BFD Working Group G. Mirsky Internet-Draft Ericsson Intended status: Informational 9 May 2023 Expires: 10 November 2023 BFD in Demand Mode over a Point-to-Point MPLS LSP draft-mirsky-bfd-mpls-demand-14 Abstract This document describes procedures for using Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) in Demand mode to detect data plane failures in Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) point-to-point Label Switched Paths. 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 10 November 2023. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2023 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 (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. Mirsky Expires 10 November 2023 [Page 1] Internet-Draft BFD Demand Mode over P2P MPLS LSP May 2023 Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2. Acronyms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3. Use of the BFD Demand Mode . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3.1. The Applicability of BFD for Multipoint Networks . . . . 3 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 7. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 1. Introduction [RFC5884] defined use of the Asynchronous method of Bidirectional Detection (BFD) [RFC5880] to monitor and detect failures in the data path of a Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Path (LSP). Use of the Demand mode, also specified in [RFC5880], has not been defined so far. This document describes procedures for using the Demand mode of BFD protocol to detect data plane failures in MPLS point-to-point (p2p) LSPs. 2. Acronyms MPLS: Multiprotocol Label Switching LSP: Label Switched Path LER: Label switching Edge Router BFD: Bidirectional Forwarding Detection p2p: Point-to-Point 3. Use of the BFD Demand Mode [RFC5880] defines that the Demand mode may be: * asymmetric, i.e. used in one direction of a BFD session; * switched to and from without bringing BFD session to Down state through using a Poll Sequence. For the case of BFD over MPLS LSP, ingress Label switching Edge Router (LER) usually acts as Active BFD peer and egress LER acts as Passive BFD peer. The Active peer bootstraps the BFD session by using LSP ping. If the BFD session is configured to use the Demand mode, once the BFD session is in Up state the ingress LER switches to Mirsky Expires 10 November 2023 [Page 2] Internet-Draft BFD Demand Mode over P2P MPLS LSP May 2023 the Demand mode as defined in Section 6.6 [RFC5880]. The egress LER also follows procedures defined in Section 6.6 [RFC5880] and ceases further transmission of periodic BFD control packets to the ingress LER. In this state BFD peers remain as long as the egress LER is in Up state. The ingress LER can periodically check continuity of a bidirectional path between the ingress and egress LERs by using the Poll Sequence, as described in Section 6.6 [RFC5880]. An implementation that supports using the Poll Sequence as the mechanism for bidirectional path continuity check must control the interval between consecutive Poll Sequences. The default value could be selected as 1 second. If the Detection Time at the egress LER expires, the session state on the egress LER transitions to the Down state according to Section 6.2 of [RFC5880]. As a result, the BFD system exits the Demand mode and sends the BFD Control packet to the ingress LER with the Status (Sta) field set to the Down (1) value and the Diagnostic (Diag) field set to Control Detection Time Expired (1) value. The egress LER periodically transmits these Control packets to the ingress LER until either it receives the valid BFD control packet from the ingress LER. The interval between BFD control packets is determined according to Section 6.8.7 of [RFC5880]. The ingress LER transmits BFD Control packets over the MPLS LSP with the Demand (D) flag set at the negotiated interval per [RFC5880]. If it receives the valid BFD packet from the egress LER with the Status (Sta) field set to Down and the Diagnostic (Diag) field value Control Detection Time Expired, the ingress LER indicates that the monitored LSP has a failure. Consequently, the BFD system on the ingress LER advances the state of the BFD session to the Init state and sends a BFD control packet with the Demand (D) flag cleared. That packet is transmitted periodically. The BFD system continues performing in the BFD Asynchronous mode until the BFD session reaches the Up state. Then the ingress LER switches to the Demand mode. 3.1. The Applicability of BFD for Multipoint Networks [RFC8562] and [RFC8563] define the use of BFD in multipoint networks. This specification analyzes the case of p2p LSP. In that scenario, the ingress of the LSP acts as the MultipointHead, and the egress - as MultipointTail. The BFD state machines for MultipointHead, MultipointClient, and MultipointTail don't use the three-way handshakes for session establishment and teardown. As a result, the Init state is absent, and the session transitions to the Up state once the BFD session is administratively enabled. Hence, a BFD session over a p2p LSP, using principles of [RFC8562] or [RFC8563], Mirsky Expires 10 November 2023 [Page 3] Internet-Draft BFD Demand Mode over P2P MPLS LSP May 2023 can be established faster if the MultipointTail has been provisioned with the value of My Discriminator used by the MultipointHead for that BFD session. That value can be provided to the MultipointTail using different mechanisms, e.g., an extension to IGP. Description of mechanism to provide the value of My Discriminator used by the MultipointHead for the particular BFD session is outside the scope of this specification. Unsolicited notification of the detected failure by the MultipointTail to the MultipointClient performs as described in Section 3 for the case after the ingress BFD system switches the remote peer into the Demand mode. 4. IANA Considerations This document doesn't require any IANA action. This section can be removed before the publication of the document. 5. Security Considerations This document does not introduce new security aspects but inherits all security considerations from [RFC5880], [RFC5884], [RFC7726], [RFC8029], [RFC6425], [RFC8562], and [RFC8563] 6. Acknowledgements The author expresses his genuine appreciation of the extensive technical comments and the discussion with Jeffrey Haas that helped to clarify and properly position this document relative to the existing BFD specifications. 7. Normative References [RFC5880] Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD)", RFC 5880, DOI 10.17487/RFC5880, June 2010, . [RFC5883] Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) for Multihop Paths", RFC 5883, DOI 10.17487/RFC5883, June 2010, . [RFC5884] Aggarwal, R., Kompella, K., Nadeau, T., and G. Swallow, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) for MPLS Label Switched Paths (LSPs)", RFC 5884, DOI 10.17487/RFC5884, June 2010, . Mirsky Expires 10 November 2023 [Page 4] Internet-Draft BFD Demand Mode over P2P MPLS LSP May 2023 [RFC6425] Saxena, S., Ed., Swallow, G., Ali, Z., Farrel, A., Yasukawa, S., and T. Nadeau, "Detecting Data-Plane Failures in Point-to-Multipoint MPLS - Extensions to LSP Ping", RFC 6425, DOI 10.17487/RFC6425, November 2011, . [RFC7726] Govindan, V., Rajaraman, K., Mirsky, G., Akiya, N., and S. Aldrin, "Clarifying Procedures for Establishing BFD Sessions for MPLS Label Switched Paths (LSPs)", RFC 7726, DOI 10.17487/RFC7726, January 2016, . [RFC8029] Kompella, K., Swallow, G., Pignataro, C., Ed., Kumar, N., Aldrin, S., and M. Chen, "Detecting Multiprotocol Label Switched (MPLS) Data-Plane Failures", RFC 8029, DOI 10.17487/RFC8029, March 2017, . [RFC8562] Katz, D., Ward, D., Pallagatti, S., Ed., and G. Mirsky, Ed., "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) for Multipoint Networks", RFC 8562, DOI 10.17487/RFC8562, April 2019, . [RFC8563] Katz, D., Ward, D., Pallagatti, S., Ed., and G. Mirsky, Ed., "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) Multipoint Active Tails", RFC 8563, DOI 10.17487/RFC8563, April 2019, . Author's Address Greg Mirsky Ericsson Email: gregimirsky@gmail.com Mirsky Expires 10 November 2023 [Page 5]