--- 1/draft-ietf-mpls-self-ping-01.txt 2015-06-15 12:14:59.316998416 -0700 +++ 2/draft-ietf-mpls-self-ping-02.txt 2015-06-15 12:14:59.340998992 -0700 @@ -1,25 +1,25 @@ MPLS Working Group R. Torvi Internet-Draft R. Bonica Intended status: Standards Track Juniper Networks -Expires: December 7, 2015 I. Minei +Expires: December 17, 2015 I. Minei Google, Inc. M. Conn D. Pacella L. Tomotaki M. Wygant Verizon - June 5, 2015 + June 15, 2015 LSP Self-Ping - draft-ietf-mpls-self-ping-01 + draft-ietf-mpls-self-ping-02 Abstract When certain RSVP-TE optimizations are implemented, ingress LSRs can receive RSVP RESV messages before forwarding state has been installed on all downstream nodes. According to the RSVP-TE specification, the ingress LSR can forward traffic through an LSP as soon as it receives a RESV message. However, if the ingress LSR forwards traffic through the LSP before forwarding state has been installed on all downstream nodes, traffic can be lost. @@ -45,21 +45,21 @@ 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 http://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 December 7, 2015. + This Internet-Draft will expire on December 17, 2015. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2015 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 @@ -233,30 +233,29 @@ o The IP Time to Live (TTL) / Hop Count MAY be configurable. By default, it MUST be 255 o The IP DSCP MAY be configurable. By default, it MUST be CS6 (Ox48) [RFC4594] o The UDP Source Port MUST be selected from the dynamic range (49152-65535) [RFC6335] - o The UDP Destination Port MUST be LSP Self-ping. (Value to be - assigned by IANA. See Section 7) + o The UDP Destination Port MUST be lsp-self-ping (8503) [IANA.PORTS] UDP packet contents have the following format: 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Session-ID | - | | + | (64 bits) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ LSP Self-ping Message The Session-ID is a 64-bit field that associates an LSP Self-ping message with an LSP Self-ping session. 4. LSP Self Ping Procedures In order to verify that an LSP is ready to carry traffic, the ingress @@ -380,22 +379,22 @@ setup. Moreover, the above-mentioned timer is configured on a per-router basis. However, its optimum value is determined by a network-wide behavior. Therefore, changes in the network could require changes to the value of the timer, making the optimal setting of this timer a moving target. 7. IANA Considerations - This memo request that IANA assign a UDP port from the user range - (1024-49151) for LSP Self-ping. + IANA has assigned theUDP Port Number 8503 [IANA.PORTS] for use by LSP + Self-ping. 8. Security Considerations LSP Self-ping messages are easily forged. Therefore, an attacker can send the ingress LSR a forged LSP Self-ping message, causing the ingress LSR to terminate the LSP Self-ping session prematurely. In order to mitigate these threats, implementations SHOULD NOT assign Session-ID's in a predictable manner. Furthermore, operators SHOULD filter LSP Self-ping packets at network ingress points. @@ -441,20 +440,26 @@ 6335, August 2011. 10.2. Informative References [I-D.akiya-bfd-seamless-base] Akiya, N., Pignataro, C., Ward, D., Bhatia, M., and J. Networks, "Seamless Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (S-BFD)", draft-akiya-bfd-seamless-base-03 (work in progress), April 2014. + [IANA.PORTS] + IANA, "Service Name and Transport Protocol Port Number + Registry", . + [RFC4594] Babiarz, J., Chan, K., and F. Baker, "Configuration Guidelines for DiffServ Service Classes", RFC 4594, August 2006. [RFC6383] Shiomoto, K. and A. Farrel, "Advice on When It Is Safe to Start Sending Data on Label Switched Paths Established Using RSVP-TE", RFC 6383, September 2011. Authors' Addresses