--- 1/draft-rekhter-mpls-pim-sm-over-mldp-07.txt 2014-02-07 09:14:32.698580854 -0800 +++ 2/draft-rekhter-mpls-pim-sm-over-mldp-08.txt 2014-02-07 09:14:32.722581436 -0800 @@ -1,34 +1,34 @@ Network Working Group Yakov Rekhter Internet Draft Juniper Networks Intended status: Standards Track -Expires: April 2014 Rahul Aggarwal +Expires: August 2014 Rahul Aggarwal Arktan Nicolai Leymann Deutsche Telekom Wim Henderickx Alcatel-Lucent Quintin Zhao Huawei Richard Li Huawei - October 2 2013 + February 7 2014 Carrying PIM-SM in ASM mode Trees over P2MP mLDP LSPs - draft-rekhter-mpls-pim-sm-over-mldp-07.txt + draft-rekhter-mpls-pim-sm-over-mldp-08.txt Status of this Memo This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. @@ -65,32 +65,32 @@ to map such trees to Point-to-Multipoint Label Switched Paths. This document describes how to accomplish this in the case where such Point-to-Multipoint Label Switched Paths are established using mLDP. Table of Contents 1 Specification of Requirements ......................... 3 2 Introduction .......................................... 3 3 Option 1 - Non-transitive mapping of IP multicast shared tree 5 3.1 Originating Source Active auto-discovery routes (Option 1) 5 - 3.2 Receiving BGP Source Active auto-discovery route by LSR ...5 + 3.2 Receiving BGP Source Active auto-discovery route by LSR ...6 3.3 Handling (S, G, RPT-bit) state ........................ 6 4 Option 2 - Transitive mapping of IP multicast shared tree .6 - 4.1 In-band signaling for IP Multicast Shared Tree ........ 6 + 4.1 In-band signaling for IP Multicast Shared Tree ........ 7 4.2 Originating Source Active auto-discovery routes (Option 2) 8 4.3 Receiving BGP Source Active auto-discovery route ...... 9 4.4 Pruning Sources off the Shared Tree ................... 9 4.5 More on handling (S,G,RPT-bit) state .................. 10 5 IANA Considerations ................................... 10 6 Security Considerations ............................... 10 7 Acknowledgements ...................................... 10 - 8 Normative References .................................. 10 + 8 Normative References .................................. 11 9 Informative References ................................ 11 10 Authors' Addresses .................................... 11 1. Specification of Requirements The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. 2. Introduction @@ -111,23 +111,33 @@ The reader of this document is expected to be familiar with PIM-SM [RFC4601] and mLDP [mLDP]. This document relies on the procedures in [RFC6826] to support Source Trees. E.g., following these procedures an LSR may initiate a mLDP Label Map with the Transit IPv4/IPv6 Source TLV for (S, G) when receiving PIM (S,G) Join. This document uses BGP Source Active auto-discovery routes, as - defined in [MVPN-BGP]. This document also identifies the deployment - scenarios where BGP Source Active auto-discovery routes will not be - used. + defined in [MVPN-BGP]. + + In a deployment scenario where the service provider has provisioned + the network in such a way that the RP for a particular ASM group G is + always between the receivers and the sources. If the network is + provisioned in this manner, the ingress PE for (S,G) is always the + same as the ingress PE for the RP, and thus the Source Active A-D + routes are never needed. If it is known a priori that the network is + provisioned in this manner, mLDP in-band signaling can be supported + using a different set of procedures, as specified in [draft- + wijnands]. A service provider will provision the PE routers either + to use [draft-wijnands] procedures or to use the procedures of this + document. Like [RFC6826], each IP multicast tree is mapped one-to-one to a P2MP LSP in the MPLS network. This type of service works well if the number of LSPs that are created is under control of the MPLS network operator, or if the number of LSPs for a particular service are known to be limited in number. It is to be noted that the existing BGP MVPN [MVPN-BGP] procedures may be used to map Internet IP multicast trees to P2MP LSPs. These procedures would accomplish this for IP multicast trees created by @@ -416,20 +426,24 @@ 9. Informative References [RFC4601] Fenner, B., Handley, M., Holbrook, H., and I. Kouvelas, "Protocol Independent Multicast - Sparse Mode (PIM-SM): Protocol Specification (Revised)", RFC 4601, August 2006. [RFC4607] Holbrook, H. and B. Cain, "Source-Specific Multicast for IP", RFC 4607, August 2006. + [draft-wijnands] Wijnands IJ, et. al., "mLDP In-Band Signaling with + Wildcards", draft-wijnands-mpls-mldp-in-band-wildcard-encoding, work + in progress + 10. Authors' Addresses Yakov Rekhter Juniper Networks, Inc. e-mail: yakov@juniper.net Rahul Aggarwal e-mail: raggarwa_1@yahoo.com Nicolai Leymann