TRILL: Vendor Specific TRILL Channel Protocol
Author(s): Hao Weiguo, Li Yizhou, Donald Eastlake, Ayan Banerjee
The IETF TRILL (TRansparent Interconnection of Lots of Links) protocol is implemented by devices called TRILL switches or RBridges (Routing Bridges). TRILL includes a general mechanism, called RBridge Channel, for the transmission of typed messages between RBridges in...
TRILL Working Group Donald Eastlake INTERNET-DRAFT Yizhou Li Intended status: Proposed Standard Weiguo Hao Huawei Ayan Banerjee Insieme Expires: August 15, 2013 February 16, 2013 TRILL: Vendor Specific TRILL Channel Protocol <draft-eastlake-trill-vendor-channel-00.txt> Abstract The IETF TRILL (TRansparent Interconnection of Lots of Links) protocol is implemented by devices called TRILL switches or RBridges (Routing Bridges). TRILL includes a general mechanism, called RBridge Channel, for the transmission of typed messages between RBridges in the same campus and between RBridges and end stations on the same link. This document specifies how to send vendor specific messages over the RBridge Channel facility. Status of This Memo 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. D. Eastlake, et al [Page 1] INTERNET-DRAFT TRILL: Vendor Channel Table of Contents 1. Introduction............................................3 1.1 Terminology and Acronyms...............................3 2. Vendor Channel Packet Format............................4 3. Vendor Channel Errors...................................6 3.1 Sending an Error Response..............................6 4. IANA Considerations.....................................8 5. Security Considerations.................................9 Normative References......................................10 Informative References....................................10 Acknowledgements..........................................10 Authors' Addresses........................................11 D. Eastlake, et al [Page 2] INTERNET-DRAFT TRILL: Vendor Channel 1. Introduction The IETF TRILL (TRansparent Interconnection of Lots of Links) protocol [RFC6325] is implemented by devices called TRILL switches or RBridges. It provides efficient least cost transparent frame routing in multi-hop networks with arbitrary topologies and link technologies, using link-state routing and a hop count. Links between TRILL switches can be arbitrary technology and, in general, the TRILL way to address or specify a TRILL switch (RBridge) in the interior of a TRILL campus is by its TRILL provided nickname [RFC6325] [ClearCorrect]. The TRILL protocol includes an RBridge Channel facility [RFCchannel] to support typed message transmission between RBridges in the same campus and between RBridges and end stations on the same link. This document specifies a method of sending messages specific to a particular organization, indicated by OUI (Organizationally Unique Identifier [RFC5342]), over the RBridge Channel facility. Such organization specific messages can be used for vendor specific diagnotic or experimental messages. 1.1 Terminology and Acronyms 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 [RFC 2119]. This document uses the acronyms defined in [RFC6325] supplemented by the following additional acronym: OUI - Organizationally Unique Identifier [RFC5342] TRILL switch - An alternative term for an RBridge D. Eastlake, et al [Page 3] INTERNET-DRAFT TRILL: Vendor Channel 2. Vendor Channel Packet Format The general structure of an RBridge Channel packet on a link between RBridges (TRILL switches) is shown in Figure 1 below. When an RBridge Channel message is sent between an RBridge and an end station on the same link, in either direction, the TRILL Header is omitted. The type of RBridge Channel packet is given by a Protocol field in the RBridge Channel Header which indicates how to interpret the Channel Protocol Specific Payload. See [RFCchannel]. Frame Structure +-----------------------------------+ | Link Header | +-----------------------------------+ | TRILL Header | +--------------------------------+ | | Inner Ethernet Addresses | | +--------------------------------+ | | Data Label (VLAN or FGL) | | +--------------------------------+--+ | RBridge Channel Header | +-----------------------------------+ | Channel Protocol Specific Payload | +-----------------------------------+ | Link Trailer (FCS if Ethernet) | +-----------------------------------+ Figure 1. RBridge Channel Packet Structure Figure 2 below expands the RBridge Channel Header and Channel Protocol Specific Payload above for the case of the Vendor Specific RBridge Channel Tunnel Protocol. D. Eastlake, et al [Page 4] INTERNET-DRAFT TRILL: Vendor Channel 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 RBridge Channel Header: +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | RBridge-Channel (0x8946) | 0x0 | Channel Protocol | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Flags | ERR | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Vendor RBridge Channel Protocol Specific: +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | OUI | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | OUI (cont.) | VERR | Sub-Protocol | Sub-Version | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Vendor Protocol Specific Data | | ... Figure 2. Channel Tunnel Message Structure The fields in Figure 2 related to the Vendor RBridge Channel Protocol are as follows: Channel Protocol: The RBridge Channel Protocol value allocated for Vendor Channel (see Section 4). OUI: The field indicates the vendor specifying the particular use or uses of the Vendor Channel. The vendor to whom the OUI in this field has been allocated is in charge of specifying Vendor Channel messages using their OUI. VERR: Vendor Channel Error. See Section 3. Sub-Protocol: Actually, the vendor specifying their use of the Vendor Channel can do whatever they want with the bits after the VERR field. But it is strongly recommended that they use the sub-protocol / sub-version fields so that multiple and evolving uses can be specified based on a single OUI. Sub-Version: See explanation above of the Sub-Protocol field. This field is provided to indicate the version of the particuar vendor's Sub-Protocol. D. Eastlake, et al [Page 5] INTERNET-DRAFT TRILL: Vendor Channel 3. Vendor Channel Errors The VERR field values from 0x0 through 0xF inclusive are reserved for specification by the IETF. See Section 4. All other non-zero values of VERR are available for whatever use the vendor specifies except that a Vendor Channel implementation MUST NOT send a Vendor Channel Error in response to a Vendor Channel message with a non-zero VERR field. The IETF specified VERR values thus far are as follows: 0. The VERR field is zero in Vendor Channel messages unless the the Vendor Channel packet is reporting an error. 1. The value one indicate that the OUI field value is unknown. If an RBridge implements the Vendor Channel facility and receives a Vendor Channel packet with a zero VERR field and an OUI field it does not recognize and the SL flag is zero in the RBridge Channel Header, it MUST set the VERR field to the value one and returns the packet as described in Section 3.1. 2. The value two indicates that the Sub-Protocol field value is unknown. If an RBridge implements the Vendor Channel facility and receives a Vendor Channel packet with a zero VERR field and zero SL flag in the RBridge Channel Header, an OUI that it implements, but a Sub-Protocol fields value it does not recongize, it SHOULD set the VERR field to the value two and returns the packet as described in Section 3.1. 3. The value three indicates that the Sub-Version field value is unknown. If an RBridge implements the Vendor RBridge Channel facility and receives a Vendor Channel packet with a zero VERR field and zero SL flag in the RBridge Channel Header, an OUI and Sub-Protocol that it implements, but a Sub-Version fields value it does not recongize, it SHOULD set the VERR field to the value three and returns the packet as described in Section 3.1. 3.1 Sending an Error Response The IETF specified Vendor Channel error response are sent in response to a received RBridge Channel packet by setting the VERR field as specified above and modifying the packet as specified below. The RBridge Channel Header is modified by setting the SL flag. (The ERR field will be zero because, if it was non-zero, the packet would have been handled at the RBridge Channel rather than being passed down to the Vendor Channel level.) D. Eastlake, et al [Page 6] INTERNET-DRAFT TRILL: Vendor Channel o If Vendor Channel message was sent between RBridges, the TRILL Header is modified by clearing the M bit, setting the egress nickname to the ingress nickname as received, and setting the ingress nickname to a nickname held by the TRILL switch sending the error packet. o If Vendor Channel message was sent between an RBridge and an end station in either direction, the outer MAC addresses are modified by setting the Outer.MacDA to the Outer.MacSA as received, and the Outer.MacSA is set to the MAC address of the port of the TRILL switch or end station sending the error packet. o The priority of the error response message MAY be reduced from the priority of the Vendor Chanel messge causing the error, unless it was already minimum priority, and MAY set the Drop Eligibility Indicator bit in an error response. (Priorities are ordered from highest to lowest as 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 0, and 1. See Section 4.1.1, [RFC6325].) It is generally anticipated that the entire packet in which an error was detected would be sent back, modified as above, so that, for example, error responses could more easily be matched with messages sent; however, this is really up to the vendor specifying how their Vendor RBridge Channel messages are to be used. D. Eastlake, et al [Page 7] INTERNET-DRAFT TRILL: Vendor Channel 4. IANA Considerations IANA is requested to allocate TBD for Vendor Specific RBridge Channel Protocol from the range of RBridge Channel protocols allocated by Standards Action. IANA is requested to establish a "Vendor RBridge Channel Error Codes" registry with initial entries as follows: Code Description Reference ---- ----------- --------- 0 No error This document 1 Unknown OUI This document 2 Unknown Sub-Protocol This document 3 Unknown Sub-Version This document 0x04-0x0F Allocated by Standards Action - 0x10-0xFF Reserved for vendor use This document D. Eastlake, et al [Page 8] INTERNET-DRAFT TRILL: Vendor Channel 5. Security Considerations See [RFC6325] for general TRILL Secuirty Considerations. See [RFCchannel] for general RBridge Channel Security Considerations. The Vendor Specific RBridge Channel Protocol provides no security assurances or features. Any needed security could be provided by fields or processing within the Vendor Protocol Specific Data, which is outside the scope of this document. Alternatively, use of Vendor Channel could be nested inside the RBridge Channel Tunnel Protocol [RFCtunnel] which can provide some security services. D. Eastlake, et al [Page 9] INTERNET-DRAFT TRILL: Vendor Channel Normative References [RFC 2119] - Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. [RFC5342] - Eastlake 3rd, D., "IANA Considerations and IETF Protocol Usage for IEEE 802 Parameters", BCP 141, RFC5342, September 2008. [RFC6325] - Perlman, R., D. Eastlake, D. Dutt, S. Gai, and A. Ghanwani, "RBridges: Base Protocol Specification", RFC6325, July 2011. [RFCchannel] - D. Eastlake, V. Manral, L. Yizhou, S. Aldrin, D. Ward, "TRILL: RBridge Channel Support", draft-ietf-trill-rbridge- channel-08.txt, in RFC Edtior's queue. [ClearCorrect] - Eastlake, D., M. Zhang, A. Ghanwani, V. Manral, A. Banerjee, "TRILL: Clarifications, Corrections, and Updates", draft-ietf-trill-clear-correct, work in progress. Informative References [RFCtunnel] - Eastlake, D., ... "TRILL: Channel Tunnel", draft- eastlake-trill-channel-tunnel, work in progress. Acknowledgements The document was prepared in raw nroff. All macros used were defined within the source file. D. Eastlake, et al [Page 10] INTERNET-DRAFT TRILL: Vendor Channel Authors' Addresses Donald E. Eastlake, 3rd Huawei Technologies 155 Beaver Street Milford, MA 01757 USA Phone: +1-508-333-2270 EMail: firstname.lastname@example.org Yizhou Li Huawei Technologies 101 Software Avenue, Nanjing 210012, China Phone: +86-25-56622310 Email: email@example.com Weiguo Hao Huawei Technologies 101 Software Avenue, Nanjing 210012, China Phone: +86-25-56623144 Email: firstname.lastname@example.org Ayan Banerjee Insieme Networks 210 West Tasman Drive San Jose, CA 95134 USA Email: email@example.com D. Eastlake, et al [Page 11] INTERNET-DRAFT TRILL: Vendor Channel Copyright, Disclaimer, and Additional IPR Provisions Copyright (c) 2013 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 Simplified 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. D. Eastlake, et al [Page 12]