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].¶
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 21 November 2023.¶
Copyright (c) 2023 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.¶
The fast protection of a transit node of a
"Bit Index Explicit Replication" (BIER) Traffic Engineering
(BIER-TE) path or tunnel is described
in [I-D.chen-bier-te-frr].
[RFC8424] presents extensions to RSVP-TE for
the fast protection of the ingress node of
a traffic engineering (TE) Label Switching Path (LSP).
However, these documents do not discuss any protocol extensions
for the fast protection of
the ingress node of a BIER-TE path or tunnel.¶
This document fills that gap and specifies protocol extensions to
Path Computation Element (PCE) communication Protocol (PCEP)
for the fast protection of the ingress node of a BIER-TE
path or tunnel.
Ingress node and ingress, fast protection and protection as well as
BIER-TE path and BIER-TE tunnel
will be used exchangeably in the following sections.¶
Figure 1
shows an example of protecting
ingress PE1 of a BIER-TE path,
which is from ingress PE1 to egress nodes PE3 and PE4.
This primary BIER-TE path is represented by *** in the figure.
The ingress of the primary BIER-TE path is called primary ingress.¶
The backup BIER-TE path is from ingress PE2 to
egress nodes PE3 and PE4,
which is represented by ### in the figure.
The ingress of the backup BIER-TE path is called backup ingress.¶
In normal operations, CE1 sends the packets with
a multicast group and source
to ingress PE1,
which imports/encapsulates the packets into the BIER-TE path
through adding a BIER-TE header. The header contains the
BIER-TE path from ingress PE1 to egress nodes PE3 and PE4.¶
When CE1 detects the failure of ingress PE1 using
a failure detection mechanism such as BFD,
it switches the traffic to backup ingress PE2,
which imports the traffic from CE1 into the backup BIER-TE path.
When the traffic is imported into the backup path,
it is sent to the egress nodes PE3 and PE4 along the path.¶
Given the traffic source (e.g., CE1), ingress (e.g., PE1) and egresses
(e.g., PE3 and PE4) of the primary BIER-TE path,
the PCE computes a backup ingress (e.g., PE2),
a backup BIER-TE path from the backup ingress to the egresses,
and sends the backup BIER-TE path to the PCC of the backup ingress.
It also sends the backup ingress, primary ingress and the
traffic description
to the PCC of the traffic source (e.g., CE1).¶
When the PCC of the traffic source receives the backup ingress,
primary ingress and traffic description,
it sets up the fast detection of the primary ingress failure and
the switch over target backup ingress.
This setup lets the traffic source node switch the traffic (to be
sent to the primary ingress)
to the backup ingress when it detects the failure of the
primary ingress.¶
When the PCC of the backup ingress receives the backup BIER-TE path,
it adds a forwarding entry into its BIFT.
This entry encapsulates the packets from the traffic source
in the backup BIER-TE path.
This makes the backup ingress send the traffic received from the
traffic source to the egress nodes via the backup BIER-TE path.¶
This section describes the behavior of some nodes
connected to the ingress before and after the ingress
fails. These nodes are the traffic source (e.g., CE1) and
the backup ingress (e.g., PE2).
It presents three ways in which these nodes work together
to protect the ingress.
The first way is called source detect, where
the traffic source is responsible for fast
detecting the failure of the ingress.
The second way is called backup ingress detect, in which
the backup ingress is responsible for
fast detecting the failure of the ingress.
The third way is called both detect, where both the
traffic source and the backup ingress are responsible for
fast detecting the failure of the ingress.¶
In normal operations, i.e., before the failure of the ingress,
the traffic source sends the traffic to the ingress of the
primary BIER-TE path.
The backup ingress (e.g., PE2) is ready to import the traffic
from the traffic source into the backup BIER-TE path installed.¶
When the traffic source detects the failure of the ingress,
it switches the traffic to the backup ingress,
which delivers the traffic to the egress nodes of the BIER-TE path
via the backup BIER-TE path.¶
The traffic source (e.g., CE1) always sends the traffic to
both the ingress (e.g., PE1) of the primary BIER-TE path
and the backup ingress (e.g., PE2).¶
The backup ingress does not import any traffic
from the traffic source into the backup BIER-TE path
in normal operations.
When it detects the failure of the ingress of the primary BIER-TE path,
it imports the traffic from the source into the backup BIER-TE path.¶
For the backup ingress to fast detect the failure of
the primary ingress, it SHOULD directly connect to the
primary ingress. When a PCE computes a backup ingress
and a backup BIER-TE path, it SHOULD consider this.¶
In normal operations, i.e., before the failure of the ingress,
the traffic source sends the traffic to the ingress of the
primary BIER-TE path.
When it detects the failure of the ingress,
it switches the traffic to the backup ingress.¶
The backup ingress does not import any traffic
from the traffic source into the backup BIER-TE path
in normal operations.
When it detects the failure of the ingress of the primary BIER-TE path,
it imports the traffic from the source into the backup BIER-TE path.¶
A PCC runs on each of the edge nodes such as PEs and CEs
of a network normally.
A PCE runs on a server as a controller to communicate with PCCs.
The PCE and the PCCs running on backup ingress PEs and traffic source CEs
work together to support protection for the ingress
of a BIER-TE path.¶
When a PCE and a PCC running on a backup ingress
establish a PCEP session between them,
they exchange their capabilities of supporting protection for
the ingress node of a BIER-TE path/tunnel.¶
A new sub-TLV called BIER-TE_INGRESS_PROTECTION_CAPABILITY is defined.
It is included in the PATH_SETUP_TYPE_CAPABILITY TLV with PST = TBD1
(suggested value 2 for protecting the ingress of a BIER-TE path/tunnel)
in the OPEN object, which is exchanged in Open messages
when a PCC and a PCE establish a PCEP session between them.
Its format is illustrated below.¶
D flag bit: A PCC sets this flag to 1 to indicate
that it is able to detect its adjacent node's failure quickly.¶
o
A flag bit: A PCE sets this flag to 1 to request a PCC
to let the forwarding entry for the backup BIER-TE
path/tunnel be Active.¶
A PCC, which supports ingress protection for a BIER-TE tunnel/path,
sends a PCE an Open message containing
BIER-TE_INGRESS_PROTECTION_CAPABILITY
sub-TLV. This sub-TLV indicates that the PCC is capable of supporting
the ingress protection for a BIER-TE tunnel/path.¶
A PCE, which supports ingress protection for a BIER-TE tunnel/path,
sends a PCC an Open message containing
BIER-TE_INGRESS_PROTECTION_CAPABILITY
sub-TLV. This sub-TLV indicates that the PCE is capable of supporting
the ingress protection for a BIER-TE tunnel/path.¶
If both a PCC and a PCE support
BIER-TE_INGRESS_PROTECTION_CAPABILITY,
each of the Open messages sent by the PCC and PCE contains
PATH-SETUP-TYPE-CAPABILITY TLV with a PST list containing PST=TBD1 and
a BIER-TE-INGRESS_PROTECTION_CAPABILITY sub-TLV.¶
If a PCE receives an Open message without a
BIER-TE_INGRESS_PROTECTION_CAPABILITY sub-TLV from a PCC,
then the PCE MUST not send the PCC any request for ingress protection
of a BIER-TE path/tunnel.¶
If a PCC receives an Open message without a
BIER-TE_INGRESS_PROTECTION_CAPABILITY sub-TLV from a PCE,
then the PCC MUST ignore any request for ingress protection
of a BIER-TE path/tunnel from the PCE.¶
If a PCC sets D flag to zero, then the PCE SHOULD send the PCC
an Open message with A flag set to one and the fast detection of
the failure of the primary ingress MUST be done by the traffic source.
When the PCE sends the PCC a message for initiating
a backup BIER-TE path,
the PCC MUST let the forwarding entry for the backup
BIER-TE path be Active.¶
When a PCE and a PCC running on a traffic source node
establish a PCEP session between them,
they exchange their capabilities of supporting protection for
the ingress node of a BIER-TE path/tunnel.¶
The PCECC-CAPABILITY sub-TLV defined in
[I-D.ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller]
is included
in the OPEN object in the PATH-SETUP-TYPE-CAPABILITY TLV,
which is exchanged in Open messages
when a PCC and a PCE establish a PCEP session between them.¶
A new flag bit P is defined in the Flags field of the
PCECC-CAPABILITY sub-TLV:¶
P flag (for Ingress Protection):
if set to 1 by a PCEP speaker, the P flag indicates
that the PCEP speaker supports and is willing to handle the PCECC
based central controller instructions for ingress protection.
The bit
MUST be set to 1 by both a PCC and a PCE for the PCECC ingress
protection instruction
download/report on a PCEP session.¶
This section specifies the extensions to PCEP for
the backup ingress and
the traffic source.
The extensions let the traffic source¶
S1:
fast detect the failure of the primary
ingress and switch the traffic to the backup ingress
when the traffic source detects the failure
of the primary ingress, or¶
S2:
always send the traffic to both
the primary ingress and the backup ingress.¶
For the packets from the traffic source,
if the primary ingress (i.e., the ingress of the primary BIER-TE path)
encapsulates the packets with a service ID or label into
the BIER-TE path, the backup ingress MUST have this service ID
or label and encapsulates the packets with the service ID or label
into the backup BIER-TE path when the primary ingress fails.¶
If the backup ingress is requested to detect the failure of
the primary ingress, it MUST have the information about the primary
ingress such as the address of the primary ingress.¶
A new TLV called BIER-TE_INGRESS_PROTECTION TLV is defined
to transfer the information about the primary ingress and/or
the service ID or label.
When a PCE sends the PCC of a backup ingress
a PCInitiate message for initiating
a backup BIER-TE path/tunnel to protect the primary ingress
of a primary BIER-TE path/tunnel, the message contains this TLV
in the RP/SRP object.
Its format is illustrated below.¶
1 is to request the backup ingress
to let the forwarding entry for the backup BIER-TE
path/tunnel be Active always.
In this case, the traffic source detects the failure
of the primary ingress and switches the traffic
to the backup ingress when it detects the failure.¶
o
0 is to request the backup ingress
to detect the failure of the primary ingress and
let the forwarding entry for the backup BIER-TE
path/tunnel be Active when the primary ingress fails.
In this case, the TLV includes the primary ingress address
in a Primary-Ingress sub-TLV.
The traffic source can send the traffic
to both the primary ingress and the backup ingress.
It may switch the traffic to the backup ingress from
the primary ingress when it detects the failure of
the primary ingress.¶
Two optional sub-TLVs are defined.
One is Service sub-TLV.
The other is Primary-Ingress sub-TLV.
The Multicast Flow Specification TLV for IPv4 or IPv6,
which is defined in [I-D.ietf-pce-pcep-flowspec],
is used as a sub-TLV to
indicate the traffic to be imported into the backup
BIER-TE path.¶
A Service sub-TLV contains a service label such as
VPN service label or ID to be added
into a packet to be carried by a BIER-TE path/tunnel.
It has two formats: one for the service identified by a label
and the other for the service identified by a service
identifier (ID) of 32 or 128 bits,
which are illustrated below.¶
A Primary-Ingress sub-TLV indicates the IP address of the
primary ingress node of a primary BIER-TE path/tunnel.
It has two formats: one for primary ingress node IPv4 address
and the other for primary ingress node IPv6 address,
which are illustrated below.¶
If the traffic source is requested to detect the failure
of the primary ingress and switch the traffic (to be sent to
the primary ingress) to the backup ingress when the primary
ingress fails, it MUST have the information about the
backup ingress, the primary ingress and the traffic.
This information may be transferred via a
CCI object for BIER-TE-INGRESS-PROTECTION
to the PCC of the traffic source node from a PCE.¶
If the traffic source PCC does not accept the request from
the PCE or support the extensions, the PCE SHOULD have
the information about the behavior of the traffic source configured
such as whether it detects the failure of the primary
ingress. Based on the information,
the PCE instructs the backup ingress accordingly.¶
The Central Control Instructions (CCI) Object is defined
in [I-D.ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller]
for a PCE as a controller to send instructions for LSPs
to a PCC.
This document defines a new object-type (TBDt)
for BIER-TE ingress protection
based on the CCI object.
The body of the object with the new object-type is
illustrated below. The object may be in PCRpt, PCUpd,
or PCInitiate message.¶
D = 1 instructs the PCC of the traffic source
to Detect the failure
of the primary ingress and switch the traffic
to the backup ingress when it detects the failure.¶
B:
B = 1 instructs the PCC of the traffic source
to send the traffic
to Both the primary ingress and the backup ingress.¶
The primary ingress sub-TLV defined above is used as a TLV
to contain the information
about the primary ingress in the object.
The Multicast Flow Specification TLV for IPv4 or IPv6,
which is defined in [I-D.ietf-pce-pcep-flowspec],
is used to contain the information about the
traffic in the object.
A new TLV, called backup ingress TLV, is defined
to contain the information about the backup ingress in the object.¶
A Backup-Ingress TLV indicates the IP address of the
ingress node of a backup BIER-TE path/tunnel.
It has two formats: one for backup ingress node IPv4 address
and the other for backup ingress node IPv6 address,
which are illustrated below. They have the same format as
the Primary-Ingress sub-TLVs.¶
Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC5440]
Vasseur, JP., Ed. and JL. Le Roux, Ed., "Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication Protocol (PCEP)", RFC 5440, DOI 10.17487/RFC5440, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5440>.
[RFC8231]
Crabbe, E., Minei, I., Medved, J., and R. Varga, "Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Stateful PCE", RFC 8231, DOI 10.17487/RFC8231, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8231>.
Li, Z., Peng, S., Negi, M. S., Zhao, Q., and C. Zhou, "Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Procedures and Extensions for Using the PCE as a Central Controller (PCECC) of LSPs", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller-14, , <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller-14>.
Filsfils, C., Ed., Previdi, S., Ed., Ginsberg, L., Decraene, B., Litkowski, S., and R. Shakir, "Segment Routing Architecture", RFC 8402, DOI 10.17487/RFC8402, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8402>.
[RFC8424]
Chen, H., Ed. and R. Torvi, Ed., "Extensions to RSVP-TE for Label Switched Path (LSP) Ingress Fast Reroute (FRR) Protection", RFC 8424, DOI 10.17487/RFC8424, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8424>.