can be associated with only one IPLS instance.
   An AC, in this document, is either a customer-facing Ethernet port,
   or a particular VLAN (identified by an IEEE 802.1Q VLAN ID) on a
   customer-facing Ethernet port.

   The PE router can optionally be configured with a local MAC address
   to be used as source MAC address when IP packets are forwarded from
   Shah, et al.          Expires January 2013                     Page 9


   Internet Draft    draft-ietf-l2vpn-ipls-11.txt


   a pseudowire to an AC. By default, a PE uses the MAC address of the
   customer-facing Ethernet interface for this purpose.

5.0 Discovery

   The discovery process includes:
     . Remote PE discovery
     . VPN (i.e., IPLS) membership discovery
     . IP CE end station discovery

   This draft does not discuss the remote PE discovery or VPN
   membership discovery. This information can either be user configured
   or can be obtained using auto-discovery techniques described in
   [L2VPN-SIG] or other methods. However, the discovery of the CE is an
   important operational step in the IPLS model and is described below.

5.1 CE discovery

   Each PE actively detects the presence of local CEs by snooping IP
   and ARP frames received over the ACs. When an AC configured in an
   IPLS instance becomes operational, it enters the CE discovery phase.
   In this phase, the PE examines each multicast/broadcast Ethernet
   frame. For link-local IP frames (for example IGP
   discovery/multicast/broadcast packets typically 224.0.0.x addresses
   [RFC-1112]), the CE's (source) MAC address is extracted from the
   Ethernet header and the (source) IP address is obtained from the IP
   header.

   For each CE, the PE maintains the following tuple: <Attachment
   Circuit identification info, VPN-Id, MAC address, IP address
   (optional)>.


 5.1.1 IPv4 based CE discovery

   As indicated earlier, a copy of ARP frames received over the AC is
   submitted to the control plane. The PE learns MAC address and
   optionally IP address of the CE from the source address fields of
   the ARP PDU.

   Once a CE is discovered, its status is monitored continuously by
   examining the received ARP frames and by periodically generating ARP
   requests. The absence of an ARP response from a CE after a
   configurable number of ARP requests is interpreted as loss of
   connectivity with the CE.


 5.1.2 Ipv6 based CE discovery [RFC 2461]

   A copy of Neighbor and Router Discovery frames received over the AC
   are submitted to the control plane in the PE.
   Shah, et al.          Expires January 2013                    Page 10


   Internet Draft    draft-ietf-l2vpn-ipls-11.txt



   If the PE receives a Neighbor Solicitation message, and the source
   IP address of the message is not the unspecified address, the PE
   learns the MAC address and optionally IP address of the CE.

   If the PE receives an unsolicited Neighbor Advertisement message,
   the PE learns the source MAC address and optionally the IP address
   of the CE.

   If the PE receives a Router Solicitation, and the source IP address
   of the message is not the unspecified address, the PE learns source
   MAC address and optionally the IP address of the CE.

   If the PE receives a Router Advertisement, it learns source MAC
   address and optionally the IP address of the CE.

   The PE will periodically generate Neighbor Solicitation messages for
   the IP address of the CE as a means of verifying the continued
   existence of the address and its MAC address binding. The absence of
   a response from the CE device for a given number of retries could be
   interpreted as a loss of connectivity with the CE.


6.0 Pseudowire Creation

6.1 Receive Unicast Multipoint-to-point Pseudowire

   As the PE discovers each locally attached CE, a unicast multipoint-
   to-point pseudowire (mp2p PW) associated exclusively with that CE is
   created by distributing the MAC address and optionally IP address of
   the CE along with a PW-Label to all the remote PE peers that
   participate in the same IPLS instance. Note that the same value of a
   PW-label SHOULD be distributed to all the remote PE peers for a
   given CE. The mp2p PW thus created is used by remote PEs to send
   unicast IP traffic to a specific CE.

   (The same functionality can be provided by a set of point-to-point
   PWs, and the PE is not required to send the same PW-label to all the
   other PEs.  For convenience, however, we will use the term mp2p PWs,
   which may be implemented using a set of point-to-point PWs.)

   The PE forwards a frame received over this mp2p PW to the associated
   AC.

   The unicast pseudowire uses IP Layer2 Transport encapsulation as
   define in [PWE3-CONTROL].

6.2 Receive Multicast Multipoint-to-point Pseudowire

   When a PE is configured to participate in an IPLS instance, it
   advertises a 'multicast' PW-label to every other PE that is a member
   Shah, et al.          Expires January 2013                    Page 11


   Internet Draft    draft-ietf-l2vpn-ipls-11.txt


   of the same IPLS. The advertised PW-label value is the same for each
   PE, which creates an mp2p pseudowire. There is only one such
   multicast mp2p PW per PE for each IPLS instance and this pseudowire
   is used exclusively to carry IP multicast/broadcast, ARP traffic and
   (inverse) Neighbor Discovery packets for IPv6 from the remote PEs to
   this PE for this IPLS instance.

   Note that no special functionality is expected from this pseudowire.
   We call it a 'multicast' pseudowire because we use it to carry
   multicast and broadcast IP, ARP and IPv6 Neighbor Discovery traffic.
   The pseudowire itself need not provide any different service than
   any of the unicast pseudowires.

   In particular, the Receive multicast mp2p PW does not perform any
   replication of frames itself. Rather, it is there to signify to the
   PE that the PE may need to replicate a copy of a frame received over
   this mp2p PW onto all the AC that are associated with the IPLS
   instance of the mp2p PW.

   The multicast mp2p pseudowire is considered the principle pseudowire
   in the bundle of mp2p pseudowires that consist of one multicast mp2p
   pseudowire and a variable number of unicast mp2p pseudowires for a
   given IPLS instance. In a principle role, multicast PW represents
   the IPLS instance. The life of all unicast PWs in the IPLS instance
   depends on the existence of the multicast PW. If, for some reasons,
   multicast PW cease to exist, all the associated unicast pseudowires
   in the bundle are removed.

   The multicast pseudowire uses Ethernet encapsulation as defined in
   [PWE3-ETH].

   The use of pseudowires which are specially optimized for multicast
   is for further study.

6.3 Send Multicast Replication tree

   The PE creates a send replication tree for each IPLS instance, which
   consists of the collection of all ACs and all the 'multicast'
   pseudowires of the IPLS instance.

   Any ARP, Neighbor Discovery or multicast IP Ethernet frame received
   over an AC is replicated to the other ACs and to the mp2p multicast
   pseudowire of the send replication tree. The send replication tree
   deals mostly with broadcast/multicast Ethernet MAC frames. One
   exception to this is unicast ARP and IPv6 Neighbor Discovery frame,
   the processing of which is described in the following section.

   Any Ethernet frame received over the multicast PW is replicated to
   all the ACs of the send replication tree of the IPLS instance
   associated with the incoming PW label. One exception is unicast ARP
   Shah, et al.          Expires January 2013                    Page 12


   Internet Draft    draft-ietf-l2vpn-ipls-11.txt


   and Neighbor Discovery frame used for IPv6, the processing of which
   is described in the following section.

7.0 Signaling

   [PWE3-CONTROL] uses the Label Distribution Protocol (LDP) to
   exchange PW-FECs in the Label Mapping message in a downstream
   unsolicited mode. The PW-FEC comes in two forms; PWid and
   Generalized PWid FEC elements. These FEC elements define some fields
   that are common between them. The discussions below refer to these
   common fields for IPLS related extensions. Note that the use of
   multipoint to point and unidirectional characteristics of the PW
   makes BGP as the ideal candidate for PW-FEC signaling. The use of
   BGP for such purposes is for future study.

7.1 IPLS PW Signaling

   An IPLS carries IP packets as payload over its unicast pseudowires
   and Ethernet packet as payload over its multicast pseudowire. The
   PW-type to be used for unicast pseudowire is the IP PW, defined in
   [PWE3-CONTROL] as IP Layer2 Transport. The PW-type to be used for
   multicast pseudowire is the Ethernet PW as defined in [PWE3-ETH].
   The PW-Type values for these encapsulations are defined in [PWE3-
   IANA].

   When processing a received PW FEC, the PE matches the PW Id with the
   locally configured PW Id for the IPLS instance. If the PW type is
   Ethernet, the PW-FEC is for multicast PW. If the PW type is 'IP
   Layer2 transport', the PW FEC is for unicast PW.

   For unicast PW, PE must check the presence of MAC address TLV in the
   optional parameter fields of the Label Mapping message. If this
   parameter is absent, a Label Release message must be issued with a
   Status Code meaning "MAC Address of the CE is absent" [note: Status
   Code 0x0000004C is pending IANA allocation], to reject the
   establishment of the unicast PW with the remote PE.

   The PE may optionally include IP address TLV based on the user
   configuration for advertising of the IP addresses of the local CE.

   The processing of the address list TLV is as follows.

     o  If a pseudowire is configured for AC with IPv4 CEs only, the
        PE should advertise address list tlv with address family type
        to be of IPv4 address. The PE should process the IPv4 address
        list TLV as described in this document.
     o  If a pseudowire is configured for AC with both IPv4 and IPv6
        CEs, the PE should advertise IPv6 capability using the
        procedures described in Section below.
   Shah, et al.          Expires January 2013                    Page 13


   Internet Draft    draft-ietf-l2vpn-ipls-11.txt


     o  If a PE does not receive any IP address list TLV or IPv6
        capability advertisement, it MAY assume IPv4 behavior.

   The IPLS uses the Address List TLV as defined in [RFC 3036] to
   signal the MAC (and optionally IP) address of the local CE. There
   are two TLVs defined below; IP Address TLV and MAC Address TLV. MAC
   address TLV must be included in the optional parameter field of the
   Label Mapping message when establishing the unicast IP PW for IPLS.

   When configured to support specific type of IP traffic (IPv4 or
   IPv6), the PE augments verification of the type of traffic PW will
   carry using the Address Family Type value. If there is a mismatch
   between the received Address Family value and the expectation of
   IPLS instance to which the PW belongs, the PE must issue a Label
   Release message with a Status Code meaning "IP Address type
   mismatch" (Status Code 0x0000004A) to reject the PW establishment.

   Encoding of the IP Address TLV is:

       0                   1                   2                   3
       0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |0|0| Address List (0x0101)     |      Length                   |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |     Address Family            |     CE's IP Address           |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |       CE's IP Address         |                               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

      Length
        When Address Family is IPV4, Length is equal to 6 bytes;
        2 bytes for address family and 4 bytes of IP address.

      Address Family
        Two octet quantity containing a value from the ADDRESS FAMILY
        NUMBERS from ADDRESS FAMILY NUMBERS in [RFC 3232] that encodes
        the addresses contained in the Addresses field.

      IP Address of the CE
        IP address of the CE attached to the advertising PE.  The
        encoding of the individual address depends on the Address
        Family.

   The following address encodings are defined by this version of the
   protocol:

            Address Family      Address Encoding

            IPv4 (1)             4 octet full IPv4 address
   Shah, et al.          Expires January 2013                    Page 14


   Internet Draft    draft-ietf-l2vpn-ipls-11.txt


            IPv6 (2)             16 octet full IPv6 address

   Note that more than one instance of the IP address TLV may exist,
   especially when support for IPv6 is configured.
   Shah, et al.          Expires January 2013                    Page 15


   Internet Draft    draft-ietf-l2vpn-ipls-11.txt



   Encoding of the MAC Address TLV is:

       0                   1                   2                   3
       0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |0|0| Address List (0x0101)     |      Length                   |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |     Address Family            |     CE's MAC address          |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+                               +
      |                                                               |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

      Length
        The length field is set to value 8 (2 for address family, 6 for
        MAC address)

      Address Family
        Two octet quantity containing a value from ADDRESS FAMILY
        NUMBERS in [RFC 3232] that encodes the addresses contained in
        the Addresses field.

      CE's MAC Address
        MAC address of the CE attached to the advertising PE. The
        encoding of the individual address depends on the Address
        Family.

   The following address encodings are defined by this version of the
   protocol:

            Address Family      Address Encoding

            MAC (6)             6 octet full Ethernet MAC address

   The IPv4 address of the CE is also supplied in the optional
   parameters field of the LDP Notification message along with the PW
   FEC. The LDP Notification message is used to signal any change in
   the status of the CE's IPv4 address.

   Note that Notification message does not apply to MAC address TLV
   since an update to MAC address of the CE should result in label
   withdraw followed by establishment of new PW with new MAC address of
   the CE. However, advertisement of IP address(es) of the CE is
   optional and changes may become known after the establishment of
   unicast PW.
   Shah, et al.          Expires January 2013                    Page 16


   Internet Draft    draft-ietf-l2vpn-ipls-11.txt



   The encoding of the LDP Notification message is as follows.

   0                   1                   2                   3
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |0|   Notification (0x0001)     |      Message Length           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                       Message ID                              |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                       Status (TLV)                            |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                 IP Address List TLV (as defined above)        |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                 PWId FEC or Generalized ID FEC                |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   The Status TLV status code is set to 0x0000002C "IP address of CE",
   to indicate that IP Address update follows. Since this notification
   does not refer to any particular message the Message Id, and Message
   Type fields are set to 0.

   The PW FEC TLV SHOULD not include the interface parameters as they
   are ignored in the context of this message.


7.2 IPv6 Capability Advertisement

   A 'Stack Capability' Interface Parameter sub-TLV is signaled by the
   two PEs so that they can agree which stack(s) they should be using.
   It is assumed by default that the IP PW will always be capable of
   carrying IPv4 packets. Thus this capability sub-TLV is used to
   indicate if other stacks need to be supported concurrently with
   IPv4.

   The 'Stack Capability' sub-TLV is part of the interface parameters
   of the PW FEC. The proposed format for the Stack Capability
   interface parameter sub-TLV is as follows:

    0                   1                   2                   3
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   | Parameter ID  |     Length    |       Stack Capability        |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   Parameter ID = 0x16

   Length = 4

   Stack capability = 0x0001 to indicate IPv6 stack capability
   Shah, et al.          Expires January 2013                    Page 17


   Internet Draft    draft-ietf-l2vpn-ipls-11.txt



   The Value of Stack capability is dependent on the PW type context.
   For IP PW type, a setting of 0x0001 indicates IPv6 stack capability.

   A PE that supports IPv6 on an IP PW MUST signal the stack capability
   sub-TLV in the initial label mapping message for the PW. The PE
   nodes compare the value advertised by the remote PE with the local
   configuration and only use a capability which is advertised by both.
   If a PE that supports IPv6 does not receive a 'stack capability'
   sub-TLV from the far-end PE in the initial label mapping message, or
   one is received but it is set to a reserved value, the PE MUST send
   an unsolicited release for the PW label with the LDP status code
   meaning "IP Address type mismatch" (Status Code 0x0000004A).

   The behavior of a PE that does not understand an interface parameter
   sub-TLV is specified in RFC4447 [RFC4447].


7.3 Signaling Advertisement Processing

   A PE should process a received [PWE3-CONTROL] advertisement with PW-
   type of IP Layer2 transport for IPLS as follows,
        - Verify the IPLS VPN membership by matching the VPN-Id
          signaled in the AGI field or the PW-ID field with all the
          VPN-Ids configured in the PE. Discard and release the PW
          label if VPN-Id is not found.
        - Program the Forwarding Information Base (FIB) such that when
          a unicast IP packet is received from an AC with its
          destination MAC address matching the advertised MAC address,
          the packet is forwarded out over the tunnel to the
          advertising PE with the advertised PW-label as the inner
          label.

   A PE should process a received [PWE3-CONTROL] advertisement with the
   PW type of Ethernet for IPLS as follows,
        - Verify the IPLS VPN membership by matching the VPN-Id
          signaled in the AGI field or the PW-ID field with all the
          VPN-Ids configured in the PE. Discard and release the PW
          label if VPN-Id is not found.
        - Add the PW-label to the send broadcast replication tree for
          the VPN-Id. This enables sending a copy of a
          multicast/broadcast IP Ethernet frame or ARP Ethernet frame
          or Neighbor Discovery frames from the AC to this pseudowire.

   Shah, et al.          Expires January 2013                    Page 18


   Internet Draft    draft-ietf-l2vpn-ipls-11.txt



8. IANA Considerations

8.1. LDP Status messages

   This document uses new LDP status code. IANA already maintains a
   registry of name "STATUS CODE NAME SPACE" defined by [RFC 3036]. The
   following value is suggested for assignment:

             0x0000002C "IP Address of CE"
             0x0000004A "IP Address Type Mismatch"
             0x0000004C "MAC Address of CE is absent"


8.2. Interface Parameters

   This document proposes a new Interface Parameters sub-TLV, to be
   assigned from the 'Pseudowire Interface Parameters Sub-TLV type
   Registry'. The following value is suggested for the Parameter ID:

   0x16 "Stack capability"

   IANA is also requested to set up a registry of "L2VPN PE stack
   capabilities". This is a 16 bit field. Stack capability values
   0x0001 is specified in Section 7.  of this document.  The remaining
   bitfield values (0x0002,..,0x8000) are to be assigned by IANA using
   the "IETF Consensus" policy defined in [RFC2434].

   L2VPN PE Stack Capabilities:

   Bit (Value)       Description
   ===============   ==========================================
   Bit 0  (0x0001) - IPv6 stack capability
   Bit 1  (0x0002) - Reserved
   Bit 2  (0x0004) - Reserved
            .
            .
            .

   Bit 14 (0x4000) - Reserved
   Bit 15 (0x8000) - Reserved


9.0 Forwarding

9.1 Non-IP or non-ARP traffic

   In an IPLS VPN, a PE forwards only IP and ARP traffic. All other
   frames are dropped silently.  If the CEs must pass non-IP traffic to
   each other, they must do so through IP tunnels that terminate at the
   CEs themselves.
   Shah, et al.          Expires January 2013                    Page 19


   Internet Draft    draft-ietf-l2vpn-ipls-11.txt



9.2 Unicast IP Traffic

   In IPLS, IP traffic is forwarded from the AC to the PW based on the
   destination MAC address of the layer 2 frame (and not based on the
   IP Header).

   The PE identifies the FIB associated with an IPLS instance based on
   the AC or the PW label. When a frame is received from an AC, the PE
   uses the destination MAC address as the lookup key. When a frame is
   received from a PW, the PE uses the PW-Label as the lookup key. The
   frame is dropped if the lookup fails.

   For IPv6 support, the unicast IP ICMP frame of Neighbor Discovery
   Protocol [RFC 2461] is bi-casted; one copy is submitted to the
   control plane and other copy to the PW, based on the destination MAC
   address.

9.3 Broadcasts and Multicast IP Traffic

   When the destination MAC address is either a broadcast or multicast,
   a copy of the frame is sent to the control plane for CE discovery
   purposes (see section 5.1). It is important to note that the frames
   sent to the control plane is applied stricter rate limiting criteria
   to avoid overwhelming the control plane under adverse conditions
   such as Denial Of Service attack. The service provider should also
   provide a configurable limitation to prevent overflowing of the
   learned source addresses in a given IPLS instance. Also, a caution
   must be used such that only link local multicasts and broadcast IP
   packets are sent to control plane.

   When a multicast/broadcast IP packet is received from an AC, the PE
   replicates it onto the Send Multicast Replication Tree (See section
   6.3). When a multicast/broadcast IP Ethernet frame is received from
   a pseudowire, the PE forwards a copy of the frame to all the ACs
   associated with the respective IPLS VPN instance. Note that
   'multicast' PW uses Ethernet encapsulation and hence does not
   require additional header manipulations.

9.4 ARP Traffic

   When a broadcast ARP frame is received over the AC, a copy of the
   frame is sent to the control plane for CE discovery purposes. The PE
   replicates the frame onto the Send Multicast Replication Tree (see
   section 6.3), which results into a copy to be delivered to all the
   remote PEs on the 'multicast' PW and other local CEs through the
   egress ACs.

   When a broadcast Ethernet ARP frame is received over the 'multicast'
   PW, a copy of the Ethernet ARP frame is sent to all the ACs
   associated with the IPLS instance.
   Shah, et al.          Expires January 2013                    Page 20


   Internet Draft    draft-ietf-l2vpn-ipls-11.txt



   When a unicast Ethernet ARP frame is received over the AC, a copy of
   the frame is sent to the control plane for the CE discovery
   purposes. The PE may optionally do MAC DA lookup in the forwarding
   table and send the ARP frame to a specific egress interface (AC or
   'multicast' PW to a remote PE) or replicate the frame onto the Send
   Multicast Replication Tree (see section 6.3).

   When a unicast ARP Ethernet frame is received over the 'multicast'
   PW, PE may optionally do MAC DA lookup in the forwarding table and
   forward it to the AC where the CE is located. If the CE is not
   accessible through any local AC, the frame is dropped. Conversely,
   the PE may simply forward the frame to all the ACs associated with
   that IPLS instance without any lookup in the forwarding table.

9.5 Discovery of IPv6 CE devices

   A PE device that supports IPv6 MUST be capable of,

   -  Intercepting ICMPv6 Neighbor Discovery [RFC 2461] packets
      received over the AC.
   -  Record the IPv6 interface addresses and CE link-layer addresses
      present in these packets
   -  Forward them towards the original destination
   A PE device may also intercept Router Discovery packets in order to
   discover the link layer address and IPv6 interface address(es) of
   the CE. Following sections describe the details.

   The PE device MUST learn the link-layer address of the local CE and
   be able to use it when forwarding traffic between CEs. The PE MAY
   also wish to monitor the source link-layer address of data packets
   received from the CE, and discard packets not matching its learned
   CE link-layer address. The PE device may also optionally learn a
   list of CE IPv6 interface addresses for its directly-attached CE.


9.5.1. Processing of Neighbor Solicitations

   When a broadcast Neighbor Solicitation frame is received over the
   AC, a copy of the frame is sent to the control plane for CE
   discovery purposes. The PE replicates the frame onto the Send
   Multicast Replication Tree (see section 6.3), which results into a
   copy to be delivered to all the remote PEs on the 'multicast' PW and
   other local CEs through the egress ACs. The PE may optionally learn
   an IPv6 interface address (If provided - this will not be the case
   for Duplicate Address Detection) when present.

   Shah, et al.          Expires January 2013                    Page 21


   Internet Draft    draft-ietf-l2vpn-ipls-11.txt


   When a broadcast Ethernet Neighbor Solicitation frame is received
   over the 'multicast' PW, a copy is sent to all the ACs associated
   with the IPLS instance.

9.5.2 Processing of Neighbor Advertisements

   When a unicast Neighbor Advertisement is received over the AC, a
   copy of the frame is sent to the control plane for the CE discovery
   purposes. The PE may optionally do MAC DA lookup in the forwarding
   table and send the Neighbor Advertisement frame to a specific egress
   interface (AC or 'multicast' PW to a remote PE) or replicate the
   frame onto the Send Multicast Replication Tree (see section 6.3).

   Optionally, PE could learn the IPv6 Interface address of the CE.

   When a unicast Neighbor Advertisement frame is received over the
   'multicast' PW, PE may optionally do MAC DA lookup in the forwarding
   table and forward it to the AC where the CE is located. If the CE is
   not accessible through any local AC, the frame is dropped.
   Conversely, the PE may simply forward the frame to all the ACs
   associated with that IPLS instance without any lookup in the
   forwarding table.

9.5.3 Processing of Inverse Neighbor Solicitations and Advertisement

   Inverse Neighbor Discovery is typically used on non-broadcast links,
   but are allowed on broadcast links too [3122]. PE may optionally
   intercept Inverse Neighbor Solicitation and Advertisement and learn
   MAC and IPv6 interface address list of the attached CE from the copy
   of the frame sent to the control plane. The PE may optionally do MAC
   DA lookup in the forwarding table and send another copy of the frame
   to a specific egress interface (AC or 'multicast' PW to a remote PE)
   or replicate the frame onto the Send Multicast Replication Tree (see
   section 6.3).

9.5.4 Processing of Router Solicitations and Advertisements

   Router Solicitations (RS) are multicast while Router Advertisement
   (RA) can be unicast or multicast Ethernet frames. The PE could
   optionally intercept RS and RA frames and send a copy to control
   plane. The PE may learn the MAC address and a list of interface
   addresses for the attached CE.

   For unicast RA, the PE may optionally do MAC DA lookup in the
   forwarding table and send the Neighbor Advertisement frame to a
   specific egress interface (AC or 'multicast' PW to a remote PE) or
   replicate the frame onto the Send Multicast Replication Tree (see
   section 6.3). The multicast RA and RS Ethernet frames are replicated
   to using the Send Multicast Replication Tree as described in section
   6.3.

   Shah, et al.          Expires January 2013                    Page 22


   Internet Draft    draft-ietf-l2vpn-ipls-11.txt



9.6 Encapsulation

   The Ethernet MAC header of a unicast IP packet received from an AC
   is stripped before forwarding the frame to the unicast pseudowire.
   However, the MAC header is retained for the following cases,
     . when a frame is unicast or broadcast IP packet that is directed
        to one or more local AC(s).
     . when a frame is a broadcast IP packet
     . when a frame is an ARP packet
     . when a frame is Neighbor/Router Solicitation/Advertisement

   An IP frame received over a unicast pseudowire is prepended with a
   MAC header before transmitting it on the appropriate ACs). The
   fields in the MAC header are filled in as follows:
        - The destination MAC address is the MAC address associated
          with the PW label in the FIB
        - The source MAC address is the PE's own local MAC address or a
          MAC address which has been specially configured on the PE for
          this use.
        - The Ethernet Type field is 0x0800 if IPv4 or 0x86DD if IPv6
          [RFC 2464]
        - The frame may be IEEE802.1Q tagged based on the VLAN
          information associated with the AC.

   An FCS is appended to the frame.

10.0   Attaching to IPLS via ATM or FR

   In addition to (i) an Ethernet port and a (ii) combination of
   Ethernet port and a VLAN ID, an AC to IPLS may also be (iii) an ATM
   or FR VC carrying encapsulated bridged Ethernet frames or (iv) the
   combination of an ATM or FR VC and a VLAN ID.

   The ATM/FR VC is just used as a way to transport Ethernet frames
   between a customer site and the PE. The PE terminates the ATM/FR VC
   and operates on the encapsulated Ethernet frames exactly as if those
   were received on a local Ethernet interface. When a frame is
   propagated from pseudowire to a ATM or FR VC the PE prepends the
   Ethernet frame with the appropriate bridged encapsulation header as
   defined in [RFC 2684] and [RFC 2427] respectively. Operation of an
   IPLS over ATM/FR VC is exactly as described above, with the
   exception that the AC is then identified via the ATM VCI/VPI or
   Frame Relay DLCI (instead of via a local Ethernet port ID), or a
   combination of those with a VLAN ID.

11.0 VPLS vs IPLS

   The VPLS approach proposed in [VPLS] provides VPN services for IP as
   well as other protocols. The IPLS approach described in this draft
   is similar to VPLS in many respects:
   Shah, et al.          Expires January 2013                    Page 23


   Internet Draft    draft-ietf-l2vpn-ipls-11.txt


        - It provides a Provider Provisioned Virtual LAN service with
          multipoint capability where a CE connected via a single
          attachment circuit can reach many remote CEs
        - It appears as a broadcast domain and a single subnet
        - forwarding is based on destination MAC addresses

   However, unlike VPLS, IPLS is restricted to IP traffic only. By
   restricting the scope of the service to the predominant type of
   traffic in today's environment, IPLS eliminates the need for service
   provider edge routers to implement some bridging functions such as
   MAC address learning in the data path (by, instead, distributing MAC
   information in the control plane). Thus this solution offers a
   number of benefits:

        - Facilitates Virtual LAN services in instances where PE
          devices cannot or cannot efficiently (or are specifically
          configured not to) perform MAC address learning.
        - Unknown Unicast frames are never flooded as would be the case
          in VPLS.
        - Encapsulation is more efficient (MAC header is stripped) for
          unicast IP packets while traversing the backbone network.
        - PE devices are not burdened with the processing overhead
          associated with traditional bridging (e.g., STP processing,
          etc.). Note however that some of these overheads (e.g., STP
          processing) could optionally be turned-off with a VPLS
          solution in the case where it is known that only IP devices
          are interconnected.
        - Loops (perhaps through backdoor links) are minimized since a
          PE could easily reject (via label release) a duplicate IP to
          MAC address advertisement.
        - Greater control over CE topology distribution.

12.0 IP Protocols

   The solution described in this document offers IPLS service for IPv4
   and IPv6 traffic only. For this reason, the MAC Header is not
   carried over the unicast pseudowire. It is reconstructed by the PE
   when receiving a packet from a unicast pseudowire and the Ethertype
   0x0800 or 0x86DD is used in the MAC Header since IPv4 or IPv6
   respectively, is assumed.

   However, this solution may be extended to carry other types of
   important traffic such as ISIS , which does not use Ethernet-II,
   EtherType based header. In order to permit the propagation of such
   packets correctly, one may create a separate set of pseudowires, or
   pass protocol information in the "control word" of a "multiprotocol"
   pseudowire, or encapsulate the Ethernet MAC Header in the
   pseudowire. The selection of appropriate multiplexing/demultiplexing
   scheme is the subject of future study. The current document focuses
   on IPLS service for IPv4 and IPv6 traffic.

   Shah, et al.          Expires January 2013                    Page 24


   Internet Draft    draft-ietf-l2vpn-ipls-11.txt


13.0 Dual Homing with IPLS

   As stated in previous sections, IPLS prohibits connection of a
   common LAN or VLAN to more than one PE. Alternatively the CE device
   itself can connect to more than one instance of IPLS through two
   separate LAN or VLAN connections to separate PEs. To the CE IP
   device, these separate connections appear as connections to two IP
   subnets. The failure of reachability through one subnet is then
   resolved via the other subnet using IP routing protocols.

14.0 Proxy ARP function

   The earlier version of this proposal used IP-PW to carry both the
   broadcast/multicast and unicast IP traffic. It also discussed how PE
   proxy functionality responds to the ARP requests of the local CE on
   behalf of remote CE. The current version of the draft eliminated
   these functions and instead uses Ethernet PW to carry broadcast,
   multicast and ARP frames to remote PEs. The motivation to use
   Ethernet PW and propagate ARP frames in the current version is to
   support configuration like back-to-back IPLS (similar to Inter
   AS option-A configurations in [RFC 4364]).

   The termination and controlled propagation of ARP frames is still a
   desirable option for security, DoS and other purposes. For these
   reasons, we re-introduce the ARP Proxy [PROXY-ARP] function in this
   revision as an optional feature. Following sections describe this
   option.

14.1 ARP Proxy - Responder

   As a local configuration, a PE can enable ARP Proxy responder
   function. In this mode, local PE responds to ARP requests received
   over the Attachment Circuit via learnt IP and MAC address
   associations, which are advertised by the remote PEs. In addition,
   PE may utilize local policies to determine if ARP requests should be
   responded based on the source of the ARP request, rate at which the
   ARP requests are generated, etc. In nutshell, when this feature is
   enabled, ARP requests are not propagated to remote PE routers that
   are members of the same IPLS instance.

14.2 ARP Proxy - Generator

   As a local configuration, a PE can enable ARP Proxy generator
   function. In this mode, the PE generates ARP request for each IP and
   MAC address associations received from the remote PEs. The remote
   CE's IP and MAC address is used as the source information in the ARP
   request while the destination IP address in the request is obtained
   from the local configuration (that is, user needs to configure an IP
   address when this feature is enabled). The ARP request is sent on
   Shah, et al.          Expires January 2013                    Page 25


   Internet Draft    draft-ietf-l2vpn-ipls-11.txt


   the Attachment Circuits that have ARP Proxy Generator enabled and is
   associated with the given IPLS instance.

   In addition, the PE may utilize local policies to determine which
   IP/MAC addresses are candidate for ARP request generation.

   The ARP Proxy Generator feature is required to support back-to-back
   IPLS configuration when any member of the IPLS instance is using ARP
   Proxy Responder function. An example of a back-to-back IPLS is a
   configuration where PE-1 (ASBR) in an IPLS cloud in one Autonomous
   System (say, AS-1) is connected via an Attachment Circuit to another
   PE-2 (ASBR) in an IPLS cloud in another Autonomous System (say, AS-
   2) where each PE appears as CE to each other. Such configuration is
   described in [RFC 4364] as option-A for inter-AS connectivity. The
   Proxy ARP responder feature prevents propagation of ARP requests to
   PE-1 (ASBR) in AS-1. This necessitates that PE-1 (ASBR) in AS-1
   generate ARP request on behalf of each CE connected to the IPLS
   instance in AS-1 as a mean to 'advertise' the reachability to IPLS
   cloud in AS-2

15.0 Data Center Applicability

   The resurgence of interest in providing IP/MPLS based solution for
   Data Center Networks (DCN) deserves another look at the IPLS
   methodologies described in this document. The key requirement of
   DCN to permit VM mobility within or across DCN necessiates
   extending the reachability of IP subnet over a LAN, transparently.
   In addition, VMs tendancy to generate frequent gratutious ARPs
   for location discovery necessiates a solution that curbs broadcasts
   closest to the source.

   The IPLS solution facilitates VM mobility by way of PE closest to
   the new location signaling the MAC address to all remote peers.
   In addition, control-plane based MAC learning mechanisms prevent
   flooding of unknown unicast across DCN. The optional ARP proxy
   mechanisms further reduces ARP broadcast floods by preventing
   its reach across local PE.

16.0 Acknowledgements

   Authors would like to thank Alp Dibirdi from Alcatel, Xiahou from
   Huawei and other L2VPN working group members for their valuable
   comments.
   Shah, et al.          Expires January 2013                    Page 26


   Internet Draft    draft-ietf-l2vpn-ipls-11.txt


17.0 Security Considerations

   A more comprehensive description of the security issues involved in
   L2VPNs are covered in [VPN-SEC]. Most of the security issues can be
   avoided through implementation of appropriate guards. The security
   aspect of this solution is addressed for two planes; control plane
   and data plane.

17.1 Control plane security

   The control plane security pertains to establishing the LDP
   connection, pseudo-wire establishment and CE's IP and MAC address
   distribution. The LDP connection between two trusted PEs can be
   achieved by each PE verifying the incoming connection against the
   configured peer's address and authenticating the LDP messages using
   MD5 authentication. The pseudo-wire establishments between two
   secure LDP peers do not pose security issue but mis-wiring could
   occur due to configuration error. Some checks, such as, proper
   pseudo-wire type and other pseudo-wire options may prevent mis-
   wiring due to configuration errors.

   The learning of the appropriate CE's IP and MAC address can be a
   security issue. It is expected that the local attachment circuit to
   CE be physically secured. If this is a concern, the PE must be
   configured with CE's IP and MAC address. During each ARP frame
   processing, PE must verify the received information against the
   configuration before accepting. This prevents theft of service,
   denial of service to a subscriber or DoS attacks to all subscribers
   by malicious use of network services.

   The IPLS also provides MAC anti spoofing by preventing the use of
   already known MAC address. For instance, if a PE has already learned
   a presence of a CE through local connection or from another PE, and
   subsequently an advertisement for the same MAC and/or IP address is
   received from a different PE, the receiving PE can terminate service
   to that CE (either through label release and/or removing the ARP
   entry from the FIB) and raise the alarm.

   The IPLS learns and distributes CE reachability through the control
   plane. This provides greater control over CE topology distribution
   through application of local policies.

17.2 Data plane security

   The data traffic between CE and PE is not encrypted and it is
   possible that in an insecure environment, a malicious user may tap
   into the CE to PE connection and generate traffic using the spoofed
   destination MAC address on the Ethernet Attachment Circuit. In
   order to avoid such hijacking, local PE may verify the source MAC
   address of the received frame against the MAC address of the
   admitted connection. The frame is forwarded to PW only when
   authenticity is verified. When spoofing is detected, PE must severe
   the connection with the local CE, tear down the PW and start over.

   Each IPLS instance uses its own FIB. This prevents leaking of one
   customer data into another.


   Shah, et al.          Expires January 2013                    Page 27


   Internet Draft    draft-ietf-l2vpn-ipls-11.txt


18.0 References

18.1 Normative References


   [ARP] RFC 826, STD 37, D. Plummer, "An Ethernet Address Resolution
      Protocol:  Or Converting Network Protocol Addresses to 48.bit
      Ethernet Addresses for Transmission on Ethernet Hardware".

   [PWE3-CONTROL] L. Martini et al., "Pseudowire Setup and Maintenance
      using LDP", RFC 4447.


   [PWE3-IANA] L. Martini et al,. "IANA Allocations for pseudo Wire
      Edge to Edge Emulation (PWE3)", RFC 4446.

   [PWE3-ETH] Martini et al., "Encapsulation Methods for Transport of
      Ethernet over MPLS Networks", RFC 4448.

   [VPLS] Lasserre et al, "Virtual Private LAN Service Using LDP", RFC
      4762, January 2007.

   [RFC 3036] L. Anderson et al., "LDP Specification", January 2001.

   [RFC 2119] S. Bradner, "Key words for use in RFCs to indicate
      requirement levels".

   [IEEE 802.1D] ISO/IEC 10038, ANSI/IEEE Std 802.1D-1993, "MAC
      Bridges".

   [RFC 2461] Narten, T., Nordmark, E. and W.Simpson, "Neighbor
             Discovery for IP Version(IPv6)", RFC 2461, December,
             1998.
   [RFC 2464] Crawford, M., "Transmission of IPv6 packets over
             Ethernet Networks", RFC 2464, December 1998.
   [RFC 3122] Conta, A., "Extensions to IPv6 Neighbor Discovery for
             Inverse Discovery Specification", RFC 3122, June 2001.
   Shah, et al.          Expires January 2013                    Page 28


   Internet Draft    draft-ietf-l2vpn-ipls-11.txt



18.2 Informative References

   [L2VPN-FWK] L. Andersson et al., "Framework for L2VPN", December
      2004, work in progress.

   [PROXY-ARP] RFC 925, J. Postel, "Multi-LAN Address Resolution".

   [L2VPN-REQTS] Augustyn, W. et.al "Service Requirements for Layer 2
      Provider Provisioned Virtual Private Networks", RFC 4665,
      September 2006.

   [L2VPN-SIG] Rosen et al., "Provisioning, Autodiscovery, and
      signaling in L2VPN", draft-ietf-l2vpn-signaling-08.txt, May 2006,
      (work in progress).

   [RFC-1112] Deering, S., "Host Extensions for IP Multicasting", RFC
      1112, August, 1989.

   [RFC 2684] Grossman, et al., "Multiprotocol Encapsulation over ATM
      Adaptation Layer 5", September 1999.

   [RFC 2427] Brown, et al., "Multiprotocol Interconnect over Frame
      Relay", September 1998.

   [RFC 4364] Rosen et al., "BGP/MPLS IP Virtual Private Network
      (VPNs)", February 2006.

   [VPN-SEC] Fang, L., "Security framework for Provider Provisioned
      Virtual Private Networks", RFC 4111, July 2005.

   [RFC 3232] Reynolds and Postel, "Assigned Numbers".
   Shah, et al.          Expires January 2013                    Page 29


   Internet Draft    draft-ietf-l2vpn-ipls-11.txt






18.0 Author's Address

   Himanshu Shah
   Ciena Corp
   1741 Technology Dr, #400,
   San Jose, CA 95110
   Email: hshah@ciena.com

   Eric Rosen
   Cisco Systems
   300 Apollo Drive,
   Chelmsford, MA 01824
   Email: erosen@cisco.com

   Giles Heron
   Cisco Systems
   Email: giheron@cisco.com

   Francois Le Faucheur
   Cisco Systems, Inc.
   Village d'Entreprise Green Side - Batiment T3
   400, Avenue de Roumanille
   06410 Biot-Sophia Antipolis, France
   Email: flefauch@cisco.com


   Shah, et al.          Expires January 2013                    Page 30


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129d, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/