| Internet-Draft | BIER Babel extensions | May 2022 |
| Zhang & Przygienda | Expires 2 November 2022 | [Page] |
BIER introduces a novel multicast architecture. It does not require a signaling protocol to explicitly build multicast distribution trees, nor does it require intermediate nodes to maintain any per-flow state.¶
Babel defines a distance-vector routing protocol that operates in a robust and efficient fashion both in wired as well as in wireless mesh networks. This document defines a way to carry necessary BIER signaling information in Babel.¶
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). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.¶
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."¶
This Internet-Draft will expire on 2 November 2022.¶
Copyright (c) 2022 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.¶
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://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 Revised BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.¶
[RFC8279] introduces a novel multicast architecture. It does not require a signaling protocol to explicitly build multicast distribution trees, nor does it require intermediate nodes to maintain any per-flow state. All procedures necessary to support BIER are abbreviated by the "BIER architecture" moniker in this document.¶
[RFC8966] define a distance-vector routing protocol under the name of "Babel". Babel operates in a robust and efficient fashion both in ordinary wired as well as in wireless mesh networks.¶
The terminology of this documents follows [RFC8279] and [RFC8966].¶
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.¶
In case a router is configured with BIER information, and Babel is the routing protocol used, such a router MAY use Babel protocol to announce the BIER information using the BIER sub-TLV specified below.¶
BFR-prefix and according information is carried in a Babel Update TLV per [RFC8966]. A new sub-TLV is defined to convey further BIER information such as BFR-id, sub-domain-id and BSL. Two sub-sub-TLVs are carried as payload of BIER sub-TLV.¶
The mandatory bit of BIER sub-TLV should be set to 0. If a router cannot recognize a sub-TLV, the router MUST ignore this unknown sub-TLV.¶
The BIER sub-TLV format aligns exactly with the definition and restrictions in [RFC8401] , [RFC8444] and [I-D.ietf-bier-ospfv3-extensions]. It is a sub-TLV of Babel update TLV. The prefix MUST NOT be summarized and the according sub-TLV MUST be treated as optional and transitive.¶
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| BAR | IPA | subdomain-id |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| BFR-id |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| sub-sub-TLVs (variable) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 1: BIER sub-TLV
¶
The BIER MPLS Encapsulation sub-sub-TLV can be carried by BIER sub-TLV. The format and restrictions are aligned with [RFC8401], [RFC8444] and [I-D.ietf-bier-ospfv3-extensions]. This sub-sub-TLV carries the information for the BIER MPLS encapsulation including the label range for a specific BSL for a certain <MT,SD> pair.¶
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Max SI |BS Len | Label |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 2: MPLS Encapsulation sub-sub-TLV
¶
The BIER non-MPLS Encapsulation sub-sub-TLV can be carried by BIER sub-TLV. The format and restrictions are aligned with [I-D.ietf-bier-lsr-non-mpls-extensions]. This sub-sub-TLV carries the information for the BIER MPLS encapsulation including the label range for a specific BSL for a certain <MT,SD> pair.¶
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Max SI | BIFT-id |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|BS Len | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 3: non-MPLS Encapsulation sub-sub-TLV
¶
The BIER IPv6 transportation sub-sub-TLV can be carried by BIER non-MPLS Encapsulation sub-sub-TLV. The format and restrictions are aligned with [I-D.ietf-bier-bierin6]. A node that requires IPv6 encapsualtion MUST advertise the BIER IPv6 transportation sub-sub-TLV according to local configuration or policy in the BIER domain to request other BFRs to always use IPv6 encapsulation.¶
The format is the same with the definition in section 4.1, [I-D.ietf-bier-bierin6].¶
Since Babel is performing a diffusion computation, support for different tree types is not as natural as with link-state protocols. Hence this specification is assuming that normal Babel reachability computation is performed without further modifications.¶
BIER architecture does not rely on all routers in a domain performing BFR procedures. How to support tunnels that will allow to tunnel BIER across such routers in Babel is for further study.¶
Security considerations discussed in [RFC8296], [RFC8966] apply to this document¶
A new type of Babel update sub-TLV needs to be defined for BIER information advertisement.¶