draft-ietf-idr-flow-spec-v6-01.txt   draft-ietf-idr-flow-spec-v6-02.txt 
IDR Working Group R. Raszuk, Ed. IDR Working Group R. Raszuk, Ed.
Internet-Draft NTT MCL Inc. Internet-Draft NTT MCL Inc.
Intended status: Standards Track B. Pithawala Updates: RFC5575 (if approved) B. Pithawala
Expires: April 9, 2012 Cisco Systems Intended status: Standards Track Cisco Systems
D. McPherson Expires: April 28, 2012 D. McPherson
Verisign, Inc. Verisign, Inc.
October 7, 2011 October 26, 2011
Dissemination of Flow Specification Rules for IPv6 Dissemination of Flow Specification Rules for IPv6
draft-ietf-idr-flow-spec-v6-01 draft-ietf-idr-flow-spec-v6-02
Abstract Abstract
Dissemination of Flow Specification Rules [RFC5575] provides a Dissemination of Flow Specification Rules [RFC5575] provides a
protocol extension for propagation of traffic flow information for protocol extension for propagation of traffic flow information for
the purpose of rate limiting or filtering. The [RFC5575] specifies the purpose of rate limiting or filtering. The [RFC5575] specifies
those extensions for IPv4 protocol data packets. those extensions for IPv4 protocol data packets.
This specification extends the current [RFC5575] and defines changes This specification extends the current [RFC5575] and defines changes
to the original document in order to make it also usable and to the original document in order to make it also usable and
skipping to change at page 1, line 40 skipping to change at page 1, line 40
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on April 9, 2012. This Internet-Draft will expire on April 28, 2012.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 2, line 19 skipping to change at page 2, line 19
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. IPv6 Flow Specification encoding in BGP . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. IPv6 Flow Specification encoding in BGP . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. IPv6 Flow Specification types changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. IPv6 Flow Specification types changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. IPv6 Flow Specification Traffic Filtering Action changes . . . 5 4. IPv6 Flow Specification Traffic Filtering Action changes . . . 5
5. Security considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5. Security considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 7. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
The growing amount of IPv6 traffic in private and public networks The growing amount of IPv6 traffic in private and public networks
requires the extension of tools used in the IPv4 only networks to be requires the extension of tools used in the IPv4 only networks to be
also capable of supporting IPv6 data packets. also capable of supporting IPv6 data packets.
skipping to change at page 6, line 7 skipping to change at page 6, line 7
One of the traffic filtering actions which can be expressed by BGP One of the traffic filtering actions which can be expressed by BGP
extended community is defined in [RFC5575] as traffic-marking. This extended community is defined in [RFC5575] as traffic-marking. This
extended community type is of value: 0x8009. extended community type is of value: 0x8009.
For the purpose of making it compatible with IPv6 header action For the purpose of making it compatible with IPv6 header action
expressed by presence of this extended community has been modified to expressed by presence of this extended community has been modified to
read: read:
Traffic Marking: The traffic marking extended community instructs a Traffic Marking: The traffic marking extended community instructs a
system to modify the Traffic Class bits of a transiting IPv6 packet system to modify first 6 bits of Traffic Class field as (recommended
to the corresponding value. This extended community is encoded as a by [RFC2474]) of a transiting IPv6 packet to the corresponding value.
sequence of 5 zero bytes followed by the 8 bit Traffic Class value This extended community is encoded as a sequence of 42 zero bits
encoded in the 6th byte. followed by the 6 bits overwriting DSCP portion of Traffic Class
value.
5. Security considerations 5. Security considerations
No new security issues are introduced to the BGP protocol by this No new security issues are introduced to the BGP protocol by this
specification. specification.
6. IANA Considerations 6. IANA Considerations
IANA is requested to rename currently defined SAFI 133 and SAFI 134 IANA is requested to rename currently defined SAFI 133 and SAFI 134
per [RFC5575] to read: per [RFC5575] to read:
skipping to change at page 6, line 46 skipping to change at page 7, line 8
Type 8 - ICMP code Type 8 - ICMP code
Type 9 - TCP flags Type 9 - TCP flags
Type 10 - Packet length Type 10 - Packet length
Type 11 - Traffic Class Type 11 - Traffic Class
Type 12 - Reserved Type 12 - Reserved
Type 13 - Flow Label Type 13 - Flow Label
7. Acknowledgments 7. Acknowledgments
Authors would like to thank Pedro Marques, Hannes Gredler and Bruno Authors would like to thank Pedro Marques, Hannes Gredler and Bruno
Rijsman for their valuable input. Rijsman and Brian Carpenter for their valuable input.
8. References 8. References
8.1. Normative References 8.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-6man-flow-3697bis]
Amante, S., Carpenter, B., Jiang, S., and J. Rajahalme,
"IPv6 Flow Label Specification",
draft-ietf-6man-flow-3697bis-07 (work in progress),
July 2011.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2460] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6 [RFC2460] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6
(IPv6) Specification", RFC 2460, December 1998. (IPv6) Specification", RFC 2460, December 1998.
[RFC2474] Nichols, K., Blake, S., Baker, F., and D. Black,
"Definition of the Differentiated Services Field (DS
Field) in the IPv4 and IPv6 Headers", RFC 2474,
December 1998.
[RFC4271] Rekhter, Y., Li, T., and S. Hares, "A Border Gateway [RFC4271] Rekhter, Y., Li, T., and S. Hares, "A Border Gateway
Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", RFC 4271, January 2006. Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", RFC 4271, January 2006.
[RFC5492] Scudder, J. and R. Chandra, "Capabilities Advertisement [RFC5492] Scudder, J. and R. Chandra, "Capabilities Advertisement
with BGP-4", RFC 5492, February 2009. with BGP-4", RFC 5492, February 2009.
[RFC5575] Marques, P., Sheth, N., Raszuk, R., Greene, B., Mauch, J., [RFC5575] Marques, P., Sheth, N., Raszuk, R., Greene, B., Mauch, J.,
and D. McPherson, "Dissemination of Flow Specification and D. McPherson, "Dissemination of Flow Specification
Rules", RFC 5575, August 2009. Rules", RFC 5575, August 2009.
 End of changes. 9 change blocks. 
12 lines changed or deleted 24 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.41. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/