BIER IPv6 Requirements
draft-ietf-bier-ipv6-requirements-02
The information below is for an old version of the document.
| Document | Type |
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft whose latest revision state is "Expired".
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Mike McBride , Jingrong Xie , Senthil Dhanaraj , Rajiv Asati | ||
| Last updated | 2019-11-01 (Latest revision 2019-07-01) | ||
| Replaces | draft-mcbride-bier-ipv6-requirements | ||
| RFC stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Additional resources | Mailing list discussion | ||
| Stream | WG state | WG Document | |
| Document shepherd | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | I-D Exists | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
draft-ietf-bier-ipv6-requirements-02
Network Working Group M. McBride
Internet-Draft Futurewei
Intended status: Standards Track J. Xie
Expires: May 4, 2020 S. Dhanaraj
Huawei
R. Asati
Cisco
November 1, 2019
BIER IPv6 Requirements
draft-ietf-bier-ipv6-requirements-02
Abstract
The BIER WG includes, in it's charter, work on developing mechanisms
to transport BIER natively in IPv6. This document is intended to
help the WG with this effort by specifying requirements for
transporting packets, with Bit Index Explicit Replication (BIER)
headers, in an IPv6 environment. There will be a need to send IPv6
payloads, to multiple IPv6 destinations, using BIER. There have been
several proposed solutions in this area. But there hasn't been a
document which describes the problem and lists the requirements. The
goal of this document is to describe the BIER IPv6 requirements,
summarize the proposed solutions, and guide the working group in
understanding the benefits, and drawbacks, of the various solutions
and to help in the development of acceptable solutions.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
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 https://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 May 4, 2020.
McBride, et al. Expires May 4, 2020 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft BIER IPv6 Requirements November 2019
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://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.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Problem Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. BIER IPv6 Scenario's . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1. BIERv6 for Access Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.2. BIERv6 for Data Center . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.3. BIERv6 for Core Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.4. Implications for BIER in SRv6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.1. L2 Agnostic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.2. Hop by hop SA modification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.3. L4 Inspection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.4. Multicast address in SA field . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.5. Incorrect bits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.6. SA filtering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.7. BIER architecture support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.8. Simple Encapsulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.9. Hardware fast path . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.10. Conform to existing IPv6 Spec . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.11. Support Fragmentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.12. Support IPv6 Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5. Solutions Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5.1. BIER-ETH encapsulation in IPv6 networks . . . . . . . . . 8
5.2. Encode Bitstring in IPv6 destination address . . . . . . 10
5.3. Add BIER header into IPv6 Extension Header . . . . . . . 10
5.4. Transport BIER as IPv6 payload . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.5. Tunneling BIER in a IPv6 tunnel . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
8. Acknowledgement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
McBride, et al. Expires May 4, 2020 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft BIER IPv6 Requirements November 2019
9. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
1. Introduction
Bit Index Explicit Replication (BIER) [RFC8279] is an architecture
that provides optimal multicast forwarding, without requiring
intermediate routers to maintain per-flow state, through the use of a
multicast-specific BIER header. [RFC8296] defines two types of BIER
encapsulation to run on physical links: one is BIER MPLS
encapsulation to run on various physical links that support MPLS, the
other is non-MPLS BIER Ethernet encapsulation to run on ethernet
links, with an ethertype 0xAB37. This document describes using BIER
in non-MPLS IPv6 environments. We explain the requirements of
transporting IPv4/IPv6 multicast payloads, from an IPv6 router (BFIR)
to multicast IPv6 destinations (BFERs), using BIER. This can include
native IPv6 encapsulation and generic tunneling. Native IPv6, in
this document, is defined as BIER not encapsulated in mpls or
ethernet. The goal of this document is to help the BIER WG evaluate
the BIER v6 requirements and solutions in order to begin adopting
solution drafts.
1.1. Requirements Language
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 [RFC2119].
1.2. Terminology
o BIER: Bit Index Explicit Replication. Provides optimal multicast
forwarding through adding a BIER header and removing state in
intermediate routers.
o BUM: Broadcast, Unknown Unicast, Multicast. Term used to describe
the three types of Ethernet modes that will be forwarded to
multiple destinations
2. Problem Statement
The problem is the ability of the network to transport BUM packets,
with BIER headers, in an IPv6 environment. In IPv6 networks, many
deployments use non-MPLS encapsulation for unicast as the data-plane.
In such case, it may be expected to have a BIER IPv6 encapsulation
which is compliant with various kinds of physical links, perhaps in a
hop-by-hop manner, and maintain the benefit of "fast reroute" of an
IPv6 tunnel. Evaluating the BIER IPv6 requirements will help
determine the best solutions to address these problems.
McBride, et al. Expires May 4, 2020 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft BIER IPv6 Requirements November 2019
3. BIER IPv6 Scenario's
+--------------------------------------------+
| |
| +------+
| | BFER |
+------+ IPv6 +------+
| BFIR | |
+------+ Network +------+
| | BFER |
| +------+
| |
+--------------------------------------------+
This basic scenario depicts the need to replicate bier packets from a
BFIR to BFERs across an IPv6 core. The IPv6 environment may include
a variety of link types, may be entirely IPv6, may be dual stack or
any type of combination which includes IPv6. Regardless of the
environment, there are times when a BIER header, including the BIER
bitstring used to determine the set of BIER forwarding egress
routers, will need to traverse a IPv6 domain. The ways in which BIER
will function in an IPv6 environment is the problem that needs to be
solved. [RFC8354] lists some good IPv6 related use cases which we
will similarly reference in this document.
3.1. BIERv6 for Access Network
Access networks deliver a variety of types of multicast video traffic
from the service provider's network to the home (or Enterprise)
environment and from the home towards the service provider's network.
There will be a need to send traffic from the IPv4 access towards the
service provider's IPv6 network and vice versa. A packet could be
mapped into a providers IPv6 network through the use of a BIERv6
header. The access devices would not need to know specific details
about the packet to perform this mapping; instead the access device
would only need to know how to process a BIER header unless there is
end to end IPv6.
3.2. BIERv6 for Data Center
Some Data Center operators are transitioning their Data Center
infrastructure from IPv4 to native IPv6 only, in order to cope with
IPv4 address depletion and to achieve larger scale. In such
environment, BIERv6, can be used to natively steer multicast data
across an IPv6 data center.
McBride, et al. Expires May 4, 2020 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft BIER IPv6 Requirements November 2019
3.3. BIERv6 for Core Networks
While the overall amount of traffic offered to the network continues
to grow and considering that multiple types of traffic with different
characteristics and requirements are quickly converging over single
network architecture, the network operators are starting to face new
challenges.
Some operators are currently building, or plan to build in the near
future, an IPv6 only native infrastructure for their core network.
Having a native BIERv6 infrastructure will help maintain simplicity
of the network and reduce state versus traditional IP Multicast.
3.4. Implications for BIER in SRv6
The Source Packet Routing in Networking (SPRING) architecture
describes how Segment Routing can be used to steer packets through an
IPv6 or MPLS network using the source routing paradigm. [RFC8354]
focuses on use cases for Segment Routing in an IPv6 only environment,
something which is equially important for BIER in an IPv6 only
environment.
4. Requirements
There have been several suggested requirements, on the BIER email
list and in meetings, which have been used to form BIER IPv6
requirements used to help the wg evaluate against the proposed
solutions:
4.1. L2 Agnostic
The solution should be agnostic to the underlying L2 data link type.
4.2. Hop by hop SA modification
The solution should not require hop-by-hop modification of the IP
source address field.
Solutions that do not require Hop-by-hop SA modification are
preferred. Solutions which maintain the SA will help fast-path
forwarding (req 4.9 in this doc), are beneficial for receiving
notices from the BFIR for functions like BIER PING, TRACE and MTU
notification, are beneficial for identifying an MVPN instance to help
remove more encapsulation such as Service Label (such as MPLS VPN
Label or VNI in the SRv6 network), and are beneficial for SA
filtering (req 4.6 in this doc).
McBride, et al. Expires May 4, 2020 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft BIER IPv6 Requirements November 2019
It is commonly thought that BIERv6 could use a multicast address, as
BIER is one-hop replication on each BFR in normal cases. However, as
described in section 6.9 of [RFC8279], it is useful to support non-
BIER routers within a BIER domain. From the wg discussion about this
document, focus is on the advantages of using unicast addresses that
otherwise could not be possible by using a multicast address or
anycast address for two cases: replication from a BFR to other BFR(s)
connected by Layer-3 Non-BFR router(s) without using tunneling
techniques, and replication from a BFR to other BFR(s) connected by
Layer-2 switch(es) without broadcasting or snooping on Layer-2
switch(es) in between. Based on the natural reachability of an IPv6
unicast address, it can support the multi-hop replication cases as
well as the one-hop replication case.
This requirement may be deprecated if unicast address is prefered as
a solution for both multi-hop replication and one-hop replication
without using two different encapsulations.
4.3. L4 Inspection
The solution should not require the BFRs to inspect layer 4 or
require any changes to layer 4.
In fragmentation events, BIER is payload and will be fragmented. For
instance (BIER-header + payload-1-to-1xxx bytes) in one packet, and
(payload-1xxx-to-2xxx) in another packet. Thus, when BFR B receives
a packet from BFR A, BFR B has to assemble the fragmented packets
before sending to BFR C and BFR D.
In IPSEC, the BIER header is part of the payload for confidentiality
or integrity. The need to change the BitString in the BIER Header,
when forwarding BIER packets, makes it incompatible with IPSEC.
In SRH, BIER is the payload, and will be reached only after the SRH
is processed. Thus, when BFR B receive a packet with SRH from BFR A,
BFR B has to process the SRH first, and then the Upper-layer BIER
header last. SRH needs to be integrated for two reasons, first is
that the solution is targetted to work well in SRv6 networks as a use
case in section 3.4 of this doc, second reason is that a few of the
proposed solutions agree to consider SRH integration.
4.4. Multicast address in SA field
The solution should not allow a multicast address to be put in the IP
source address field. According to [RFC1112] "A host group address
must never be placed in the source address field or anywhere in a
source route or record route option of an outgoing IP datagram."
McBride, et al. Expires May 4, 2020 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft BIER IPv6 Requirements November 2019
4.5. Incorrect bits
The solution should not assume that bits never get set incorrectly.
If a packet with incorrect bits is set, it should not damage BIERv6
functionality or any other functions such as Unicast Reverse Path
Forwarding (URPF), nor should it cause loops or duplicates as
described in section 6.8 of [RFC8279].
4.6. SA filtering
The solution should not require changes in source address filtering
procedures. For instance if a host uses a "BIER address" as its
source address in a given packet, and the packet doesn't get dropped
according to existing SA filtering procedures, the packet may elicit
responses that put the BIER address in their destination address
fields. This could be a security issue, as it creates an attack
vector that can create 64 responses to a single probe.
4.7. BIER architecture support
It should be possible to use the solution to support the entire BIER
architecture. The ability to bypass Non-BIER routers and L2 switches
is part of the BIER architecture and having this ability is a
mandatory requirement.
Multiple sub-domains bound to one or many topologies or algorithms,
multiple sets for more BFERs, BS multiple BIFTs for ECMP should be
supported.
4.8. Simple Encapsulation
The solution should avoid requiring different encapsulation types, or
complex tunneling techniques, to support BIER as an E2E multicast
transport.
A single encapsulation should support Layer-2 switches within BFRs,
or non-BFR within a BIER domain, or inter-domain deployment of BIER.
4.9. Hardware fast path
The solution should enable the processing and forwarding of BIER
packets in hardware fast path.
McBride, et al. Expires May 4, 2020 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft BIER IPv6 Requirements November 2019
4.10. Conform to existing IPv6 Spec
The proposed encapsulation must conform to the IPv6 specification and
guidelines as described in RFC8200. It should not require any new
modifications to the IPv6 specification aside from extensions to
existing mechanisms such as IPv6 Options.
4.11. Support Fragmentation
The proposed encapsulation must support fragmentation. It shouldn't
require fragmentation and re-assembly at each hop.
4.12. Support IPv6 Security
The proposed encapsulation should support IPv6 security including AH/
ESP extension headers. It shouldn't require hop-by-hop encryption/
decryption.
5. Solutions Evaluation
The following are solutions that have been proposed to solve BIER in
IPv6 environments. Some solutions propose encoding while others
propose encapsulation. It is recommended for the wg to evaluate
these solutions against the requirements listed previously in order
to make informed decisions on solution readiness.
As illustrated in these examples, the BIER header, or the BitString,
may appear in the IPv6 Header, IPv6 Extension Header, IPv6 Payload,
or IPv6 Tunnel Packet:
5.1. BIER-ETH encapsulation in IPv6 networks
+---------------+-----------------+-------------------
| Ethernet | BIER header | payload
| (ethType = | (BIFT-id, ...) |
| 0xAB37) | |
| | Next Header |
+---------------+-----------------+-------------------
BIER-ETH encapsulation (BIER header for Non-MPLS networks as defined
in [RFC8296]) can be used to transport the multicast data in the IPv6
network by encapsulating the multicast user data payload within the
BIER-ETH header. However, using BIER-ETH in IPv6 networks is not
considered to be a native IPv6 solution which utilizes the IPv6
header to forward the packet. Below listed are some of the
properties of BIER-ETH encapsulation which could be seen as the
reasons for the same,
McBride, et al. Expires May 4, 2020 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft BIER IPv6 Requirements November 2019
o BIER-ETH is not agnostic to the underlying (L2) data link type.
It can be deployed only in the networks with Ethernet data link
and cannot be deployed in an network which deploys any other data
link types. Use of BIER-ETH in IPv6 networks might also result in
using different BIER encapsulations, when BIER is used as a E2E
multicast transport across a larger heterogeneous IPv6 networks
with different data link types used in different layers of the
network.
o BIER-ETH in IPv6 networks is considered similar to 6PE solution
where-in the multicast user data packet is encapsulated with-in
the BIER-MPLS header.
* It is worth noting that the only major difference between BIER-
MPLS and BIER-Non-MPLS header is that BIER-MPLS uses downstream
assigned MPLS label while BIER-Non-MPLS header uses a domain-
wide-unique BIFT-id. While the use of domain-wide-unique BIFT-
id in BIER-ETH header takes away the complexity of allocation
and state maintenance from the network, it still requires some
sort of ID (similar to label) to identify the application
context after the decapsulation of BIER header (example: MVPN
VRF Label). Encoding of such an ID/LABEL before encapsulating
the multicast user data payload with BIER-ETH header cannot be
avoided.
* The absence of an IPv6 header, and the optional IPv6 extension
headers, deprives BIER of some of the useful cases (ex: Use of
IPv6 address for identification of network function or service
mapping) that is otherwise possible in native IPv6
encapsulation which utilizes a IPv6 header.
* Tunneling of BIER packets is one common technique used for FRR,
to tunnel over BIER incapable nodes etc. While it is possible
for the BIER-ETH encapsulated packet to be further encapsulated
within a GRE6 or SRv6, etc tunnel, it might not be possible to
parse and decapsulate different types of tunnel headers and
forward the BIER packet completely in hardware fast path
similar to the label stack processing in BIER-MPLS networks.
It would be useful to select an encapsulation which could help
in processing the tunnel and BIER header and make the
forwarding decision completely in hardware fast path, which is
lacking in BIER-ETH encapsulation if chosen to be deployed in
pure IPv6 networks.
McBride, et al. Expires May 4, 2020 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft BIER IPv6 Requirements November 2019
5.2. Encode Bitstring in IPv6 destination address
+---------------+-------------------
| IPv6 header | payload
| (BitString in |
| DA lower bits)|
| Next Header |
+---------------+-------------------
As described in [I-D.pfister-bier-over-ipv6], The information
required by BIER is stored in the destination IPv6 address. The BIER
BitString is encoded in the low-order bits of the IPv6 destination
address of each packet. The high-order bits of the IPv6 destination
address are used by intermediate routers for unicast forwarding,
deciding whether a packet is a BIER packet, and if so, to identify
the BIER Sub-Domain, Set Identifier and BitString length. No
additional extension or encapsulation header is required. Instead of
encapsulating the packet in IPv6, the payload is attached to the BIER
IPv6 header and the IPv6 protocol number is set to the type of the
payload. If the payload is UDP, the UDP checksum needs to change
when the BitString in the IPv6 destination address changes.
5.3. Add BIER header into IPv6 Extension Header
+---------------+-----------------+-------------------
| IPv6 header | IPv6 Ext header | payload
| | (BIER header in |
| | TLV Type = X) |
| Next Header | Next Header |
+---------------+-----------------+-------------------
According to [RFC8200] In IPv6, optional internet-layer information
is encoded in separate headers that may be placed between the IPv6
header and the upper- layer header in a packet. There is a small
number of such extension headers, each one identified by a distinct
Next Header value. An IPv6 packet may carry zero, one, or more
extension headers, each identified by the Next Header field of the
preceding header. Extension headers (except for the Hop-by-Hop
Options header) are not processed, inserted, or deleted by any node
along a packet's delivery path, until the packet reaches the node (or
each of the set of nodes, in the case of multicast) identified in the
Destination Address field of the IPv6 header. The Hop-by-Hop Options
header is not inserted or deleted, but may be examined or processed
by any node along a packet's delivery path, until the packet reaches
the node (or each of the set of nodes, in the case of multicast)
identified in the Destination Address field of the IPv6 header. The
Hop-by-Hop Options header, when present, must immediately follow the
McBride, et al. Expires May 4, 2020 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft BIER IPv6 Requirements November 2019
IPv6 header. Its presence is indicated by the value zero in the Next
Header field of the IPv6 header.
Two of the currently-defined extension headers are the Hop-by-Hop
Options header and the Destination Options header which carry a
variable number of type-length-value (TLV) encoded "options".
In [I-D.xie-bier-ipv6-encapsulation] an IPv6 BIER Destination Option
is carried by the IPv6 Destination Option Header (indicated by a Next
Header value 60). It is initialized in a packet sent by an IPv6 BFIR
router to inform the following BFR routers in an IPv6 BIER domain to
replicate to destination BFER routers hop-by-hop. BIER is generally
a hop-by-hop and one-to-many architecture and it is required for a
BIER IPv6 encapsulation to include the BIER Header ([RFC8296]) as an
IPv6 Extension Header, to pilot the hop-by-hop BIER replication.
Hop by hop Options Headers may be considered. The Hop-by-Hop Options
header is used to carry optional information that may be examined and
processed by every node along a packet's delivery path. The Hop-by-
Hop Options header is identified by a Next Header value of 0 in the
IPv6 header.
Defining New Extension Headers and Options may also be considered, if
the IPv6 Destination Option Header is not good enough and new
extension headers can solve the problem better.
Such proposals may include requests to IANA to allocate a "BIER
Option" code from "Destination Options and Hop-by-Hop Options", and/
or a "BIER Option Header" code from "IPv6 Extension Header Types".
5.4. Transport BIER as IPv6 payload
+---------------+-----------------+-------------------
| IPv6 header | IPv6 Ext header | BIER Hdr + payload
| | (optional) | as IPv6 payload
| | |
| Next Header | Next Header = X |
+---------------+-----------------+-------------------
There is a proposal for a transport-independent BIER encapsulation
header which is applicable regardless of the underlying transport
technology. As described in [I-D.xu-bier-encapsulation] and
[I-D.zhang-bier-bierin6], the BIER header, and the payload following
it, can be combined as an IPv6 payload, and be indicated by a new
Upper-layer IPv6 Next-Header value. A unicast IPv6 destination
address is used for the replication and changes when replicating a
packet out to a neighbor.
McBride, et al. Expires May 4, 2020 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft BIER IPv6 Requirements November 2019
Such proposals may include a request to IANA to allocate an IPv6
Next-Header code from "Assigned Internet Protocol Numbers".
5.5. Tunneling BIER in a IPv6 tunnel
+---------------+-----------------+------------+----------------
| IPv6 header | IPv6 Ext header | GRE header |
| | (optional) | | BIER Hdr +
| | | | payload as GRE
| Next Header | Next Header | Proto = X | Payload
+---------------+-----------------+------------+----------------
A generic IPv6 Tunnel could be used to encapsulate the bier packet
within an IPv6 domain.
GRE is a mechanism by which any ethernet payload can be carried by an
IP GRE tunnel due to the 16-bits 'Protocol Type' field. Both IPv4
and IPv6 can be used to carry GRE. The Ethernet type codepoint
0xAB37, defined for BIER, can be used in a GRE header to indicate the
subsequent BIER header and payload in an IPv6 network.
+---------------+-----------------+------------+----------------
| IPv6 header | IPv6 Ext header | UDP header |
| | (optional) | | BIER Hdr +
| | | | payload as UDP
| Next Header | Next Header | DPort = X | Payload
+---------------+-----------------+------------+----------------
UDP-based tunneling is another mechanism which uses a specific UDP
port to indicate a UDP payload format. Both IPv4 and IPv6 can
support UDP. Such UDP-based tunnels can be used for BIER in a IPv6
network by defining a new UDP port to indicate the BIER header and
payload.
6. IANA Considerations
Some BIERv6 encapsulation proposals do not require any action from
IANA while other proposals require new BIER Destination Option
codepoints from IPv6 sub-registries, new "Next header" values, or
require new IP Protocol codes. This document, however, does not
require anything from IANA.
7. Security Considerations
There are no security issues introduced by this draft.
McBride, et al. Expires May 4, 2020 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft BIER IPv6 Requirements November 2019
8. Acknowledgement
Thank you to Eric Rosen for his listed set of requirements on the
bier wg list.
9. Normative References
[I-D.pfister-bier-over-ipv6]
Pfister, P. and I. Wijnands, "An IPv6 based BIER
Encapsulation and Encoding", draft-pfister-bier-over-
ipv6-01 (work in progress), October 2016.
[I-D.xie-bier-ipv6-encapsulation]
Xie, J., Geng, L., McBride, M., Asati, R., and S.
Dhanaraj, "Encapsulation for BIER in Non-MPLS IPv6
Networks", draft-xie-bier-ipv6-encapsulation-03 (work in
progress), July 2019.
[I-D.xu-bier-encapsulation]
Xu, X., somasundaram.s@alcatel-lucent.com, s., Jacquenet,
C., Raszuk, R., and Z. Zhang, "A Transport-Independent Bit
Index Explicit Replication (BIER) Encapsulation Header",
draft-xu-bier-encapsulation-06 (work in progress),
September 2016.
[I-D.zhang-bier-bierin6]
Zhang, Z., Przygienda, T., Wijnands, I., Bidgoli, H., and
M. McBride, "BIER in IPv6 (BIERin6)", draft-zhang-bier-
bierin6-03 (work in progress), July 2019.
[RFC1112] Deering, S., "Host extensions for IP multicasting", STD 5,
RFC 1112, DOI 10.17487/RFC1112, August 1989,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1112>.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC2473] Conta, A. and S. Deering, "Generic Packet Tunneling in
IPv6 Specification", RFC 2473, DOI 10.17487/RFC2473,
December 1998, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2473>.
[RFC8200] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6
(IPv6) Specification", STD 86, RFC 8200,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8200, July 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8200>.
McBride, et al. Expires May 4, 2020 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft BIER IPv6 Requirements November 2019
[RFC8279] Wijnands, IJ., Ed., Rosen, E., Ed., Dolganow, A.,
Przygienda, T., and S. Aldrin, "Multicast Using Bit Index
Explicit Replication (BIER)", RFC 8279,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8279, November 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8279>.
[RFC8296] Wijnands, IJ., Ed., Rosen, E., Ed., Dolganow, A.,
Tantsura, J., Aldrin, S., and I. Meilik, "Encapsulation
for Bit Index Explicit Replication (BIER) in MPLS and Non-
MPLS Networks", RFC 8296, DOI 10.17487/RFC8296, January
2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8296>.
[RFC8354] Brzozowski, J., Leddy, J., Filsfils, C., Maglione, R.,
Ed., and M. Townsley, "Use Cases for IPv6 Source Packet
Routing in Networking (SPRING)", RFC 8354,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8354, March 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8354>.
Authors' Addresses
Mike McBride
Futurewei
Email: michael.mcbride@futurewei.com
Jingrong Xie
Huawei
Email: xiejingrong@huawei.com
Senthil Dhanaraj
Huawei
Email: senthil.dhanaraj@huawei.com
Rajiv Asati
Cisco
Email: rajiva@cisco.com
McBride, et al. Expires May 4, 2020 [Page 14]