--- 1/draft-ietf-teas-gmpls-lsp-fastreroute-10.txt 2017-08-03 08:13:48.111923829 -0700 +++ 2/draft-ietf-teas-gmpls-lsp-fastreroute-11.txt 2017-08-03 08:13:48.183925533 -0700 @@ -1,23 +1,23 @@ TEAS Working Group M. Taillon Internet-Draft T. Saad, Ed. Updates: 4090 R. Gandhi, Ed. Intended Status: Standards Track Z. Ali -Expires: January 19, 2018 Cisco Systems, Inc. +Expires: February 4, 2018 Cisco Systems, Inc. M. Bhatia Nokia - July 18, 2017 + August 3, 2017 Updates to Resource Reservation Protocol For Fast Reroute of Traffic Engineering GMPLS LSPs - draft-ietf-teas-gmpls-lsp-fastreroute-10 + draft-ietf-teas-gmpls-lsp-fastreroute-11 Abstract This document updates the Resource Reservation Protocol - Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) Fast Reroute (FRR) procedures defined in RFC 4090 to support Packet Switched Capable (PSC) Generalized Multi- Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs). These updates allow the coordination of a bidirectional bypass tunnel assignment protecting a common facility in both forward and reverse directions of a co-routed bidirectional LSP. In addition, these @@ -87,26 +87,26 @@ 6. Fast Reroute For Bidirectional GMPLS LSPs with Out-of-band Signaling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 7. Message and Object Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 7.1. BYPASS_ASSIGNMENT Subobject . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 7.2. FRR Bypass Assignment Error Notify Message . . . . . . . . 18 8. Compatibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 10.1. BYPASS_ASSIGNMENT Subobject . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 10.2. FRR Bypass Assignment Error Notify Message . . . . . . . 19 - 11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 - 11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 - 11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 - Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 - Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 - Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 + 11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 + 11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 + 11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 + Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 + Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 + Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 1. Introduction Packet Switched Capable (PSC) Traffic Engineering (TE) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) can be setup using Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) signaling procedures specified in [RFC3473] for both unidirectional and bidirectional tunnels. The GMPLS signaling allows sending and receiving the RSVP messages in-band with the data traffic or out-of-band over a separate control-channel. Fast Reroute (FRR) [RFC4090] has been widely deployed in the packet TE networks @@ -794,28 +794,38 @@ message defined in this document will ignore it but forward it without modification. 9. Security Considerations This document introduces a new BYPASS_ASSIGNMENT subobject for the RECORD_ROUTE Object that is carried in an RSVP signaling message. Thus in the event of the interception of a signaling message, more information about LSP's fast reroute protection can be deduced than was previously the case. This is judged to be a very minor security - risk as this information is already available by other means. The - Notify message for FRR Bypass Assignment Error defined in this - document does not result in tear-down of the protected LSP and is not - service affecting. + risk as this information is already available by other means. If a + MP does not find a matching bypass tunnel with given source and + destination addresses locally, it ignores the BYPASS_ASSIGNMENT + subobject. Due to this, security risk introduced by inserting a + random address in this subobject is minimal. The Notify message for + FRR Bypass Assignment Error defined in this document does not result + in tear-down of the protected LSP and is not service affecting. - Otherwise, this document introduces no additional security - considerations. For general discussion on MPLS and GMPLS related - security issues, see the MPLS/GMPLS security framework [RFC5920]. + Security considerations for RSVP-TE and GMPLS signaling extensions + are covered in [RFC3209] and [RFC3473]. Further, general + considerations for securing RSVP-TE in MPLS-TE and GMPLS networks can + be found in [RFC5920]. This document updates the mechanisms defined + in [RFC4090], which also discusses related security measures and are + also applicable to this document. As specified in [RFC4090], a PLR + and its selected merge point trust RSVP messages received from each + other. The security considerations pertaining to the original RSVP + protocol [RFC2205] also remain relevant to the updates in this + document. 10. IANA Considerations 10.1. BYPASS_ASSIGNMENT Subobject IANA manages the "RSVP PARAMETERS" registry located at . IANA is requested to assign a value for the new BYPASS_ASSIGNMENT subobject in the "Class Type 21 ROUTE_RECORD - Type 1 Route Record" registry.