One document matched: draft-hegde-ospf-node-admin-tag-00.xml

<?xml version="1.0"?>
<!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd" [
<!ENTITY RFC5310 PUBLIC "" "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5310.xml">
<!ENTITY RFC5329 PUBLIC "" "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5329.xml">
<!ENTITY RFC5250 PUBLIC "" "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5250.xml">
<!ENTITY RFC2119 PUBLIC "" "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2119.xml">
<!ENTITY RFC2328 PUBLIC "" "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2328.xml">
<!ENTITY RFC5340 PUBLIC "" "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5340.xml">
<!ENTITY RFC4970 PUBLIC "" "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.4970.xml">
<!ENTITY RFC3630 PUBLIC "" "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.3630.xml">
<!ENTITY RFC5286 PUBLIC "" "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.5286.xml">
]>
<?rfc toc="yes"?>
<?rfc tocompact="yes"?>
<?rfc tocdepth="3"?>
<?rfc tocindent="yes"?>
<?rfc symrefs="yes"?>
<?rfc sortrefs="yes"?>
<?rfc comments="yes"?>
<?rfc inline="yes"?>
<?rfc compact="yes"?>
<?rfc subcompact="no"?>
<rfc category="std" docName="draft-hegde-ospf-node-admin-tag-00" ipr="trust200902">

<front>
    <title>Advertising per-node administrative tags in OSPF</title>

    <author initials="S." surname="Hegde" fullname="Shraddha Hegde">
<organization>Juniper Networks, Inc.</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>Embassy Business Park</street>
<city>Bangalore</city>
<region>KA</region>
<code>560093</code>
<country>India</country>
</postal>
<email>shraddha@juniper.net</email>
</address>
    </author>

    <author initials="H." surname="Raghuveer" fullname="Harish Raghuveer">
<organization>Juniper Networks, Inc.</organization>
<address>
<postal>
<street>Embassy Business Park</street>
<city>Bangalore</city>
<code>560093</code>
<country>India</country>
</postal>
<email>hraghuveer@juniper.net</email>
</address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Hannes Gredler" initials="H." surname="Gredler">
      <organization>Juniper Networks, Inc.</organization>
      <address>
<postal>
<street>1194 N. Mathilda Ave.</street>
<city>Sunnyvale</city>
<region>CA</region>
<code>94089</code>
<country>US</country>
</postal>
<email>hannes@juniper.net</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    
     <author fullname="Rob shakir" initials="R." surname="Shakir">
      <organization>British Telecom</organization>
      <address>
<postal>
<street> </street>
<city> </city>
<region> </region>
<code> </code>
<country> </country>
</postal>
<email>rob.shakir@bt.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>

    <date day="21" month="October" year="2013" />

    <area>Routing</area>
    <workgroup>Open Shortest Path First IGP</workgroup>

    <keyword>MPLS</keyword>
    <keyword>IGP</keyword>
    <keyword>OSPF</keyword>
    <keyword>admin-tag</keyword>
    <keyword>traffic engineering</keyword>

    <abstract>
      <t> This document describes an extension to OSPF protocol <xref target="RFC2328" /> to
      add an optional operational capability, that allows tagging and grouping of
      the nodes in an OSPF domain. This allows simplification,ease of management and
      control over route and path selection based on configured policies. </t>

      <t>This document describes the protocol extensions to disseminate
      per-node admin-tags to the OSPFv2 and OSPFv3 protocols.</t>
    </abstract>

    <note title="Requirements Language">
      <t>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 <xref
      target="RFC2119">RFC 2119</xref>.</t>
    </note>
</front>

<middle>

<section title="Introduction" anchor='intro'>
  <t> This document provides mechanisms to advertise per-node administrative
  tags in the OSPF router information LSA <xref target="RFC4970"/>.
  In certain path-selection applications like for example in traffic-engineering
  or LFA backup selection there is a need to tag the nodes
  based on their roles in the network and have policies to prefer or
  prune a certain group of nodes.
  </t>
</section>

<section title='Applicability'>
    <t> For the purpose of advertising per-node administrative tags within OSPF
    a new TLV is proposed. Because path selection is a functional set which applies
    both to TE and non-TE applications, this new TLV is carried in
    the Router Information LSA <xref target="RFC4970"/>
    </t>
</section>

<section title='Administrative Tag TLV'>
    <t> An administrative Tag is a 32-bit integer value that can be
    used to identify a group of nodes in the OSPF domain.
    <vspace blankLines="1" />
    The new TLV defined will be carried within an RI LSA for OSPFV2 and
    OSPFV3. Router information LSA <xref target="RFC4970"/> can have link,area or AS level
    flooding scope. Choosing the flooding scope to flood the group
    tags are defined by the policies and is a local matter.
    <vspace blankLines="1" />
    The TLV specifies one or more administrative tag values. An OSPF
    node advertises the set of groups it is part of in the OSPF domain.
    (for example, all PE-nodes are configured with certain tag value,
    all P-nodes are configured with a different tag value in a domain).
    </t>
</section>

<section title='TLV format'>
<section title='OSPF per-node administrative tag TLV'>
<t>The format of the TLVs within the body of an RI LSA is the same
as the format used by the Traffic Engineering Extensions to OSPF
<xref target="RFC3630"/>.
<vspace blankLines="1" />
The LSA payload consists of one or more nested Type/Length/Value
(TLV) triplets. The format of each TLV is:
<vspace blankLines="2" />

<figure anchor="OSPF-Admin-tag-TLV" title="OSPF per-node Administrative Tag TLV"
suppress-title="false" align="left" alt="" width="" height="">
  <artwork xml:space="preserve" name="" type="" align="left" alt="" width="" height="">
  
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                        |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|           Administrative Tag #1                               |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|           Administrative Tag #2                               |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
//                                                             //
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|           Administrative Tag #N                               |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  </artwork>
</figure>

    
     <vspace blankLines="1" />
<vspace blankLines="1" />
      Type : TBA
     <vspace blankLines="1" />
      Length: A 16-bit field that indicates the length of the value
               portion in octets and will be a multiple of 4 octets
               dependent on the number of tags advertised.
     <vspace blankLines="1" />
      Value: A sequence of multiple 4 octets defining the
               administrative tags.
</t>
</section>

<section title='Ordering of tags'>
<t> The semantics of the tag order are implementation-dependent. That
is, there is no implied meaning to the ordering of the tags that
indicates a certain operation or set of operations that need to be
performed based on the ordering.
<vspace blankLines="1" />

Each tag SHOULD be treated as an independent identifier that MAY be
used in policy to perform a policy action. Whether or not tag A
precedes or succeeds tag B SHOULD not change the meaning of the
tag set.
</t>
</section>
</section>

<section title='Applications'>
<t>Increased deployment of Loop Free Alternates (LFA) as defined in
    <xref target="RFC5286"/> has exposed some limitations.New draft Operation management
    of Loop Free Alternates <xref target="I-D.litkowski-rtgwg-lfa-manageability"/>
    proposes refinements to address those limitations.
     <vspace blankLines="1" />
    One of the proposed refinements is to be able to group the nodes
    in IGP domain with administrative tags and engineer the LFA based
    on configured policies.
     <vspace blankLines="1" />
    The mechanisms outlined in this document helps provide the capability
    to advertise group tags within OSPF protocol in order to achieve
    policy based LFA selection.
     <vspace blankLines="1" />
    The policies configured on each node can then make use of these tags
    to prefer or prune certain group of nodes for selecting LFAs.
</t>
</section>

<!-- HG: FIXME: add traffic-engineering reference -->

<section title='Security Considerations' anchor='sec-con'>

    <t>
    This document does not introduce any further security issues other
    than those discussed in <xref target="RFC2328"/> and <xref target="RFC5340"/>.
    </t>

</section>

<section anchor="IANA" title="IANA Considerations">

    <t>IANA maintains the registry for the TLVs. OSPF Administrative Tags
    will require one new type code for the TLV defined in this document.
    </t>

</section>

<section title='Acknowledgments'>
    <t>Thanks to Bharath R and Pushpasis Sarakar for useful inputs.
    </t>
</section>

</middle>

<back>
<references title='Normative References'>
  &RFC2328;
  &RFC5340;
  &RFC3630;
  &RFC4970;
  &RFC2119;
  &RFC5250;	
</references>

<references title='Informative References'>
   &RFC5286;
   &RFC5310;
   &RFC5329;
   <?rfc include="http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.draft-litkowski-rtgwg-lfa-manageability-01.xml"?>
</references>
</back>
</rfc>