120 likes | 255 Views
Definition of ACH TLV Structure draft-ietf-mpls-tp-ach-tlv-02. {S. Boutros, S. Bryant, S. Sivabalan, G . Swallow} Cisco Systems, {D.Ward} Juniper Networks}, V. Manral {IP Infusion}. Status. This draft is in WGLC WGLC will complete as planned.
E N D
Definition of ACH TLV Structure draft-ietf-mpls-tp-ach-tlv-02 {S. Boutros, S. Bryant, S. Sivabalan, G . Swallow} Cisco Systems, {D.Ward} Juniper Networks}, V. Manral {IP Infusion}
Status • This draft is in WGLC • WGLC will complete as planned. • Using this session to gather f/b on some of the issues raised and possible approaches to resolution
Experimental TLVs • Propose to add 8 as the top values • Exact values depend on compact null and transitive TLV discussion draft-bocci-mpls-tp-gach-gal-02.txt
Destination Address • Easy to add, but not actually used. • Need a decision on whether to include. • If include would just clone IPv4 SA and IPv6 SA. • Propose that those needed by Nitin’s LSP Ping Draft defined in that draft. • Any others needed?
MEP-ID • Move section “3.7. MPLS OAM SOURCE MEP-ID TLV for LSP Ping” of draft draft-ietf-ccamp-rsvp-te-mpls-tp-oam-ext-01 to draft-ietf-mpls-tp-ach-tlv-01. • Is there a dest MEP-ID as well? • PW MEP-IDs and MIP-IDs also needed – where/when are these needed?
Fixed Ordering of TLVs in Pkt • Order of TLVs should be set (or not set) by definition of ACH type. • Fixing this in this set of def’ns would not be optimal for all applications.
Alt TLV Structure 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |I|A| AchTlvType = X | Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ~ Value ~ | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ I = Ignore if not understood A = Authenticate
Compact Null • At the moment null is 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | AchTlvType = X | Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ~ Value ~ | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Compact null would be alternate: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |AchTlvType = X | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ If for example X = 0xff, then TLVs carrying data would be in the range 0x0000 to 0xFEFF If previous proposal accepted CN would be 0x3F
Authentication BFD supports Value BFD Authentication Type Name ----- ---------------------------- 0 Reserved 1 Simple Password 2 Keyed MD5 3 Meticulous Keyed MD5 4 Keyed SHA1 5 Meticulous Keyed SHA1 6-255 Unassigned We may need other hashes, but these can be added at a later date. Suggest that we continue with BFD set and add others if requested by SEC review.
Authentication Length • Should we support the ability to Auth data that follows the Auth TLV • Would do this by setting the TLV Len • How long a data set do we need to be able to cover.
Set TLV Operations • Use the top two bits of the TLV to indicate: • Ignore if not understood • Authenticate ? • Could make this the top two bits and use compact padding
MEG-ID and MIP-IDs are needed too. • Needed will be added in next version.