GRE-in-UDP Encapsulation
RFC 8086
Document | Type | RFC - Proposed Standard (March 2017; Errata) | |
---|---|---|---|
Authors | Lucy Yong , Edward Crabbe , Xiaohu Xu , Tom Herbert | ||
Last updated | 2020-01-21 | ||
Replaces | draft-yong-tsvwg-gre-in-udp-encap | ||
Stream | Internent Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
Formats | plain text html pdf htmlized (tools) htmlized with errata bibtex | ||
Reviews | |||
Stream | WG state | Submitted to IESG for Publication | |
Document shepherd | David Black | ||
Shepherd write-up | Show (last changed 2016-09-13) | ||
IESG | IESG state | RFC 8086 (Proposed Standard) | |
Action Holders |
(None)
|
||
Consensus Boilerplate | Yes | ||
Telechat date | |||
Responsible AD | Spencer Dawkins | ||
Send notices to | "David L. Black" <david.black@emc.com> | ||
IANA | IANA review state | Version Changed - Review Needed | |
IANA action state | RFC-Ed-Ack |
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) L. Yong, Ed. Request for Comments: 8086 Huawei Technologies Category: Standards Track E. Crabbe ISSN: 2070-1721 Oracle X. Xu Huawei Technologies T. Herbert Facebook March 2017 GRE-in-UDP Encapsulation Abstract This document specifies a method of encapsulating network protocol packets within GRE and UDP headers. This GRE-in-UDP encapsulation allows the UDP source port field to be used as an entropy field. This may be used for load-balancing of GRE traffic in transit networks using existing Equal-Cost Multipath (ECMP) mechanisms. There are two applicability scenarios for GRE-in-UDP with different requirements: (1) general Internet and (2) a traffic-managed controlled environment. The controlled environment has less restrictive requirements than the general Internet. Status of This Memo This is an Internet Standards Track document. This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has received public review and has been approved for publication by the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 7841. Information about the current status of this document, any errata, and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8086. Yong, et al. Standards Track [Page 1] RFC 8086 GRE-in-UDP Encapsulation March 2017 Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2017 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. Yong, et al. Standards Track [Page 2] RFC 8086 GRE-in-UDP Encapsulation March 2017 Table of Contents 1. Introduction ....................................................4 1.1. Terminology ................................................5 1.2. Requirements Language ......................................5 2. Applicability Statement .........................................6 2.1. GRE-in-UDP Tunnel Requirements .............................6 2.1.1. Requirements for Default GRE-in-UDP Tunnel ..........7 2.1.2. Requirements for TMCE GRE-in-UDP Tunnel .............8 3. GRE-in-UDP Encapsulation ........................................9 3.1. IP Header .................................................11 3.2. UDP Header ................................................11 3.2.1. Source Port ........................................11 3.2.2. Destination Port ...................................11 3.2.3. Checksum ...........................................12 3.2.4. Length .............................................12 3.3. GRE Header ................................................12 4. Encapsulation Procedures .......................................13 4.1. MTU and Fragmentation .....................................13 4.2. Differentiated Services and ECN Marking ...................14 5. Use of DTLS ....................................................14 6. UDP Checksum Handling ..........................................15 6.1. UDP Checksum with IPv4 ....................................15 6.2. UDP Checksum with IPv6 ....................................15 7. Middlebox Considerations .......................................18 7.1. Middlebox Considerations for Zero Checksums ...............19 8. Congestion Considerations ......................................19 9. Backward Compatibility .........................................20 10. IANA Considerations ...........................................21 11. Security Considerations .......................................21Show full document text