86th IETF, Orlando, March 2013 IS-IS Support for Unidirectional Links draft-ginsberg-isis-udl-00.txt Les Ginsberg

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Advertising Generic Information in IS-IS draft-ietf-isis-genapp-00.txt Les Ginsberg Stefano Previdi Mike Shand.
Advertisements

OSPF Header OSPF HEADER OSPF HEADER for this project Types we will use
1 Introduction to ISIS SI-E Workshop AfNOG The Gambia Noah Maina.
ISIS Advanced Routing Workshop AfNOG IS-IS Standards History  ISO specifies OSI IS-IS routing protocol for CLNS traffic Tag/Length/Value.
Umut Girit  One of the core members of the Internet Protocol Suite, the set of network protocols used for the Internet. With UDP, computer.
Transmission Control Protocol (TCP)
Release 5.1, Revision 0 Copyright © 2001, Juniper Networks, Inc. Advanced Juniper Networks Routing Module 4: Intermediate System To Intermediate System.
Bridging. Bridge Functions To extend size of LANs either geographically or in terms number of users. − Protocols that include collisions can be performed.
Computer Networks with Internet Technology William Stallings
EIGRP routing protocol Omer ben-shalom Omer Ben-Shalom: Must show how EIGRP is dealing with count to infinity problem Omer Ben-Shalom: Must.
Nov 11, 2004CS573: Network Protocols and Standards1 IP Routing: OSPF Network Protocols and Standards Autumn
1 Relates to Lab 4. This module covers link state routing and the Open Shortest Path First (OSPF) routing protocol. Dynamic Routing Protocols II OSPF.
CSEE W4140 Networking Laboratory Lecture 5: IP Routing (OSPF and BGP) Jong Yul Kim
Objectives After completing this chapter you will be able to: Describe hierarchical routing in OSPF Describe the 3 protocols in OSPF, the Hello, Exchange.
Revision of the Appointed Forwarder RFC draft-eastlake-trill-rfc txt Donald E. Eastlake, 3 rd March 2015 Appointed.
1 Relates to Lab 4. This module covers link state routing and the Open Shortest Path First (OSPF) routing protocol. Dynamic Routing Protocols II OSPF.
CMPT 471 Networking II Address Resolution IPv6 Neighbor Discovery 1© Janice Regan, 2012.
Single-Area OSPF Implementation
Link State Routing Protocol W.lilakiatsakun. Introduction (1) Link-state routing protocols are also known as shortest path first protocols and built around.
Lecture Week 10 Link-State Routing Protocols. Objectives Describe the basic features & concepts of link-state routing protocols. List the benefits and.
Unicast Routing Protocols  A routing protocol is a combination of rules and procedures that lets routers in the internet inform each other of changes.
© Janice Regan, CMPT 128, CMPT 371 Data Communications and Networking BGP, Flooding, Multicast routing.
CSC 336 Data Communications and Networking Lecture 7d: Interconnecting LAN Dr. Cheer-Sun Yang Spring 2001.
Protocol Topology Support for IS-IS Kay Noguchi draft-ietf-noguchi-isis-protocol-topology-01.txt 56th IETF San Francisco, CA, USA March 18, 2003.
TCOM 515 Lecture 2. Lecture 2 Objectives Dynamic Routing Distance Vector Routing Link State Routing Interior vs Exterior RIP - Routing Information Protocol.
Simplified BFD Procedures for Bi-Directional LSPs.
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. ICND v2.3—3-1 Determining IP Routes Enabling OSPF.
Example STP runs on bridges and switches that are 802.1D-compliant. There are different flavors of STP, but 802.1D is the most popular and widely implemented.
Data Link Control Protocols
© 2007 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.Cisco Public 1 Version 4.0 Link-State Routing Protocols Routing Protocols and Concepts – Chapter 10.
10/13/2015© 2008 Raymond P. Jefferis IIILect 07 1 Internet Protocol.
TRILL with Multicast draft-hares-trill-mutlicast.00.txt Susan Hares.
© 2002, Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. 1 Determining IP Routes.
Chapter 15 Interior Routing Protocols 1 Chapter 15 Interior Routing Protocols.
Dynamic Source Routing (DSR) Sandeep Gupta M.Tech - WCC.
1 © 2003, Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. CCNA 3 v3.0 Module 2 Single-Area OSPF.
CCNA 3 Week 2 Link State Protocols OSPF. Copyright © 2005 University of Bolton Distance Vector vs Link State Distance Vector –Copies Routing Table to.
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. BSCI v3.0—4-1 The IS-IS Protocol Introducing IS-IS and Integrated IS-IS Routing.
Link State Routing NETE0521 Presented by Dr.Apichan Kanjanavapastit.
 Development began in 1987  OSPF Working Group (part of IETF)  OSPFv2 first established in 1991  Many new features added since then  Updated OSPFv2.
IS-IS An introduction to IGP routing protocols Hagai Kahana.
Supplement to “Introduction to IS-IS” presented at NANOG 20 Greg Hankins.
1 Computer Communication & Networks Lecture 21 Network Layer: Delivery, Forwarding, Routing Waleed.
CSC 600 Internetworking with TCP/IP Unit 5: IP, IP Routing, and ICMP (ch. 7, ch. 8, ch. 9, ch. 10) Dr. Cheer-Sun Yang Spring 2001.
Dynamic Routing Protocols II OSPF
Computer Networks22-1 Network Layer Delivery, Forwarding, and Routing.
CCNP Routing Semester 5 Chapter 4 OSPF.
© 2007 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved.Cisco Public 1 Version 4.0 Link-State Routing Protocols Routing Protocols and Concepts – Chapter 10.
Spring Routing: Part I Section 4.2 Outline Algorithms Scalability.
88th IETF, Vancouver, November 2013 IS-IS Support for Unidirectional Links draft-ietf-isis-udl-01.txt Les Ginsberg
Doc.: IEEE /0174r1 Submission Hang Liu, et al. March 2005 Slide 1 A Routing Protocol for WLAN Mesh Hang Liu, Jun Li, Saurabh Mathur {hang.liu,
1 The Data Link Layer A. S. Tanenbaum Computer Networks W. Stallings Data and Computer Communications Chapter 3.
86th IETF, Orlando, March 2013 Flooding Scope PDUs draft-ginsberg-isis-fs-lsp-00.txt Les Ginsberg Stefano Previdi.
Prof. Alfred J Bird, Ph.D., NBCT Office – Science 3rd floor – S Office Hours – Monday and Thursday.
CSE 421 Computer Networks. Network Layer 4-2 Chapter 4: Network Layer r 4. 1 Introduction r 4.2 Virtual circuit and datagram networks r 4.3 What’s inside.
Prof. Alfred J Bird, Ph.D., NBCT Office – McCormick 3rd floor 607 Office Hours – Monday 3:00 to 4:00 and.
1 Introduction to ISIS AfNOG 2011 SI-E Workshop. 2 IS-IS Standards History  ISO specifies OSI IS-IS routing protocol for CLNS traffic A Link State.
1 Relates to Lab 4. This module covers link state routing and the Open Shortest Path First (OSPF) routing protocol. Dynamic Routing Protocols II OSPF.
1 CMPT 471 Networking II OSPF © Janice Regan,
Dynamic Routing Protocols II OSPF
Multi-Instances ISIS Extension draft-ietf-isis-mi-08.txt
Dynamic routing Routing Algorithm (Dijkstra / Bellman-Ford) – idealization All routers are identical Network is flat. Not true in Practice Hierarchical.
ISIS Flooding Reduction in MSDC
Dynamic Interior Routing Information Mechanisms
Link State Algorithm Alternative to distance-vector
Similar Yet Different Protocol Design Choices in IS-IS and OSPF
Dynamic Routing Protocols II OSPF
Aayush Patidar Ashwin Ramakrishnan Manoj Juneja
Viet Nguyen Jianqing Liu Yaqin Tang
A Routing Protocol for WLAN Mesh
Presentation transcript:

86th IETF, Orlando, March 2013 IS-IS Support for Unidirectional Links draft-ginsberg-isis-udl-00.txt Les Ginsberg Sina Stefano Previdi Abhay

Goals Modest Protocol Extensions No IP Encapsulation No Static Configuration of neighbor Information Allow UDL on the Return Path Reliable Adjacency Maintenance Reliable LSP Updates Minimum Additional Network Wide Protocol Traffic Support for Pt-Pt and LAN subnetworks 86th IETF, Orlando, March 2013

Basic Mechanisms Sending Hellos IS-T sends hellos as normal IS-R sends hello information in “UDL-LSPs” Adjacency Maintenance IS-T relies on existence of return path rooted at IS-R to IS-T IS-R maintains as normal Update Process IS-T operates as DIS on LAN (even on Pt-Pt links) IS-R operates as non-DIS on LAN (even on Pt-Pt links) IS-R may use UDL-LSPs to send PSNP equivalent Special rules for UDL-LSPs 86th IETF, Orlando, March 2013

UDL-LSPs Must be a non-zero fragment Contains only UDL TLVs [and authentication/purge TLVs] Enforcement by sender (not checked by receiver) Flooded normally…some exceptions on UDL Circuits UDL-LSPs flooded on UDL Circuits regardless of adjacency state (allows formation of adjacency on UDL even when return path is via a UDL) 86th IETF, Orlando, March 2013

UDL-TLV # octets | Type (11) | 1 | (To be assigned by IANA) | | Length | | Sub-TLVs | : Sub-tlv Types Pt-Pt IS-Neighbor LAN IS-Neighbor LSP Entries Manual Area Addresses 86th IETF, Orlando, March 2013

IS-Neighbor sub-TLV Pt-Pt IS-Neighbor # octets | Type (240) | 1 | (To be assigned by IANA) | | Length (9+ID Length) to | 1 | (15 + ID Length) | | Adjacency 3-way state | | Extended Local Circuit ID | | Neighbor System ID | ID Length | Neighbor Extended Local | 4 | Circuit ID | | Local LAN Address | 6 | | (LAN only) LAN IS-Neighbor # octets | Type (6) | 1 | (To be assigned by IANA) | | Length (7 + ID Length) | | Neighbor LAN ID | ID Length | Local LAN Address | th IETF, Orlando, March 2013

LSP Entry sub-TLV Sub-TLV Format # octets | Type (9) | 1 | (To be assigned by IANA) | | Length (10+ID Length) *N | : LSP Entries : LSP Entry # octets | Remaining Lifetime | | LSP ID | ID Length | LSP Sequence Number | | Checksum | th IETF, Orlando, March 2013

Manual Area Address sub-TLV Sub-TLV Format # octets | Type (1) | 1 | (To be assigned by IANA) | | Length | : Area Address(es) : Area Address # octets | Address Length | | Area Address | Address Length th IETF, Orlando, March 2013

Simple UDL Topology – Pt-Pt Adjacency Establishment 1.T sends P2P-IIH (State Init, Local Cid n)-> R 2.R sends UDL-LSP (State Init, Local Cid p, Neighbor T, Neighbor Cid n, [Local LAN Address]) 3.UDL-LSP Propagated by B to T 4.T sends P2P-IIH (State UP, Local Cid n, Neighbor R, Neighbor Cid p) 5.R sends UDL-LSP (State UP, Local Cid p, Neighbor T, Neighbor Cid n, [Local LAN address]) 6.T sends CSNPs to R 7.T floods LSPDB to R (once) R T B 86th IETF, Orlando, March 2013

Simple UDL Topology – Pt-Pt Adjacency Establishment w UDL in return path 1.T sends P2P-IIH (State Init, Local Cid n)-> R 2.R sends UDL-LSP (State Init, Local Cid p, Neighbor T, Neighbor Cid n, [Local LAN Address]) 3.UDL-LSP Propagated by B to T even when adjacency is in INIT state 4.T sends P2P-IIH (State UP, Local Cid n, Neighbor R, Neighbor Cid p) 5.R sends UDL-LSP (State UP, Local Cid p, Neighbor T, Neighbor Cid n, [Local LAN address]) 6.T sends CSNPs to R 7.T floods LSPDB to R (once) R T B 86th IETF, Orlando, March 2013

Simple UDL Topology – LAN Adjacency Establishment 1.T multicasts LAN-IIH (LANID T-n) 2.Rn sends UDL-LSP (LANID T-n, Local LAN Address]) and creates adjacency in Init state 3.UDL-LSPs Propagated by B to T 4.T creates adjacency(s) in UP state, sends LAN- IIH (LANID T-n, LAN Address R1, LAN Address R2…) 5.Rn transition adjacency to UP state 6.T sends CSNPs to LAN 7.T floods LSPDB to LAN T R1 B R2 Splitter 86th IETF, Orlando, March 2013

Adjacency Maintenance – P2P - Transmit Side T sends periodic P2P-IIH (State UP, Local Cid n, Neighbor R, Neighbor Cid p) T maintains adjacency with R so long as: It has valid UDL-LSP from R with adjacency info (State UP, Local Cid p, Neighbor T, Neighbor Cid n, [Local LAN address]) T can calculate a return path from R to T which does NOT use the UDL circuit Return path calculation is only required when a topology change occurs R T B 86th IETF, Orlando, March 2013

Adjacency Maintenance – P2P - Receive Side R maintains adjacency based on receipt of periodic P2P-IIH (State UP, Local Cid n, Neighbor R, Neighbor Cid p) as normal RT B 86th IETF, Orlando, March 2013

Adjacency Maintenance – LAN –TX Side T R1 B R2 Splitter T sends periodic LAN-IIH (LANID T-n, LAN Address R1, R2…) T maintains adjacency with Rn so long as: It has valid UDL-LSP from Rn with adjacency info (LANID T-n, Local LAN address Rn) T can calculate a return path from Rn to T which does NOT use the UDL circuit Return path calculation is only required when a topology change occurs 86th IETF, Orlando, March 2013

Adjacency Maintenance – LAN –RX Side T R1 B R2 Splitter Rn maintains adjacency based on receipt of periodic LAN--IIH (LANID T-n, IS Neighbor LAN Address Rn as normal 86th IETF, Orlando, March 2013

Adjacency Failure Detection: Case #1 1.UDL Link between T-R fails 2.Adjacency Holddown timer on R times out – adjacency on R is down 3.R sends UDL-LSP w no UDL neighbor T information 4.T receives updated UDL-LSP – takes adjacency to R down R T B X 86th IETF, Orlando, March 2013

Adjacency Failure Detection: Case #2 R T B X 1.Link between B-R fails 2.B generates new LSP w no neighbor info to R 3.T receives updated LSP from B 4.T recalculates return path from R to T – takes adjacency to R down 5.T sends P2P-IIH (State Init, Local Cid n)-> R 6.R takes adjacency to T down 7.R generates UDL-LSP (State Init, Local Cid p, Neighbor T, Neighbor Cid n, [Local LAN Address]) 86th IETF, Orlando, March 2013

Update Process Overview RT B Flooding process is the same on P2P and LAN cases except for destination address For LSP flooding, T operates on the circuit in a manner similar to a LAN where T is the DIS: Send new LSPs once only (no ACK expected) Periodic CSNPs PSNP requests for LSPs embedded in the UDL- LSP from R will cause a retransmission For LSP reception, R operates on the circuit as a non-DIS on a LAN. Does NOT send acknowledgements May send PSNP requests in its UDL-LSP for LSPs it sees in CSNPs from T Delay before sending PSNP to minimize need to utilize UDL-LSP for this purpose (network-wide flooding) 86th IETF, Orlando, March 2013

Update Process Pathological Example RT B 1.New LSP A-00(20) T 2.T floods LSP A-00(20) to R 3.R fails to receive LSP A-00(20) 4.T sends periodic CSNP to R showing A-00(20) 5.R sends PSNP for A-00(20) in a UDL-LSP to B 6.B receives UDL-LSP from R and floods to T 7.T receives UDL-LSP R via B and processes PSNP entry 8.T retransmits LSP A-00(20) to R 9.R receives LSP A-00(20), updates database Steps 2-8 repeat if necessary until successful update. 86th IETF, Orlando, March 2013

Update Process UDL Special Rules 1.T sends P2P-IIH (State Init, Local Cid n)-> R 2.R sends UDL-LSP (State Init, Local Cid p, Neighbor T, Neighbor Cid n, [Local LAN Address]) 3.UDL-LSP Propagated by B to T even when adjacency is in INIT state 4.T fails to receive UDL-LSP 5.B periodically transmit R’s UDL-LSP until it can calculate return path from R to T 6.T receives R’s UDL-LSP…adjacency comes up 7.B stops periodic retransmissions of R’s UDL- LSP R T B 86th IETF, Orlando, March 2013

UDL Metrics R T B 10 Max R T B 10 Max Unicast Multicast 86th IETF, Orlando, March 2013