BFD Working Group W. Cheng Internet-Draft R. Wang Updates: 5880 (if approved) China Mobile Intended status: Standards Track X. Min, Ed. Expires: 25 October 2023 ZTE Corp. R. Rahman Graphiant R. Boddireddy Juniper Networks 23 April 2023 Unaffiliated BFD Echo draft-ietf-bfd-unaffiliated-echo-07 Abstract Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) is a fault detection protocol that can quickly determine a communication failure between two forwarding engines. This document proposes a use of the BFD Echo where the local system supports BFD but the neighboring system does not support BFD. BFD Async procedures can be executed over the BFD Echo port where the neighboring system only loops packets back to the local system. This document updates RFC 5880. 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 25 October 2023. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2023 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. Cheng, et al. Expires 25 October 2023 [Page 1] Internet-Draft Unaffiliated BFD Echo April 2023 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 Revised BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License. Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.1. Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Unaffiliated BFD Echo Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. Updates to RFC 5880 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4. Unaffiliated BFD Echo Applicability . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 8. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 1. Introduction To minimize the impact of device/link faults on services and improve network availability, a network device must be able to quickly detect faults in communication with adjacent devices. Measures can then be taken to promptly rectify the faults to ensure service continuity. BFD [RFC5880] is a low-overhead, short-duration method to detect faults on the communication path between adjacent forwarding engines. The faults can be on interfaces, data link(s), and even the forwarding engines. It is a single, unified mechanism to monitor any media and protocol layers in real time. Cheng, et al. Expires 25 October 2023 [Page 2] Internet-Draft Unaffiliated BFD Echo April 2023 BFD defines Asynchronous and Demand modes to satisfy various deployment scenarios. It also supports an Echo function to reduce the device requirement for BFD. When the Echo function is activated, the local system sends BFD Echo packets and the remote system loops back the received Echo packets through the forwarding path. If several consecutive BFD Echo packets are not received by the local system, then the BFD session is declared to be Down. Section 5 of [RFC5880] indicates that the payload of a BFD Echo packet is a local matter and hence its contents are outside the scope of that specification. This document, on the other hand, specifies the contents of the Echo packets and what to do with them. When using BFD Echo function, there are two typical scenarios as below: * Full BFD protocol capability with affiliated Echo function. This scenario requires both the local device and the neighboring device to support the full BFD protocol. * BFD Echo-Only method without full BFD protocol capability. This scenario requires only the local device to support sending and demultiplexing BFD Control packets. In this scenario, the BFD Control packets are sent over the BFD Echo port, but that the BFD Async procedures are used with the modifications described in this document. The former scenario is not changed by this document in any way. The latter scenario is referred to as Unaffiliated BFD Echo in this document. The BFD Control packets sent over the BFD Echo port is referred to as Unaffiliated BFD Echo packets in this document. Section 6.2.2 of [BBF-TR-146] describes one use case of the Unaffiliated BFD Echo. Section 2 of [I-D.wang-bfd-one-arm-use-case] describes another use case of the Unaffiliated BFD Echo. This document describes the use of the Unaffiliated BFD Echo over IPv4 and IPv6 for single IP hop. 1.1. Conventions Used in This Document The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here. 2. Unaffiliated BFD Echo Procedures Cheng, et al. Expires 25 October 2023 [Page 3] Internet-Draft Unaffiliated BFD Echo April 2023 Device A Device B BFD Enabled BFD packets looped +--------+ Unaffiliated BFD Echo session +--------+ | A |---------------------------------------| B | | |Interface 1 Interface 1| | +--------+ +--------+ BFD is supported. BFD is not supported. Figure 1: Unaffiliated BFD Echo diagram As shown in Figure 1, device A supports BFD, whereas device B does not support BFD. Device A would send Unaffiliated BFD Echo packets, and after receiving the Unaffiliated BFD Echo packets sent from device A, the one-hop-away BFD peer device B immediately loops them back by normal IP forwarding, this allows device A to rapidly detect a connectivity loss to device B. Note that device B would not intercept any received Unaffiliated BFD Echo packet or parse any BFD protocol field within the Unaffiliated BFD Echo packet. For unaffiliated echo, a Unaffiliated BFD Echo session is created on device A, and the Unaffiliated BFD Echo session MUST follow the BFD state machine defined in Section 6.2 of [RFC5880], except that the received state is not sent but echoed from the remote system. Unaffiliated BFD Echo does not use the AdminDown state. BFD Control packets are transmitted and received as BFD Echo packets using destination UDP port 3785, as defined in [RFC5881]. The procedures for BFD Async sessions are executed for the looped BFD Control packets as per [RFC5880], including validation and authentication. Cheng, et al. Expires 25 October 2023 [Page 4] Internet-Draft Unaffiliated BFD Echo April 2023 Once a Unaffiliated BFD Echo session is created on device A, it starts sending Unaffiliated BFD Echo packets. Device A performs its initial demultiplexing of a Unaffiliated BFD Echo session using the source IP address or UDP source port, once the remote system echoes back the local discriminator, all further received packets are demultiplexed based on the "Your Discriminator" field only, which is conformed to the procedure specified in Section 6.3 of [RFC5880]. Regarding the selection of IP address, as specified in Section 4 of [RFC5881], the destination address MUST be chosen in such a way as to cause the remote system to forward the packet back to the local system. The source address MUST be chosen in such a way as to preclude the remote system from generating ICMP or Neighbor Discovery Redirect messages. In particular, the source address SHOULD NOT be part of the subnet bound to the interface over which the BFD Echo packet is being transmitted, and it SHOULD NOT be an IPv6 link-local address, unless it is known by other means that the remote system will not send Redirects. All Unaffiliated BFD Echo packets for the session MUST be sent with a Time to Live (TTL) or Hop Limit value of 255, and received with a TTL or Hop Limit value of 254, otherwise the received packets MUST be dropped [RFC5082]. Within the Unaffiliated BFD Echo packet, the "Desired Min TX Interval" and "Required Min RX Interval" defined in [RFC5880] SHOULD be populated with an expected value. A suggested value is 1 second (1,000,000 microseconds). These values, however, MUST be ignored on receipt. Furthermore, these values MUST NOT be used to calculate the Detection Time. The "Required Min Echo RX Interval" defined in [RFC5880] SHOULD be populated with an expected value. A suggested value is 0. This value MUST be ignored on receipt. The transmission interval for Unaffiliated BFD Echo packets in the Up state MUST be provisioned on device A. The method for provisioning device B to loop back BFD Unaffiliated Echo packets is outside the scope of this document. Similar to what's specified in [RFC5880], the Unaffiliated BFD Echo session begins with the periodic, slow transmission of Unaffiliated BFD Echo packets. The slow transmission rate SHOULD be no less then one second per packet, until the session is Up. Afterwards, the provisioned transmission interval is used. When the Unaffiliated BFD Echo session goes Down, the slow transmission rate is resumed. The "Detect Mult" defined in [RFC5880] MUST be set to a value provisioned on device A. When the bfd.SessionState is Up and a Detect Mult number of Unaffiliated BFD Echo packets have not arrived at device A as they should, the device A MUST set bfd.SessionState to Down and bfd.LocalDiag to 2 (Echo Function Failed), as specified in Section 6.8.5 of [RFC5880]. Cheng, et al. Expires 25 October 2023 [Page 5] Internet-Draft Unaffiliated BFD Echo April 2023 In summary, the Unaffiliated BFD Echo packet reuses the format of the BFD Control packet defined in [RFC5880], and the fields within the Unaffiliated BFD Echo packet are populated as follows: * My Discriminator MUST be set to the provisioned local discriminator. * Your Discriminator MUST be set to 0 initially, and then MUST be set to the same as My Discriminator echoed back. * Desired Min TX Interval SHOULD be set to an expected value. A suggested value is 1 second (1,000,000 microseconds). * Required Min RX Interval SHOULD be set to an expected value. A suggested value is 1 second (1,000,000 microseconds). * Required Min Echo RX Interval SHOULD be set to an expected value. A suggested value is 0. * Detect Mult MUST be set to the provisioned maximum allowable number of consecutively lost Unaffiliated BFD Echo packets. 3. Updates to RFC 5880 The Unaffiliated BFD Echo described in this document reuses the BFD Echo function as described in [RFC5880] and [RFC5881], but does not require BFD Asynchronous or Demand mode. When using the Unaffiliated BFD Echo, only the local system has the BFD protocol enabled; the remote system just loops back the received BFD Echo packets as regular data packets. This document updates [RFC5880] with respect to its descriptions on the BFD Echo function as follows. The 4th paragraph of Section 3.2 of [RFC5880] is updated as below: OLD TEXT An adjunct to both modes is the Echo function. NEW TEXT An adjunct to both modes is the Echo function, which can also be running independently. OLD TEXT Since the Echo function is handling the task of detection, the rate of periodic transmission of Control packets may be reduced (in the case of Asynchronous mode) or eliminated completely (in the case of Demand mode). Cheng, et al. Expires 25 October 2023 [Page 6] Internet-Draft Unaffiliated BFD Echo April 2023 NEW TEXT Since the Echo function is handling the task of detection, the rate of periodic transmission of Control packets may be reduced (in the case of Asynchronous mode) or eliminated completely (in the case of Demand mode). The Echo function may also be used independently, with neither Asynchronous nor Demand mode. The 3rd and 9th paragraphs of Section 6.1 of [RFC5880] are updated as below: OLD TEXT Once the BFD session is Up, a system can choose to start the Echo function if it desires and the other system signals that it will allow it. The rate of transmission of Control packets is typically kept low when the Echo function is active. NEW TEXT When a system is running with Asynchronous or Demand mode, once the BFD session is Up, it can choose to start the Echo function if it desires and the other system signals that it will allow it. The rate of transmission of Control packets is typically kept low for Asynchronous mode or eliminated completely for Demand mode when the Echo function is active. OLD TEXT If the session goes Down, the transmission of Echo packets (if any) ceases, and the transmission of Control packets goes back to the slow rate. NEW TEXT In Asynchronous mode, if the session goes Down, the transmission of Echo packets (if any) ceases, and the transmission of Control packets goes back to the slow rate. Demand mode MUST NOT be active if the session goes Down. The 2nd paragraph of Section 6.4 of [RFC5880] is updated as below: OLD TEXT When a system is using the Echo function, it is advantageous to choose a sedate reception rate for Control packets, since liveness detection is being handled by the Echo packets. This can be controlled by manipulating the Required Min RX Interval field (see section 6.8.3). NEW TEXT When a system is using the Echo function with Asynchronous mode, it is advantageous to choose a sedate reception rate for Control packets, since liveness detection is being handled by the Echo Cheng, et al. Expires 25 October 2023 [Page 7] Internet-Draft Unaffiliated BFD Echo April 2023 packets. This can be controlled by manipulating the Required Min RX Interval field (see section 6.8.3). Note that a system operating in Demand mode would direct the remote system to cease the periodic transmission of BFD Control packets, by setting the Demand (D) bit in its BFD Control packets. The 2nd paragraph of Section 6.8 of [RFC5880] is updated as below: OLD TEXT When a system is said to have "the Echo function active" it means that the system is sending BFD Echo packets, implying that the session is Up and the other system has signaled its willingness to loop back Echo packets. NEW TEXT When a system in Asynchronous or Demand mode is said to have "the Echo function active" it means that the system is sending BFD Echo packets, implying that the session is Up and the other system has signaled its willingness to loop back Echo packets. The 7th paragraph of Section 6.8.3 of [RFC5880] is updated as below: OLD TEXT When the Echo function is active, a system SHOULD set bfd.RequiredMinRxInterval to a value of not less than one second (1,000,000 microseconds). This is intended to keep received BFD Control traffic at a negligible level, since the actual detection function is being performed using BFD Echo packets. NEW TEXT When the Echo function is active with Asynchronous mode, a system SHOULD set bfd.RequiredMinRxInterval to a value of not less than one second (1,000,000 microseconds). This is intended to keep received BFD Control traffic at a negligible level, since the actual detection function is being performed using BFD Echo packets. While a system operating in Demand mode would not receive BFD Control traffic. The 1st and 2nd paragraphs of Section 6.8.9 of [RFC5880] are updated as below: OLD TEXT BFD Echo packets MUST NOT be transmitted when bfd.SessionState is not Up. BFD Echo packets MUST NOT be transmitted unless the last BFD Control packet received from the remote system contains a nonzero value in Required Min Echo RX Interval. Cheng, et al. Expires 25 October 2023 [Page 8] Internet-Draft Unaffiliated BFD Echo April 2023 NEW TEXT When a system is using the Echo function with either Asynchronous or Demand mode, BFD Echo packets MUST NOT be transmitted when bfd.SessionState is not Up, and BFD Echo packets MUST NOT be transmitted unless the last BFD Control packet received from the remote system contains a nonzero value in Required Min Echo RX Interval. OLD TEXT BFD Echo packets MAY be transmitted when bfd.SessionState is Up. The interval between transmitted BFD Echo packets MUST NOT be less than the value advertised by the remote system in Required Min Echo RX Interval... NEW TEXT When a system is using the Echo function with either Asynchronous or Demand mode, BFD Echo packets MAY be transmitted when bfd.SessionState is Up, and the interval between transmitted BFD Echo packets MUST NOT be less than the value advertised by the remote system in Required Min Echo RX Interval... 4. Unaffiliated BFD Echo Applicability Some devices that would benefit from the use of BFD may be unable to support the full BFD protocol. Examples of such devices include servers running virtual machines, or Internet of Things (IoT) devices. Unaffiliated BFD Echo can be used when two devices are connected and only one of them supports the BFD protocol, and the other is capable of looping Unaffiliated BFD Echo packets. 5. Security Considerations All Security Considerations from [RFC5880] and [RFC5881] apply. Unaffiliated BFD Echo requires the remote device to loop Unaffiliated BFD Echo packets. In order to provide this service, the remote device cannot make use of Unicast Reverse Path Forwarding (URPF) [RFC3704] [RFC8704] in strict mode. As specified in Section 5 of [RFC5880], since BFD Echo packets may be spoofed, some form of authentication SHOULD be included. Considering the Unaffiliated BFD Echo packets in this document are also BFD Control packets, the "Authentication Section" as defined in [RFC5880] for BFD Control packet is RECOMMENDED to be included within the Unaffiliated BFD Echo packet. Cheng, et al. Expires 25 October 2023 [Page 9] Internet-Draft Unaffiliated BFD Echo April 2023 In order to mitigate the potential reflector attack by the remote attackers, or infinite loop of the Unaffiliated BFD Echo packets, it's RECOMMENDED to put two requirements, also known as Generalized TTL Security Mechanism (GTSM) [RFC5082], on the device looping Unaffiliated BFD Echo packets, the first one is that a packet SHOULD NOT be looped unless it has a TTL or Hop Limit value of 255, and the second one is that a packet being looped MUST NOT reset the TTL or Hop Limit value to 255, and MUST use a TTL or Hop Limit value of 254. 6. IANA Considerations This document has no IANA action requested. 7. Acknowledgements The authors would like to acknowledge Ketan Talaulikar, Greg Mirsky, Santosh Pallagatti, and Aijun Wang for their careful review and very helpful comments. The authors would like to acknowledge Jeff Haas for his guidance, insightful review and very helpful comments. The authors would like to acknowledge Detao Zhao for the very helpful discussion. 8. Contributors Liu Aihua ZTE Email: liu.aihua@zte.com.cn Qian Xin ZTE Email: qian.xin2@zte.com.cn Zhao Yanhua ZTE Email: zhao.yanhua3@zte.com.cn 9. References 9.1. Normative References [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, . Cheng, et al. Expires 25 October 2023 [Page 10] Internet-Draft Unaffiliated BFD Echo April 2023 [RFC5880] Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD)", RFC 5880, DOI 10.17487/RFC5880, June 2010, . [RFC5881] Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) for IPv4 and IPv6 (Single Hop)", RFC 5881, DOI 10.17487/RFC5881, June 2010, . [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, May 2017, . 9.2. Informative References [BBF-TR-146] Broadband Forum, "BBF Technical Report - Subscriber Sessions Issue 1", 2013, . [I-D.wang-bfd-one-arm-use-case] Wang, R., Cheng, W., Zhao, Y., and A. Liu, "Using One-Arm BFD in Cloud Network", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-wang-bfd-one-arm-use-case-00, 18 November 2019, . [RFC3704] Baker, F. and P. Savola, "Ingress Filtering for Multihomed Networks", BCP 84, RFC 3704, DOI 10.17487/RFC3704, March 2004, . [RFC5082] Gill, V., Heasley, J., Meyer, D., Savola, P., Ed., and C. Pignataro, "The Generalized TTL Security Mechanism (GTSM)", RFC 5082, DOI 10.17487/RFC5082, October 2007, . [RFC8704] Sriram, K., Montgomery, D., and J. Haas, "Enhanced Feasible-Path Unicast Reverse Path Forwarding", BCP 84, RFC 8704, DOI 10.17487/RFC8704, February 2020, . Authors' Addresses Weiqiang Cheng China Mobile Beijing China Email: chengweiqiang@chinamobile.com Cheng, et al. Expires 25 October 2023 [Page 11] Internet-Draft Unaffiliated BFD Echo April 2023 Ruixue Wang China Mobile Beijing China Email: wangruixue@chinamobile.com Xiao Min (editor) ZTE Corp. Nanjing China Email: xiao.min2@zte.com.cn Reshad Rahman Graphiant Kanata Canada Email: reshad@yahoo.com Raj Chetan Boddireddy Juniper Networks Email: rchetan@juniper.net Cheng, et al. Expires 25 October 2023 [Page 12]