Diff: draft-ietf-bier-ping-28.txt - draft-ietf-bier-ping-29.txt

	draft-ietf-bier-ping-28.txt	draft-ietf-bier-ping-29.txt

	Network Work group N. Kumar	Network Work group N. Kumar
	Internet-Draft NVIDIA	Internet-Draft NVIDIA
	Intended status: Standards Track C. Pignataro	Intended status: Standards Track C. Pignataro
	Expires: 23 March 2027 Blue Fern Consulting	Expires: 23 March 2027 Blue Fern Consulting
	M. Chen	M. Chen

	G. Mirsky
	Independent	Independent

		G. Mirsky
		Ciena Corporation
	19 September 2026	19 September 2026

	Bit Index Explicit Replication (BIER) Ping and Trace	Bit Index Explicit Replication (BIER) Ping and Trace

	draft-ietf-bier-ping-28	draft-ietf-bier-ping-29

	Abstract	Abstract

	Bit Index Explicit Replication (BIER) is a multicast forwarding	Bit Index Explicit Replication (BIER) is a multicast forwarding
	architecture designed to simplify and optimize multicast delivery.	architecture designed to simplify and optimize multicast delivery.

	This document specifies the mechanism and basic BIER OAM packet	This document specifies the mechanism and basic BIER OAM packet
	format that can be used to perform failure detection and isolation on	format that can be used to perform failure detection and isolation on
	the BIER data plane without any dependency on other layers, like the	the BIER data plane without any dependency on other layers, like the
	IP layer.	IP layer.

	skipping to change at page 3, line 47 ¶	skipping to change at page 3, line 51 ¶
	without any dependency on other layers, like the IP layer. The	without any dependency on other layers, like the IP layer. The
	specification conforms to R-1 through R-3, R-5, and R-11 requirements	specification conforms to R-1 through R-3, R-5, and R-11 requirements
	listed in [RFC9974]. To conform to R-11, BIER Echo Request message	listed in [RFC9974]. To conform to R-11, BIER Echo Request message
	is encapsulated in the BIER header [RFC8296] that uses the same	is encapsulated in the BIER header [RFC8296] that uses the same
	values of BIFT-id, BSL, Entropy, and DSCP fields as in the BIER	values of BIFT-id, BSL, Entropy, and DSCP fields as in the BIER
	header of the monitored BIER flow. Note that the BIER Echo Request/	header of the monitored BIER flow. Note that the BIER Echo Request/
	Reply protocol doesn't modify the content of the OAM field in the	Reply protocol doesn't modify the content of the OAM field in the
	BIER header (Section 2 of [RFC8296]).	BIER header (Section 2 of [RFC8296]).

	Traceroute mode, as specified in this document, is scoped to BIER	Traceroute mode, as specified in this document, is scoped to BIER

	over MPLS; ping mode has no such restriction.

	Traceroute mode, as specified in this document, is scoped to BIER
	over MPLS [RFC8296]; ping mode has no such restriction.	over MPLS [RFC8296]; ping mode has no such restriction.

	2. Conventions used in this document	2. Conventions used in this document

	2.1. Terminology and Acronyms	2.1. Terminology and Acronyms

	In this specification:	In this specification:

	The term "Initiator" is used interchangeably with the "Sender of a	The term "Initiator" is used interchangeably with the "Sender of a
	BIER Echo Request".	BIER Echo Request".

	skipping to change at page 5, line 21 ¶	skipping to change at page 5, line 21 ¶
	14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all	14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
	capitals, as shown here.	capitals, as shown here.

	3. BIER OAM	3. BIER OAM

	BIER OAM is defined to stay within the BIER layer by directly	BIER OAM is defined to stay within the BIER layer by directly
	following the BIER header without mandating the need for an IP	following the BIER header without mandating the need for an IP
	header. To produce information that is useful to an operator,	header. To produce information that is useful to an operator,
	information that statistically reflects conditions experienced by the	information that statistically reflects conditions experienced by the
	monitored data flow, the operator must be able to ensure that active	monitored data flow, the operator must be able to ensure that active

	OAM packets, e.g., BIER Echo Request, traverse the set of links and	OAM packets (the term "active OAM" is used as described in
		[RFC10014]), e.g., BIER Echo Request, traverse the set of links and
	nodes and receive the same forwarding treatment as the monitored	nodes and receive the same forwarding treatment as the monitored
	flow. Hence, all fields in the BIER header that affect packet	flow. Hence, all fields in the BIER header that affect packet
	forwarding (e.g., BFIR-id, BitString) must be set to the values	forwarding (e.g., BFIR-id, BitString) must be set to the values
	applied to the monitored data flow. [RFC8296] defines a 4-bit field	applied to the monitored data flow. [RFC8296] defines a 4-bit field
	as "Proto" to identify the payload following the BIER header. When	as "Proto" to identify the payload following the BIER header. When
	the payload is BIER OAM, the "Proto" field will be set to 5 as	the payload is BIER OAM, the "Proto" field will be set to 5 as
	defined in [RFC8296].	defined in [RFC8296].

	3.1. BIER OAM Message Format	3.1. BIER OAM Message Format


	skipping to change at page 29, line 27 ¶	skipping to change at page 29, line 27 ¶
	\| 62 - 63 \| Reserved for Private Use \| This document \|	\| 62 - 63 \| Reserved for Private Use \| This document \|
	+---------+-------------------------------+---------------+	+---------+-------------------------------+---------------+

	Table 6: BIER OAM Message Type	Table 6: BIER OAM Message Type

	5.5. BIER Echo Request/Reply Registry Group	5.5. BIER Echo Request/Reply Registry Group

	IANA is requested to create and maintain the "BIER Echo Request/	IANA is requested to create and maintain the "BIER Echo Request/
	Reply" registry group containing the registries listed below.	Reply" registry group containing the registries listed below.


		This follows precedent set by similar registry-group reorganizations
		for other OAM/Ping-related registries [RFC7214], [RFC9041],
		[RFC7737].

	5.6. BIER Echo Request/Echo Reply Registries	5.6. BIER Echo Request/Echo Reply Registries

	IANA is requested to create three BIER Echo Request/Echo Reply	IANA is requested to create three BIER Echo Request/Echo Reply
	registries in the BIER Echo Request/Reply registry group, as	registries in the BIER Echo Request/Reply registry group, as
	described below.	described below.

	5.6.1. Reply Modes	5.6.1. Reply Modes

	IANA is requested to create in the BIER Echo Request/Reply registry	IANA is requested to create in the BIER Echo Request/Reply registry
	group the new Reply Modes registry as follows:	group the new Reply Modes registry as follows:

	skipping to change at page 34, line 32 ¶	skipping to change at page 34, line 32 ¶
	[RFC0792], ICMPv6 [RFC4443], and LSP Ping [RFC8029], [RFC6425]. As	[RFC0792], ICMPv6 [RFC4443], and LSP Ping [RFC8029], [RFC6425]. As
	with ICMP or LSP Ping, BFR can be exposed to Denial-of-Service (DoS)	with ICMP or LSP Ping, BFR can be exposed to Denial-of-Service (DoS)
	attacks, and it is RECOMMENDED to regulate the BIER Ping packet flow	attacks, and it is RECOMMENDED to regulate the BIER Ping packet flow
	to the control plane. A rate limiter SHOULD be applied to avoid any	to the control plane. A rate limiter SHOULD be applied to avoid any
	attack. Specifically, a rate limiter SHOULD be applied to the well-	attack. Specifically, a rate limiter SHOULD be applied to the well-
	known UDP port defined in Section 5.1. Although using BIER Echo	known UDP port defined in Section 5.1. Although using BIER Echo
	Request in a DoS amplification attack is theoretically possible,	Request in a DoS amplification attack is theoretically possible,
	spoofing BFIR ID in the BIER Header presents itself as a serious	spoofing BFIR ID in the BIER Header presents itself as a serious
	challenge. As a result, this threat is not a big concern.	challenge. As a result, this threat is not a big concern.


		Setting the BIER header TTL to 255 in ping mode (Section 4.1) follows
		the same principle as the Generalized TTL Security Mechanism (GTSM)
		[RFC5082].

	As with ICMP or LSP Ping, a traceroute can be used to obtain network	As with ICMP or LSP Ping, a traceroute can be used to obtain network
	information. It is RECOMMENDED that the implementation checks the	information. It is RECOMMENDED that the implementation checks the
	integrity of BFIR of the Echo messages against any locally secured	integrity of BFIR of the Echo messages against any locally secured
	list before processing the message further.	list before processing the message further.

	In some BIER environments, transmitting a single BIER Echo Request	In some BIER environments, transmitting a single BIER Echo Request
	message can result in the sender receiving an overwhelming number of	message can result in the sender receiving an overwhelming number of
	BIER Echo Reply messages. In that case, an operator MAY choose to	BIER Echo Reply messages. In that case, an operator MAY choose to
	address the BIER Echo Request to a subset of BFERs rather than to all	address the BIER Echo Request to a subset of BFERs rather than to all
	BFERs in the domain.	BFERs in the domain.

	skipping to change at page 36, line 44 ¶	skipping to change at page 36, line 49 ¶
	the Use of Router Alert in LSP Ping", RFC 9570,	the Use of Router Alert in LSP Ping", RFC 9570,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC9570, May 2024,	DOI 10.17487/RFC9570, May 2024,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9570>.	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9570>.

	[RFC9974] Mirsky, G., Ed., Kumar, N., Chen, M., and S. Pallagatti,	[RFC9974] Mirsky, G., Ed., Kumar, N., Chen, M., and S. Pallagatti,
	Ed., "Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM)	Ed., "Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM)
	Requirements for the Bit Index Explicit Replication (BIER)	Requirements for the Bit Index Explicit Replication (BIER)
	Layer", RFC 9974, DOI 10.17487/RFC9974, June 2026,	Layer", RFC 9974, DOI 10.17487/RFC9974, June 2026,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9974>.	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9974>.


		[RFC10014] Pignataro, C., Farrel, A., and T. Mizrahi, "Guidelines for
		Characterizing the Term "OAM"", BCP 161, RFC 10014,
		DOI 10.17487/RFC10014, June 2026,
		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc10014>.

		[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,
		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5082>.

		[RFC7214] Andersson, L. and C. Pignataro, "Moving Generic Associated
		Channel (G-ACh) IANA Registries to a New Registry",
		RFC 7214, DOI 10.17487/RFC7214, May 2014,
		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7214>.

		[RFC9041] Andersson, L., Chen, M., Pignataro, C., and T. Saad,
		"Updating the MPLS Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping
		Parameters IANA Registry", RFC 9041, DOI 10.17487/RFC9041,
		July 2021, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9041>.

		[RFC7737] Akiya, N., Swallow, G., Pignataro, C., Andersson, L., and
		M. Chen, "Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping and Traceroute
		Reply Mode Simplification", RFC 7737,
		DOI 10.17487/RFC7737, January 2016,
		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7737>.

	[I-D.ietf-bier-bierin6]	[I-D.ietf-bier-bierin6]
	Zhang, Z., Zhang, Z. J., Wijnands, I., Mishra, M. P.,	Zhang, Z., Zhang, Z. J., Wijnands, I., Mishra, M. P.,
	Bidgoli, H., and G. S. Mishra, "Supporting BIER in IPv6	Bidgoli, H., and G. S. Mishra, "Supporting BIER in IPv6
	Networks (BIERin6)", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft,	Networks (BIERin6)", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft,
	draft-ietf-bier-bierin6-14, 17 August 2026,	draft-ietf-bier-bierin6-14, 17 August 2026,
	<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-bier-	<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-bier-
	bierin6-14>.	bierin6-14>.

	Contributors' Addresses	Contributors' Addresses


	skipping to change at page 37, line 22 ¶	skipping to change at page 38, line 4 ¶
	Lianshu Zheng	Lianshu Zheng
	Individual Contributor	Individual Contributor
	China	China
	Email: veronique_cheng@hotmail.com	Email: veronique_cheng@hotmail.com

	Authors' Addresses	Authors' Addresses

	Nagendra Kumar	Nagendra Kumar
	NVIDIA	NVIDIA
	Email: nagendrakumar.nainar@gmail.com	Email: nagendrakumar.nainar@gmail.com


	Carlos Pignataro	Carlos Pignataro
	Blue Fern Consulting	Blue Fern Consulting
	Email: carlos@bluefern.consulting	Email: carlos@bluefern.consulting

	Mach Chen	Mach Chen
	Independent	Independent
	Email: mach.chen@outlook.com	Email: mach.chen@outlook.com

	Greg Mirsky	Greg Mirsky

	Independent	Ciena Corporation
	Email: gregimirsky@gmail.com	Email: gregimirsky@gmail.com, grmirsky@ciena.com

End of changes. 10 change blocks.
	7 lines changed or deleted	39 lines changed or added
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.49. The latest version is available from https://github.com/ietf-tools/rfcdiff