draft-ietf-pim-mtid-05.txt   draft-ietf-pim-mtid-06.txt 
PIM WG Yiqun Cai PIM WG Yiqun Cai
Internet Draft Heidi Ou Internet Draft Heidi Ou
Intended Status: Proposed Standard Intended Status: Proposed Standard
Expires: March 22, 2011 Cisco Systems, Inc. Expires: July 11, 2011 Cisco Systems, Inc.
September 22, 2010 January 11, 2011
PIM Multi-Topology ID (MT-ID) Join-Attribute PIM Multi-Topology ID (MT-ID) Join-Attribute
draft-ietf-pim-mtid-05.txt draft-ietf-pim-mtid-06.txt
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. provisions of BCP 78 and 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 Internet- other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts. Drafts.
skipping to change at page 1, line 35 skipping to change at page 1, line 35
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."
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 March 22, 2011. This Internet-Draft will expire on July 11, 2011.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2010 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2010 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 34 skipping to change at page 2, line 34
4.2.1 Sending PIM MT-ID Join Attribute ................... 5 4.2.1 Sending PIM MT-ID Join Attribute ................... 5
4.2.2 Receiving PIM MT-ID Join Attribute ................. 6 4.2.2 Receiving PIM MT-ID Join Attribute ................. 6
4.2.3 Validating PIM MT-ID Join Attribute ................ 6 4.2.3 Validating PIM MT-ID Join Attribute ................ 6
4.2.4 Conflict Resolution ................................ 7 4.2.4 Conflict Resolution ................................ 7
4.2.4.1 Conflict Resolution Rules For Upstream Routers ..... 7 4.2.4.1 Conflict Resolution Rules For Upstream Routers ..... 7
4.2.4.2 Conflict Resolution Rules For Downstream Routers ... 8 4.2.4.2 Conflict Resolution Rules For Downstream Routers ... 8
5 Packet Format ...................................... 8 5 Packet Format ...................................... 8
5.1 PIM MT-ID Hello Option ............................. 8 5.1 PIM MT-ID Hello Option ............................. 8
5.2 PIM MT-ID Join Attribute TLV Format ................ 9 5.2 PIM MT-ID Join Attribute TLV Format ................ 9
6 IANA Considerations ................................ 9 6 IANA Considerations ................................ 9
7 Security Considerations ............................ 9 7 Security Considerations ............................ 10
8 Acknowledgments .................................... 10 8 Acknowledgments .................................... 10
9 Authors' Addresses ................................. 10 9 Authors' Addresses ................................. 10
10 Normative References ............................... 10 10 Normative References ............................... 10
11 Informative References ............................. 11 11 Informative References ............................. 11
1. Specification of Requirements 1. Specification of Requirements
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 this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
skipping to change at page 3, line 33 skipping to change at page 3, line 33
procedures described in this document, it is possible to construct procedures described in this document, it is possible to construct
two source trees for (S1, G1) and (S1, G2) in such a way that they do two source trees for (S1, G1) and (S1, G2) in such a way that they do
not share any transit network segment. As a result, a single network not share any transit network segment. As a result, a single network
failure will not cause any loss to the stream. failure will not cause any loss to the stream.
This draft introduces a new type of PIM Join Attribute used to encode This draft introduces a new type of PIM Join Attribute used to encode
the identity of the topology PIM uses for RPF. It is based on the identity of the topology PIM uses for RPF. It is based on
[RFC5384], and specifies additional procedures and rules to process [RFC5384], and specifies additional procedures and rules to process
the attribute and resolve conflict. The draft does not introduce any the attribute and resolve conflict. The draft does not introduce any
change to the RPF check procedure used to verify the incoming change to the RPF check procedure used to verify the incoming
interface when a packet is forwarded. interface when a packet is forwarded. As an example to use the
capability described by this draft, an application can choose to use
group addresses, and/or source addresses, to identify a unique
multicast stream. It might further need to perform the functions of
splitting and merging. But the detailed processing is beyond the
scope of the document.
3. Functional Overview 3. Functional Overview
3.1. PIM RPF Topology 3.1. PIM RPF Topology
PIM RPF topology is a collection of routes used by PIM to perform RPF PIM RPF topology is a collection of routes used by PIM to perform RPF
operation when building shared or source trees. In the rest of the operation when building shared or source trees. In the rest of the
document, PIM RPF topology may be simply referred to as "topology" document, PIM RPF topology may be simply referred to as "topology"
when there is no ambiguity. when there is no ambiguity.
skipping to change at page 4, line 26 skipping to change at page 4, line 31
The details of the first two methods are implementation specific and The details of the first two methods are implementation specific and
are not discussed in this document. The specification to support the are not discussed in this document. The specification to support the
third method is included in this document. third method is included in this document.
3.2. PIM MT-ID 3.2. PIM MT-ID
For each PIM RPF topology created, a unique numerical ID is assigned For each PIM RPF topology created, a unique numerical ID is assigned
per PIM domain. This ID is called PIM MT-ID. PIM MT-ID has the per PIM domain. This ID is called PIM MT-ID. PIM MT-ID has the
following property, following property,
- it is the path identifier that is used by PIM control plane, but
does not function in the forwarding state for a specific
topology. The differentiation for topologies on forwarding plane
is made by different group addresses, and/or source addresses
instead.
- this value is not required to be the same as the MT-ID used by - this value is not required to be the same as the MT-ID used by
the unicast routing protocols that contribute routes to the the unicast routing protocols that contribute routes to the
topology. In practice, when only one unicast routing protocol topology. In practice, when only one unicast routing protocol
(such as OSPF or IS-IS) is used, PIM MT-ID is recommended to be (such as OSPF or IS-IS) is used, PIM MT-ID is recommended to be
assigned using the same value as the IGP topology identifier. assigned using the same value as the IGP topology identifier.
This is for the purpose of reducing management overhead and This is for the purpose of reducing management overhead and
simplifying troubleshooting. simplifying troubleshooting.
- this value must be unique and consistent within the network - this value must be unique and consistent within the network
domain for the same topology. For actual deployment, one should domain for the same topology. For actual deployment, one should
skipping to change at page 10, line 8 skipping to change at page 10, line 14
7. Security Considerations 7. Security Considerations
As a type of PIM Join Attribute, the security considerations As a type of PIM Join Attribute, the security considerations
described in [RFC5384] apply here. Specifically, malicious alteration described in [RFC5384] apply here. Specifically, malicious alteration
of PIM MT-ID may cause the resiliency goals to be violated. of PIM MT-ID may cause the resiliency goals to be violated.
8. Acknowledgments 8. Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Eric Rosen, Ice Wijnands, Dino The authors would like to thank Eric Rosen, Ice Wijnands, Dino
Farinacci, Colby Barth, Les Ginsberg, Dimitri Papadimitriou and Farinacci, Colby Barth, Les Ginsberg, Dimitri Papadimitriou, Thomas
Thomas Morin for their input. Morin and Hui Liu for their input.
9. Authors' Addresses 9. Authors' Addresses
Yiqun Cai Yiqun Cai
Cisco Systems, Inc Cisco Systems, Inc
170 West Tasman Drive 170 West Tasman Drive
San Jose, CA 95134 San Jose, CA 95134
E-mail: ycai@cisco.com E-mail: ycai@cisco.com
 End of changes. 8 change blocks. 
8 lines changed or deleted 19 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.40. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/