draft-ietf-bfd-seamless-base-06.txt		draft-ietf-bfd-seamless-base-07.txt
	skipping to change at page 1, line 14		skipping to change at page 1, line 14
	Internet-Draft Big Switch Networks		Internet-Draft Big Switch Networks
	Updates: 5880 (if approved) C. Pignataro		Updates: 5880 (if approved) C. Pignataro
	Intended status: Standards Track D. Ward		Intended status: Standards Track D. Ward
	Expires: August 12, 2016 Cisco Systems		Expires: August 12, 2016 Cisco Systems
	M. Bhatia		M. Bhatia
	Ionos Networks		Ionos Networks
	S. Pallagatti		S. Pallagatti
	February 9, 2016		February 9, 2016
	Seamless Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (S-BFD)		Seamless Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (S-BFD)
	draft-ietf-bfd-seamless-base-06		draft-ietf-bfd-seamless-base-07
	Abstract		Abstract
	This document defines a simplified mechanism to use Bidirectional		This document defines a simplified mechanism to use Bidirectional
	Forwarding Detection (BFD) with large portions of negotiation aspects		Forwarding Detection (BFD) with large portions of negotiation aspects
	eliminated, thus providing benefits such as quick provisioning as		eliminated, thus providing benefits such as quick provisioning as
	well as improved control and flexibility to network nodes initiating		well as improved control and flexibility to network nodes initiating
	the path monitoring.		the path monitoring.
	This document updates RFC5880.		This document updates RFC5880.
	skipping to change at page 2, line 36		skipping to change at page 2, line 36
	4.1. S-BFD Discriminator Uniqueness . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6		4.1. S-BFD Discriminator Uniqueness . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
	4.2. Discriminator Pools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6		4.2. Discriminator Pools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
	5. Reflector BFD Session . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		5. Reflector BFD Session . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	6. State Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		6. State Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	6.1. New State Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7		6.1. New State Variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
	6.2. State Variable Initialization and Maintenance . . . . . . 8		6.2. State Variable Initialization and Maintenance . . . . . . 8
	7. S-BFD Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8		7. S-BFD Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
	7.1. Demultiplexing of S-BFD Control Packet . . . . . . . . . 8		7.1. Demultiplexing of S-BFD Control Packet . . . . . . . . . 8
	7.2. Responder Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9		7.2. Responder Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
	7.2.1. Responder Demultiplexing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9		7.2.1. Responder Demultiplexing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
	7.2.2. Transmission of S-BFD Control Packet by SBFDReflector 9		7.2.2. Transmission of S-BFD Control Packet by SBFDReflector 10
	7.2.3. Additional SBFDReflector Behaviors . . . . . . . . . 11		7.2.3. Additional SBFDReflector Behaviors . . . . . . . . . 11
	7.3. Initiator Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11		7.3. Initiator Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
	7.3.1. SBFDInitiator State Machine . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12		7.3.1. SBFDInitiator State Machine . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
	7.3.2. Transmission of S-BFD Control Packet by SBFDInitiator 13		7.3.2. Transmission of S-BFD Control Packet by SBFDInitiator 13
	7.3.3. Additional SBFDInitiator Behaviors . . . . . . . . . 13		7.3.3. Additional SBFDInitiator Behaviors . . . . . . . . . 13
	7.4. Diagnostic Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14		7.4. Diagnostic Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
	7.5. The Poll Sequence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14		7.5. The Poll Sequence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
	8. Scaling Aspect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14		8. Scaling Aspect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
	9. Co-existence with Classical BFD Sessions . . . . . . . . . . 14		9. Co-existence with Classical BFD Sessions . . . . . . . . . . 14
	10. S-BFD Echo Function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15		10. S-BFD Echo Function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
	skipping to change at page 3, line 17		skipping to change at page 3, line 17
	1. Introduction		1. Introduction
	Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD), [RFC5880] and related		Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD), [RFC5880] and related
	documents, has efficiently generalized the failure detection		documents, has efficiently generalized the failure detection
	mechanism for multiple protocols and applications. There are some		mechanism for multiple protocols and applications. There are some
	improvements which can be made to better fit existing technologies.		improvements which can be made to better fit existing technologies.
	There is a possibility of evolving BFD to better fit new		There is a possibility of evolving BFD to better fit new
	technologies. This document focuses on several aspects of BFD in		technologies. This document focuses on several aspects of BFD in
	order to further improve efficiency, to expand failure detection		order to further improve efficiency, to expand failure detection
	coverage and to allow BFD usage for wider scenarios.		coverage and to allow BFD usage for wider scenarios. Additional use
			cases are listed in [I-D.ietf-bfd-seamless-use-case].
	Specifically, this document defines Seamless Bidirectional Forwarding		Specifically, this document defines Seamless Bidirectional Forwarding
	Detection (S-BFD) a simplified mechanism to use Bidirectional		Detection (S-BFD) a simplified mechanism to use Bidirectional
	Forwarding Detection (BFD) with large portions of negotiation aspects		Forwarding Detection (BFD) with large portions of negotiation aspects
	eliminated, thus providing benefits such as quick provisioning as		eliminated, thus providing benefits such as quick provisioning as
	well as improved control and flexibility to network nodes initiating		well as improved control and flexibility to network nodes initiating
	the path monitoring. S-BFD enables cases benefiting from the use of		the path monitoring. S-BFD enables cases benefiting from the use of
	core BFD technologies in a fashion that leverages existing		core BFD technologies in a fashion that leverages existing
	implementations and protocol machinery while providing a rather		implementations and protocol machinery while providing a rather
	simplified and largely stateless infrastructure for continuity		simplified and largely stateless infrastructure for continuity
	skipping to change at page 6, line 5		skipping to change at page 6, line 5
	IS SystemID yyy (node D) allocates an S-BFD discriminator 456, and		IS SystemID yyy (node D) allocates an S-BFD discriminator 456, and
	IS-IS advertises the S-BFD discriminator 456 in an IS-IS TLV. A		IS-IS advertises the S-BFD discriminator 456 in an IS-IS TLV. A
	reflector BFD session is created on both network nodes (node A and		reflector BFD session is created on both network nodes (node A and
	node D). When network node A wants to check the reachability to		node D). When network node A wants to check the reachability to
	network node D, node A can send an S-BFD control packet, destined to		network node D, node A can send an S-BFD control packet, destined to
	node D, with "your discriminator" field set to 456. When the		node D, with "your discriminator" field set to 456. When the
	reflector BFD session on node D receives this S-BFD control packet,		reflector BFD session on node D receives this S-BFD control packet,
	then response S-BFD control packet is sent back to node A, which		then response S-BFD control packet is sent back to node A, which
	allows node A to complete the continuity test.		allows node A to complete the continuity test.
	The use of multiple S-BFD discriminators by a single network node is		When a node allocates multiple S-BFD discriminators, how remote nodes
	outside the scope of this document.		determine which of the discriminators is associated with a specific
			entity is currently unspecified. The use of multiple S-BFD
			discriminators by a single network node is therefore discouraged
			until a means of learning the mapping is defined.
	4. S-BFD Discriminators		4. S-BFD Discriminators
	4.1. S-BFD Discriminator Uniqueness		4.1. S-BFD Discriminator Uniqueness
	One important characteristics of an S-BFD discriminator is that it		One important characteristics of an S-BFD discriminator is that it
	MUST be unique within an administrative domain. If multiple network		MUST be unique within an administrative domain. If multiple network
	nodes allocated a same S-BFD discriminator value, then S-BFD control		nodes allocated a same S-BFD discriminator value, then S-BFD control
	packets falsely terminating on a wrong network node can result in a		packets falsely terminating on a wrong network node can result in a
	reflector BFD session to generate a response back, due to "your		reflector BFD session to generate a response back, due to "your
	skipping to change at page 18, line 10		skipping to change at page 18, line 10
	[I-D.ietf-bfd-generic-crypto-auth]		[I-D.ietf-bfd-generic-crypto-auth]
	Bhatia, M., Manral, V., Zhang, D., and M. Jethanandani,		Bhatia, M., Manral, V., Zhang, D., and M. Jethanandani,
	"BFD Generic Cryptographic Authentication", draft-ietf-		"BFD Generic Cryptographic Authentication", draft-ietf-
	bfd-generic-crypto-auth-06 (work in progress), April 2014.		bfd-generic-crypto-auth-06 (work in progress), April 2014.
	[I-D.ietf-bfd-multipoint]		[I-D.ietf-bfd-multipoint]
	Katz, D., Ward, D., and J. Networks, "BFD for Multipoint		Katz, D., Ward, D., and J. Networks, "BFD for Multipoint
	Networks", draft-ietf-bfd-multipoint-07 (work in		Networks", draft-ietf-bfd-multipoint-07 (work in
	progress), August 2015.		progress), August 2015.
			[I-D.ietf-bfd-seamless-use-case]
			Aldrin, S., Bhatia, M., Matsushima, S., Mirsky, G., and N.
			Kumar, "Seamless Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD)
			Use Case", draft-ietf-bfd-seamless-use-case-03 (work in
			progress), July 2015.
	[RFC0791] Postel, J., "Internet Protocol", STD 5, RFC 791,		[RFC0791] Postel, J., "Internet Protocol", STD 5, RFC 791,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC0791, September 1981,		DOI 10.17487/RFC0791, September 1981,
	<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc791>.		<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc791>.
	[RFC2460] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6		[RFC2460] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6
	(IPv6) Specification", RFC 2460, DOI 10.17487/RFC2460,		(IPv6) Specification", RFC 2460, DOI 10.17487/RFC2460,
	December 1998, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2460>.		December 1998, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2460>.
	[RFC3031] Rosen, E., Viswanathan, A., and R. Callon, "Multiprotocol		[RFC3031] Rosen, E., Viswanathan, A., and R. Callon, "Multiprotocol
	Label Switching Architecture", RFC 3031,		Label Switching Architecture", RFC 3031,
End of changes. 5 change blocks.
	5 lines changed or deleted		15 lines changed or added
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.42. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/