RFC 8666: OSPFv3 Extensions for Segment Routing
- P. Psenak, Ed.,
- S. Previdi, Ed.
Abstract
Segment Routing (SR) allows a flexible definition of end-to-end paths within IGP topologies by encoding paths as sequences of topological subpaths called "segments". These segments are advertised by the link-state routing protocols (IS-IS and OSPF).¶
This document describes the OSPFv3 extensions required for Segment Routing with the MPLS data plane.¶
Status of This Memo
This is an Internet Standards Track document.¶
This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has received public review and has been approved for publication by the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 7841.¶
Information about the current status of this document, any
errata, and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
https://
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2019 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://
1. Introduction
Segment Routing (SR) allows a flexible definition of end-to-end paths within IGP topologies by encoding paths as sequences of topological subpaths called "segments". These segments are advertised by the link-state routing protocols (IS-IS and OSPF). Prefix segments represent an ECMP-aware shortest path to a prefix (or a node) as per the state of the IGP topology. Adjacency segments represent a hop over a specific adjacency between two nodes in the IGP. A prefix segment is typically a multi-hop path while an adjacency segment, in most cases, is a one-hop path. SR's control plane can be applied to both IPv6 and MPLS data planes, and it does not require any additional signaling (other than IGP extensions). The IPv6 data plane is out of the scope of this specification; the OSPFv3 extension for SR with the IPv6 data plane will be specified in a separate document. When used in MPLS networks, SR paths do not require any LDP or RSVP-TE signaling. However, SR can interoperate in the presence of Label Switched Paths (LSPs) established with RSVP or LDP.¶
This document describes the OSPFv3 extensions required for Segment Routing with the MPLS data plane.¶
2. Terminology
This section lists some of the terminology used in this document:¶
- ABR:
- Area Border Router¶
- Adj-SID:
- Adjacency Segment Identifier¶
- AS:
- Autonomous System¶
- ASBR:
- Autonomous System Boundary Router¶
- DR:
- Designated Router¶
- IS-IS:
- Intermediate System to Intermediate System¶
- LDP:
- Label Distribution Protocol¶
- LSP:
- Label Switched Path¶
- MPLS:
- Multiprotocol Label Switching¶
- OSPF:
- Open Shortest Path First¶
- SPF:
- Shortest Path First¶
- RSVP:
- Resource Reservation Protocol¶
- SID:
- Segment Identifier¶
- SR:
- Segment Routing¶
- SRGB:
- Segment Routing Global Block¶
- SRLB:
- Segment Routing Local Block¶
- SRMS:
- Segment Routing Mapping Server¶
- TLV:
- Type Length Value¶
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.¶
3. Segment Routing Identifiers
Segment Routing defines various types of Segment Identifiers (SIDs): Prefix-SID, Adjacency SID, and LAN Adjacency SID.¶
3.1. SID/Label Sub-TLV
The SID/Label sub-TLV appears in multiple TLVs or sub-TLVs defined later in this document. It is used to advertise the SID or label associated with a prefix or adjacency. The SID/Label sub-TLV has the following format:¶
where:¶
4. Segment Routing Capabilities
Segment Routing requires some additional router capabilities to be advertised to other routers in the area.¶
These SR capabilities are advertised in the OSPFv3 Router Information Opaque LSA (defined in [RFC7770]) and specified in [RFC8665].¶
5. OSPFv3 Extended Prefix Range TLV
In some cases, it is useful to advertise attributes for a range of prefixes in a single advertisement. The SR Mapping Server, which is described in [RFC8661], is an example of where SIDs for multiple prefixes can be advertised. To optimize such advertisement in case of multiple prefixes from a contiguous address range, OSPFv3 Extended Prefix Range TLV is defined.¶
The OSPFv3 Extended Prefix Range TLV is a top-level TLV of the following LSAs defined in [RFC8362]:¶
Multiple OSPFv3 Extended Prefix Range TLVs MAY be advertised in each LSA mentioned above. The OSPFv3 Extended Prefix Range TLV has the following format:¶
where:¶
The range represents the contiguous set of prefixes with the same prefix length as specified by the Prefix Length field. The set starts with the prefix that is specified by the Address Prefix field. The number of prefixes in the range is equal to the Range Size.¶
If the OSPFv3 Extended Prefix Range TLVs advertising the exact same range appears in multiple LSAs of the same type, originated by the same OSPFv3 router, the LSA with the numerically smallest Instance ID MUST be used, and subsequent instances of the OSPFv3 Extended Prefix Range TLVs MUST be ignored.¶
6. Prefix-SID Sub-TLV
The Prefix-SID sub-TLV is a sub-TLV of the following OSPFv3 TLVs as defined in [RFC8362] and in Section 5:¶
It MAY appear more than once in the parent TLV and has the following format:¶
where:¶
If an OSPFv3 router advertises multiple Prefix-SIDs for the same prefix, topology, and algorithm, all of them MUST be ignored.¶
When calculating the outgoing label for the prefix, the router MUST take into account, as described below, the E-, NP-, and M-Flags advertised by the next-hop router if that router advertised the SID for the prefix. This MUST be done regardless of whether the next-hop router contributes to the best path to the prefix.¶
The NP-Flag (No-PHP) MUST be set and the E-Flag MUST be clear for Prefix-SIDs allocated to prefixes that are propagated between areas by an ABR based on intra-area or inter-area reachability, unless the advertised prefix is directly attached to such ABR.¶
The NP-Flag (No-PHP) MUST be set and the E-Flag MUST be clear for Prefix-SIDs allocated to redistributed prefixes, unless the redistributed prefix is directly attached to the advertising ASBR.¶
If the NP-Flag is not set, then:¶
If the NP-Flag is set and the E-Flag is not set, then:¶
If both the NP-Flag and E-Flag are set, then:¶
When the M-Flag is set, the NP-Flag and the E-Flag MUST be ignored on reception.¶
As the Mapping Server does not specify the originator of a prefix advertisement, it is not possible to determine PHP behavior solely based on the Mapping Server Advertisement. However, PHP behavior SHOULD be done in the following cases:¶
When a Prefix-SID is advertised in the OSPFv3 Extended Prefix Range TLV, then the value advertised in the Prefix-SID sub-TLV is interpreted as a starting SID/Label value.¶
Example 1: If the following router addresses (loopback addresses) need to be mapped into the corresponding Prefix-SID indexes:¶
then the Address Prefix field in the OSPFv3 Extended Prefix Range TLV would be set to 2001:DB8::1, the Prefix Length would be set to 128, the Range Size would be set to 4, and the Index value in the Prefix-SID sub-TLV would be set to 1.¶
Example 2: If the following prefixes need to be mapped into the corresponding Prefix-SID indexes:¶
then the Prefix field in the OSPFv3 Extended Prefix Range TLV would be set to 2001:DB8:1::0, the Prefix Length would be set to 120, the Range Size would be set to 7, and the Index value in the Prefix-SID sub-TLV would be set to 51.¶
7. Adjacency Segment Identifier (Adj-SID)
An Adjacency Segment Identifier (Adj-SID) represents a router adjacency in Segment Routing.¶
7.1. Adj-SID Sub-TLV
The Adj-SID sub-TLV is an optional sub-TLV of the Router-Link TLV as defined in [RFC8362]. It MAY appear multiple times in the Router-Link TLV. The Adj-SID sub-TLV has the following format:¶
where:¶
An SR-capable router MAY allocate an Adj-SID for each of its adjacencies and set the B-Flag when the adjacency is eligible for protection by an FRR mechanism (IP or MPLS) as described in [RFC8402].¶
An SR-capable router MAY allocate more than one Adj-SID to an adjacency.¶
An SR-capable router MAY allocate the same Adj-SID to different adjacencies.¶
When the P-Flag is not set, the Adj-SID MAY be persistent. When the P-Flag is set, the Adj-SID MUST be persistent.¶
7.2. LAN Adj-SID Sub-TLV
The LAN Adjacency SID is an optional sub-TLV of the Router-Link TLV. It MAY appear multiple times in the Router-Link TLV. It is used to advertise a SID/Label for an adjacency to a non-DR router on a broadcast, Non-Broadcast Multi-Access (NBMA), or hybrid [RFC6845] network.¶
where:¶
8. Elements of Procedure
8.1. Intra-area Segment Routing in OSPFv3
An OSPFv3 router that supports Segment Routing MAY advertise Prefix- SIDs for any prefix to which it is advertising reachability (e.g., a loopback IP address as described in Section 6).¶
A Prefix-SID can also be advertised by SR Mapping Servers (as
described in [RFC8661]). A Mapping
Server advertises Prefix-SIDs for remote prefixes that exist in the
OSPFv3 routing domain. Multiple Mapping Servers can advertise Prefix-SIDs
for the same prefix, in which case the same Prefix-SID MUST be advertised by
all of them. The SR Mapping Server could use either area flooding scope or
autonomous system flooding scope when advertising Prefix-SIDs for
prefixes, based on the configuration of the SR Mapping Server.
Depending on the flooding scope used, the SR Mapping Server chooses the
OSPFv3 LSA type that will be used. If the area flooding scope is needed,
an E
When a Prefix-SID is advertised by the Mapping Server, which is indicated by the M-Flag in the Prefix-SID sub-TLV (Section 6), the route type as implied by the LSA type is ignored and the Prefix-SID is bound to the corresponding prefix independent of the route type.¶
Advertisement of the Prefix-SID by the Mapping Server using an
Inter-Area Prefix TLV, External-Prefix TLV, or Intra
An SR Mapping Server MUST use the OSPFv3 Extended Prefix Range TLVs when advertising SIDs for prefixes. Prefixes of different route types can be combined in a single OSPFv3 Extended Prefix Range TLV advertised by an SR Mapping Server.¶
Area-scoped OSPFv3 Extended Prefix Range TLVs are propagated between areas, similar to propagation of prefixes between areas. Same rules that are used for propagating prefixes between areas [RFC5340] are used for the propagation of the prefix ranges.¶
8.2. Inter-area Segment Routing in OSPFv3
In order to support SR in a multiarea environment, OSPFv3 MUST propagate Prefix-SID information between areas. The following procedure is used to propagate Prefix-SIDs between areas.¶
When an OSPFv3 ABR advertises an Inter
When an OSPFv3 ABR advertises an Inter
8.3. Segment Routing for External Prefixes
AS-External-LSAs are flooded domain wide. When an ASBR, which
supports SR, originates an E
When a Not-So-Stubby Area (NSSA) [RFC3101] ABR
translates an E-NSSA-LSA into an E
8.4. Advertisement of Adj-SID
The Adjacency Segment Routing Identifier (Adj-SID) is advertised using the Adj-SID sub-TLV as described in Section 7.¶
8.4.1. Advertisement of Adj-SID on Point-to-Point Links
An Adj-SID MAY be advertised for any adjacency on a point-to-point (P2P) link that is in neighbor state 2-Way or higher. If the adjacency on a P2P link transitions from the FULL state, then the Adj-SID for that adjacency MAY be removed from the area. If the adjacency transitions to a state lower than 2-Way, then the Adj-SID Advertisement MUST be withdrawn from the area.¶
8.4.2. Adjacency SID on Broadcast or NBMA Interfaces
Broadcast, NBMA, or hybrid [RFC6845] networks in OSPFv3 are represented by a star topology where the DR is the central point to which all other routers on the broadcast, NBMA, or hybrid network connect. As a result, routers on the broadcast, NBMA, or hybrid network advertise only their adjacency to the DR. Routers that do not act as DR do not form or advertise adjacencies with each other. They do, however, maintain 2-Way adjacency state with each other and are directly reachable.¶
When Segment Routing is used, each router on the broadcast, NBMA, or hybrid network MAY advertise the Adj-SID for its adjacency to the DR using the Adj-SID sub-TLV as described in Section 7.1.¶
SR-capable routers MAY also advertise a LAN Adjacency SID for other neighbors (e.g., Backup Designated Router (BDR), DR-OTHER, etc.) on the broadcast, NBMA, or hybrid network using the LAN Adj-SID sub-TLV as described in Section 7.2.¶
9. IANA Considerations
This specification updates two existing OSPFv3 registries.¶
9.1. "OSPFv3 Extended-LSA TLVs" Registry
The following values have been allocated:¶
9.2. "OSPFv3 Extended-LSA Sub-TLVs" Registry
The following values have been allocated:¶
10. TLV/Sub-TLV Error Handling
For any new TLVs/sub-TLVs defined in this document, if the length is invalid, the LSA in which it is advertised is considered malformed and MUST be ignored. Errors SHOULD be logged subject to rate limiting.¶
11. Security Considerations
With the OSPFv3 Segment Routing extensions defined herein, OSPFv3 will now program the MPLS data plane [RFC3031]. Previously, LDP [RFC5036] or another label distribution mechanism was required to advertise MPLS labels and program the MPLS data plane.¶
In general, the same types of attacks that can be carried out on the IP control plane can be carried out on the MPLS control plane resulting in traffic being misrouted in the respective data planes. However, the latter can be more difficult to detect and isolate.¶
Existing security extensions, as described in [RFC5340] and [RFC8362], apply to these Segment Routing extensions. While OSPFv3 is under a single administrative domain, there can be deployments where potential attackers have access to one or more networks in the OSPFv3 routing domain. In these deployments, stronger authentication mechanisms, such as those specified in [RFC4552] or [RFC7166], SHOULD be used.¶
Implementations MUST ensure that malformed TLVs and sub-TLVs defined in this document
are detected and that they do not provide a vulnerability for attackers to crash the OSPFv3
router or routing process. Reception of a malformed TLV or sub-TLV SHOULD be counted
and/or logged for further analysis. Logging of malformed TLVs and sub-TLVs SHOULD
be rate limited to prevent a Denial
12. References
12.1. Normative References
- [ALGOREG]
-
IANA, "Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP) Parameters", <https://
www >..iana .org /assignments /igp -parameters - [RFC2119]
-
Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC2119 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc2119 - [RFC3031]
-
Rosen, E., Viswanathan, A., and R. Callon, "Multiprotocol Label Switching Architecture", RFC 3031, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC3031 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc3031 - [RFC3101]
-
Murphy, P., "The OSPF Not-So-Stubby Area (NSSA) Option", RFC 3101, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC3101 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc3101 - [RFC5036]
-
Andersson, L., Ed., Minei, I., Ed., and B. Thomas, Ed., "LDP Specification", RFC 5036, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC5036 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc5036 - [RFC5340]
-
Coltun, R., Ferguson, D., Moy, J., and A. Lindem, "OSPF for IPv6", RFC 5340, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC5340 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc5340 - [RFC5462]
-
Andersson, L. and R. Asati, "Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Stack Entry: "EXP" Field Renamed to "Traffic Class" Field", RFC 5462, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC5462 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc5462 - [RFC6845]
-
Sheth, N., Wang, L., and J. Zhang, "OSPF Hybrid Broadcast and Point
-to , RFC 6845, DOI 10-Multipoint Interface Type" .17487 , , <https:///RFC6845 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc6845 - [RFC7770]
-
Lindem, A., Ed., Shen, N., Vasseur, JP., Aggarwal, R., and S. Shaffer, "Extensions to OSPF for Advertising Optional Router Capabilities", RFC 7770, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC7770 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc7770 - [RFC8174]
-
Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8174 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8174 - [RFC8362]
-
Lindem, A., Roy, A., Goethals, D., Reddy Vallem, V., and F. Baker, "OSPFv3 Link State Advertisement (LSA) Extensibility", RFC 8362, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8362 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8362 - [RFC8402]
-
Filsfils, C., Ed., Previdi, S., Ed., Ginsberg, L., Decraene, B., Litkowski, S., and R. Shakir, "Segment Routing Architecture", RFC 8402, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8402 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8402 - [RFC8661]
-
Bashandy, A., Ed., Filsfils, C., Ed., Previdi, S., Decraene, B., and S. Litkowski, "Segment Routing MPLS Interworking with LDP", RFC 8661, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8661 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8661 - [RFC8665]
-
Psenak, P., Ed., Previdi, S., Ed., Filfils, C., Gredler, H., Shakir, R., Henderickx, W., and J. Tantsura, "OSPF Extensions for Segment Routing", RFC 8665, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC8665 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc8665
12.2. Informative References
- [RFC4552]
-
Gupta, M. and N. Melam, "Authentication
/Confidentiality , RFC 4552, DOI 10for OSPFv3" .17487 , , <https:///RFC4552 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc4552 - [RFC7166]
-
Bhatia, M., Manral, V., and A. Lindem, "Supporting Authentication Trailer for OSPFv3", RFC 7166, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC7166 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc7166 - [RFC7855]
-
Previdi, S., Ed., Filsfils, C., Ed., Decraene, B., Litkowski, S., Horneffer, M., and R. Shakir, "Source Packet Routing in Networking (SPRING) Problem Statement and Requirements", RFC 7855, DOI 10
.17487 , , <https:///RFC7855 www >..rfc -editor .org /info /rfc7855
Contributors
The following people gave a substantial contribution to the content of this document and should be considered coauthors:¶
Thanks to Acee Lindem for his substantial contribution to the content of this document.¶
We would like to thank Anton Smirnov for his contribution as well.¶