One document matched: draft-ietf-idmr-membership-reports-04.txt
Differences from draft-ietf-idmr-membership-reports-03.txt
Domain Wide Multicast Group Membership Reports
Status of this Memo
This document is an Internet Draft and is in full conformance with all
provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. 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.
Internet Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months.
Internet Drafts may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other
documents at any time. It is not appropriate to use Internet Drafts as
reference material or to cite them other than as a "working draft" or
"work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
Distribution of this document is unlimited.
Abstract
When running a multi-level multicast routing protocol, upper levels
need to know about group memberships in lower levels in a protocol-
independent fashion. Domain Wide Multicast Group Membership
Reports allow this information to be learned in a fashion similar
to IGMP[RFC2236] at the domain level.
This document is a product of the IDMR working group within the Internet
Engineering Task Force. Comments are solicited and should be addressed
to the working group's mailing list at idmr@cs.ucl.ac.uk and/or the
author.
Fenner Expires February 2000 [Page 1]
Internet Draft draft-ietf-idmr-membership-reports-04.txtAugust 25, 1999
1. Introduction
Domain-Wide Multicast Group Membership Reports (DWRs) are a group
membership protocol at the domain level. When using a hierarchical
multicast routing protocol [Thya94,Estr98], the inter-domain protocol
needs to learn of group memberships inside domains. Although some
intra-domain routing protocols can provide this information easily to
the domain border routers, some cannot. DWRs specify a protocol-
independent manner to learn group membership inside a domain.
This document specifies the DWR protocol, as used by border routers and
interior routers. It specifies a behavior that can be used with any
intra-domain protocol, along with optimizations for certain intra-domain
protocols, and a transition scheme so that all interior routers need not
be updated.
1.1. Conventions
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 [RFC2119].
Tunable timer values are named inside square brackets, e.g. [Robustness
Variable]. These values are described in section 8.
2. Packet Format
DWR packets are sent as UDP packets (IP protocol #17). The UDP
destination port is 644. The UDP checksum SHOULD be calculated on
transmission. However, packets without checksums MUST be accepted.
Received packets with incorrect checksums MUST be dropped. The UDP
payload is as follows:
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| MBZ | DWR Type |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type-specific header ...
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Data ...
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
2.1. MBZ: 24 bits
Must be zeroed on transmission and ignored on reception.
Fenner Expires February 2000 [Page 2]
Internet Draft draft-ietf-idmr-membership-reports-04.txtAugust 25, 1999
2.2. DWR Type: 8 bits
The following DWR types are defined:
|
Type | Name
-----+-------------------------------------
0x00 | Domain-Wide Query
0x01 | Domain-Wide Membership Report
0x02 | Domain-Wide Leave
0x03 | Non-authoritative Domain-Wide Leave
2.3. Type-specific header
The only type-specific header defined is for the Domain-Wide Query;
its header contains:
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Response Time | Query Interval| Robustness |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| MBZ | Priority |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
2.3.1. Response Time
The time, in units of 10ms, allowed for responses to this query.
Varying this field allows tuning the burstiness of DWR traffic at
the cost of higher latencies.
2.3.2. Query Interval
The time, in units of 10 seconds, between periodic Query messages
from this Querier.
2.3.3. Robustness
The Robustness variable, described later. Along with the Query
Interval, conveying this data in the Query allows exact calculation
of Querier timeouts and allows interior routers to calculate the
group membership lifetime.
2.3.4. Priority
The configured priority of this border router for Querier Election
purposes. If no value is configured, the default value is 128.
Fenner Expires February 2000 [Page 3]
Internet Draft draft-ietf-idmr-membership-reports-04.txtAugust 25, 1999
Lower values are better, i.e. more likely to be selected as the
querier.
2.3.5. MBZ
This field must be zeroed on transmission and ignored on reception.
There is no type-specific header for Report and Leave messages; the data
field starts immediately after the checksum.
2.4. Data
The remainder of the packet consists of a series of groups and
options. Each field in the rest of the packet is either a group
address:
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Group Address |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
or an option header:
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| option number | MBZ |S|I| Option Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Option Data...
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
The two forms may be told apart because option numbers are assigned
in the range [0,223], the first byte of an IPv4 group address is in
the range [224,239], and the first byte of an IPv6 group address is
255.
2.4.1. Data Description
2.4.1.1. Group Address
The group address being reported or queried.
2.4.1.2. Option Number
The number of the option.
Fenner Expires February 2000 [Page 4]
Internet Draft draft-ietf-idmr-membership-reports-04.txtAugust 25, 1999
2.4.1.3. MBZ
Must be zeroed on transmission and ignored on reception.
2.4.1.4. I
Ignore this packet or group for group membership purposes if
the option is not recognized.
2.4.1.5. S
Ignore this packet or group for report suppression purposes
(on Reports or Leaves) or for reply purposes (on Queries) if
the option is not recognized.
2.4.1.6. Option Length
The number of words, excluding the initial word, of option
data following the option header.
2.4.1.7. Option Data
Option Length words of data.
2.4.2. Option Processing
Options which precede any group addresses are called Global
Options. Options which follow a group address are associated
with that group address and are called Group Options. There
are two bits describing how to handle unsupported options.
2.4.2.1. The S bit
The S bit is used when processing Queries, Reports and Leaves
by interior routers. Groups with options attached should be
ignored as if they were not present if there are unrecognized
Group Options with the S bit set. Packets with Global Options
should be ignored as if they were not received if there are
unrecognized Global Options with the S bit set.
2.4.2.2. The I bit
The I bit is used when processing Reports and Leaves by border
routers. Groups with options attached should be ignored as if
they were not present if there are unrecognized Group Options
with the I bit set. Packets with Global Options should be
ignored as if they were not received if there are unrecognized
Global Options with the I bit set.
Fenner Expires February 2000 [Page 5]
Internet Draft draft-ietf-idmr-membership-reports-04.txtAugust 25, 1999
2.4.3. Defined Options
2.4.3.1. Padding (option #0)
This option need not be handled specially by option
parsers; it may be left as an unrecognized option. The S
and I bits are both 0, so failing to recognize this
option does not affect the processing of the packet. The
length field may be 0, meaning there are 0 additional
words of data associated with the option. A non-zero
length field may be used with the padding option if
additional padding is required.
Routers MUST interpret the S and I bits of Padding
options as though the option is not supported.
2.4.3.2. Group masks accepted/present (option #1)
This option may be used as a global option on a Query, to
indicate that all border routers understand the group
mask option in Report and Leave messages. This option
MUST only be sent when the Querier knows that all border
routers support it; in general this can only be by manual
configuration. In this use, the I and S bits are off.
When the most recent Query message contained the Group
masks accepted global option, a router may attach a group
masks present option to any group in its Report or Leave
messages. This option contains the following data:
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| 1 | MBZ |0|0| 1 for IPv4, 4 for IPv6 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Mask to go with group |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
The data portion is a bitwise mask, to be applied to the
group to create a group range.
This usage also has the S and I bits turned off.
2.4.3.3. Unicast-reply (option #2)
This option has the S and I bits turned off. If a query
is received with this option, the reply should be
unicasted to the source of the query. If the option
Fenner Expires February 2000 [Page 6]
Internet Draft draft-ietf-idmr-membership-reports-04.txtAugust 25, 1999
carries a unicast address, it is the address to be
unicasted to.
If a unicast address is specified in the option, the
option MUST be ignored if the packet is not authenticated
using IPSEC[RFC2401] as described later in this document.
3. Message Descriptions
3.1. Domain-Wide Query
A Domain-Wide Query is sent periodically by one of the domain's
border routers. The default period is 5 minutes, and MUST be
configurable. Domain-Wide Query messages are sent to the well-
known Domain-Wide Query multicast group (224.0.255.254). This
group is in the range of addresses that are scoped to a single
domain, 224.0.255.0 through 224.0.255.255.
A Domain-Wide Query with no additional data is a request for
knowledge of all multicast group memberships in the domain. The
Domain-Wide Query may be restricted by including groups or options
in the data portion of the packet. If group addresses or DWR
options are specified in the packet, the Query is restricted to
those groups or other options as specified in the packet.
3.2. Domain-Wide Report
A Domain-Wide Report is sent by a router in response to a Domain-
Wide Query message, or in response to the appearance of a new group
member in the domain. The latter messages are called "Unsolicited"
Domain-Wide Reports.
A Domain-Wide Report message includes a list of group memberships
and other options in the additional data portion of the packet.
3.3. Domain-Wide Leave
A Domain-Wide Leave is sent by a router when it knows that there
are no more members in the domain of a group or groups. The group
or groups listed in the additional data portion of the packet are
considered by the border routers to have no more members.
3.4. Non-Authoritative Domain-Wide Leave
A Non-Authoritative Domain-Wide Leave is sent by a router when it
knows of no more members of the group but cannot be sure there are
no more members in the domain. Reception of a Domain-Wide Leave
causes the elected border router to send a Domain-Wide Query
Fenner Expires February 2000 [Page 7]
Internet Draft draft-ietf-idmr-membership-reports-04.txtAugust 25, 1999
message for the group(s) mentioned in the Non-Authoritative Domain-
Wide Leave message.
4. Interior Router Behavior
4.1. General Behavior
This section describes the general behavior of interior routers, or
of proxies running inside domains. Some of these behaviors may be
optimized when running multicast routing protocols with more
centralized knowledge of group memberships inside the domain; these
optimizations will be described later.
If a router has not yet been upgraded to perform domain-wide
reports, a proxy may be placed on each of its connected networks.
This proxy must participate in the network's group membership
protocol (e.g. IGMPv2[RFC2236]). For example, it may perform only
the duties of a Non-Querier router in IGMPv2, which allow it to
passively learn all of the group members on a network. The proxy
can then respond to Domain-Wide Query messages just as the interior
router would.
4.1.1. Reception of Queries
All routers in the domain join the Domain-Wide Query well-known
multicast group. Upon reception of a Domain-Wide Query message, a
router sets a timer to a value randomly chosen from the range (0,
Response time] as specified in the packet. The Data section of the
Query should be saved to be used when the timer expires.
4.1.2. Transmission of Reports
Upon the expiration of a Domain-Wide Query timer, a router
assembles a packet containing the list of group memberships known
to this router via IGMP or other mechanism, excluding those that
were suppressed by previous reports, and sends this message to the
Domain-Wide Report well-known multicast group (224.0.255.253). If
the Domain-Wide Query contained a list of groups or options, the
Report should be restricted to those groups in the list in the
Query message.
4.1.3. Reception of Reports
All routers in the domain join the Domain-Wide Report well-known
multicast group in order to perform suppression, as follows. Upon
reception of a Domain-Wide Report message, a router processes the
list of groups in the message. If the packet contains unrecognized
global options, the packet should be dropped and not processed if
Fenner Expires February 2000 [Page 8]
Internet Draft draft-ietf-idmr-membership-reports-04.txtAugust 25, 1999
any of the unrecognized options have their S bit set. For each
group, if the group has unrecognized options, the group should be
skipped if any of the unrecognized options have their S bit set.
Otherwise, if the router's Domain-Wide Query timer is running, it
SHOULD mark the group as having been suppressed and SHOULD NOT
report it when the Domain-Wide Query timer expires.
Routers MAY record the existence of this group membership in the
domain to be used for future suppression. This record MUST time
out after [Query Interval] * [Robustness Variable], and MUST be
canceled by reception of a Domain-Wide Leave or Non-Authoritative
Domain-Wide Leave message mentioning this group.
4.1.4. Reception of Leaves
Upon the reception of a Domain-Wide Leave, a router should process
the list of groups in the message. For each group, if the group
has unrecognized options, it should be skipped if any of the
unrecognized options have their S bit set. Otherwise, the router
should remove its record of the existence of another group
membership in the domain.
4.1.5. Transmission of Leaves
A router sends a Non-Authoritative Leave when it no longer knows of
any members of the group. This message MAY be suppressed if this
router's last attempt to report this group was suppressed by
reception of a Report.
4.2. Optimizations
In explicit group membership protocols like PIM, CBT and MOSPF,
there is a set of routers smaller than "all routers in the domain"
which knows of group memberships in the domain. This section
describes the optimizations possible when running a protocol like
this.
In PIM and CBT, only RP's and Cores must participate. MOSPF is a
special case, in that all routers in the MOSPF domain know of all
group memberships in the domain. In this case, the DWR protocol
may degenerate to a virtual protocol run entirely inside the
elected border router.
4.2.1. Reception of a Query Message
Only participating interior routers must join the Domain-Wide Query
well-known multicast group.
Fenner Expires February 2000 [Page 9]
Internet Draft draft-ietf-idmr-membership-reports-04.txtAugust 25, 1999
4.2.2. Transmission of a Report Message
Report messages contain all memberships that this router knows
about (e.g. in MOSPF, it's all memberships in the domain; in PIM,
it's all groups that for which this router is the RP).
4.2.3. Reception of a Report Message
If there is no overlap of the groups being reported by each
participant, the interior routers need not join the Domain-Wide
Report well-known multicast group so will not receive Report
messages. E.g. if R1 and R2 each handle one half of the multicast
group address space, there is no need for either of them to join
the Domain-Wide Report group.
4.2.4. Reception of a Leave Message
As with Reports, if there is no overlap, the interior routers need
not join the DWR group so will not receive these messages.
4.2.5. Transmission of a Leave Message
If it is possible to know when the last member in the domain goes
away, routers SHOULD send authoritative Domain-Wide Leave messages,
instead of Non-Authoritative Domain-Wide Leave messages.
5. Unsolicited messages
When a new group member appears in the domain, a Report message
SHOULD be transmitted (called an Unsolicited Report). Interior
routers MAY track the presence of group members inside the domain;
a router which is doing this SHOULD suppress its unsolicited Report
if it knows of another group member inside the domain.
6. Border Router Behavior
6.1. Querier Election
All border routers should join the Domain-Wide Queries well-known
multicast group, in order to perform Querier Election. All routers
start up thinking they are the elected Querier. If a router hears
a DWQ which has a lower ("better") priority, or an equal priority
and a lower IP address, it elects that router as Querier. If a
router has not heard a DWQ from the elected Querier in [Querier's
Query Interval] * [Querier's Robustness Variable] + [Querier's
Response Interval], it assumes the role of Querier. It is
recommended to have an IPSEC[RFC2401] relationship for the DWQ
multicast group among the domain border routers so that Querier
Fenner Expires February 2000 [Page 10]
Internet Draft draft-ietf-idmr-membership-reports-04.txtAugust 25, 1999
Election can not be fouled by a forged packet.
6.2. Send Periodic Queries
The elected border router sends periodic Queries once every [Query
Interval]. These Queries include the router's Query Interval and
Robustness Variable. The Response Interval should be set to
[Normal Response Interval].
6.3. Reception of Non-Authoritative Leave
Upon reception of a Non-Authoritative Leave, the elected Querier
sets a group membership timeout timer to [Robustness Variable] *
[Fast Response Interval] + [Round Trip Delay], and sends a group-
specific Query, listing all groups in the Non-Authoritative Leave
message. The Response Interval should be set to [Fast Response
Interval]. Until a response is heard for each listed group, the
Query should be retransmitted once every [Fast Response Interval]
for a total of [Robustness Variable] transmissions. The Querier
MUST wait an additional [Round Trip Delay] after the final [Fast
Response Interval] for reports before assuming that there are no
members present in the domain.
6.4. Reception of Group-Specific Queries
Upon reception of a Group-Specific Query, non-Querier routers MUST
set a group membership timeout timer to [Querier's Robustness
Variable] * [Querier's Response Interval] + [Round Trip Delay]. If
this timeout occurs without receiving a Report for the listed
groups, the group membership record is removed. The Querier's
Query Interval and Querier's Response Interval are the values
carried in the Query packet.
6.5. Reception of Reports
Upon reception of a Domain-Wide Report message, all border routers
set a group membership timer for each group mentioned in the
Report. This timer's value is set to [Querier's Query Interval] *
[Querier's Robustness Variable] + [Querier's Response Interval] *
2. The Querier's Query Interval, Querier's Response Interval and
Querier's Robustness Variable are remembered from the last General
Query received from the Querier. This timer is refreshed by
reception of further messages.
6.6. Request Unicast Replies
If a Border Router wishes to reduce the amount of DWR multicast
traffic in a domain, it may add the "Reply via Unicast" option to
Fenner Expires February 2000 [Page 11]
Internet Draft draft-ietf-idmr-membership-reports-04.txtAugust 25, 1999
its DWQ's. This has the advantage of reducing the amount of state
kept inside the domain for forwarding packets destined to the DWR-
reply multicast group, at the cost of eliminating suppression. The
border router must multicast DWR's summarizing the replies it got
via unicast to the DWR-reply multicast group at the end of the
response interval, in order to share membership information with
all routers. This summary MUST contain a global padding option
with its S bit set to 1, to prevent suppression of real reports.
7. Use of IPSEC
The use of IPSEC AH is recommended on Domain-Wide Query packets for
two reasons:
1. Prevention of forgery of Queries which can foil Querier election.
This use requires all border routers to use IPSEC.
2. In order to allow the use of the Unicast Replies option. This use
requires all border and interior routers to use IPSEC.
In either configuration, security associations are configured as
described in section 4.7 of [RFC2401]. Briefly, a single Security
Association is manually configured in all required devices with a
static key. The number of devices (e.g. domain border routers)
should be small enough for this to not be an undue burden. When a
secure multicast key distribution protocol exists in the IPSEC
framework, this protocol may be used instead of manual
configuration.
8. List of timers and tunable values
8.1. Robustness Variable
The Robustness Variable allows tuning for the expected packet loss
in a domain. If transmission inside a domain is expected to be
lossy, the Robustness Variable may be increased, at the cost of
increased latency in determining failures. The DWR protocol is
robust to ([Robustness Variable] - 1) packet losses. The
Robustness Variable MUST NOT be zero, and SHOULD NOT be one.
Default value: 2
8.2. Query Interval
The Query Interval is the interval between General Queries sent by
the domain-wide Querier. Default value: 5 minutes
Fenner Expires February 2000 [Page 12]
Internet Draft draft-ietf-idmr-membership-reports-04.txtAugust 25, 1999
8.3. Normal Response Interval
The Normal Response Interval is the Response Time inserted into the
periodic General Queries. Default: 60 seconds
By varying the [Normal Response Interval], an administrator may
tune the burstiness of DWR messages in the domain; larger values
make the traffic less bursty, as host responses are spread out over
a larger interval. The number of seconds represented by the
[Normal Response Interval] must be less than the [Query Interval].
8.4. Fast Response Interval
The Fast Response Interval is the Response Time inserted into
Group-Specific Queries in response to Non-Authoritative Leave
messages, and is also the time between the Group-Specific Query
messages. Default: 1 second
This value may be tuned to modify the "leave latency" of the
domain. A reduced value results in reduced time to detect the loss
of the last member of a group.
8.5. Round Trip Delay
The Round Trip Delay is the worst-case round trip time through the
domain. This is used to ensure that group membership is not lost
due to a small Fast Response Interval and a large round trip delay
through the domain. This value must be manually configured.
Default: 100ms.
IGMPv2 ignores end-to-end message delay, assuming that this delay
is negligible. Although the DWR protocol is very similar to
IGMPv2, the reality is that end-to-end round trip delays can be
very different on LANs vs. in a routing domain. On a LAN, the
round trip delay is generally dwarfed by the IGMPv2 response
interval. Within a domain, the opposite may be true, so it's
important for the protocol to acknowledge that.
9. Message destinations
This information is provided elsewhere in the document, but is
summarized here for convenience.
Fenner Expires February 2000 [Page 13]
Internet Draft draft-ietf-idmr-membership-reports-04.txtAugust 25, 1999
Message Type Destination Group
------------ -----------------
General Query Domain-wide Query group (224.0.255.254)
Group-specific Query Domain-wide Query group (224.0.255.254)
Report Domain-wide Report group (224.0.255.253)
Leave Domain-wide Report group (224.0.255.253)
Non-Authoritative Leave Domain-wide Report group (224.0.255.253)
10. Acknowledgments
The ideas of unicasting DWR replies and of electing a "designated
reporter" came from a discussion on the IDMR mailing list with
Jeffrey Zhang and Yunzhou Li of Bay Networks.
11. Security Considerations
11.1. Forged Packets
11.1.1. Forged Packets from Outside the Domain
Since all packets in this memo are sent to domain-scoped multicast
groups, a scope boundary around the domain which drops domain-
scoped packets from entering the domain from outside protects
against forged packets from outside the domain.
11.1.2. Forged Packets from Inside the Domain
We consider the effects of a forged packet of each type.
11.1.2.1. Forged Query
A forged Query will cause interior routers to send Reports for some
or all of their group memberships, increasing control traffic
within the domain but not affecting the memberships learned by the
border routers.
Border routers perform Querier Elections on Query messages. A
forged General Query could cause the forger to be elected Querier,
giving him some control over the group membership reporting in the
domain. For this reason, IPSEC SHOULD be used between the domain
border routers to ensure that Querier election only occurs between
known border routers.
11.1.2.2. Forged Report
A forged Report will cause interior routers to suppress their own
Report messages for the group being reported. However, the forged
Fenner Expires February 2000 [Page 14]
Internet Draft draft-ietf-idmr-membership-reports-04.txtAugust 25, 1999
message will be accepted by the border routers, so this
accomplishes nothing.
If interior routers keep state for all Reports heard, forged
Reports can cause increased memory consumption on interior routers.
However, keeping state for all Reports is optional, so interior
routers that are running low on memory due to the amount of DWR-
related state may simply release all of that state.
Border routers must keep state for all Reports heard, so they are
vulnerable to increased memory consumption. If this is a worry,
once again IPSEC relationships may be created between all of the
interior routers and the border routers. This is a much larger
burden on administrators, however, so is only recommended if this
is expected to be a problem.
11.1.2.3. Forged Leave
A forged Leave (Authoritative or Non-Authoritative) will cause
interior routers to forget their state (if any) regarding the
suppression status of a group. This may cause increased control
message traffic during the next Query interval.
A forged Non-Authoritative leave will cause the border routers to
issue group-specific Query messages to learn if there are remaining
group members. This causes increased control message traffic.
A forged Authoritative Leave will cause a black hole until the next
Query occurs; the border routers will accept the Leave and not
perform any Queries. Border routers SHOULD be configurable to
ignore all Authoritative Leaves and interior routers SHOULD be
configurable to only send Non-Authoritative Leaves, in order to be
able to prevent this attack.
11.2. Unicast Responses
Sending a DWQ requesting a unicast response can cause many DWR's to
be unicasted to the sender. In order to prevent the use of this
option as a "packet amplifier", any DWQ message using this option
SHOULD be authenticated using IPSEC as described in this document.
12. References
RFC2119 Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", RFC 2119/BCP 14, Harvard University,
March 1997.
Fenner Expires February 2000 [Page 15]
Internet Draft draft-ietf-idmr-membership-reports-04.txtAugust 25, 1999
Estr98 Estrin, D., D. Meyer, D. Thaler, ``Border Gateway
Multicast Protocol (BGMP): Protocol Specification'', Work
In Progress, March 1998.
RFC2236 Fenner, W. ``Internet Group Management Protocol, Version
2'', RFC2236, Xerox PARC, November 1997.
RFC2401 Kent, S. and R. Atkinson, ``Security Architecture for the
Internet Protocol'', RFC 2401, November 1998.
Thya95 Thyagarajan, A. and S. Deering, ``Hierarchical Distance-
Vector Multicast Routing'', Proceedings of ACM Sigcomm,
September 1995.
13. Author's Address
William C. Fenner
AT&T Labs - Research
75 Willow Road
Menlo Park, CA 94025
Phone: +1 650 330 7893
Email: fenner@research.att.com
Fenner Expires February 2000 [Page 16]
| PAFTECH AB 2003-2026 | 2026-04-23 15:58:52 |