INTERNET-DRAFT Mohammed Umair Intended Status: Proposed Standard IP Infusion Inc. Expires: February 13, 2015 August 12, 2014 TRILL-campus-name draft-umair-multiple-trill-campus-to-lan-00 Abstract TRILL supports multi-access LAN (Local Area Network) links that can have multiple end stations and RBridges attached. Where multiple RBridges are attached to a link, native traffic to and from end stations on that link is handled by a subset of those RBridges called "Appointed Forwarders", with the intent that native traffic in each VLAN (Virtual LAN) be handled by at most one RBridge. But when two trill campuses are connected through a LAN network, AF selection for each campus should be selected differently. This type of scenario occurs when two different TRILL Campuses are connected to single LAN and want access to common set of VLAN's. The following paper is an attempt to handle such scenario. Status of this Memo This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. 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." The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html Mohammed Umair Expires February 13, 2015 [Page 1] INTERNET DRAFT TRILL-campus-name August 12, 2014 Copyright and License Notice Copyright (c) 2014 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. Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Problem Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. TRILL Campus Name . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4. AF sharing between the two Campus. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5. TRILL Campus Digest TLV. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 8. Acknowledgement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Mohammed Umair Expires February 13, 2015 [Page 2] INTERNET DRAFT TRILL-campus-name August 12, 2014 1. Introduction The IETF TRILL protocol provides transparent forwarding, with a number of additional features, by use of link state routing and encapsulation with a hop count as specified in [RFC6325] and [RFC6327]. Devices implementing the TRILL protocol are called TRILL switches or RBridges (Routing Bridges). A TRILL campus is an area of TRILL switches and possibly bridges bounded by and interconnecting end stations and Layer 3 routers, analogous to a customer bridge LAN. In a TRILL campus, native frames (as defined in [RFC6325]), when they arrive at their first or ingress RBridge, are encapsulated, routed in encapsulated form via zero or more transit TRILL switches, and finally decapsulated and delivered by their egress TRILL switch or switches. This document describes the scenario when there are two different TRILL Campuses which are connected by a common LAN and both the campuses want access for the same set of VLAN's. 1.1. Terminology 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]. Mohammed Umair Expires February 13, 2015 [Page 3] INTERNET DRAFT TRILL-campus-name August 12, 2014 2. Problem Statement ........................................... : Campus1 : ........... : +-----+ : . . +------| RB1 |-----|---------------| : . . | : +-----+ | | : . +-----+ : | | Transit | +-----+ : . o--| SWe1| : | | RBRIDGES |---| RBx |---o Sx1 . | +-----+ : | | | +-----+ : . | . | : +-----+ | | : . | . +------| RB2 |-----|---------------| : . | . : +-----+ : . | . : : . | . ........................................... . L2|LAN. . | . . | . . | . ........................................... . | . : Campus2 : . | . : +-----+ : . | . +-----| RB1 |-----|---------------| : . | . | : +-----+ | | : . | +-----+ : | |Transit | +-----+ : . o--| SWe2| : | |RBridges |---| RBx |---o Sx2 . +-----+ : | | | +-----+ : . . | : +-----+ | | : . . +-----| RB2 |-----|---------------| : . . : +-----+ : ........... : : ........................................... TRILL Campus1 and TRILL Campus2 are the two different Campuses connected to same LAN. RB1 and RB2 of both the TRILL Campus want access to same set of VLAN's, but L2 LAN is transparent for TRILL hellos due to which RB1 and RB2 of both the campuses become TRILL neighbors, hence both the campuses end station ports can't become AF Mohammed Umair Expires February 13, 2015 [Page 4] INTERNET DRAFT TRILL-campus-name August 12, 2014 for same set of VLAN's. 3. TRILL Campus Name TRILL Campus name is unique name configured on RBridges (Edge RBridge). Whenever the endstation port sends hello it will add Campus digest TLV in each hello. To add Campus Digest TLV in hello, ports should be enabled with campus_digest. Only the ports which are enabled with Campus_digest will send hellos with Campus Digest TLV. Whenever a port which is enabled for campus_digest, receives hello without Campus Digest TLV, that port will simply ignore the Hello and won't form adjacency with the sender RBridge port. TRILL Campus name should be configured on RBridge globally, where as campus_digest should be enabled at interface level. 4. AF sharing between the two Campus. When RBridge end-station Ports send hellos with Campus Digest TLV, only the ports with same digest will form adjacency, and the AF distribution will happen between the ports with same digest (digest will be calculated using the unique campus name), hence different campuses ports can become AF for same set of VLAN's. For example, if Campus 1 and Campus 2 are two different campuses separated by LAN, then AF selection will happen separately between the edge RBridges of the campuses. If both campuses have VLAN 1-100 configured in their edge RBridges, then trill campus 1 edge ports will not form adjacency with the trill campus 2 edge ports since the digest shared in the campus digest TLV is different, hence both campuses edge ports will become AF for VLAN 1-100. Mohammed Umair Expires February 13, 2015 [Page 5] INTERNET DRAFT TRILL-campus-name August 12, 2014 5. TRILL Campus Digest TLV. +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type | (1 byte) +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Length | (1 byte) +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | | | | TRILL Campus Digest | | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ TLV_type = TRILL Campus Digest TLV. This field indicates the nature of the information carried in this TLV Tuple. This is 1 byte field. Length = 18 bytes. This field indicates the total length the TLV. This field is of 1 byte. Campus Digest. MD5 Digest (As per [RFC 1321] [RFC 6151]) of 16 bytes and derived from the unique Campus name configured on the RBridge. Mohammed Umair Expires February 13, 2015 [Page 6] INTERNET DRAFT TRILL-campus-name August 12, 2014 6. Security Considerations This Memo does not change the security considerations of TRILL base protocol. 7. IANA Considerations IANA is required to assign TLV Type value for campus digest TLV. 8. Acknowledgement Author would like to thank Vaibhav Agrwal and Hemanth Ramaswamy. 9. References Normative and Informative references are given below 9.1. Normative References [RFC 6325] - Routing Bridges (RBridges): Base Protocol Specification (http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6325) [RFC 6326] - Transparent Interconnection of Lots of Links (TRILL) Use of IS-IS (http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6326) [RFC 6327] - Routing Bridges (RBridges): Adjacency (http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6327) [RFC 7180] - Transparent Interconnection of Lots of Links (TRILL):Clarifications, Corrections, and Updates (http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7180) [RFC 1321] - The MD5 Message-Digest Algorithm https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc1321 [RFC 6151] - Updated Security Considerations for the MD5 Message-Digest and the HMAC-MD5 Algorithms (https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6151) 9.2. Informative References Mohammed Umair Expires February 13, 2015 [Page 7] INTERNET DRAFT TRILL-campus-name August 12, 2014 No informative references as such Authors' Addresses Mohammed Umair IP Infusion Software India Pvt. Ltd. Bangalore - 560 048, Karnataka, India EMail: mohammed.umair2@ipinfusion.com Mohammed Umair Expires February 13, 2015 [Page 8]