One document matched: draft-ietf-trill-rbridge-vlan-mapping-02.txt

Differences from draft-ietf-trill-rbridge-vlan-mapping-01.txt


TRILL Working Group                                        Radia Perlman
INTERNET-DRAFT                                                Intel Labs
Intended status: Proposed Standard                           Dinesh Dutt
                                                           Cisco Systems
                                                     Donald Eastlake 3rd
                                                        Stellar Switches
Expires: September 6, 2010                                 March 7, 2010



                         RBridges: VLAN Mapping

             <draft-ietf-trill-rbridge-vlan-mapping-02.txt>


Abstract

   Some bridge products provide a feature known as "VLAN mapping" or
   "VLAN ID translation", in which a bridge translates a data frame's
   VLAN ID from one VLAN to another when it forwards a frame from one
   port to another. This feature facilitates scenarios such as combining
   two bridged LANs with overlapping VLAN IDs into one bridged LAN
   without merging two communities just because they have been given the
   same VLAN ID in the original two clouds. This document describes how
   RBridges can achieve the same functionality.


Status of This Document

   This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Distribution of this document is unlimited. Comments should be sent
   to the TRILL working group mailing list.

   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
   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."

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html





R. Perlman, et al.                                              [Page 1]

INTERNET-DRAFT                                    RBridges: VLAN Mapping


Table of Contents

      Abstract...................................................1
      Status of This Document....................................1

      1. Introduction............................................3
      1.1 Terminology............................................4

      2. Internal RBridges and VLAN Mapping......................5
      3. Configuration of Cut Set VLAN Mapping RBridges..........5
      4. Advertisement of VLAN Mappings..........................6
      5. Translation of VLAN IDs by Cut Set RBridges.............6
      6. Reporting Attached VLANs by Cut Set RBridges in LSPs....7
      7. Advertising of Multicast Groups by Cut Set RBridges.....7
      8. Endnode Advertisements by cut set RBridges..............7

      9. IANA Considerations.....................................9
      10. Security Considerations................................9

      11. Normative References..................................10
      12. Informative References................................10

      Appendix Z: Change Summary................................11
      Changes from -00 to -01...................................11
      Changes from -01 to -02...................................11

      Authors' Addresses........................................12
      Copyright, Disclaimer, and Additional IPR Provisions......13
























R. Perlman, et al.                                              [Page 2]

INTERNET-DRAFT                                    RBridges: VLAN Mapping


1. Introduction

   Bridges perform a feature known as "VLAN mapping" or "VLAN ID
   translation", in which two or more layer 2 clouds are connected
   together using a set of bridges, but in which the VLAN IDs are not
   consistent in the different clouds.

   The set of bridges interconnecting the clouds are known as the "cut
   set", meaning that if that set of bridges is removed, the clouds are
   separated.

   Bridges in the cut set are configured to translate some set of VLAN
   IDs in one cloud to different VLAN IDs when forwarding from one cloud
   to the other.

   One reason to do this is to intentionally not merge VLAN-A endnodes
   in one layer 2 cloud with the community of VLAN-A endnodes in the
   other cloud.

   Another reason to do this is to intentionally merge two communities,
   marked with different VLAN IDs in the different clouds.

   This feature is accomplished solely by configuring bridges in the cut
   set.

   This document explains how to accomplish the same functionality with
   RBridges.  In this document we will assume there are two clouds
   "East" and "West", and RBridges RB1, RB2, and RB3 that interconnect
   the two clouds.

          .   .   .         +-----+            .   .   .
        .   .   . + - - - - + RB1 + - - - - +    .   .   .
      .   W   .             +-----+            .   . E .
        . e .   .                                .   a   .
      .   s   .             +-----+                . s .   .
        . t .   .+ - - - - -+ RB2 + - - - - - - +.   t   .
      .   .   .            -+-+---+                .   .   .
        . C .   .        /    |      _ _ _ _ _ _+.   C   .   .
          l   .  + - - -      |    /               . l .   .
        . o .   .           +-+---+              .   o   .   .
          u   .   .+ - - - -+ RB3 + - - - - - - - +. u .   .
        . d .   .           +-----+                  d   .   .
      .   .   .   .                                .   .   .

   We will refer to RBridges other than the cut set of RBridges as
   "internal RBridges".

   General familiarity with the base TRILL protocol [RFCtrill] is
   assumed in this document.



R. Perlman, et al.                                              [Page 3]

INTERNET-DRAFT                                    RBridges: VLAN Mapping


1.1 Terminology

   The same terminology and acronyms are used in this document as in
   [RFCtrill].

   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].












































R. Perlman, et al.                                              [Page 4]

INTERNET-DRAFT                                    RBridges: VLAN Mapping


2. Internal RBridges and VLAN Mapping

   Internal RBridges will not be aware that VLAN mapping is going on.
   They will behave exactly as they would without VLAN mapping.  The
   only evidence they will have of VLAN mapping is the existence of an
   optional TLV that a cut set RBridge, RB1, MAY include in its LSP
   [layer2], listing the VLAN mappings that RB1 is configured to be
   performing.

   Internal RBridges will ignore this TLV field. It is only there for
   detection of misconfiguration.



3. Configuration of Cut Set VLAN Mapping RBridges

   If VLAN A in cloud "East" is to be translated into VLAN B in cloud
   "West", a cut set RBridge RB1 MUST be configured, for every port, as
   to whether that port is in East or West, and configured with VLAN
   mappings, such as:

      "East/VLAN A <----> West/VLAN B"

   That mapping means that when RB1 forwards a frame on a port
   configured to be in East to a port configured to be in West, with the
   VLAN tag of A, it replaces the VLAN tag "A" with "B" in the inner
   encapsulated frame.

   Note that mappings are always symmetric, meaning that if RB1 is
   translating tag "VLAN A" to tag "VLAN B" when forwarding from East to
   West, it will translate tag "VLAN B" to tag "VLAN A" when forwarding
   from West to East.

   The complete rules for a cut set RBridge forwarding a frame from port
   X in VLAN A to port Y are as follows:

   1. If the ports connect to the same cloud, the frame is forwarded
      without VLAN translation.

   2. If the ports connect to different clouds then

      2.a If there is a translation in effect for VLAN A frames arriving
          from the cloud to which port X connects to the cloud to which
          port Y connects, the VLAN ID is changed according to the
          translation.

      2.b If there is no translation in effect for VLAN A frames
          arriving from the cloud to which port X connects to the cloud
          to which port Y connects, the frame is forwarded without
          translating the VLAN.


R. Perlman, et al.                                              [Page 5]

INTERNET-DRAFT                                    RBridges: VLAN Mapping


   A cut set RBridge MAY be configured with a translation from a valid
   VLAN A to VLAN ID zero, which means to drop frames in VLAN A at the
   cut set RBridge, but this may result in partitioning VLAN A as
   follows: In the diagram below, if the link between RBwest1 and
   RBwest2 fails, then the shortest path from RBwest1 to RBwest2 may be
   through RBcut1, RBeast1, and RBcut2. RBcut1 and RBcut2 might be
   configured to map VLAN A to zero, dropping VLAN A frames, perhaps in
   an attempt to keep VLAN A frames confined to the West region. If so,
   the failure of the link between RBwest1 and RBwest2 partitions VLAN A
   in the West region since the RBridges will try to forward the frames
   via RBcut1-RBeast1-RBcut2 and they will be dropped at RBcut1 or
   RBcut2.

      ---+
         |
      +--+------+     +--------+          |
   ---+ RBwest1 +-----+ RBcut1 +-------+  |  +---
      +-+---+---+     +--------+       |  |  |
        |   |                        +-+--+--+-+
     ---+   |                        | RBeast1 +---
            |                        +-+--+--+-+
      +-----+---+     +--------+       |  |  |
   ---+ RBwest2 +-----+ RBcut2 +-------+  |  +---
      +--+------+     +--------+          |
         |
      ---+



4. Advertisement of VLAN Mappings

   To detect misconfiguration, a cut set RBridge RB1 MAY advertise its
   VLAN mappings in its LSP. This is done by assigning 16-bit IDs to
   each of the clouds by manual configuration. All cut set RBridges
   SHOULD be configured with the same IDs for the clouds.  So, in our
   example, if "East" is "1" and "West" is "2", and VLAN A in East is
   mapped to VLAN B in West, the TLV [layer2] would report a set of
   mappings, including:

      {(1:A,2:B)}



5. Translation of VLAN IDs by Cut Set RBridges

   If RB1 is configured to believe port X is in "East" and port Y is in
   "West", and RB1 is configured such that "East/VLAN A <----> West/VLAN
   B", then when RB1 forwards data frames from port X to port Y, if the
   received frame from port X has Inner.VLAN (inner header VLAN ID) VLAN
   A , then RB1 changes the VLAN tag from VLAN A to VLAN B as it


R. Perlman, et al.                                              [Page 6]

INTERNET-DRAFT                                    RBridges: VLAN Mapping


   forwards onto port Y.

   Note: This is true whether RB1 is the appointed forwarder on port X
   for VLAN A and the frame arrives unencapsulated, or whether the frame
   has arrived already encapsulated as a VLAN A frame.

   Likewise, RB1 performs the same VLAN translation whether the frame is
   known unicast or multi-destination.



6. Reporting Attached VLANs by Cut Set RBridges in LSPs

   If RB1 is configured to translate VLAN A in east to VLAN B in west,
   then RB1 reports, in its LSP, that it is connected to both VLAN A and
   VLAN B, even if RB1 is not appointed forwarder for either or both
   VLAN A or VLAN B.

   The reason RB1 must claim to be attached to VLAN A and VLAN B is so
   that multi-destination data frames for VLAN A originating in West
   will not get filtered before reaching RB1, and multi-destination data
   frames for VLAN B originating in East will also not get prematurely
   filtered.



7. Advertising of Multicast Groups by Cut Set RBridges

   If RB1 is configured to translate VLAN A in East to VLAN B in West,
   then RB1 MUST take steps as described below in order to ensure that a
   multicast packet for group G in VLAN A will not be filtered inside
   the West cloud, if there are receivers for (VLAN A, group G) in East
   and vice versa. If the cut set RBridges do nothing, then a multicast
   for VLAN B, group G would be filtered inside the West cloud, since
   RBridges inside the East cloud will only be requesting receipt of
   VLAN A, group G.

   To solve this problem RB1 MUST report connectivity to an IPv4
   multicast router and an IPv6 multicast router for both VLANs A and B.



8. Endnode Advertisements by cut set RBridges

   TRILL allows RBridges to optionally advertise attached endnodes. This
   endnode advertisement uses the TRILL ESADI (End System Address
   Distribution Information) protocol.

   If cut set RBridge RB1 is translating VLAN A (in East) to VLAN B (in
   West), and RB1 is doing ESADI for its attached endnodes in VLAN A, it


R. Perlman, et al.                                              [Page 7]

INTERNET-DRAFT                                    RBridges: VLAN Mapping


   should transmit the ESADI advertisement inner tagged with VLAN A when
   forwarding onto ports labeled as "East", and transmit the same ESADI
   advertisement inner tagged with VLAN B when forwarding onto ports
   labeled as "West". An East VLAN-A ESADI generated by any RBridge in
   East will automatically get translated into a VLAN B ESADI when
   forwarding into West, because ESADIs are handled just like ordinary
   encapsulated data frames, the VLAN tag to which the ESADI belongs is
   the VLAN tag on the inner data frame, and that VLAN tag will be
   translated by (properly configured) cut set RBridges when forwarding
   between East and West.










































R. Perlman, et al.                                              [Page 8]

INTERNET-DRAFT                                    RBridges: VLAN Mapping


9. IANA Considerations

   This document requires no IANA actions. This section should be
   deleted by the RFC Editor before publication.



10. Security Considerations

   See [RFCtrill] for general RBridge Security Considerations.

   If cut set RBridges have misconfigured VLAN mappings, VLANs may be
   inadvertently partitioned or inadvertently merged and frames may be
   delivered in the wrong VLAN, which could violate security policies.
   However, misconfiguration of VLAN mapping will not cause loops.





































R. Perlman, et al.                                              [Page 9]

INTERNET-DRAFT                                    RBridges: VLAN Mapping


11. Normative References

   [layer2] Banerjee, A., et al., "Extensions to IS-IS for Layer-2
         Systems", draft-ietf-isis-layer2, work in progress.

   [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
         Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997

   [RFCtrill] R. Perlman, D. Eastlake, D. Dutt, S. Gai, and A. Ghanwani,
         "RBridges: Base Protocol Specification", draft-ietf-trill-
         rbridge-protocol-16.txt, work in progress.



12. Informative References

   None.



































R. Perlman, et al.                                             [Page 10]

INTERNET-DRAFT                                    RBridges: VLAN Mapping


Appendix Z: Change Summary

   RFC Editor: Please delete this section on publication.



Changes from -00 to -01

   1. Because RBridges can not tell what cloud other RBridges are in,
      drop the "optimized" option for advertising multicast listeners
      and require the advertisement of multicast router connectivity.

   2. Specify that the cloud connectivity must be specified for all cut
      set RBridges and that cloud IDs are manually configured and are 16
      bit.

   3. Expand rules for VLAN ID mapping/handling at a cut set RBridge so
      as to drop frames that are for a VLAN ID to which another VLAN ID
      is being mapped. (See Section 3.)

   4. Add mention of "VLAN ID translation", the 802.1 name for VLAN
      mapping.

   5. Minor editing changes.



Changes from -01 to -02

   1. Remove previous confused text about VLAN mapping (point 3 in
      changes from -00 to -01).

   2. Add text allowing mapping to zero to indicate frames should be
      dropped. Add text and diagram explaining that this can lead to
      VLAN partition.

   3. Add normative reference to draft-ietf-isis-layer2.

   4. Minor editing changes.













R. Perlman, et al.                                             [Page 11]

INTERNET-DRAFT                                    RBridges: VLAN Mapping


Authors' Addresses

   Radia Perlman
   Intel Labs
   2200 Mission College Blvd.
   Santa Clara, CA 95054-1549 USA

   Phone: +1-408-765-8080
   Email: Radia@alum.mit.edum


   Dinesh G. Dutt
   Cisco Systems
   170 Tasman Drive
   San Jose, CA 95134-1706 USA

   Phone: +1-408-527-0955
   Email: ddutt@cisco.com


   Donald Eastlake 3rd
   Stellar Switches, Inc.
   155 Beaver Street
   Milford, MA 01757 USA

   Tel:   +1-508-333-2270
   Email: d3e3e3@gmail.com

























R. Perlman, et al.                                             [Page 12]

INTERNET-DRAFT                                    RBridges: VLAN Mapping


Copyright, Disclaimer, and Additional IPR Provisions

   Copyright (c) 2010 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
   (http://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 Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the BSD License.  The definitive version of an IETF
   Document is that published by, or under the auspices of, the IETF.
   Versions of IETF Documents that are published by third parties,
   including those that are translated into other languages, should not
   be considered to be definitive versions of IETF Documents. The
   definitive version of these Legal Provisions is that published by, or
   under the auspices of, the IETF. Versions of these Legal Provisions
   that are published by third parties, including those that are
   translated into other languages, should not be considered to be
   definitive versions of these Legal Provisions.  For the avoidance of
   doubt, each Contributor to the IETF Standards Process licenses each
   Contribution that he or she makes as part of the IETF Standards
   Process to the IETF Trust pursuant to the provisions of RFC 5378. No
   language to the contrary, or terms, conditions or rights that differ
   from or are inconsistent with the rights and licenses granted under
   RFC 5378, shall have any effect and shall be null and void, whether
   published or posted by such Contributor, or included with or in such
   Contribution.





















R. Perlman, et al.                                             [Page 13]


PAFTECH AB 2003-20262026-04-23 11:31:01