Internet DRAFT - draft-ietf-rift-kv-registry
draft-ietf-rift-kv-registry
RIFT J. Head, Ed.
Internet-Draft T. Przygienda
Intended status: Standards Track Juniper Networks
Expires: 14 September 2023 13 March 2023
RIFT Key/Value Structure and Registry
draft-ietf-rift-kv-registry-05
Abstract
The RIFT (Routing in Fat-Trees) protocol allows for key/value pairs
to be advertised within Key-Value Topology Information Elements (KV-
TIEs). The data contained within these KV-TIEs can be used for any
imaginable purpose. This document defines the various Key-Types
(i.e. Well-Known, OUI, and Experimental) and a method to structure
corresponding values.
Requirements Language
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 asdescribed in BCP
14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here.
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 14 September 2023.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2023 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
Head & Przygienda Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-rift-kv-registry-05 March 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
2. Key Structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. Experimental Key-Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2. Well-Known Key-Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.3. OUI Key-Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Design Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1. Tie-Breaking Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1.1. Southbound Key-Value TIE Tie-Breaking Key/Value
Pair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.1. RIFT Key-Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.1.1. RIFT Key-Types Requested Entries . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.2. RIFT Well-Known Key-Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.2.1. RIFT Well-Known Key-Types Requested Entries . . . . . 7
4.3. Expert Review Guidance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
7. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
8. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Appendix A. Thrift Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
A.1. southbound_kv.thrift . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
1. Introduction
The Routing in Fat-Trees RIFT [RIFT] protocol allows for key/value
pairs to be advertised within Key-Value Topology Information Elements
(KV-TIEs). There are no restrictions placed on the type of data that
is contained in KV-TIEs nor what the data is used for.
For example, it might be beneficial to advertise overlay protocol
state from leaf nodes to the Top-of-Fabric (ToF) nodes. This would
make it possible to view critical state of a fabric-wide service from
a single ToF node rather than retrieving and reconciling the same
state from multiple leaf nodes.
Head & Przygienda Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-rift-kv-registry-05 March 2023
2. Key Structure
This section describes the generic Key structure and semantics,
Figure 1 further illustrates these components.
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Key-Type | Key Identifier |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Values (variable) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 1: Generic Key-Value Structure
*where:*
*Key-Type:*
A 1-byte value that identifies the Key-Type. It MUST be a
reserved value from the RIFT Key-Type Registry that is defined
later in this document.
The range of valid values is 1 - 255 (2^8-1).
0 is an illegal value and MUST NOT be allocated to or used by
any implementation. It MUST be ignored on receipt.
*Key Identifier:*
A 3-byte value that identifies the specific key and describes
the structure of the contained values.
The range of valid values is 1 - 16777215 (2^24-1).
0 is an illegal value and MUST NOT be allocated to or used by
any implementation. It MUST be ignored on receipt.
*Values:*
A variable length value that contains data associated with the
Key Identifier. It SHOULD contain 1 or more elements. Whether
the collection of elements allows duplicates and/or is ordered
is governed by the particular Key Identifier's specification.
2.1. Experimental Key-Type
This section reserves a value in the RIFT Key-Type Registry to
indicate an Experimental Key-Type.
Head & Przygienda Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-rift-kv-registry-05 March 2023
As shown in Figure 2, the Key-Type will be used to identify the Key-
Type as Experimental. The Key Identifier will be used to identify
the specific key and describe the structure of the contained values.
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| 1 | Experimental Key Identifier |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Experimental Values (variable) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 2: Experimental Key-Type
2.2. Well-Known Key-Type
This section reserves a value in the RIFT Key-Type Registry to
indicate Well-Known Key-Types that all implementations SHOULD
support.
As shown in Figure 3, the Key-Type will be used to identify the Key-
Type as Well-Known. The Key Identifier will be used to identify the
specific key and describe the structure of the contained values.
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| 2 | Well-Known Key Identifier |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Well-Known Values (variable) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 3: Well-Known Key-Type
2.3. OUI Key-Type
This section reserves a value in the RIFT Key-Type Registry to
indicate an OUI (vendor-specific) Key-Type that any implementation
MAY support.
As shown in Figure 4, the Key-Type will be used to identify the Key-
Type as OUI. The Key Identifier MUST use the implementing
organization's reserved OUI space to indicate the key and value
structure.
Head & Przygienda Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-rift-kv-registry-05 March 2023
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| 3 | OUI Key Identifier |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Vendor Specific Values (variable) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 4: OUI Key-Type
3. Design Considerations
While no restrictions are placed on Key-Value data or what it is used
for, it is RECOMMENDED that a serialized Thrift [THRIFT] model be
used for simpler interoperability. [RIFT-AUTO-EVPN] is an example of
this type of implementation.
Key-Value elements SHOULD NOT be used to carry topology information
used by RIFT itself to perform distributed computations.
3.1. Tie-Breaking Considerations
In cases where KV-TIEs are flooded from north to south, policies
SHOULD be implemented in order to avoid network-wide flooding.
For networks with more than one ToF node, it is RECOMMENDED that
those ToF nodes contain identical KV-TIE information when being
distributed from north to south. RIFT [RIFT] requires that only one
KV-TIE is selected when identical keys are received from multiple
northbound neighbors. If this is not considered then the tie-
breaking rules may cause a node to select a suboptimal KV-TIE.
Consider a case where failure conditions cause the ToF nodes to
become split-brained. While the Key-Type and Key Identifier will be
identical, the value(s) contained within may differ. The node(s)
receiving these differing KV-TIEs will select the one from the ToF
node with the highest System ID, potentially leading to unintended
effects.
3.1.1. Southbound Key-Value TIE Tie-Breaking Key/Value Pair
This Key/Value pair contains information that allows for verification
of proper tie-breaking for the Southbound Key store.
Head & Przygienda Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-rift-kv-registry-05 March 2023
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Well-Known | Southbound Tie-Break (Global) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| (System ID, |
| Level), |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 5: Southbound Tie-Break (Global) Key/Value Pair
*where:*
*System ID:*
A REQUIRED value indicating the node's unique System ID.
*Level:*
A RECOMMENDED value indicating the node's level.
4. IANA Considerations
Per [RFC8126], IANA is requested to create two new registries under
the top-level "RIFT" category:
* RIFT Key-Types
* RIFT Well-Known Key-Types
The following sections detail each registry's individual requirements
and suggested values.
Experts reviewing requests for new values to either registry MUST
consider the items in the Expert Review Guidance (Section 4.3)
section.
4.1. RIFT Key-Types
This section requests that IANA create and help govern the following
registry:
*Registry Name:*
RIFT Key-Types
*Registration Procedures:*
Expert Review
*Description:*
Key-Type registry for the RIFT protocol.
Head & Przygienda Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-rift-kv-registry-05 March 2023
*Reference:*
This document.
4.1.1. RIFT Key-Types Requested Entries
This section requests that IANA register the following suggested
values to the "RIFT Key-Types" registry.
+=======+==============+=============================+===========+
| Value | Key-Type | Description | Status/ |
| | | | Reference |
+=======+==============+=============================+===========+
| 0 | Illegal | Not allowed. | This |
| | | | document |
+-------+--------------+-----------------------------+-----------+
| 1 | Experimental | Indicates that the Key-Type | This |
| | | is Experimental. | document. |
+-------+--------------+-----------------------------+-----------+
| 2 | Well-Known | Indicates that the Key-Type | This |
| | | is Well-Known. | document. |
+-------+--------------+-----------------------------+-----------+
| 3 | OUI | Indicates that the Key-Type | This |
| | | is OUI (vendor specific). | document. |
+-------+--------------+-----------------------------+-----------+
Table 1
4.2. RIFT Well-Known Key-Types
This section requests that IANA create and help govern the following
registry:
*Registry Name:*
RIFT Well-Known Key-Types
*Registration Procedures:*
Expert Review
*Description:*
Well-Known Key-Types registry for the RIFT protocol.
*Reference:*
This document.
4.2.1. RIFT Well-Known Key-Types Requested Entries
This section requests that IANA register the following suggested
values to the "RIFT Well-Known Key-Types" Registry.
Head & Przygienda Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-rift-kv-registry-05 March 2023
+=======+================+==============================+===========+
| Value | Key-Identifier | Description | Status/ |
| | | | Reference |
+=======+================+==============================+===========+
| 0 | Illegal | Not allowed. | This |
| | | | document. |
+-------+----------------+------------------------------+-----------+
| 1 | MAC/IP Binding | To be defined. | To be |
| | | | defined. |
+-------+----------------+------------------------------+-----------+
| 2 | FAM Security | To be defined. | To be |
| | Roll-Over Key | | defined. |
+-------+----------------+------------------------------+-----------+
| 127 | Southbound | Used for Southbound | This |
| | Tie-Break Key | Keystore tie- | document. |
| | | breaking purposes. | |
+-------+----------------+------------------------------+-----------+
Table 2
4.3. Expert Review Guidance
Experts reviewing requests for values from the "RIFT Key-Types"
registry or the "RIFT Well-Known Key-Types" registry are responsible
for the following:
1. Determining the existence of a specification that clearly defines
the purpose supporting the request and MUST contain all required
fields for given registry.
The document MUST also be permenent and publically available.
2. Ensuring that any requests are made available to the RIFT working
group for review should the work originate from outside of the
RIFT Working Group.
3. Ensuring that any work produce outside of the IETF does not
conflict with any work that is already published or actively
pursuing being published.
5. Security Considerations
This document introduces no new security concerns to RIFT or other
specifications referenced in this document given that the Key-Value
TIEs are already extensively secured by the RIFT [RIFT] protocol
specification itself.
Head & Przygienda Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-rift-kv-registry-05 March 2023
6. Acknowledgements
To be provided.
7. 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,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for
Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", June
2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
[RIFT] Przygienda, T., Sharma, A., Thubert, P., Rijsman, B., and
D. Afanasiev, "RIFT: Routing in Fat Trees", Work in
Progress draft-ietf-rift-rift-15, July 2021,
<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-rift-rift-
15.pdf>.
8. Informative References
[RIFT-AUTO-EVPN]
Head, J., Przygienda, T., and W. Lin, "RIFT Auto-EVPN",
Work in Progress, draft-ietf-rift-auto-evpn-03, June 2022,
<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-rift-auto-
evpn-03.html>.
[THRIFT] Apache Software Foundation, "Thrift Language
Implementation and Documentation",
<https://github.com/apache/thrift/tree/0.15.0/doc>.
Appendix A. Thrift Models
This section contains the normative Thrift models required to support
Auto-EVPN. Per the main RIFT [RIFT] specification, all signed values
MUST be interpreted as unsigned values.
A.1. southbound_kv.thrift
Head & Przygienda Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft draft-ietf-rift-kv-registry-05 March 2023
include "common.thrift"
namespace py southbound_kv
namespace rs models
const i8 GlobalSystemIdentifierKV = 127
/** simple type to test correct tie-breaking based on system ID */
struct SystemIdentifierKV {
1: required common.SystemIDType system_id,
2: optional common.LevelType level,
}
Figure 6: RIFT Common Schema for Auto-EVPN
Authors' Addresses
Jordan Head (editor)
Juniper Networks
1137 Innovation Way
Sunnyvale, CA
United States of America
Email: jhead@juniper.net
Tony Przygienda
Juniper Networks
1137 Innovation Way
Sunnyvale, CA
United States of America
Email: prz@juniper.net
Head & Przygienda Expires 14 September 2023 [Page 10]
