draft-ietf-isis-link-attr-02.txt   draft-ietf-isis-link-attr-03.txt 
ISIS WG Networking Working Group JP. Vasseur
Internet Draft Jean-Philippe Vasseur Internet-Draft S. Previdi
Stefano Previdi Intended status: Standards Track Cisco Systems, Inc
Cisco Systems Expires: August 10, 2007 February 6, 2007
Document: draft-ietf-isis-link-attr-02.txt
Expires: April 2007 October 2006
Definition of an IS-IS Link Attribute sub-TLV Definition of an IS-IS Link Attribute sub-TLV
draft-ietf-isis-link-attr-03.txt
draft-ietf-isis-link-attr-02.txt
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79. aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Internet-Drafts. Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on August 10, 2007.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
Abstract Abstract
This document defines a sub-TLV called "Link-attributes" carried This document defines a sub-TLV called "Link-attributes" carried
within the TLV 22 and used to flood some link characteristics. within the TLV 22 and used to flood some link characteristics.
Conventions used in this document Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC-2119 [RFC]. document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
Table of contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction ..................................................2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Link-attributes sub-TLV format ................................2 2. Link-attributes sub-TLV format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Interoperability with routers non supporting this capability ..3 3. Interoperability with routers non supporting this
4. Security considerations .......................................3 capability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
5. IANA considerations ...........................................3 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6. Intellectual Property Considerations ..........................3 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
7. Acknowledgments ...............................................4 6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
8. References ....................................................4 7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
8.1 Normative references .........................................4 7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
8.2 Informative references .......................................4 7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
9. Authors' Addresses ............................................4 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Full Copyright Statement .........................................5 Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . . 6
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
[IS-IS] specifies the IS-IS protocol (ISO 10589) with extensions to [IS-IS] specifies the IS-IS protocol (ISO 10589) with extensions to
support IPv4 in [IS-IS-IP]. A router advertises one or several Link support IPv4 in [RFC1195]. A router advertises one or several Link
State Protocol data units which are composed of variable length State Protocol data units which are composed of variable length
tuples called TLVs (Type-Length-Value). tuples called TLVs (Type-Length-Value).
[IS-IS-TE] defines a set of new TLVs whose aims are to add more [RFC3784] defines a set of new TLVs whose aims are to add more
information about links characteristics, increase the range of IS-IS information about links characteristics, increase the range of IS-IS
metrics and optimize the encoding of IS-IS prefixes. metrics and optimize the encoding of IS-IS prefixes.
This document defines a new sub-TLV named "Link-attributes" carried This document defines a new sub-TLV named "Link-attributes" carried
within the extended IS reachability TLV (type 22) specified in within the extended IS reachability TLV (type 22) specified in
[IS-IS-TE]. [RFC3784].
2. Link-attributes sub-TLV format 2. Link-attributes sub-TLV format
The link-attribute sub-TLV is carried within the TLV 22 and has a The link-attribute sub-TLV is carried within the TLV 22 and has a
format identical to the sub-TLV format used by the Traffic format identical to the sub-TLV format used by the Traffic
Engineering Extensions for IS-IS [IS-IS-TE]: 1 octet of sub-type, 1 Engineering Extensions for IS-IS ([RFC3784]): 1 octet of sub-type, 1
octet of length of the value field of the sub-TLV followed by the octet of length of the value field of the sub-TLV followed by the
value field, in this case, a 16 bit flags field. value field - in this case, a 16 bit flags field.
The Link-attribute sub-type is 19 (to be assigned by IANA) and has a The Link-attribute sub-type is 19 (to be assigned by IANA) and has a
length of 2 octets. length of 2 octets.
This sub-TLV is OPTIONAL and MAY appear at most once for a single IS This sub-TLV is OPTIONAL and MUST appear at most once for a single IS
neighbor. If a received LSP contains more than one Link-Attribute neighbor. If a received LSP contains more than one Link-Attribute
Sub-TLV, an implementation MAY decide to consider only the first Sub-TLV, an implementation MAY decide to consider only the first
encountered instance. encountered instance.
The following bits are defined: The following bits are defined:
Local Protection Available (0x01). When set, this indicates that the Local Protection Available (0x01). When set, this indicates that the
link is protected by means of some local protection mechanism (e.g link is protected by means of some local protection mechanism (e.g
[FRR]). [RFC4090]).
Link excluded from local protection path (0x02). When set, this link Link excluded from local protection path (0x02). When set, this link
SHOULD not be included in any computation of a repair path by any SHOULD not be included in any computation of a repair path by any
other router in the routing area. The triggers for setting up this other router in the routing area. The triggers for setting up this
bit are out of the scope of this document. bit are out of the scope of this document.
3. Interoperability with routers non supporting this capability 3. Interoperability with routers non supporting this capability
A router not supporting the link-attribute sub-TLV MUST just A router not supporting the link-attribute sub-TLV will just silently
silently ignore this sub-TLV. ignore this sub-TLV.
4. Security considerations
No new security issues are raised in this document.
5. IANA considerations 4. IANA Considerations
IANA will assign a new codepoint for the link-attribute sub-TLV IANA will assign a new codepoint for the link-attribute sub-TLV
defined in this document and carried within TLV 22. Suggested value defined in this document and carried within TLV 22. Suggested value
is 19 (to be assigned by IANA). is 19 (to be assigned by IANA).
6. Intellectual Property Considerations IANA is requested to create a registry for bit values inside the
link-attributes sub-TLV. The initial contents of this registry will
be:
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any Value Name Reference
Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed ----- ---- ---------
to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described 0x1 Local Protection Available [This Document]
in this document or the extent to which any license under such 0x2 Link Excluded from Local Protection [This Document]
rights might or might not be available; nor does it represent that
it has made any independent effort to identify any such rights.
Information on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC
documents can be found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any Further values are to be allocated by the Standards Action process
assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an defined in [RFC2434], with Early Allocation (defined in [RFC4020])
attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use permitted.
of such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository
at http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any 5. Security Considerations
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at
ietf-ipr@ietf.org.
7. Acknowledgments Any new security issues raised by the procedures in this document
depend upon the opportunity for LSPs to be snooped and modified, the
ease/difficulty of which has not been altered. As the LSPs may now
contain additional information regarding router capabilities, this
new information would also become available to an attacker.
Specifications based on this mechanism need to describe the security
considerations around the disclosure and modification of their
information. Note that an integrity mechanism, such as one defined
in [RFC3567] should be applied if there is high risk resulting from
modification of capability information.
The authors would like to thank Mike Shand and Les Ginsberg for 6. Acknowledgements
their useful comments.
8. References The authors would like to thank Mike Shand, Les Ginsberg and Bill
Fenner for their useful comments.
8.1 Normative references 7. References
[RFC] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 7.1. Normative References
Requirement Levels," RFC 2119.
[IS-IS] "Intermediate System to Intermediate System Intra-Domain [IS-IS] "Intermediate System to Intermediate System Intra-Domain
Routeing Exchange Protocol for use in Conjunction with the Protocol Routeing Exchange Protocol for use in Conjunction with the Protocol
for Providing the Connectionless-mode Network Service (ISO 8473)", for Providing the Connectionless-mode Network Service (ISO 8473)",
ISO 10589. ISO 10589.
[IS-IS-IP] Callon, R., RFC 1195, "Use of OSI IS-IS for routing in [RFC1195] Callon, R., "Use of OSI IS-IS for routing in TCP/IP and
TCP/IP and dual environments", RFC 1195, December 1990. dual environments", RFC 1195, December 1990.
[IS-IS-TE] H. Smit, T. Li, "IS-IS extensions for traffic [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
engineering", RFC 3784. Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
8.2 Informative references [RFC2434] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 2434,
October 1998.
[FRR] Ping Pan, et al, "Fast Reroute Extensions to RSVP-TE for LSP [RFC3784] Smit, H. and T. Li, "Intermediate System to Intermediate
Tunnels", RFC 4090, May 2005. System (IS-IS) Extensions for Traffic Engineering (TE)",
RFC 3784, June 2004.
9. Authors' Addresses [RFC4020] Kompella, K. and A. Zinin, "Early IANA Allocation of
Standards Track Code Points", BCP 100, RFC 4020,
February 2005.
Jean-Philippe Vasseur 7.2. Informative References
Cisco Systems, Inc.
[RFC3567] Li, T. and R. Atkinson, "Intermediate System to
Intermediate System (IS-IS) Cryptographic Authentication",
RFC 3567, July 2003.
[RFC4090] Pan, P., Swallow, G., and A. Atlas, "Fast Reroute
Extensions to RSVP-TE for LSP Tunnels", RFC 4090,
May 2005.
Authors' Addresses
JP Vasseur
Cisco Systems, Inc
1414 Massachusetts Avenue 1414 Massachusetts Avenue
Boxborough, MA 01719 Boxborough, MA 01719
USA USA
Email: jpv@cisco.com Email: jpv@cisco.com
Stefano Previdi Stefano Previdi
Cisco Systems, Inc. Cisco Systems, Inc
Via Del Serafico 200 Via Del Serafico 200
00142 - Roma Roma, 00142
ITALY Italy
Email: sprevidi@cisco.com Email: sprevidi@cisco.com
Full Copyright Statement Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006). This document is subject Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and
except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.
This document and the information contained herein are provided on This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
an "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE retain all their rights.
INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR
IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND
THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS
OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF
THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Intellectual Property
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at
ietf-ipr@ietf.org.
Acknowledgment
Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF
Administrative Support Activity (IASA).
 End of changes. 39 change blocks. 
93 lines changed or deleted 111 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.33. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/