Internet-Draft Prefix Flag Extension for OSPF April 2025
Chen, et al. Expires 10 October 2025 [Page]
Workgroup:
LSR
Internet-Draft:
draft-ietf-lsr-ospf-prefix-extended-flags-07
Published:
Intended Status:
Standards Track
Expires:
Authors:
R. Chen
ZTE Corporation
D. Zhao
ZTE Corporation
P. Psenak
Cisco Systems
K. Talaulikar
Cisco Systems
L. Gong
China mobile

Prefix Flag Extension for OSPFv2 and OSPFv3

Abstract

Each OSPF prefix can be advertised with an 8-bit field to indicate specific properties of that prefix. However, all the OSPFv3 Prefix Options bits have already been assigned and only a few bits remain unassigned in the flags field of the OSPFv2 Extended Prefix TLV.

This document solves this problem by defining variable-length Prefix Attribute Flags sub-TLV for OSPF. This sub-TLV is applicable to OSPFv2 and OSPFv3.

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 October 2025.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction

Each OSPF prefix can be advertised with an 8-bit field to indicate specific properties of that prefix. This is done using the OSPFv3 Prefix Options (Appendix A.4.1.1 of [RFC5340]) and the flags field in the OSPFv2 Extended Prefix TLV (Section 2.1 of [RFC7684]). The rest of this document refers to these 8-bit fields in both OSPFv2 and OSPFv3 as the "existing fixed-size prefix attribute flags".

However, all the OSPFv3 Prefix Options bits have already been assigned (see "OSPFv3 Prefix Options (8 bits)" IANA registry [IANA-OSPFv3-PO]). Also, only 5 bits remain unassigned (at the time of publication of this document) in the Flags field of the OSPFv2 Extended Prefix TLV (see "OSPFv2 Extended Prefix TLV Flags" IANA registry [IANA-OSPFv2-EPF]).

This document solves the problem of insufficient flag bits for the signaling of prefix properties in OSPF by defining variable-length Prefix Attribute Flags sub-TLVs for OSPFv2 and OSPFv3.

1.1. 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 as described in BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.

2. Variable-Length Prefix Attribute Flags Sub-TLV

This document defines variable-Length Prefix Attribute Flags sub-TLV for OSPFv2 and OSPFv3. Such sub-TLV specifies the variable-flag fields to advertise additional attributes associated with OSPF prefixes. The advertisement and processing of the existing fixed-size prefix attribute flags remain unchanged.

The format of OSPFv2/OSPFv3 Prefix Attribute Flags sub-TLVs is shown in Figure 1.


 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|              Type             |            Length             |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|                                                               |
//                 Prefix Attribute Flags (Variable)           //
|                                                               |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


Figure 1: Format of OSPFv2/OSPFv3 Prefix Attribute Flags Sub-TLV

where:

Type (2 octets): 11 for OSPFv2 and 37 for OSPFv3.

Length (2 octets): Variable, dependent on the included Prefix Attribute Flags. This indicates the length of the prefix attributes flags in octets. The length MUST be a multiple of 4 octets. If the length is not a multiple of 4 octets, the Link State Advertisement (LSA) is malformed and MUST be ignored.

Prefix Attribute Flags (Variable): The extended flag field. This field contains a variable number of flags, grouped in 4-octet blocks. The bits are numbered starting from bit 0 as the most significant bit of the first 32-bit block. If a Prefix Attribute Flags field's length exceeds 4 octets, numbering for the additional bits picks up where the previous 4-octet block left off. For example, the most significant bit in the fifth octet of an 8-octet Prefix Attribute Flags is referred to as bit 32. Currently, no bits are defined in this document.

Unassigned bits MUST be set to zero on transmission and MUST be ignored on receipt.

An implementation MUST limit the length of the sub-TLV so as to signal the bits that are set to 1. Defined prefix flags that are not transmitted due to being beyond the transmitted length MUST be treated as being set to 0.

OSPFv2 Prefix Attribute Flags sub-TLV is advertised as a sub-TLV of the OSPFv2 Extended Prefix TLV defined in [RFC7684]. Additional OSPFv2 prefix flags SHOULD be allocated from the unused bits in the Flags field of the OSPFv2 Extended Prefix TLV prior to allocating flags in the OSPFv2 Prefix Attribute Flags sub-TLV.

OSPFv3 Prefix Attribute Flags sub-TLV is advertised as a sub-TLV of the following OSPFv3 TLVs:

When multiple instances of the OSPFv2/OSPFv3 Prefix Attribute Flags sub-TLVs are received within the same TLV, an implementation MUST use only the first occurrence of the sub-TLV and MUST ignore all subsequent instances of the sub-TLV. Errors SHOULD be logged subject to rate limiting.

3. Backward Compatibility

The Prefix Attribute Flags sub-TLV does not introduce any backward compatibility issues. An implementation that does not recognize the OSPFv2/OSPFv3 Prefix Attribute Flags sub-TLV would ignore the sub-TLV as per normal TLV processing operations (refer Section 6.3 of [RFC3630] and Section 2.3.2 of [RFC8362]).

4. Acknowledgements

The authors thank Shraddha Hegde, Changwang Lin, Tom Petch and many others for their suggestions and comments.

The authors would like to thank Acee Lindem for aligning the terminology with existing OSPF documents and for editorial improvements.

5. IANA Considerations

This document requests allocation for the following registries.

5.1. OSPFv2

5.1.1. OSPFv2 Prefix Attribute Flags Sub-TLV Registry

This document requests IANA to make permanent the early allocation of the following codepoint for the "OSPFv2 Prefix Attribute Flags" in the "OSPFv2 Extended Prefix TLV Sub-TLVs" registry to be made permanent:


  Value            Description                     Reference
---------  -----------------------------------   ---------------
   11         OSPFv2 Prefix Attribute Flags        RFC to be

5.1.2. OSPFv2 Prefix Extended Flags Field Registry

This document requests the creation of "OSPFv2 Prefix Extended Flag Field" Registry under "Open Shortest Path First v2 (OSPFv2) Parameters" registry group. The registry defines the bits in the Prefix Attribute Flags field in the OSPFv2 Prefix Attribute Flags sub-TLV as specified in Section 2. The bits are to be allocated via IETF Review [RFC8126]. Each bit definition will include:


*  Bit number (counting from bit 0 as the most significant
   bit of the first block)
*  Description
*  Reference

No bits are currently defined. Bits 0-31 are to be initially marked as "Unassigned". The flags defined in this document may use either a single bit or multiple bits to represent a state, as determined by the specific requirements of the document defining them. IANA is requested to add subsequent blocks of 32 bits upon exhaustion of the preceding 32-bit block.

5.2. OSPFv3

5.2.1. OSPFv3 Prefix Attribute Flags Sub-TLV Registry

This document requests IANA to make permanent the early allocation of the following codepoint for the "OSPFv3 Prefix Attribute Flags" in the "OSPFv3 Extended-LSA sub-TLVs" registry:


 Value            Description                      Reference
--------   ----------------------------------   --------------
  37         OSPFv3 Prefix Attribute Flags         RFC to be

5.2.2. OSPFv3 Prefix Extended Flags Field Registry

This document requests the creation of "OSPFv3 Prefix Extended Flag Field" registry under "Open Shortest Path First v3 (OSPFv3)" registry group. The registry defines the bits in the Prefix Attribute Flags field in the OSPFv2 Prefix Attribute Flags sub-TLV as specified in Section 2. The bits are to be allocated via IETF Review [RFC8126]. Each bit definition will include:


*  Bit number (counting from bit 0 as the most significant
   bit of the first block )
*  Description
*  Reference

No bits are currently defined. Bits 0-31 are to be initially marked as "Unassigned". The flags defined in this document may use either a single bit or multiple bits to represent a state, as determined by the specific requirements of the document defining them. IANA is requested to add subsequent blocks of 32 bits upon exhaustion of the preceding 32-bit block.

6. Security Considerations

Procedures and protocol extensions defined in this document do not affect the OSPFv2 or OSPFv3 security models. See the "Security Considerations" Section of [RFC7684] for a discussion of OSPFv2 TLV-encoding considerations, and the "Security Considerations" Section of [RFC8362] for a discussion of OSPFv3 security.

7. References

7.1. Normative References

[RFC2119]
Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC3630]
Katz, D., Kompella, K., and D. Yeung, "Traffic Engineering (TE) Extensions to OSPF Version 2", RFC 3630, DOI 10.17487/RFC3630, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3630>.
[RFC5340]
Coltun, R., Ferguson, D., Moy, J., and A. Lindem, "OSPF for IPv6", RFC 5340, DOI 10.17487/RFC5340, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5340>.
[RFC7684]
Psenak, P., Gredler, H., Shakir, R., Henderickx, W., Tantsura, J., and A. Lindem, "OSPFv2 Prefix/Link Attribute Advertisement", RFC 7684, DOI 10.17487/RFC7684, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7684>.
[RFC8126]
Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, , <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, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
[RFC8362]
Lindem, A., Roy, A., Goethals, D., Reddy Vallem, V., and F. Baker, "OSPFv3 Link State Advertisement (LSA) Extensibility", RFC 8362, DOI 10.17487/RFC8362, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8362>.
[RFC9513]
Li, Z., Hu, Z., Talaulikar, K., Ed., and P. Psenak, "OSPFv3 Extensions for Segment Routing over IPv6 (SRv6)", RFC 9513, DOI 10.17487/RFC9513, , <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9513>.

7.2. Informative References

[IANA-OSPFv2-EPF]
"OSPFv2 Extended Prefix TLV Flags", <https://www.iana.org/assignments/ospfv2-parameters/ospfv2-parameters.xhtml#extended-prefix-tlv-flags>.
[IANA-OSPFv3-PO]
"OSPFv3 Prefix Options (8 bits)", <https://www.iana.org/assignments/ospfv3-parameters/ospfv3-parameters.xhtml#ospfv3-parameters-4>.

Authors' Addresses

Ran Chen
ZTE Corporation
Nanjing
China
Detao Zhao
ZTE Corporation
Nanjing
China
Peter Psenak
Cisco Systems
Apollo Business Center
Mlynske nivy 43
Bratislava 821 09
Slovakia
Ketan Talaulikar
Cisco Systems
India
Liyan Gong
China mobile
China