[bess] Re: [Shepherding AD review] review of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-redundant-mcast-source-11
"Gunter van de Velde (Nokia)" <gunter.van_de_velde@nokia.com> Thu, 12 December 2024 19:27 UTC
Return-Path: <gunter.van_de_velde@nokia.com>
X-Original-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: bess@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DBA1C14F68C; Thu, 12 Dec 2024 11:27:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.115
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.115 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.148, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, HTML_TAG_BALANCE_BODY=0.1, LONGWORDS=2.035, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=nokia.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hTV1p3yk_DsH; Thu, 12 Dec 2024 11:27:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from EUR05-AM6-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-am6eur05on2048.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.107.22.48]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-384) server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 72196C14F685; Thu, 12 Dec 2024 11:27:03 -0800 (PST)
ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector10001; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=RPQ4O9hd2g63hYODG3hbIxX6bS7fX8dILnPloRdOPmaEg8tcAspB/lJCxU002JpwiOZLH2k20NUAp2OI+f9+rcf9RpjyqrJzCqM4CQCZSnCmp5CRpraeeDAIEIhqhZK88mY9qS+jIs8zprZHIERNlD9RIxkYPZFjyffdki/Xg8irZmysTxHFeWKLwh6YC0vugT7ehd8alknrJahuD0eBz1gGlR2Lf87FSP5+SeIGvJdL9K8yV2xQ3/+tJlSMZrok1KHYXireIQLXPysgNYPUGf0KzzNtzxB3NEQ8C5r2Cof+D3ZsPNpE5EFQBAaaibEkgoikqtwj/OBxuihCRqx/Ng==
ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector10001; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=kIJJSzEU1BA0F6VOyNsr+PXKN22o0k55afcIOyjmB3A=; b=t+ndx+kyPM9R4srD6EvvA5YvaSSnwBNzNxtzmT8y3Dh+Xu2Wqds554EsJd/XFE5CoFhxOsmzz/IsIGcR6MyyJ7PZ0AkhdyauvKiuuOzK1ACG9xiQEWoVd56BeUMdnvk51q5oOKnGkwnI11tUO3R8QGlq8UdB9JtuAUQDxBi8uthmDqwNkKjLzmmUCBBThVQasNp0c4cHBf7/uAN0Lg/y2GiGx9V7XScDKCfsBA+idkB4hCdFvcgWuANJ8YHjK1vlANw9sAzyffbMXJPzWRN0wKxSen+rvyHWOvKAdgay+Dpxq5u91ghRYvqJK5OfmYnDn/PrlBKfLByRYW3B5smosA==
ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=nokia.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=nokia.com; dkim=pass header.d=nokia.com; arc=none
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nokia.com; s=selector2; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=kIJJSzEU1BA0F6VOyNsr+PXKN22o0k55afcIOyjmB3A=; b=jLyIGDVmd73ufiqb9SMa/UUwUJNl3g0bX3Oh0qrAZpgfSPGCXTfRvHv/6NdpRO2nMz6GhytPXYMgipLzKFIEhN4aU06w+wqpWLZ7rGBYExAPZESKB+Up59RBepQX4ZgbE/YFOi2IC4tm17U0DBJ3V02do/8q6Mz4WRIxeR/fOCTjC5TEAnaAtJpWB7EAKCfwAxFNWpja3oC1LMHgm8Ap69LcpXaAyvk0dFVvB4A9JgRlJOcq1yYbFz6RqhB+TIvuZRFhVoKU1gBeSA/mzYKHQ2VyMNccjMyhBEs5zwdUCY7xh6Ppm+Pk33yngz1ba3cDw0xZLioqKf795DHWDnghNg==
Received: from AS1PR07MB8589.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:20b:470::16) by PR3PR07MB8159.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com (2603:10a6:102:176::6) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.8251.15; Thu, 12 Dec 2024 19:26:58 +0000
Received: from AS1PR07MB8589.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::5ca6:f902:8e31:6f3e]) by AS1PR07MB8589.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::5ca6:f902:8e31:6f3e%6]) with mapi id 15.20.8251.015; Thu, 12 Dec 2024 19:26:57 +0000
From: "Gunter van de Velde (Nokia)" <gunter.van_de_velde@nokia.com>
To: "Jorge Rabadan (Nokia)" <jorge.rabadan@nokia.com>
Thread-Topic: [Shepherding AD review] review of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-redundant-mcast-source-11
Thread-Index: AdtH96flxUZmnmXxSouzm5g1tt0ozADQACMGAGT7mCM=
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2024 19:26:57 +0000
Message-ID: <AS1PR07MB8589DB03A4F4A977AEAC43D5E03F2@AS1PR07MB8589.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
References: <AS1PR07MB858921C8FF5AB173B1E1B3AFE0312@AS1PR07MB8589.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <SA1PR08MB721593E59C2EEAD6E5CFB6B2F73D2@SA1PR08MB7215.namprd08.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <SA1PR08MB721593E59C2EEAD6E5CFB6B2F73D2@SA1PR08MB7215.namprd08.prod.outlook.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-GB
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-reactions: allow
authentication-results: dkim=none (message not signed) header.d=none;dmarc=none action=none header.from=nokia.com;
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: AS1PR07MB8589:EE_|PR3PR07MB8159:EE_
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 99c69e64-2f02-4f0b-87e4-08dd1ae2f1dc
x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1
x-ms-exchange-antispam-relay: 0
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;ARA:13230040|1800799024|366016|376014|10070799003|7053199007|8096899003|38070700018;
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 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
x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255;CTRY:;LANG:en;SCL:1;SRV:;IPV:NLI;SFV:NSPM;H:AS1PR07MB8589.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com;PTR:;CAT:NONE;SFS:(13230040)(1800799024)(366016)(376014)(10070799003)(7053199007)(8096899003)(38070700018);DIR:OUT;SFP:1101;
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata-chunkcount: 1
x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata-0: 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
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_AS1PR07MB8589DB03A4F4A977AEAC43D5E03F2AS1PR07MB8589eurp_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: nokia.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: AS1PR07MB8589.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 99c69e64-2f02-4f0b-87e4-08dd1ae2f1dc
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 12 Dec 2024 19:26:57.8949 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 5d471751-9675-428d-917b-70f44f9630b0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: //5KHR3aNBXBgx5xLRQcFUwovMnxwMO8fZe1bk43oQsa6dMhBEAZ3GtKHPW6nDyq8mYDdTvw6ZnAslCCRoiuDLCzRGMUNKaM+u5Sn1ddI18=
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: PR3PR07MB8159
Message-ID-Hash: K4ZV2CYZZHCKZRHT52CFDZWI7OFA5GSS
X-Message-ID-Hash: K4ZV2CYZZHCKZRHT52CFDZWI7OFA5GSS
X-MailFrom: gunter.van_de_velde@nokia.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-bess.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: "draft-ietf-bess-evpn-redundant-mcast-source@ietf.org" <draft-ietf-bess-evpn-redundant-mcast-source@ietf.org>, "bess-chairs@ietf.org" <bess-chairs@ietf.org>, "bess@ietf.org" <bess@ietf.org>
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [bess] Re: [Shepherding AD review] review of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-redundant-mcast-source-11
List-Id: BGP-Enabled ServiceS working group discussion list <bess.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bess/MDrCIDJcnj42pD_7pZxu184L44o>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/bess>
List-Help: <mailto:bess-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:bess-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:bess@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:bess-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:bess-leave@ietf.org>
Hi Jorge, Thanks for the feedback and the updated document. I’ll do my best to give this a look in next few days. Brgds, G/ Sent from Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef> ________________________________ From: Jorge Rabadan (Nokia) <jorge.rabadan@nokia.com> Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2024 7:57:24 PM To: Gunter van de Velde (Nokia) <gunter.van_de_velde@nokia.com> Cc: draft-ietf-bess-evpn-redundant-mcast-source@ietf.org <draft-ietf-bess-evpn-redundant-mcast-source@ietf.org>; bess-chairs@ietf.org <bess-chairs@ietf.org>; bess@ietf.org <bess@ietf.org> Subject: Re: [Shepherding AD review] review of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-redundant-mcast-source-11 Hi Gunter, Thank you very much for your yet another thorough and great review! Your comments are addressed in version 12, which we just published. Please see our response to your comments in line below with [jorge]. Thanks! Jorge From: Gunter van de Velde (Nokia) <gunter.van_de_velde@nokia.com> Date: Friday, December 6, 2024 at 8:06 AM To: draft-ietf-bess-evpn-redundant-mcast-source@ietf.org <draft-ietf-bess-evpn-redundant-mcast-source@ietf.org> Cc: bess-chairs@ietf.org <bess-chairs@ietf.org>, 'BESS' <bess@ietf.org> Subject: [Shepherding AD review] review of draft-ietf-bess-evpn-redundant-mcast-source-11 # Gunter Van de Velde, RTG AD, comments for draft-ietf-bess-evpn-redundant-mcast-source-11 # The line numbers used are rendered from IETF idnits tool: https://author-tools.ietf.org/api/idnits?url=https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-redundant-mcast-source-11.txt # Many thanks for the shepherd writeup from Mankamana and the RTGDIR reviews from Loa and Sandy # I found this a difficult draft to review, due to the combination of various signaling and control plane aspects. # Most (if not all) examples use IPv4 addresses. Is that the intention? Maybe some IPv6 addresses could be used in examples along with text explaining that the solution supports IPv6 [jorge] the spec supports ipv6 for sure. Added this sentence at the beginning of sections 4 and 5: “Note that while the examples use IPv4 addresses, the solution supports both IPv4 and IPv6 sources.” # Throughout the document the use of abbreviations or expanded abbreviations is used. I tried to catch some of them (for example RPF vs Reverse Path Forwarding), but did not succeed everywhere. Especially i found the term "Single Flow Groups" and "SFG" and "Single Flow Groups (SFG)" was often used inconsistently. The document better use either SFG or Single Flow Group, but maybe try to avoid using them intermixed throughout the document. There are many EVPN/Multicast abbreviations in the draft and using them inconsistent will cause additional confusion. [jorge] thanks. I made a few changes to along those lines. # The flags field that is defined by this document is in some sections identified as bit 4 (IANA section) and other as bit 5 (line 1092). Allocating single value helps. [jorge] actually it is a different bit in a different extended community, but the second one was not indicated in the IANA section – it was an oversight, fixed now, thanks! # The provided review is mostly focusing upon readability and document structure. I hope I managed to retain correct representation of procedures within this shepherding AD review for the draft. #DETAILED COMMENTS #================= 14 Abstract 16 Ethernet Virtual Private Network (EVPN) supports intra and inter- 17 subnet IP multicast forwarding. However, EVPN (or conventional IP 18 multicast techniques for that matter) do not have a solution for the 19 case where the following two statements are true at the same time: a) 20 a given multicast group carries more than one flow (i.e., more than 21 one source), and b) it is desired that each receiver gets only one of 22 the several flows. Existing multicast techniques assume there are no 23 redundant sources sending the same flow to the same IP multicast 24 group, and, in case there were redundant sources, the receiver's 25 application would deal with the received duplicated packets. This 26 document extends the existing EVPN specifications and assumes that IP 27 Multicast source redundancy may exist. It also assumes that, in case 28 two or more sources send the same IP Multicast flows into the tenant 29 domain, the EVPN PEs need to avoid that the receivers get packet 30 duplication by following the described procedures. GV> Proposed alternate Abstract " In Ethernet Virtual Private Networks (EVPNs), multicast traffic replication and delivery play a crucial role in enabling efficient and scalable Layer 2 and Layer 3 services. A common deployment scenario involves redundant multicast sources that ensure high availability and resiliency. However, the presence of redundant sources can lead to duplicate multicast traffic in the network, causing inefficiencies and increased overhead. This document specifies extensions to the EVPN multicast procedures that allow for the suppression of duplicate multicast traffic from redundant sources. The proposed mechanisms enhance EVPN's capability to deliver multicast traffic efficiently while maintaining high availability. These extensions are applicable to various EVPN deployment scenarios and provide guidelines to ensure consistent and predictable behavior across diverse network topologies. " [jorge] ok, taken, thanks. 93 1. Introduction 94 95 Intra and Inter-subnet IP Multicast forwarding are supported in EVPN 96 networks. [RFC9251] describes the procedures required to optimize 97 the delivery of IP Multicast flows when Sources and Receivers are 98 connected to the same EVPN Broadcast Domain, whereas [RFC9625] 99 specifies the procedures to support Inter-subnet IP Multicast in a 100 tenant network. Inter-subnet IP Multicast means that IP Multicast 101 Source and Receivers of the same multicast flow are connected to 102 different Broadcast Domains of the same tenant. 103 104 [RFC9251], [RFC9625] or conventional IP multicast techniques do not 105 have a solution for the case where the following two statements are 106 true at the same time: a) a given multicast group carries more than 107 one flow (i.e., more than one source) and b) it is desired that each 108 receiver gets only one of the several flows. Multicast techniques 109 assume there are no redundant sources sending the same flows to the 110 same IP multicast group, and, in case there were redundant sources, 111 the receiver's application would deal with the received duplicated 112 packets. 113 114 As a workaround in conventional IP multicast (that is, networks 115 running Protocol Independent Multicast [RFC7761] or Multicast Virtual 116 Private Networks [RFC6513]), if all the redundant sources are given 117 the same IP address, each receiver will get only one flow. The 118 reason is that, in conventional IP multicast, the RP (Rendezvous 119 Point) always creates (S,G) state, and the Last Hop Router sometimes 120 creates (S,G) state. The (S,G) state always binds the (S,G) flow to 121 a source-specific tree, rooted at the source IP address. If multiple 122 sources have the same IP address, one may end up with multiple (S,G) 123 trees. However, the way the trees are constructed ensures that any 124 given Last Hop Router or Rendezvous Point router is on at most one of 125 them. The use of an anycast address assigned to multiple sources may 126 be useful for warm standby redundancy solutions (Section 2). 127 However, on one hand, it is not really helpful for hot standby 128 redundancy solutions (Section 2) and on the other hand, configuring 129 the same IP address (in particular, the same IPv4 address) in 130 multiple sources may bring issues if the sources need to be reached 131 by IP unicast traffic or if the sources are attached to the same 132 Broadcast Domain. 133 134 In addition, in the scenario where several multicast sources 135 streaming traffic to the same group are attached via EVPN/OISM 136 (Optimized Inter-Subnet Multicast), there is not necessarily any 137 (S,G) state created for the redundant sources. The Last Hop Routers 138 may have only (*,G) state, and there may not be a Rendezvous Point 139 router (creating (S,G) state) either. Therefore, this document 140 extends [RFC9251] and [RFC9625], and now assumes that IP Multicast 141 source redundancy may exist. The document also specifies how, in 142 case two or more sources send the same IP Multicast flows into the 143 tenant domain, the EVPN PEs avoid the receivers from getting packet 144 duplication. The procedures to handle redundant sources in solutions 145 different from [RFC9251] or [RFC9625] are out of the scope of this 146 document. GV> Proposed readability rewrite: " Ethernet Virtual Private Networks (EVPN) support both intra-subnet and inter-subnet IP multicast forwarding. [RFC9251] outlines the procedures required to optimize the delivery of IP multicast flows when both sources and receivers are connected to the same EVPN Broadcast Domain. [RFC9625], on the other hand, defines the procedures for supporting inter-subnet IP multicast within a tenant network, where the IP multicast source and receivers of the same multicast flow are connected to different Broadcast Domains within the same tenant. However, [RFC9251], [RFC9625], and conventional IP multicast techniques do not provide a solution for scenarios where: 1. A given multicast group carries multiple flows (i.e., multiple sources are active), and 2. Each receiver should receive only one of the multiple flows. Existing multicast solutions typically assume that there are no redundant sources sending identical flows to the same IP multicast group. In cases where redundant sources do exist, the receiver application is expected to handle duplicate packets. In conventional IP multicast networks, such as those running Protocol Independent Multicast (PIM) [RFC7761] or Multicast VPNs (MVPN) [RFC6513], a workaround is to configure all redundant sources with the same IP address. This approach ensures that each receiver gets only one flow because: - The RP (Rendezvous Point) in the multicast network creates (S,G) state for each source. - The Last Hop Router (LHR) may also create (S,G) state. - The (S,G) state binds the flow to a source-specific tree rooted at the source IP address. When multiple sources share the same IP address, the resulting source-specific trees ensure that each LHR or RP resides on at most one tree. This workaround, which often uses anycast addresses, is suitable for warm standby redundancy solutions (Section 2). However, it is not effective for hot standby redundancy scenarios (Section 2) and introduces challenges when sources need to be reachable via IP unicast or when multiple sources with the same IP address are attached to the same Broadcast Domain. In scenarios where multiple multicast sources stream traffic to the same group using EVPN Optimized Inter-Subnet Multicast (OISM), redundant sources may not create any (S,G) state. In such cases, the Last Hop Routers may only have (*,G) state, and there may not be a Rendezvous Point router to create (S,G) state. This document extends [RFC9251] and [RFC9625] to address scenarios where IP multicast source redundancy exists. Specifically, it defines procedures for EVPN PEs to ensure that receivers do not experience packet duplication when two or more sources send identical IP multicast flows into the tenant domain. These procedures are limited to the context of [RFC9251] and [RFC9625]; handling redundant sources in other multicast solutions is beyond the scope of this document. " [jorge] ok, taken almost verbatim, thanks. 207 * P-tunnel: Provider tunnel refers to the type of tree a given 208 upstream EVPN PE uses to forward multicast traffic to downstream 209 PEs. Examples of P-tunnels supported in this document are Ingress 210 Replication (IR), Assisted Replication (AR), Bit Indexed Explicit 211 Replication (BIER), multicast Label Distribution Protocol (mLDP) 212 or Point to Multi-Point Resource Reservation protocol with Traffic 213 Engineering extensions (P2MP RSVP-TE). 215 * Redundant G-source: a host or router that transmits an SFG in a 216 tenant network where there are more hosts or routers transmitting 217 the same SFG. Redundant G-sources for the same SFG SHOULD have 218 different IP addresses, although they MAY have the same IP address 219 when in different BDs of the same tenant network. Redundant 220 G-sources are assumed NOT to be "bursty" in this document (typical 221 example are Broadcast TV G-sources or similar). GV> Proposed readability rewrite: " * P-tunnel: The term "Provider tunnel" refers to the type of tree employed by an upstream EVPN PE to forward multicast traffic to downstream PEs. The P-tunnels supported in this document include Ingress Replication (IR), Assisted Replication (AR), Bit Indexed Explicit Replication (BIER), multicast Label Distribution Protocol (mLDP), and Point-to-Multi-Point Resource Reservation Protocol with Traffic Engineering extensions (P2MP RSVP-TE). * Redundant G-source: A host or router transmitting a Single Flow Group (SFG) within a tenant network, where multiple hosts or routers are also transmitting the same SFG. Redundant G-sources transmitting the same SFG SHOULD have distinct IP addresses; however, they MAY share the same IP address if located in different Broadcast Domains (BDs) within the same tenant network. For the purposes of this document, redundant G-sources are assumed not to exhibit "bursty" traffic behavior. " [jorge] done, thanks. GV> Can you please check if the term "SFG SHOULD" here is intended as a formal procedure requirement? or as an operational "SFG should" recommendation? [jorge] good point, changed to lower case. 223 * S-ES and S-ESI: multicast Source Ethernet Segment and multicast 224 Source Ethernet Segment Identifier. The Ethernet Segment and 225 Ethernet Segment Identifier associated to a G-source. GV> should this not be "multicast S-ES" and "multicast S-ESI" when looking at the terminology? [jorge] the intent is that S-ES (and S-ESI) conveys the fact that it is used for multicast only. So I left it as it was for the moment. 227 * Selective Multicast Tree or Selective Provider Multicast Service 228 Interface (S-PMSI): defined in [RFC6513], in this document it is 229 applicable only to EVPN and refers to the multicast tree to which 230 only the interested PEs of a given BD belong to. There are two 231 types of EVPN S-PMSIs: 233 - EVPN S-PMSIs that require the advertisement of S-PMSI Auto- 234 Discovery (S-PMSI A-D) routes from the upstream PE, as in 235 [RFC9572]. The interested downstream PEs join the S-PMSI tree 236 as in [RFC9572]. 238 - EVPN S-PMSIs that don't require the advertisement of S-PMSI AD 239 routes. They use the forwarding information of the IMET 240 routes, but upstream PEs send IP Multicast flows only to 241 downstream PEs issuing Selective Multicast Ethernet Tag (SMET) 242 routes for the flow. These S-PMSIs are only supported with the 243 following P-tunnels: Ingress Replication (IR), Assisted 244 Replication (AR) and BIER. GV> Proposed readability rewrite: " * Selective Multicast Tree or Selective Provider Multicast Service Interface (S-PMSI): As defined in [RFC6513], this term refers to a multicast tree to which only the PEs interested in a specific Broadcast Domain (BD) belong. In the context of this document, it is specific to EVPN. Two types of EVPN S-PMSIs are supported: * S-PMSIs with Auto-Discovery Routes: These S-PMSIs require the upstream PE to advertise S-PMSI Auto-Discovery (S-PMSI A-D) routes, as described in [RFC9572]. Downstream PEs interested in the multicast traffic join the S-PMSI tree following the procedures specified in [RFC9572]. * S-PMSIs without Auto-Discovery Routes: These S-PMSIs do not require the advertisement of S-PMSI A-D routes. Instead, they rely on the forwarding information provided by Inclusive Multicast Ethernet Tag (IMET) routes. Upstream PEs forward IP multicast flows only to downstream PEs that advertise Selective Multicast Ethernet Tag (SMET) routes for the specific flow. These S-PMSIs are supported exclusively with the following P-tunnel types: Ingress Replication (IR), Assisted Replication (AR), and Bit Indexed Explicit Replication (BIER). " [jorge] done, thanks. 246 * SFG: Single Flow Group, i.e., a multicast group which represents 247 traffic that contains only a single flow. Multiple sources - with 248 the same or different IP - may be transmitting an SFG. An SFG is 249 represented as (*,G) if any source that issues multicast traffic 250 to G is a redundant G-source. An SFG can also be represented as 251 (S,G), where S is a prefix of any length. In this case, a source 252 is considered a redundant G-source for the SFG if it is contained 253 in the prefix. GV> Proposed readability rewrite: " * SFG (Single Flow Group): A multicast group that represents traffic containing a single flow. Multiple sources, which may have the same or different IP addresses, can transmit traffic for an SFG. An SFG can be represented in two forms: - (*,G): Indicates that any source transmitting multicast traffic to group G is considered a redundant G-source for the SFG. - (S,G): Indicates that S is a prefix of any length. In this representation, a source is deemed a redundant G-source for the SFG if its address matches the specified prefix S. " [jorge] done, thanks. 272 * Upstream PE: in this document an Upstream PE is referred to as the 273 EVPN PE that is connected to the IP Multicast source or closest to 274 it. It receives the IP Multicast flows on local ACs (Attachment 275 Circuits). GV> Proposed readability rewrite: " * Upstream PE: In this document, an Upstream PE refers to the EVPN PE that is either directly connected to the IP multicast source or is the PE closest to the source. The Upstream PE receives IP multicast flows through local Attachment Circuits (ACs). " [jorge] done, thanks. 277 * Warm Standby Redundancy: multicast source redundancy procedure 278 defined in this document, by which the upstream PEs, attached to 279 the redundant sources of the same tenant, make sure that only one 280 source of the same flow can send multicast to the interested 281 downstream PEs at the same time. GV> Proposed readability rewrite: " * Warm Standby Redundancy: A multicast source redundancy mechanism defined in this document, wherein the upstream PEs connected to redundant sources within the same tenant ensure that only one source of a given flow transmits multicast traffic to the interested downstream PEs at any given time. " [jorge] done, thanks. 287 1.2. Background on IP Multicast Delivery in EVPN Networks 289 IP Multicast is all about forwarding a single copy of a packet from a 290 source S to a group of receivers G along a multicast tree. That 291 multicast tree can be created in an EVPN tenant domain where S and 292 the receivers for G are connected to the same Broadcast Domain or 293 different Broadcast Domain. In the former case, we refer to Intra- 294 subnet IP Multicast forwarding, whereas the latter case will be 295 referred to as Inter-subnet IP Multicast forwarding. GV> Proposed readability rewrite: " IP multicast facilitates the delivery of a single copy of a packet from a source (S) to a group of receivers (G) along a multicast tree. In an EVPN tenant domain, the multicast tree can be constructed where the source (S) and the receivers for the multicast group (G) are either connected to the same Broadcast Domain (BD) or to different Broadcast Domains. The former scenario is referred to as "Intra-subnet IP Multicast forwarding", while the latter is referred to as "Inter-subnet IP Multicast forwarding"**". " [jorge] done, thanks. 297 1.2.1. Intra-subnet IP Multicast Forwarding 298 299 When the source S1 and receivers interested in G1 are attached to the 300 same Broadcast Domain, the EVPN network can deliver the IP Multicast 301 traffic to the receivers in two different ways (Figure 1): 302 303 S1 + S1 + 304 (a) + | (b) + | 305 | | (S1,G1) | | (S1,G1) 306 PE1 | | PE1 | | 307 +-----+ v +-----+ v 308 |+---+| |+---+| 309 ||BD1|| ||BD1|| 310 |+---+| |+---+| 311 +-----+ +-----+ 312 +-------|-------+ +-------| 313 | | | | | 314 v v v v v 315 +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ 316 |+---+| |-----| |-----| |+---+| |+---+| |+---+| 317 ||BD1|| ||BD1|| ||BD1|| ||BD1|| ||BD1|| ||BD1|| 318 |+---+| |-----| |-----| |+---+| |+---+| |+---+| 319 +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ 320 PE2| PE3| PE4| PE2| PE3| PE4 321 - | - - - | - | - | - - - | - 322 | | | | | | | | | 323 v v v v v 324 | R1 R2 | R3 | R1 R2 | R3 325 - - - G1- - - - - - G1- - - 326 327 Figure 1: Intra-subnet IP Multicast 328 329 Model (a) illustrated in Figure 1 is referred to as "IP Multicast 330 delivery as BUM traffic". This way of delivering IP Multicast 331 traffic does not require any extensions to [RFC7432], however, it 332 sends the IP Multicast flows to non-interested receivers, such as 333 e.g., R3 in Figure 1. In this example, downstream PEs can snoop 334 IGMP/MLD messages from the receivers so that layer-2 multicast state 335 is created and, for instance, PE4 can avoid sending (S1,G1) to R3, 336 since R3 is not interested in (S1,G1). 337 338 Model (b) in Figure 1 uses an S-PMSI to optimize the delivery of the 339 (S1,G1) flow. For instance, assuming PE1 uses IR, PE1 sends (S1,G1) 340 only to the downstream PEs that issued an SMET route for (S1,G1), 341 that is, PE2 and PE3. In case PE1 uses any P-tunnel different than 342 IR, AR or BIER, PE1 will advertise an S-PMSI A-D route for (S1,G1) 343 and PE2/PE2 will join that tree. GV> Proposed readability rewrite: " When the source S1 and the receivers interested in G1 are connected to the same Broadcast Domain (BD), the EVPN network can deliver IP multicast traffic to the receivers using two different approaches, as illustrated in Figure 1: S1 + S1 + (a) + | (b) + | | | (S1,G1) | | (S1,G1) PE1 | | PE1 | | +-----+ v +-----+ v |+---+| |+---+| ||BD1|| ||BD1|| |+---+| |+---+| +-----+ +-----+ +-------|-------+ +-------| | | | | | v v v v v +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ |+---+| |-----| |-----| |+---+| |+---+| |+---+| ||BD1|| ||BD1|| ||BD1|| ||BD1|| ||BD1|| ||BD1|| |+---+| |-----| |-----| |+---+| |+---+| |+---+| +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ PE2| PE3| PE4| PE2| PE3| PE4 - | - - - | - | - | - - - | - | | | | | | | | | v v v v v | R1 R2 | R3 | R1 R2 | R3 - - - G1- - - - - - G1- - - Figure 1: Intra-subnet IP Multicast * Model (a): IP Multicast Delivery as BUM Traffic Model (a) in Figure 1 is referred to as "IP multicast delivery as BUM traffic". This approach does not require any extensions to [RFC7432]. However, it results in the delivery of IP multicast flows to non-interested receivers, such as R3 in Figure 1. To optimize this behavior, downstream PEs can snoop IGMP/MLD messages from receivers to build Layer 2 multicast state. For instance, PE4 could avoid forwarding (S1,G1) to R3, since R3 has not expressed interest in (S1,G1). * Model (b): Optimized Delivery with S-PMSI Model (b) in Figure 1 uses a "Selective Provider Multicast Service Interface (S-PMSI)" to optimize the delivery of the (S1,G1)flow. - For example, if PE1 uses "Ingress Replication (IR)", it will forward (S1,G1) only to downstream PEs that have issued a "Selective Multicast Ethernet Tag (SMET)" route for (S1,G1), such as PE2 and PE3. - If PE1 uses a P-tunnel type other than IR (e.g., Assisted Replication (AR) or Bit Indexed Explicit Replication (BIER)), PE1 will advertise an "S-PMSI Auto-Discovery (A-D)" route for (S1,G1). Downstream PEs such as PE2 and PE3 will then join the corresponding multicast tree to receive the flow. " [jorge] took it all, and added some minor clarification, thanks. 347 1.2.2. Inter-subnet IP Multicast Forwarding 348 349 If the source and receivers are attached to different BDs of the same 350 tenant domain, the EVPN network can also use Inclusive or Selective 351 Trees as depicted in Figure 2, models (a) and (b) respectively. 352 353 S1 + S1 + 354 (a) + | (b) + | 355 | | (S1,G1) | | (S1,G1) 356 PE1 | | PE1 | | 357 +-----+ v +-----+ v 358 |+---+| |+---+| 359 ||BD1|| ||BD1|| 360 |+---+| |+---+| 361 +-----+ +-----+ 362 +-------|-------+ +-------| 363 | | | | | 364 v v v v v 365 +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ 366 |+---+| |+---+| |+---+| |+---+| |+---+| |+---+| 367 ||SBD|| ||SBD|| ||SBD|| ||SBD|| ||SBD|| ||SBD|| 368 |+-|-+| |+-|-+| |+---+| |+-|-+| |+-|-+| |+---+| 369 | VRF | | VRF | | VRF | | VRF | | VRF | | VRF | 370 |+-v-+| |+-v-+| |+---+| |+-v-+| |+-v-+| |+---+| 371 ||BD2|| ||BD3|| ||BD4|| ||BD2|| ||BD3|| ||BD4|| 372 |+-|-+| |+-|-+| |+---+| |+-|-+| |+-|-+| |+---+| 373 +--|--+ +--|--+ +-----+ +--|--+ +--|--+ +-----+ 374 PE2| PE3| PE4 PE2| PE3| PE4 375 - | - - - | - - | - - - | - 376 | | | | | | | | 377 v v v v 378 | R1 R2 | R3 | R1 R2 | R3 379 - - - G1- - - - - - G1- - - 380 381 Figure 2: Inter-subnet IP Multicast 382 383 [RFC9625] specifies the procedures to optimize the Inter-subnet 384 Multicast forwarding in an EVPN network. The IP Multicast flows are 385 always sent in the context of the source BD. As described in 386 [RFC9625], if the downstream PE is not attached to the source BD, the 387 IP Multicast flow is received on the SBD (Supplementary Broadcast 388 Domain), as in the example in Figure 2. 389 390 [RFC9625] supports Inclusive or Selective Multicast Trees, and as 391 explained in Section 1.2.1, the Selective Multicast Trees are setup 392 in a different way, depending on the P-tunnel being used by the 393 source Broadcast Domain. As an example, model (a) in Figure 2 394 illustrates the use of an Inclusive Multicast Tree for Broadcast 395 Domain BD1 on PE1. Since the downstream PEs are not attached to BD1, 396 they will all receive (S1,G1) in the context of the Supplementary 397 Broadcast Domain (SBD) and will locally route the flow to the local 398 Attachment Circuits. Model (b) uses a similar forwarding model, 399 however PE1 sends the (S1,G1) flow in a Selective Multicast Tree. If 400 the P-tunnel is Ingress Replication (IR), Assisted Replication (AR) 401 or Bit Index Explicit Replication (BIER), PE1 does not need to 402 advertise an S-PMSI A-D route. 403 404 [RFC9625] is a superset of the procedures in [RFC9251], in which 405 sources and receivers can be in the same or different Broadcast 406 Domain of the same tenant. [RFC9625] ensures every upstream PE 407 attached to a source will learn of all other PEs (attached to the 408 same Tenant Domain) that have interest in a particular set of flows. 409 This is because the downstream PEs advertise SMET routes for a set of 410 flows with the Supplementary Broadcast Domain's Route Target and they 411 are imported by all the Upstream PEs of the tenant. As a result of 412 that, inter-subnet multicasting can be done within the Tenant Domain, 413 without requiring any Rendezvous Points (RP), shared trees, Upstream 414 Multicast Hop (UMH) selection or any other complex aspects of 415 conventional multicast routing techniques. GV> Proposed readability rewrite: " 1.2.2. Inter-subnet IP Multicast Forwarding When the source and receivers are connected to different BDs within the same tenant domain, the EVPN network can deliver IP multicast traffic using either Inclusive or Selective Multicast Trees, as illustrated in Figure 2 with models (a) and (b), respectively. S1 + S1 + (a) + | (b) + | | | (S1,G1) | | (S1,G1) PE1 | | PE1 | | +-----+ v +-----+ v |+---+| |+---+| ||BD1|| ||BD1|| |+---+| |+---+| +-----+ +-----+ +-------|-------+ +-------| | | | | | v v v v v +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ |+---+| |+---+| |+---+| |+---+| |+---+| |+---+| ||SBD|| ||SBD|| ||SBD|| ||SBD|| ||SBD|| ||SBD|| |+-|-+| |+-|-+| |+---+| |+-|-+| |+-|-+| |+---+| | VRF | | VRF | | VRF | | VRF | | VRF | | VRF | |+-v-+| |+-v-+| |+---+| |+-v-+| |+-v-+| |+---+| ||BD2|| ||BD3|| ||BD4|| ||BD2|| ||BD3|| ||BD4|| |+-|-+| |+-|-+| |+---+| |+-|-+| |+-|-+| |+---+| +--|--+ +--|--+ +-----+ +--|--+ +--|--+ +-----+ PE2| PE3| PE4 PE2| PE3| PE4 - | - - - | - - | - - - | - | | | | | | | | v v v v | R1 R2 | R3 | R1 R2 | R3 - - - G1- - - - - - G1- - - Figure 2: Inter-subnet IP Multicast * Procedure Overview As defined in [RFC9625], inter-subnet multicast forwarding in EVPN is optimized by ensuring IP multicast flows are sent within the context of the source BD. If a downstream PE is not connected to the source BD, the IP multicast flow is delivered to the Supplementary Broadcast Domain (SBD), as shown in Figure 2. * Inclusive and Selective Multicast Trees - Model (a): Inclusive Multicast Tree In this model, the Inclusive Multicast Tree for BD1 on PE1 delivers (S1,G1) to all downstream PEs, such as PE2, PE3, and PE4, in the context of the SBD. Each downstream PE then locally routes the flow to its Attachment Circuits, ensuring delivery to interested receivers. - Model (b): Selective Multicast Tree In this model, PE1 optimizes forwarding by delivering (S1,G1) only to downstream PEs that explicitly indicate interest in the flow via Selective Multicast Ethernet Tag (SMET) routes. - If the P-tunnel type is "Ingress Replication (IR)", "Assisted Replication (AR)", or "Bit Indexed Explicit Replication (BIER)", PE1 does not need to advertise an S-PMSI A-D route. - Downstream PEs join the multicast tree based on the SMET routes advertised for (S1,G1). * Advantages of [RFC9625] - [RFC9625] extends the procedures defined in [RFC9251] to support both intra- and inter-subnet multicast forwarding for EVPN. - It ensures that every upstream PE attached to a source is aware of all downstream PEs within the same tenant domain that have interest in specific flows. This is achieved through the advertisement of SMET routes for the SBD Route Target, which are imported by all upstream PEs. * Elimination of Complexity The inter-subnet multicast mechanism defined in [RFC9625] eliminates the need for: - Rendezvous Points (RP), - Shared trees, - Upstream Multicast Hop selection, or - Other complex conventional multicast routing techniques. By leveraging the EVPN framework, inter-subnet multicast forwarding achieves efficient delivery without introducing unnecessary overhead or dependencies on traditional IP multicast protocols. " [jorge] took it all, thanks. 417 1.3. Multi-Homed IP Multicast Sources in EVPN 418 419 Contrary to conventional multicast routing technologies, multi-homing 420 PEs attached to the same source can never create IP Multicast packet 421 duplication if the PEs use a multi-homed Ethernet Segment. Figure 3 422 illustrates this by showing two multi-homing PEs (PE1 and PE2) that 423 are attached to the same source (S1). We assume that S1 is connected 424 to an all-active ethernet segment by a layer-2 switch (SW1) with a 425 Link Aggregation Group (LAG) to PE1 and PE2. 426 427 S1 428 | 429 v 430 +-----+ 431 | SW1 | 432 +-----+ 433 +---- | | 434 (S1,G1)| +----+ +----+ 435 IGMP | | all-active | 436 J(S1,G1) PE1 v | ES-1 | PE2 437 +----> +-----------|---+ +---|-----------+ 438 | +---+ +---+ | | +---+ | 439 R1 <-----|BD2| |BD1| | | |BD1| | 440 | +---+---+---+ | | +---+---+ | 441 +----| |VRF| | | | |VRF| |----+ 442 | | +---+---+ | | | +---+---+ | | 443 | | |SBD| | | | |SBD| | | 444 | | +---+ | | | +---+ | | 445 | +------------|--+ +---------------+ | 446 | | | 447 | | | 448 | | | 449 | EVPN | ^ | 450 | OISM v PE3 | SMET | 451 | +---------------+ | (*,G1) | 452 | | +---+ | | | 453 | | |SBD| | | 454 | | +---+---+ | | 455 +--------------| |VRF| |----------------+ 456 | +---+---+---+ | 457 | |BD2| |BD3| | 458 | +-|-+ +-|-+ | 459 +---|-------|---+ 460 ^ | | ^ 461 IGMP | v v | IGMP 462 J(*,G1) | R2 R3 | J(S1,G1) 463 464 Figure 3: All-active Multi-homing and OISM 465 466 When receiving the (S1,G1) flow from S1, SW1 will choose only one 467 link to send the flow, as per [RFC7432]. Assuming PE1 is the 468 receiving PE on Broadcast Domain BD1, the IP Multicast flow will be 469 forwarded as soon as BD1 creates multicast state for (S1,G1) or 470 (*,G1). In the example of Figure 3, receivers R1, R2 and R3 are 471 interested in the multicast flow to G1. R1 will receive (S1,G1) 472 directly via the IRB interface as per [RFC9625]. Upon receiving IGMP 473 reports from R2 and R3, PE3 will issue an SMET (*,G1) route that will 474 create state in PE1's Broadcast Domain BD1. PE1 will therefore 475 forward the IP Multicast flow to PE3's SBD and PE3 will forward to R2 476 and R3, as per [RFC9625] procedures. 477 478 When IP Multicast source multi-homing is required, EVPN multi-homed 479 Ethernet Segments MUST be used. EVPN multi-homing guarantees that 480 only one Upstream PE will forward a given multicast flow at the time, 481 avoiding packet duplication at the Downstream PEs. In addition, the 482 SMET route for a given flow creates state in all the multi-homing 483 Upstream PEs. Therefore, in case of failure on the Upstream PE 484 forwarding the flow, the backup Upstream PE can forward the flow 485 immediately. 486 487 This document assumes that multi-homing PEs attached to the same 488 source always use multi-homed Ethernet Segments. GV> Proposed readability rewrite: " 1.3. Multi-Homed IP Multicast Sources in EVPN Unlike conventional multicast routing technologies, multi-homed PEs connected to the same source do not create IP multicast packet duplication when utilizing a multi-homed Ethernet Segment. Figure 3 illustrates this scenario, where two multi-homed PEs (PE1 and PE2) are attached to the same source S1. The source S1 is connected via a Layer 2 switch (SW1) to an all-active Ethernet Segment (ES-1), with a Link Aggregation Group (LAG) extending to PE1 and PE2. S1 | v +-----+ | SW1 | +-----+ +---- | | (S1,G1)| +----+ +----+ IGMP | | all-active | J(S1,G1) PE1 v | ES-1 | PE2 +----> +-----------|---+ +---|-----------+ | +---+ +---+ | | +---+ | R1 <-----|BD2| |BD1| | | |BD1| | | +---+---+---+ | | +---+---+ | +----| |VRF| | | | |VRF| |----+ | | +---+---+ | | | +---+---+ | | | | |SBD| | | | |SBD| | | | | +---+ | | | +---+ | | | +------------|--+ +---------------+ | | | | | | | | | | | EVPN | ^ | | OISM v PE3 | SMET | | +---------------+ | (*,G1) | | | +---+ | | | | | |SBD| | | | | +---+---+ | | +--------------| |VRF| |----------------+ | +---+---+---+ | | |BD2| |BD3| | | +-|-+ +-|-+ | +---|-------|---+ ^ | | ^ IGMP | v v | IGMP J(*,G1) | R2 R3 | J(S1,G1) Figure 3: All-active Multi-homing and OISM When S1 transmits the (S1,G1) flow, SW1 selects a single link within the all-active Ethernet Segment to forward the flow, as per [RFC7432]. In this example, assuming PE1 is the receiving PE for Broadcast Domain BD1, the multicast flow is forwarded once BD1 establishes multicast state for (S1,G1) or (*,G1). In Figure 3: - Receiver R1 receives (S1,G1) directly via the IRB interface, following the procedures in [RFC9625]. - Receivers R2 and R3, upon issuing IGMP reports, trigger PE3 to advertise an SMET (*,G1) route. This creates multicast state in PE1's BD1, enabling PE1 to forward the multicast flow to PE3's SBD. PE3 subsequently delivers the flow to R2 and R3 as defined in [RFC9625]. * Requirements for Multi-Homed IP Multicast Sources - When IP multicast source multi-homing is needed, EVPN multi-homed Ethernet Segments MUST be used. - EVPN multi-homing ensures that only one upstream PE forwards a given multicast flow at a time, preventing packet duplication at downstream PEs. - The SMET route for a multicast flow ensures that all upstream PEs in the multi-homed Ethernet Segment maintain state for the flow. This allows for immediate failover, as the backup PE can seamlessly take over forwarding in case of an upstream PE failure. * Assumptions This document assumes that multi-homed PEs connected to the same source always utilize multi-homed Ethernet Segments. " [jorge] took it all, but changed the structure a little bit 490 1.4. The Need for Redundant IP Multicast Sources in EVPN 491 492 While multi-homing PEs to the same IP Multicast G-source provides 493 certain level of resiliency, multicast applications are often 494 critical in the Operator's network and greater level of redundancy is 495 required. This document assumes that: 496 497 a. Redundant G-sources for an Single Flow Group (SFG) may exist in 498 the EVPN tenant network. A Redundant G-source is a host or a 499 router that sends an Single Flow Group stream in a tenant network 500 where there is another host or router sending traffic to the same 501 Single Flow Group. 502 503 b. Those redundant G-sources may be in the same Broadcast Domain or 504 different Broadcast Domains of the tenant. There must not be 505 restrictions imposed on the location of the receiver systems 506 either. 507 508 c. The redundant G-sources can be single-homed to only one EVPN PE 509 or multi-homed to multiple EVPN PEs. 510 511 d. The EVPN PEs must avoid duplication of packets of the same Single 512 Flow Group on the receiver systems. GV> Proposed readability rewrite: " 1.4. The Need for Redundant IP Multicast Sources in EVPN While multi-homing PEs to the same IP multicast G-source provides a certain level of resiliency, multicast applications are often critical in operator networks, necessitating a higher level of redundancy. This document assumes the following: a. Redundant G-sources: Redundant G-sources for a Single Flow Group (SFG) may exist within the EVPN tenant network. A redundant G-source is defined as a host or router transmitting an SFG stream in a tenant network where another host or router is also sending traffic to the same SFG. b. G-source Placement: Redundant G-sources may reside in the same BD or in different BDs of the tenant network. There must be no restrictions on the locations of receiver systems within the tenant. c. G-source attachment to EVPN PEs: Redundant G-sources may be either single-homed to a single EVPN PE or multi-homed to multiple EVPN PEs. d. Packet Duplication Avoidance: The EVPN PEs must ensure that receiver systems do not experience duplicate packets for the same SFG. This framework ensures that EVPN networks can effectively support redundant multicast sources while maintaining high reliability and operational efficiency. " [jorge] thanks, I took it all. 514 2. Solution Overview 515 516 An Single Flow Group (SFG) is represented as (*,G) if any source that 517 issues multicast traffic to G is a redundant G-source. 518 Alternatively, this document allows a Single Flow Group to be 519 represented as (S,G), where the source IP address "S" is a prefix of 520 any length. In this case, a source is considered a redundant 521 G-source for the Single Flow Group if it is contained in the prefix. 522 This document allows variable length prefixes in the Sources 523 advertised in S-PMSI A-D routes only for the particular application 524 of redundant G-sources. 525 526 There are two redundant G-source solutions described in this 527 document: 528 529 * Warm Standby Solution 530 531 * Hot Standby Solution 532 533 The Warm Standby solution is considered an upstream-PE-based solution 534 (since downstream PEs do not participate in the procedures), in which 535 all the upstream PEs attached to redundant G-sources for a Single 536 Flow Group represented by (*,G) or (S,G) will elect a "Single 537 Forwarder" (SF) among themselves. Once a Single Forwarder is 538 elected, the upstream PEs add an Reverse Path Forwarding check to the 539 (*,G) or (S,G) state for the Single Flow Group: 540 541 * A non-Single Forwarder upstream PE discards any (*,G)/(S,G) 542 packets received over a local Attachment Circuit. 543 544 * The Single Forwarder accepts and forwards any (*,G)/(S,G) packets 545 it receives over a single local Attachment Circuit (for the Single 546 Flow Group). In case (*,G)/(S,G) packets for the Single Flow 547 Group are received over multiple local Attachment Circuits, they 548 will be discarded in all the local Attachment Circuits but one. 549 The procedure to choose the local Attachment Circuit that accepts 550 packets is a local implementation matter. 551 552 A failure on the Single Forwarder will result in the election of a 553 new Single Forwarder. The Election requires BGP extensions on the 554 existing EVPN routes. These extensions and associated procedures are 555 described in Section 3 and Section 4 respectively. 556 557 In the Hot Standby solution the downstream PEs are the ones avoiding 558 the Single Flow Group duplication. The upstream PEs are aware of the 559 locally attached G-sources and add a unique Ethernet Segment 560 Identifier label (ESI-label) per Single Flow Group to the multicast 561 packets forwarded to downstream PEs. The downstream PEs pull the 562 Single Flow Group from all the upstream PEs attached to the redundant 563 G-sources and avoid duplication on the receiver systems by adding a 564 Reverse Path Forwarding check to the (*,G) state for the Single Flow 565 Group: 566 567 * A downstream PE discards any (*,G) packets it receives from the 568 "wrong G-source". 569 570 * The wrong G-source is identified in the data path by an Ethernet 571 Segment Identifier label that is different than the Ethernet 572 Segment Identifier label used for the selected G-source. 573 574 * Note that the Ethernet Segment Identifier label is used here for 575 "ingress filtering" (at the egress/downstream PE) as opposed to 576 the [RFC7432] "egress filtering" (at the egress/downstream PE) 577 used in the split-horizon procedures. In [RFC7432] the Ethernet 578 Segment Identifier label indicates what egress Attachment Circuits 579 must be skipped when forwarding BUM traffic to the egress. In 580 this document, the Ethernet Segment Identifier label indicates 581 what ingress traffic must be discarded at the downstream PE. 582 583 The use of Ethernet Segment Identifier labels for Single Flow Groups 584 forwarded by upstream PEs require some control plane and data plane 585 extensions in the procedures used by [RFC7432] for multi-homing. 586 Upon failure of the selected G-source, the downstream PE will switch 587 over to a different selected G-source, and will therefore change the 588 Reverse Path Forwarding check for the (*,G) state. The extensions 589 and associated procedures are described in Section 3 and Section 5 590 respectively. 591 592 An operator should use the Hot Standby solution if they require a 593 fast fail-over time and the additional bandwidth consumption is 594 acceptable (Single Flow Group packets are received multiple times on 595 the downstream PEs). Otherwise the operator should use the Warm 596 Standby solution, at the expense of a slower fail-over time in case 597 of a G-source or upstream PE failure. Besides bandwidth efficiency, 598 another advantage of the Warm Standby solution is that only the 599 upstream PEs attached to the redundant G-sources for the same Single 600 Flow Group need to be upgraded to support the new procedures. 601 602 This document does not impose the support of both solutions on a 603 system. If one solution is supported, the support of the other 604 solution is OPTIONAL. GV> Proposed readability rewrite: " 2. Solution Overview A Single Flow Group (SFG) can be represented as (*,G) if any source transmitting multicast traffic to group G is considered a redundant G-source. Alternatively, this document allows an SFG to be represented as (S,G), where the source IP address S is a prefix of variable length. In this case, a source is deemed a redundant G-source for the SFG if its address falls within the specified prefix. The use of variable-length prefixes in source advertisements via S-PMSI A-D routes is permitted in this document only for the specific application of redundant G-sources. This document describes two solutions for handling redundant G-sources: - Warm Standby Solution - Hot Standby Solution 2.1. Warm Standby Solution The Warm Standby solution is an upstream PE-based solution, where downstream PEs do not participate in the procedures. In this solution, all upstream PEs connected to redundant G-sources for a Single Flow Group (*,G) or (S,G) elect a "Single Forwarder (SF)" among themselves. After the Single Forwarder is elected, the upstream PEs apply Reverse Path Forwarding checks to the multicast state for the SFG: - Non-Single Forwarder Behavior: A non-Single Forwarder upstream PE discards all (*,G) or (S,G) packets received over its local Attachment Circuit. - Single Forwarder Behavior: The Single Forwarder accepts and forwards (*,G) or (S,G) packets received on a single local Attachment Circuit for the SFG. If packets are received on multiple local Attachment Circuits, the Single Forwarder discards packets on all but one. The selection of the Attachment Circuit for forwarding is a local implementation detail. In the event of a failure of the Single Forwarder, a new Single Forwarder is elected among the upstream PEs. This election process requires BGP extensions on existing EVPN routes, which are detailed in Sections 3 and 4. 2.2. Hot Standby Solution The Hot Standby solution relies on downstream PEs to prevent duplication of SFG packets. Upstream PEs, aware of locally connected G-sources, append a unique Ethernet Segment Identifier (ESI) label to multicast packets for each SFG. Downstream PEs receive SFG packets from all upstream PEs attached to redundant G-sources and avoid duplication by performing an RPF check on the (*,G) state for the SFG: - Packet Filtering: A downstream PE discards (*,G) packets received from the "wrong G-source." - Wrong G-source Identification: The "wrong G-source" is identified using an ESI label that differs from the ESI label associated with the selected G-source. - ESI Label Usage: In this solution, the ESI label is used for "ingress filtering" at the downstream PE, rather than for "egress filtering" as described in [RFC7432]. In [RFC7432], the ESI label indicates which egress Attachment Circuits must be excluded when forwarding BUM traffic. Here, the ESI label identifies ingress traffic that should be discarded by the downstream PE. Control plane and data plane extensions to [RFC7432] are required to support ESI labels for SFGs forwarded by upstream PEs. Upon failure of the selected G-source, the downstream PE switches to a different G-source and updates its RPF check for the (*,G) state. These extensions and procedures are described in Sections 3 and 5. 2.3. Solution Selection Operators should select a solution based on their specific requirements: - The Hot Standby solution is recommended for scenarios requiring fast failover times, provided that the additional bandwidth consumption (due to multiple transmissions of SFG packets to downstream PEs) is acceptable. - The Warm Standby solution is more bandwidth-efficient but incurs longer failover times in the event of a G-source or upstream PE failure. Additionally, only the upstream PEs connected to redundant G-sources for the same SFG need to support the new procedures in the Warm Standby solution. 2.4. System Support This document does not mandate support for both solutions on a single system. If one solution is implemented, support for the other is OPTIONAL. " [jorge] took it all, thanks 606 3. BGP EVPN Extensions 607 608 This document makes use of the following BGP EVPN extensions: 609 610 1. Single Flow Group flag in the Multicast Flags Extended Community 611 612 The Single Flow Group (SFG) flag is a new bit requested to IANA 613 out of the registry Multicast Flags Extended Community Flag 614 Values. This new flag is set for S-PMSI A-D routes that carry a 615 (*,G)/(S,G) Single Flow Group in the NLRI. 616 617 2. ESI Label Extended Community is used in S-PMSI A-D routes 618 619 The Hot Standby solution requires the advertisement of one or 620 more ESI Label Extended Communities [RFC7432] that encode the 621 Ethernet Segment Identifier(s) associated to an S-PMSI A-D 622 (*,G)/(S,G) route that advertises the presence of a Single Flow 623 Group. Only the ESI Label value in the extended community is 624 relevant to the procedures in this document. The Flags field in 625 the extended community will be advertised as 0x00 and ignored on 626 reception. [RFC7432] specifies that the ESI Label Extended 627 Community is advertised along with the A-D per ES route. This 628 documents extends the use of this extended community so that it 629 can be advertised multiple times (with different ESI values) 630 along with the EVPN S-PMSI A-D route. GV> Proposed readability rewrite: " 3. BGP EVPN Extensions This document introduces the following BGP EVPN extensions: 3.1. Single Flow Group Flag in the Multicast Flags Extended Community A new Single Flow Group (SFG) flag is defined within the Multicast Flags Extended Community. This flag is requested from the IANA registry for "Multicast Flags Extended Community Flag Values". The SFG flag is set in S-PMSI A-D routes that carry (*,G) or (S,G) Single Flow Group information in the NLRI. 3.2. ESI Label Extended Community in S-PMSI A-D Routes The Hot Standby solution requires the advertisement of one or more ESI Label Extended Communities, as defined in [RFC7432]. These extended communities encode the ESI values associated with an S-PMSI A-D (*,G) or (S,G) route that advertises the presence of a Single Flow Group. Key considerations include: - Only the ESI Label value in the extended community is relevant to the procedures defined in this document. - The Flags field within the extended community will be set to `0x00` on transmission and ignored on reception. [RFC7432] specifies the use of the ESI Label Extended Community in conjunction with the A-D per ES route. This document extends the applicability of the ESI Label Extended Community by allowing its inclusion multiple times (with different ESI values) alongside the EVPN S-PMSI A-D route. These extensions enable the precise encoding and advertisement of Single Flow Group-related information, facilitating efficient multicast traffic handling in EVPN networks. " [jorge] done, thanks! 632 4. Warm Standby (WS) Solution for Redundant G-Sources 633 634 This section describes the Warm Standby solution for redundant 635 sources. 636 637 4.1. Specification 638 639 The general procedure is described as follows: 640 641 1. Configuration of the upstream PEs 642 643 Upstream PEs (possibly attached to redundant G-sources) need to 644 be configured to know which groups are carrying only flows from 645 redundant G-sources, that is, the Single Flow Groups (SFGs) in 646 the tenant domain. They will also be configured to know which 647 local Broadcast Domains may be attached to a redundant G-source. 648 The Single Flow Groups can be configured for any source, E.g., 649 SFG for "*", or for a prefix that contains multiple sources that 650 will issue the same SFG, i.e., "192.0.2.0/30". In the latter 651 case sources 192.0.2.1 and 192.0.2.2 are considered as Redundant 652 G-sources (since they are contained in 192.0.2.0/30), whereas 653 192.0.2.10 is not considered a redundant G-source for the same 654 SFG. 655 656 As an example (Figure 4): 657 658 * PE1 is configured to know that G1 is an SFG for any source and 659 redundant G-sources for G1 may be attached to Broadcast 660 Domains BD1 or BD2. 661 662 * Or PE1 can also be configured to know that G1 is an SFG for 663 the sources contained in 192.0.2.0/30, and those redundant 664 G-sources may be attached to Broadcast Domains BD1 or BD2. 665 666 2. Signaling the location of a G-source for a given Single Flow 667 Group 668 669 Upon receiving G-traffic for a configured SFG on a Broadcast 670 Domain, an upstream PE configured to follow this procedure, e.g., 671 PE1: 672 673 * Originates an S-PMSI A-D (*,G)/(S,G) route for the SFG. An 674 (*,G) route is advertised if the SFG is configured for any 675 source, and an (S,G) route is advertised (where the Source can 676 have any length) if the SFG is configured for a prefix. 677 678 * The S-PMSI A-D route is imported by all the PEs attached to 679 the tenant domain. In order to do that, the route will use 680 the SBD-RT (Supplementary Broadcast Domain Route Target) if 681 the SBD exists, in addition to the BD-RT (Broadcast Domain 682 Route Target) of the Broadcast Domain over which the G-traffic 683 is received. The route SHOULD also carry a Designated 684 Forwarder Election Extended Community and the SFG flag (in the 685 Multicast Flags Extended Community) indicating that it conveys 686 an SFG. The Designated Forwarder Election extended community 687 and its use is specified in [RFC8584]. 688 689 * The above S-PMSI A-D route MAY be advertised with or without 690 PMSI Tunnel Attribute: 691 692 - With no PMSI Tunnel Attribute if an I-PMSI or S-PMSI A-D 693 with Ingress Replication, Assisted Replication or BIER are 694 to be used. 695 696 - With PMSI Tunnel Attribute in any other case. 967 698 * The S-PMSI A-D route is triggered by the first packet of the 699 SFG and withdrawn when the flow is not received anymore. 700 Detecting when the G-source is no longer active is a local 701 implementation matter. The use of a timer is RECOMMENDED. 702 The timer is started when the traffic to G1 is not received. 703 Upon expiration of the timer, the PE will withdraw the route. 703 705 3. Single Forwarder (SF) Election 706 If the PE with a local G-source receives one or more S-PMSI A-D 707 routes for the same Single Flow Group from a remote PE, it will 708 run a Single Forwarder Election based on the information encoded 709 in the Designated Forwarder Election extended community. Two 710 S-PMSI A-D routes are considered for the same SFG if they are 711 advertised for the same tenant, and their Multicast Source 712 Length, Multicast Source, Multicast Group Length and Multicast 713 Group fields match. 714 715 1. A given Designated Forwarder Algorithm can only be used if 716 all the PEs running the Algorithm have consistent input. For 717 example, in an OISM network, if the redundant G-sources for 718 an SFG are attached to Broadcast Domains with different 719 Ethernet Tags, the Default Designated Forwarder Election 720 Algorithm MUST NOT be used. 721 722 2. In case the there is a mismatch in the Designated Forwarder 723 Election Algorithm or capabilities advertised by two PEs 724 competing for the Single Forwarder role, the lowest PE IP 725 address (given by the Originator Address in the S- PMSI A-D 726 route) will be used as a tie-breaker. 727 728 4. Reverse Path Forwarding check on the PEs attached to a redundant 729 G-source 730 731 All the PEs with a local G-source for the Single Flow Group will 732 add a Reverse Path Forwarding check to the (*,G)/(S,G) state for 733 the Single Flow Group. That Reverse Path Forwarding check 734 depends on the Single Forwarder Election result: 735 736 1. The non-Single Forwarder PEs discard any (*,G)/(S,G) packets 737 for the Single Flow Group received over a local Attachment 738 Circuit. 739 740 2. The Single Forwarder accepts any (*,G)/(S,G) packets for the 741 Single Flow Group it receives over one (and only one) local 742 Attachment Circuit. 743 744 The solution above provides redundancy for Single Flow Groups and it 745 does not require an upgrade of the downstream PEs (PEs where there is 746 certainty that no redundant G-sources are connected). Other 747 G-sources for non-Single Flow Groups may exist in the same tenant 748 domain. This document does not change the existing procedures for 749 non-Single Flow Group G-sources. 750 751 The redundant G-sources can be single-homed or multi-homed to a 752 Broadcast Domain in the tenant domain. Multi-homing does not change 753 the above procedures. 754 755 Section 4.2 and Section 4.3 show two examples of the Warm Standby 756 solution. GV> Proposed readability rewrite: " 4. Warm Standby (WS) Solution for Redundant G-Sources This section specifies the Warm Standby (WS) solution for handling redundant multicast sources (G-sources). 4.1. Specification The Warm Standby solution follows these general procedures: 1. Configuration of Upstream PEs Upstream PEs, potentially connected to redundant G-sources, must be configured to recognize: - The multicast groups that carry Single Flow Groups (SFGs) in the tenant domain. - The local Broadcast Domains that may host redundant G-sources. The SFG configuration may apply to any source (e.g., (*) or to a specific source prefix (e.g., "192.0.2.0/30"). For instance: - If the prefix is 192.0.2.0/30, the sources 192.0.2.1 and 192.0.2.2 are considered redundant G-sources for the SFG, while 192.0.2.10 is not. Example Configuration (Figure 4): - PE1 is configured to recognize G1 as an SFG for any source, with potential redundant G-sources attached to Broadcast Domains BD1 and BD2. - Alternatively, PE1 may recognize G1 as an SFG for sources within 192.0.2.0/30, with redundant G-sources in BD1 and BD2. 2. Signaling the Location of a G-Source for an SFG Upon receiving multicast traffic for a configured SFG on a Broadcast Domain, an upstream PE (e.g., PE1): - Advertises an S-PMSI A-D route for the SFG: - An (*,G) route if the SFG is configured for any source. - An (S,G) route (where S can have any prefix length) if the SFG is configured for a source prefix. - Includes the following attributes in the S-PMSI A-D route: - Route Targets (RTs): The Supplementary Broadcast Domain Route Target (SBD-RT), if applicable, and the Broadcast Domain Route Target (BD-RT) of the Broadcast Domain receiving the traffic. - Multicast Flags Extended Community: Includes the SFG flag to indicate that the route conveys an SFG. - Designated Forwarder Election Extended Community: Specifies the algorithm and preferences for Single Forwarder election, as defined in [RFC8584]. - Advertises the route: - Without a PMSI Tunnel Attribute if using Ingress Replication (IR), Assisted Replication (AR), or Bit Indexed Explicit Replication (BIER). - With a PMSI Tunnel Attribute for other tunnel types. - Withdraws the S-PMSI A-D route when the SFG traffic ceases. A timer is RECOMMEMDED to detect inactivity and trigger route withdrawal. 3. Single Forwarder Election If a PE receives one or more S-PMSI A-D routes for the same SFG from remote PEs, it performs Single Forwarder Election based on the Designated Forwarder Election Extended Community. - Two routes are considered part of the same SFG if they match on the following fields: - Tenant - Multicast Source Length - Multicast Source - Multicast Group Length - Multicast Group - Election Rules: 1. A consistent Designated Forwarder Election Algorithm must be used across all PEs. For instance, in OISM networks, the Default Designated Forwarder Election Algorithm MUST NOT be used if redundant G-sources are attached to Broadcast Domains with different Ethernet Tags. 2. In case of a mismatch in the Designated Forwarder Election Algorithm or capabilities, the tie-breaker is the lowest PE IP address (as advertised in the Originator Address field of the S-PMSI A-D route). 4. Reverse Path Forwarding Checks on Upstream PEs All PEs with a local G-source for an SFG apply an RPF check to the (*,G) or (S,G) state based on the SF election result: 1. Non-Single Forwarder PEs: Discard all (*,G) or (S,G) packets received on local Attachment Circuits. 2. Single Forwarder PEs: Forward (*,G) or (S,G) packets received on one (and only one) local Attachment Circuit. Key Features of the Warm Standby Solution - The solution ensures redundancy for SFGs without requiring upgrades to downstream PEs (where no redundant G-sources are connected). - Existing procedures for non-SFG G-sources remain unchanged. - Redundant G-sources can be either single-homed or multi-homed. Multi-homing does not alter the above procedures. Examples of the Warm Standby solution are provided in Sections 4.2 and 4.3. " [jorge] took it all with small changes to prevent changing the meaning. 758 4.2. Warm Standby Example in an OISM Network 759 760 Figure 4 illustrates an example in which S1 and S2 are redundant 761 G-sources for the Single Flow Group (*,G1). 762 763 S1 (Single S2 764 | Forwarder) | 765 (S1,G1)| (S2,G1)| 766 | | 767 PE1 | PE2 | 768 +--------v---+ +--------v---+ 769 S-PMSI | +---+ | | +---+ | S-PMSI 770 (*,G1) | +---|BD1| | | +---|BD2| | (*,G1) 771 Pref200 | |VRF+---+ | | |VRF+---+ | Pref100 772 |SFG |+---+ | | | |+---+ | | SFG| 773 | +----|SBD|--+ | |-----------||SBD|--+ |---+ | 774 v | |+---+ | | |+---+ | | v 775 | +---------|--+ +------------+ | 776 SMET | | | SMET 777 (*,G1) | | (S1,G1) | (*,G1) 778 | +--------+------------------+ | 779 ^ | | | | ^ 780 | | | EVPN | | | 781 | | | OISM | | | 782 | | | | | | 783 PE3 | | PE4 | | PE5 784 +--------v---+ +------------+ | +------------+ 785 | +---+ | | +---+ | | | +---+ | 786 | +---|SBD| |-------| +---|SBD| |--|---| +---|SBD| | 787 | |VRF+---+ | | |VRF+---+ | | | |VRF+---+ | 788 |+---+ | | |+---+ | | | |+---+ | | 789 ||BD3|--+ | ||BD4|--+ | +--->|BD1|--+ | 790 |+---+ | |+---+ | |+---+ | 791 +------------+ +------------+ +------------+ 792 | ^ | ^ 793 | | IGMP | | IGMP 794 R1 | J(*,G1) R3 | J(*,G1) 795 796 Figure 4: Warm Standby Solution for Redundant G-Sources 797 798 The Warm Standby solution works as follows: 799 800 1. Configuration of the upstream PEs, PE1 and PE2 801 PE1 and PE2 are configured to know that G1 is an Single Flow 802 Group for any source and redundant G-sources for G1 may be 803 attached to Broadcast Domains BD1 or BD2, respectively. 804 805 2. Signaling the location of S1 and S2 for (*,G1) 806 807 Upon receiving traffic to G1 on a local Attachment Circuit, PE1 808 and PE2 originate S-PMSI A-D (*,G1) routes with the SBD-RT 809 (Supplementary Broadcast Domain Route Target), Designated 810 Forwarder Election Extended Community and the SFG flag in the 811 Multicast Flags Extended Community, indicating that it conveys a 812 Single Flow Group. 813 814 3. Single Forwarder (SF) Election 815 816 Based on the Designated Forwarder Election extended community 817 content, PE1 and PE2 elect a Single Forwarder for (*,G1). 818 Assuming both PEs agree on e.g., Preference based Election as the 819 algorithm to use [I-D.ietf-bess-evpn-pref-df], and PE1 has a 820 higher preference, PE1 becomes the Single Forwarder for (*,G1). 821 822 4. Reverse Path Forwarding check on the PEs attached to a redundant 823 G-source 824 825 a. The non-Single Forwarder, PE2, discards any (*,G1) packets 826 received over a local Attachment Circuit. 827 828 b. The Single Forwarder, PE1 accepts (*,G1) packets it receives 829 over one (and only one) local Attachment Circuit. 830 831 The end result is that, upon receiving IGMP/MLD reports for (*,G1) or 832 (S,G1), the downstream PEs (PE3 and PE5) will issue SMET routes and 833 will pull the multicast Single Flow Group from PE1, and PE1 only. 834 Upon a failure on S1, the Attachment Circuit connected to source S1 835 or PE1 itself will trigger the S-PMSI A-D (*,G1) withdrawal from PE1 836 and PE2 will be promoted to Single Forwarder. GV> Proposed readability rewrite: " 4.2. Warm Standby Example in an OISM Network Figure 4 illustrates an example where S1 and S2 are redundant G-sources for the Single Flow Group (*,G1). S1 (Single S2 | Forwarder) | (S1,G1)| (S2,G1)| | | PE1 | PE2 | +--------v---+ +--------v---+ S-PMSI | +---+ | | +---+ | S-PMSI (*,G1) | +---|BD1| | | +---|BD2| | (*,G1) Pref200 | |VRF+---+ | | |VRF+---+ | Pref100 |SFG |+---+ | | | |+---+ | | SFG| | +----|SBD|--+ | |-----------||SBD|--+ |---+ | v | |+---+ | | |+---+ | | v | +---------|--+ +------------+ | SMET | | | SMET (*,G1) | | (S1,G1) | (*,G1) | +--------+------------------+ | ^ | | | | ^ | | | EVPN | | | | | | OISM | | | | | | | | | PE3 | | PE4 | | PE5 +--------v---+ +------------+ | +------------+ | +---+ | | +---+ | | | +---+ | | +---|SBD| |-------| +---|SBD| |--|---| +---|SBD| | | |VRF+---+ | | |VRF+---+ | | | |VRF+---+ | |+---+ | | |+---+ | | | |+---+ | | ||BD3|--+ | ||BD4|--+ | +--->|BD1|--+ | |+---+ | |+---+ | |+---+ | +------------+ +------------+ +------------+ | ^ | ^ | | IGMP | | IGMP R1 | J(*,G1) R3 | J(*,G1) Figure 4: Warm Standby Solution for Redundant G-Sources Procedure 1. Configuration of Upstream PEs (PE1 and PE2) - PE1 and PE2 are configured to recognize G1 as a Single Flow Group for any source. - Redundant G-sources for G1 may be attached to Broadcast Domains BD1 (for PE1) and BD2 (for PE2). 2. Signaling the Location of S1 and S2 for (*,G1) - Upon receiving traffic for G1 on a local Attachment Circuit: - PE1 and PE2 originate S-PMSI A-D routes for (*,G1), including: - The Supplementary Broadcast Domain Route Target (SBD-RT), - The Designated Forwarder Election Extended Community, and - The SFG flag in the Multicast Flags Extended Community. - These routes indicate the presence of a Single Flow Group. 3. Single Forwarder Election - Based on the Designated Forwarder Election Extended Community, PE1 and PE2 perform Single Forwarder election. - Assuming they use Preference-based Election [I-D.ietf-bess-evpn-pref-df], PE1 (with a higher preference) is elected as the Single Forwarder for (*,G1). 4. Reverse Path Forwarding (RPF) Check on Upstream PEs - Non-Single Forwarder Behavior: PE2 discards all (*,G1) packets received on its local Attachment Circuit. - Single Forwarder Behavior: PE1 forwards (*,G1) packets received on one (and only one) local Attachment Circuit. Outcome - Upon receiving IGMP/MLD reports for (*,G1) or (S,G1), downstream PEs (PE3 and PE5) issue SMET routes to pull the multicast Single Flow Group traffic from PE1 only. - In the event of a failure of S1, the Attachment Circuit connected to S1, or PE1 itself, the S-PMSI A-D route for (*,G1) is withdrawn by PE1. - As a result, PE2 is promoted to Single Forwarder, ensuring continued delivery of (*,G1) traffic. " [jorge] done, copied almost verbatim 838 4.3. Warm Standby Example in a Single-BD Tenant Network 839 840 Figure 5 illustrates an example in which S1 and S2 are redundant 841 G-sources for the Single Flow Group (*,G1), however, now all the 842 G-sources and receivers are connected to the same Broadcast Domain 843 BD1 and there is no Supplementary Broadcast Domain. 844 845 S1 (Single S2 846 | Forwarder) | 847 (S1,G1)| (S2,G1)| 848 | | 849 PE1 | PE2 | 850 +--------v---+ +--------v---+ 851 S-PMSI | +---+ | | +---+ | S-PMSI 852 (*,G1) | |BD1| | | |BD1| | (*,G1) 853 Pref200 | +---+ | | +---+ | Pref100 854 |SFG | | | | | SFG| 855 | +---| | |-----------| |---+ | 856 v | | | | | | | v 857 | +---------|--+ +------------+ | 858 SMET | | | SMET 859 (*,G1) | | (S1,G1) | (*,G1) 860 | +--------+------------------------+ | 861 ^ | | | | ^ 862 | | | EVPN | | | 863 | | | | | | 864 | | | | | | 865 PE3 | | PE4 | | PE5 866 +--------v---+ +------------+ +-|----------+ 867 | +---+ | | +---+ | | | +---+ | 868 | |BD1| |-------| |BD1| |------| +--->|BD1| | 869 | +---+ | | +---+ | | +---+ | 870 | | | | | | 871 | | | | | | 872 | | | | | | 873 +------------+ +------------+ +------------+ 874 | ^ | ^ 875 | | IGMP | | IGMP 876 R1 | J(*,G1) R3 | J(*,G1) 877 878 Figure 5: WS Solution for Redundant G-Sources in the same BD 879 880 The same procedure as in Section 4.2 is valid here, being this a sub- 881 case of the one in Section 4.2. Upon receiving traffic for the 882 Single Flow Group G1, PE1 and PE2 advertise the S-PMSI A-D routes 883 with route target BD1-RT only, since there is no Supplementary 884 Broadcast Domain (SBD). GV> Proposed readability rewrite: " 4.3. Warm Standby Example in a Single-BD Tenant Network Figure 5 illustrates an example where S1 and S2 are redundant G-sources for the Single Flow Group (*,G1). In this case, all G-sources and receivers are connected to the same Broadcast Domain (BD1), and there is no Supplementary Broadcast Domain (SBD). S1 (Single S2 | Forwarder) | (S1,G1)| (S2,G1)| | | PE1 | PE2 | +--------v---+ +--------v---+ S-PMSI | +---+ | | +---+ | S-PMSI (*,G1) | |BD1| | | |BD1| | (*,G1) Pref200 | +---+ | | +---+ | Pref100 |SFG | | | | | SFG| | +---| | |-----------| |---+ | v | | | | | | | v | +---------|--+ +------------+ | SMET | | | SMET (*,G1) | | (S1,G1) | (*,G1) | +--------+------------------------+ | ^ | | | | ^ | | | EVPN | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | PE3 | | PE4 | | PE5 +--------v---+ +------------+ +-|----------+ | +---+ | | +---+ | | | +---+ | | |BD1| |-------| |BD1| |------| +--->|BD1| | | +---+ | | +---+ | | +---+ | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | +------------+ +------------+ +------------+ | ^ | ^ | | IGMP | | IGMP R1 | J(*,G1) R3 | J(*,G1) Figure 5: Warm Standby Solution for Redundant G-Sources in the Same BD Procedure The procedures for the Warm Standby solution in this example are identical to those described in Section 4.2, with the following distinction: - Signaling the S-PMSI A-D Routes - Upon receiving traffic for the Single Flow Group (*,G1), PE1 and PE2 advertise S-PMSI A-D routes. - These routes include only the BD1-RT (Broadcast Domain 1 Route Target) as there is no Supplementary Broadcast Domain (SBD) in this scenario. This example represents a specific sub-case of the broader procedure detailed in Section 4.2, adapted to a single Broadcast Domain environment. The absence of an SBD simplifies the configuration, as all signaling remains within the context of BD1. " [jorge] done, thanks! 886 5. Hot Standby Solution for Redundant G-Sources 887 888 This section describes the Hot Standby solution for redundant 889 sources. 890 891 5.1. Specification 892 893 If fast-failover is required upon the failure of a G-source or PE 894 attached to the G-source and the extra bandwidth consumption in the 895 tenant network is not an issue, the Hot Standby solution should be 896 used. The procedure is as follows: 897 898 1. Configuration of the PEs 899 900 As in the Warm Standby case, the upstream PEs where redundant 901 G-sources may exist need to be configured to know which groups 902 (for any source or a prefix containing the intended sources) are 903 carrying only flows from redundant G-sources, that is, the Single 904 Flow Groups in the tenant domain. 905 906 In addition (and this is not done in Warm Standby mode), the 907 individual redundant G-sources for a Single Flow Group need to be 908 associated with an Ethernet Segment on the upstream PEs. This is 909 irrespective of the redundant G-source being multi-homed or 910 single-homed. Even for single-homed redundant G-sources the Hot 911 Standby procedure relies on the ESI labels for the Reverse Path 912 Forwarding check on downstream PEs. The term "S-ESI" is used in 913 this document to refer to an Ethernet Segment Identifier 914 associated to a redundant G-source. 915 916 Contrary to what is specified in the Warm Standby method (that is 917 transparent to the downstream PEs), the support of the Hot 918 Standby procedure is required not only on the upstream PEs but 919 also on all downstream PEs connected to the receivers in the 920 tenant network. The downstream PEs do not need to be configured 921 to know the connected Single Flow Groups or their Ethernet 922 Segment Identifiers, since they get that information from the 923 upstream PEs. The downstream PEs will locally select an Ethernet 924 Segment Identifier for a given Single Flow Group, and will 925 program a Reverse Path Forwarding check to the (*,G)/(S,G) state 926 for the Single Flow Group that will discard (*,G)/(S,G) packets 927 from the rest of the Ethernet Segment Identifiers. The selection 928 of the Ethernet Segment Identifier for the Single Flow Group is 929 based on local policy, and therefore, different downstream PEs 930 may select different Ethernet Segment Identifiers. 931 932 2. Signaling the location of a G-source for a given Single Flow 933 Group and its association to the local Ethernet Segments 934 935 Based on the configuration in step 1, an upstream PE configured 936 to follow the Hot Standby procedures: 937 938 a. Advertises an S-PMSI A-D (*,G)/(S,G) route per each 939 configured Single Flow Group. These routes need to be 940 imported by all the PEs of the tenant domain, therefore they 941 will carry the route targets BD-RT (the route target of the 942 Broadcast Domain) and SBD-RT (the route target of the 943 Supplementary Broadcast Domain, if the SBD exists). The 944 route also carries the ESI Label extended communities needed 945 to convey all the S-ESIs associated to the Single Flow Group 946 in the PE. 947 948 b. The S-PMSI A-D route will convey a PMSI Tunnel Attribute in 949 the same cases as in the Warm Standby procedure. 950 951 c. The S-PMSI A-D (*,G)/(S,G) route is triggered by the 952 configuration of the Single Flow Group and not by the 953 reception of G-traffic. 954 955 3. Distribution of DCB (Domain-wide Common Block) ESI-labels and 956 G-source ES routes 957 958 An upstream PE advertises the corresponding EVPN ES route, A-D 959 per EVI and A-D per ES routes for the local S-ESIs. 960 961 a. ES routes are used for regular Designated Forwarder Election 962 for the S-ES. This document does not introduce any change in 963 the procedures related to the EVPN ES routes. 964 965 b. If the SBD exists, the EVPN A-D per EVI and A-D per ES routes 966 MUST include the route target SBD-RT since they have to be 967 imported by all the PEs in the tenant domain. 968 969 c. The EVPN A-D per ES routes convey the S-ESI labels that the 970 downstream PEs use to add the Reverse Path Forwarding check 971 for the (*,G)/(S,G) associated to the Single Flow Groups. 972 This Reverse Path Forwarding check requires that all the 973 packets for a given G-source are received with the same S-ESI 974 label value on the downstream PEs. For example, if two 975 redundant G-sources are multi-homed to PE1 and PE2 via S-ES-1 976 and S-ES-2, PE1 and PE2 MUST allocate the same ESI label "Lx" 977 for S-ES-1 and they MUST allocate the same ESI label "Ly" for 978 S-ES-2. In addition, Lx and Ly MUST be different. These ESI 979 labels are Domain-wide Common Block (DCB) labels and follow 980 the allocation procedures in [RFC9573]. 981 982 4. Processing of EVPN A-D per ES/EVI routes and Reverse Path 983 Forwarding check on the downstream PEs 984 The EVPN A-D per ES/EVI routes are received and imported in all 985 the PEs in the tenant domain. The processing of the EVPN A-D per 986 ES/EVI routes on a given PE depends on its configuration: 987 988 a. The PEs attached to the same Broadcast Domain of the route 989 target BD-RT that is included in the EVPN A-D per ES/EVI 990 routes will process the routes as in [RFC7432] and [RFC8584]. 991 If the receiving PE is attached to the same Ethernet Segment 992 as indicated in the route, [RFC7432] split-horizon procedures 993 will be followed and the Designated Forwarder Election 994 candidate list may be modified as in [RFC8584] if the 995 Ethernet Segment supports the AC-DF (Attachment Circuit 996 influenced Designated Forwarder) capability. 997 998 b. The PEs that are not attached to the Broadcast Domain 999 identified by the route target BD-RT but are attached to the 1000 Supplementary Broadcast Domain of the received route target 1001 SBD-RT, will import the EVPN A-D per ES/EVI routes and use 1002 them for redundant G-source mass withdrawal, as explained 1003 later. 1004 1005 c. Upon importing EVPN A-D per ES routes corresponding to 1006 different S-ESes, a PE MUST select a primary S-ES and add a 1007 Reverse Path Forwarding check to the (*,G)/(S,G) state in the 1008 Broadcast Domain or Supplementary Broadcast Domain. This 1009 Reverse Path Forwarding check will discard all ingress 1010 packets to (*,G)/(S,G) that are not received with the ESI- 1011 label of the primary S-ES. The selection of the primary S-ES 1012 is a matter of local policy. 1013 1014 5. G-traffic forwarding for redundant G-sources and fault detection 1015 1016 Assuming there is (*,G) or (S,G) state for the Single Flow Group 1017 with Output Interface list entries associated to remote EVPN PEs, 1018 upon receiving G-traffic on a S-ES, the upstream PE will add a 1019 S-ESI label at the bottom of the stack before forwarding the 1020 traffic to the remote EVPN PEs. This label is allocated from a 1021 Domain-wide Common Block as described in step 3. If Point-to- 1022 multipoint or BIER PMSIs are used, this is not adding any new 1023 data path procedures on the upstream PEs (except that the ESI- 1024 label is allocated from a Domain-wide Common Block as described 1025 in [RFC9573]). However, if Ingress Replication or Assisted 1026 Replication are used, this document extends the [RFC7432] 1027 procedures by pushing the S-ESI labels not only on packets sent 1028 to the PEs that shared the ES but also to the rest of the PEs in 1029 the tenant domain. This allows the downstream PEs to receive all 1030 the multicast packets from the redundant G-sources with a S-ESI 1031 label (irrespective of the PMSI type and the local ESes), and 1032 discard any packet that conveys a S-ESI label different from the 1033 primary S-ESI label (that is, the label associated to the 1034 selected primary S-ES), as discussed in step 4. 1035 1036 If the last EVPN A-D per EVI or the last EVPN A-D per ES route 1037 for the primary S-ES is withdrawn, the downstream PE will 1038 immediately select a new primary S-ES and will change the Reverse 1039 Path Forwarding check. Note that if the S-ES is re-used for 1040 multiple tenant domains by the upstream PEs, the withdrawal of 1041 all the EVPN A-D per-ES routes for a S-ES provides a mass 1042 withdrawal capability that makes a downstream PE to change the 1043 Reverse Path Forwarding check in all the tenant domains using the 1044 same S-ES. 1045 1046 The withdrawal of the last EVPN S-PMSI A-D route for a given 1047 (*,G)/(S,G) that represents a Single Flow Group SHOULD make the 1048 downstream PE remove the S-ESI label based Reverse Path 1049 Forwarding check on (*,G)/(S,G). 1050 1051 As in [RFC9573] this document also allows the use of context label 1052 space ID extended community. When the context label space ID 1053 extended community is advertised along with the ESI label in an EVPN 1054 A-D per ES route, the ESI label is from a context label space 1055 identified by the Domain-wide Common Block label in the Extended 1056 Community. GV> Proposed readability rewrite: " 5. Hot Standby Solution for Redundant G-Sources This section specifies the Hot Standby solution for handling redundant multicast sources (G-sources). 5.1. Specification The Hot Standby solution is designed for scenarios requiring fast failover in the event of a G-source or upstream PE failure. It assumes that additional bandwidth consumption in the tenant network is acceptable. The procedure is as follows: 1. Configuration of PEs - Upstream PEs must be configured to identify Single Flow Groups in the tenant domain. This includes groups for any source or a source prefix containing redundant G-sources. - Each redundant G-source must be associated with an ESI on the upstream PEs. This applies to both single-homed and multi-homed G-sources. For single-homed G-sources, ESI labels are essential for Reverse Path Forwarding checks on downstream PEs. The term S-ESI is used to denote the ESI associated with a redundant G-source. - Unlike the Warm Standby solution, the Hot Standby solution requires downstream PEs to support the procedure. Downstream PEs: - Do not need explicit configuration for Single Flow Groups or their ESIs. - Dynamically select an ESI for each Single Flow Group based on local policy and program an RPF check to discard packets from other ESIs. 2. Signaling the Location of a G-source for a Single Flow Group An upstream PE configured for Hot Standby procedures: - Advertises an S-PMSI A-D route for each Single Flow Group. These routes: - Use the Broadcast Domain Route Target (BD-RT) and, if applicable, the Supplementary Broadcast Domain Route Target (SBD-RT). - Include ESI Label Extended Communities to convey the S-ESIs associated with the Single Flow Group. - Includes a PMSI Tunnel Attribute as specified in the Warm Standby procedure. - Triggers S-PMSI A-D route advertisement based on the SFG configuration, not the reception of traffic. 3. Distribution of Domain-wide Common Block (DCB) ESI Labels - Upstream PEs advertise corresponding EVPN routes: - EVPN Ethernet Segment (ES) routes for the local S-ESIs. - A-D per EVI and A-D per ES routes for tenant-specific traffic. - ESI Label Procedures: - S-ESI labels are used by downstream PEs to implement RPF checks for SFGs. - All packets for a given G-source must carry the same S-ESI label. - S-ESI labels are allocated as Domain-wide Common Block (DCB) labels and follow the procedures in [RFC9573]. 4. Downstream PE RPF Checks Downstream PEs process received EVPN routes based on their configuration: - PMSI Handling: Routes with BD-RT are processed per [RFC7432] and [RFC8584]. Split-horizon procedures are applied when necessary. - SBD-RT Processing: Routes with SBD-RT are imported for redundant G-source mass withdrawal procedures. - RPF Implementation: Upon importing EVPN routes for multiple S-ESIs, downstream PEs: - Select a primary S-ESI based on local policy. - Add an RPF check to discard packets for (*,G) or (S,G) not received with the primary S-ESI label. 5. Forwarding and Fault Detection - G-traffic Forwarding: Upstream PEs append an S-ESI label to multicast traffic for SFGs before forwarding to remote PEs. This label is allocated as a DCB label. - For Ingress Replication and Assisted Replication, the procedures in [RFC7432] are extended to ensure S-ESI labels are applied to all tenant PEs. - Fault Detection: - Downstream PEs monitor for the withdrawal of EVPN routes associated with the primary S-ESI. - Upon withdrawal, downstream PEs select a new primary S-ESI and update their RPF checks. 6. Handling G-source Failures - If all EVPN routes for a primary S-ESI are withdrawn, downstream PEs: - Perform mass withdrawal for all tenant domains using the S-ESI. - Update RPF checks to ensure continued operation. - If the last S-PMSI A-D route for an SFG is withdrawn, the downstream PE removes the S-ESI-based RPF check for the associated (*,G) or (S,G). This document supports the use of Context Label Space ID Extended Communities, as described in [RFC9573], for scenarios where S-ESI labels are allocated within context label spaces." [jorge] the above was missing some important information, so I took your suggestions but complete the text with the missing pieces. Thanks! 1058 5.2. Extensions for the Advertisement of DCB Labels 1059 1060 Domain-wide Common Block Labels are specified in [RFC9573] and this 1061 document makes use of them for the procedures described in 1062 Section 5.1. [RFC9573] assumes that Domain-wide Common Block labels 1063 can only be used along with Multipoint-to-Multipoint, Point-to- 1064 Multipoint, or BIER tunnels and that, if the PMSI label is signaled 1065 as a Domain-wide Common Block label, then the ESI label used for 1066 multi-homing is also a Domain-wide Common Block label. This document 1067 extends the use of the Domain-wide Common Block allocation for ESI 1068 labels so that: 1069 1070 a. Domain-wide Common Block allocated ESI labels MAY be used along 1071 with Ingress Replication tunnels, and 1072 1073 b. Domain-wide Common Block allocated ESI labels MAY be used by PEs 1074 that do not use Domain-wide Common Block allocated PMSI labels. 1075 1076 This control plane extension is indicated by adding the DCB-flag 1077 (Domain-wide Common Block flag) or the Context Label Space ID 1078 extended community to the EVPN A-D per ES route(s) advertised for the 1079 S-ES. The DCB-flag is encoded in the ESI Label Extended Community as 1080 follows: 1081 1082 1 2 3 1083 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 1084 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1085 | Type=0x06 | Sub-Type=0x01 | Flags(1 octet)| Reserved=0 | 1086 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1087 | Reserved=0 | ESI Label | 1088 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1089 1090 Figure 6: ESI Label Extended Community 1091 1092 This document defines the bit 5 in the Flags octet of the ESI Label 1093 Extended Community as the ESI-DCB-flag. When the ESI-DCB-flag is 1094 set, it indicates that the ESI label is a Domain-wide Common Block 1095 label. 1096 1097 A received ESI label is considered a Domain-wide Common Block label 1098 if either of these two conditions is met: 1099 1100 a. The ESI label is encoded in an ESI Label Extended Community with 1101 the ESI-DCB-flag set. 1102 1103 b. The ESI label is signaled from a PE that advertised a PMSI label 1104 that is a Domain-wide Common Block label. 1105 1106 As in [RFC9573] this document also allows the use of context label 1107 space ID extended community. When the context label space ID 1108 extended community is advertised along with the ESI label in an EVPN 1109 A-D per ES route, the ESI label is from a context label space 1110 identified by the Domain-wide Common Block label in the Extended 1111 Community. GV> Proposed readability rewrite: " 5.2. Extensions for the Advertisement of Domain-wide Common Block (DCB) Labels Domain-wide Common Block (DCB) labels are specified in [RFC9573], and this document extends their usage as outlined in Section 5.1. [RFC9573] assumes that DCB labels are applicable only to Multipoint-to-Multipoint, Point-to-Multipoint, or Bit Indexed Explicit Replication (BIER) tunnels. Additionally, it specifies that when a PMSI label is a DCB label, the ESI label used for multi-homing must also be a DCB label. This document extends the use of DCB-allocated ESI labels with the following provisions: - a. DCB-allocated ESI labels MAY be used with Ingress Replication tunnels. - b. DCB-allocated ESI labels MAY be used by PEs that do not use DCB-allocated PMSI labels. Control Plane Extensions These extensions are indicated in the EVPN A-D per ES routes for the relevant S-ESs by: 1. Adding the DCB-flag** (Domain-wide Common Block flag) to the ESI Label Extended Community, or 2. Adding the Context Label Space ID Extended Community. The encoding of the DCB-flag within the ESI Label Extended Community is shown below: 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=0x06 | Sub-Type=0x01 | Flags(1 octet)| Reserved=0 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Reserved=0 | ESI Label | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Figure 6: ESI Label Extended Community Definition of the ESI-DCB-flag - Bit 5 of the Flags octet in the ESI Label Extended Community is defined as the ESI-DCB-flag by this document. - When the ESI-DCB-flag is set, it indicates that the ESI label is a DCB label. Criteria for Identifying a DCB Label An ESI label is considered a DCB label if either of the following conditions is met: - a. The ESI label is encoded in an ESI Label Extended Community with the ESI-DCB-flag set. - b. The ESI label is signaled by a PE that has advertised a PMSI label that is a DCB label. Use of Context Label Space ID Extended Community As specified in [RFC9573], this document also permits the use of the Context Label Space ID Extended Community. When this extended community is advertised along with the ESI label in an EVPN A-D per ES route, it indicates that the ESI label belongs to a context label space identified by the DCB label specified in the extended community. " [jorge] added with some modifications. 1113 5.3. Use of BFD in the HS Solution 1114 1115 In addition to using the state of the EVPN A-D per EVI, EVPN A-D per 1116 ES or S-PMSI A-D routes to modify the Reverse Path Forwarding check 1117 on (*,G)/(S,G) as discussed in Section 5.1, Bidirectional Forwarding 1118 Detection (BFD) protocol MAY be used to monitor the status of the 1119 multipoint tunnels used to forward the Single Flow Group packets from 1120 the redundant G-sources. 1121 1122 The BGP-BFD Attribute is advertised along with the S-PMSI A-D or 1123 Inclusive Multicast Ethernet Tag routes (depending on whether 1124 Inclusive PMSI or Selective PMSI trees are used) and the procedures 1125 described in [I-D.ietf-bess-evpn-bfd] [I-D.ietf-mpls-p2mp-bfd] are 1126 used to bootstrap multipoint BFD sessions on the downstream PEs. GV> Proposed readability rewrite: " 5.3. Use of BFD in the Hot Standby Solution In addition to utilizing the state of EVPN A-D per EVI, EVPN A-D per ES, or S-PMSI A-D routes to adjust the Reverse Path Forwarding (RPF) checks for (*,G) or (S,G), as described in Section 5.1, the Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD)protocol MAY be employed to monitor the status of the multipoint tunnels used to forward Single Flow Group packets from redundant G-sources. BFD Integration - The BGP-BFD Attribute is advertised alongside the S-PMSI A-D or Inclusive Multicast Ethernet Tag routes, depending on whether Inclusive PMSI or Selective PMSI trees are being utilized. - The procedures outlined in: - [I-D.ietf-bess-evpn-bfd], and - [I-D.ietf-mpls-p2mp-bfd] are followed to bootstrap multipoint BFD sessions on the downstream PEs. " [jorge] done, except that we removed the reference to evpn-bfd, as per the discussion on the mailing list and the request from Sasha. 1128 5.4. Hot Standby Example in an OISM Network 1129 1130 Figure 7 illustrates the Hot Standby model in an Optimized Inter- 1131 Subnet Multicast (OISM) network. Consider S1 and S2 are redundant 1132 G-sources for the Single Flow Group (*,G1) in Broadcast Domain BD1 1133 (any source using G1 is assumed to transmit an SFG). S1 and S2 are 1134 (all-active) multi-homed to upstream PEs, PE1 and PE2. The receivers 1135 are attached to downstream PEs, PE3 and PE5, in Broadcast Domains BD3 1136 and BD1, respectively. S1 and S2 are assumed to be connected by a 1137 Link Aggregation Group to the multi-homing PEs, and the multicast 1138 traffic can use the link to either upstream PE. The diagram 1139 illustrates how S1 sends the G-traffic to PE1 and PE1 forwards to the 1140 remote interested downstream PEs, whereas S2 sends to PE2 and PE2 1141 forwards further. In this Hot Standby model, the interested 1142 downstream PEs will get duplicate G-traffic from the two G-sources 1143 for the same Single Flow Group. While the diagram shows that the two 1144 flows are forwarded by different upstream PEs, the all-active multi- 1145 homing procedures may cause that the two flows come from the same 1146 upstream PE. Therefore, finding out the upstream PE for the flow is 1147 not enough for the downstream PEs to program the required Reverse 1148 Path Forwarding check to avoid duplicate packets on the receiver. 1149 1150 S1(ESI-1) S2(ESI-2) 1151 | | 1152 | +----------------------+ 1153 (S1,G1)| | (S2,G1)| 1154 +----------------------+ | 1155 PE1 | | PE2 | | 1156 +--------v---+ +--------v---+ 1157 | +---+ | | +---+ | S-PMSI 1158 S-PMSI | +---|BD1| | | +---|BD1| | (*,G1) 1159 (*,G1) | |VRF+---+ | | |VRF+---+ | SFG 1160 SFG |+---+ | | | |+---+ | | | ESI1,2 1161 ESI1,2 +---||SBD|--+ | |-----------||SBD|--+ | |---+ | 1162 | | |+---+ | | EVPN |+---+ | | | v 1163 v | +---------|--+ OISM +---------|--+ | 1164 | | | | 1165 | | (S1,G1) | | 1166 SMET | +---------+------------------+ | | SMET 1167 (*,G1) | | | | | (*,G1) 1168 ^ | | +----------------------------+---+ | ^ 1169 | | | | (S2,G1) | | | | 1170 | | | | | | | | 1171 PE3 | | | PE4 | | | PE5 1172 +-------v-v--+ +------------+ | | +------------+ 1173 | +---+ | | +---+ | | | | +---+ | 1174 | +---|SBD| +-------| +---|SBD| |--|-|-| +---|SBD| | 1175 | |VRF+---+ | | |VRF+---+ | | | | |VRF+---+ | 1176 |+---+ | | |+---+ | | | | |+---+ | | 1177 ||BD3|--+ | ||BD4|--+ | | +->|BD1|--+ | 1178 |+---+ | |+---+ | +--->+---+ | 1179 +------------+ +------------+ +------------+ 1180 | ^ | ^ 1181 | | IGMP | | IGMP 1182 R1 | J(*,G1) R3 | J(*,G1) 1183 1184 Figure 7: HS Solution for Multi-homed Redundant G-Sources in OISM 1185 1186 In this scenario, the Hot Standby solution works as follows: 1187 1188 1. Configuration of the upstream PEs, PE1 and PE2 1189 PE1 and PE2 are configured to know that G1 is a Single Flow Group 1190 for any source (a source prefix length could have been configured 1191 instead) and the redundant G-sources for G1 use S-ESIs ESI-1 and 1192 ESI-2 respectively. Both Ethernet Segments are configured in 1193 both PEs and their ESI value can be configured or auto-derived. 1194 The ESI-label values are allocated from a Domain-wide Common 1195 Block [RFC9573] and are configured either locally or by a 1196 centralized controller. We assume ESI-1 is configured to use 1197 ESI-label-1 and ESI-2 to use ESI-label-2. 1198 1199 The downstream PEs, PE3, PE4 and PE5 are configured to support 1200 Hot Standby mode and select the G-source with e.g., lowest ESI 1201 value. 1202 1203 2. PE1 and PE2 advertise S-PMSI A-D (*,G1) and EVPN ES, A-D per ES 1204 and A-D per EVI routes 1205 1206 Based on the configuration of step 1, PE1 and PE2 advertise an 1207 S-PMSI A-D (*,G1) route each. The route from each of the two PEs 1208 will include two ESI Label Extended Communities with ESI-1 and 1209 ESI-2 respectively, as well as route target BD1-RT plus SBD-RT 1210 and the SFG flag (in the Multicast Flags Extended Community) that 1211 indicates that (*,G1) is a Single Flow Group. 1212 1213 In addition, PE1 and PE2 advertise EVPN ES and A-D per ES/EVI 1214 routes for ESI-1 and ESI-2. The EVPN A-D per ES and per EVI 1215 routes will include the route target of the SBD, i.e.,: SBD-RT, 1216 so that they can be imported by the downstream PEs that are not 1217 attached to Broadcast Domain BD1, e.g., PE3 and PE4. The EVPN 1218 A-D per ES routes will convey ESI-label-1 for ESI-1 (on both PEs) 1219 and ESI-label-2 for ESI-2 (also on both PEs). 1220 1221 3. Processing of EVPN A-D per ES/EVI routes and Reverse Path 1222 Forwarding check 1223 1224 PE1 and PE2 received each other's ES and A-D per ES/EVI routes. 1225 Regular [RFC7432] [RFC8584] procedures will be followed for the 1226 Designated Forwarder Election and programming of the ESI-labels 1227 for egress split-horizon filtering. PE3/PE4 import the EVPN A-D 1228 per ES/EVI routes in the SBD. Since PE3 has created a (*,G1) 1229 state based on local interest, PE3 will add a Reverse Path 1230 Forwarding check to (*,G1) so that packets coming with ESI- 1231 label-2 are discarded (lowest ESI value is assumed to give the 1232 primary S-ES). 1233 1234 4. G-traffic forwarding and fault detection 1235 PE1 receives G-traffic (S1,G1) on ES-1 that is forwarded within 1236 the context of Broadcast Domain BD1. Irrespective of the tunnel 1237 type, PE1 pushes ESI-label-1 at the bottom of the stack and the 1238 traffic gets to PE3 and PE5 with the mentioned ESI-label (PE4 has 1239 no local interested receivers). The G-traffic with ESI-label-1 1240 passes the Reverse Path Forwarding check and it is forwarded to 1241 R1. In the same way, PE2 sends (S2,G1) with ESI-label-2, but 1242 this G-traffic does not pass the Reverse Path Forwarding check 1243 and gets discarded at PE3/PE5. 1244 1245 If the link from S1 to PE1 fails, S1 will forward the (S1,G1) 1246 traffic to PE2 instead. PE1 withdraws the EVPN ES and A-D routes 1247 for ESI-1. Now both flows will be originated by PE2, however the 1248 Reverse Path Forwarding checks do not change in PE3/PE5. 1249 1250 If subsequently, the link from S1 to PE2 fails, PE2 also 1251 withdraws the EVPN ES and A-D routes for ESI-1. Since PE3 and 1252 PE5 have no longer A-D per ES/EVI routes for ESI-1, they 1253 immediately change the Reverse Path Forwarding check so that 1254 packets with ESI-label-2 are now accepted. 1255 1256 Figure 8 illustrates a scenario where sources S1 and S2 are single- 1257 homed to PE1 and PE2 respectively. This scenario is a sub-case of 1258 the one in Figure 7. Now ES-1 only exists in PE1, hence only PE1 1259 advertises the EVPN A-D per ES/EVI routes for ESI-1. Similarly, ES-2 1260 only exists in PE2 and PE2 is the only PE advertising EVPN A-D routes 1261 for ESI-2. The same procedures as in Figure 7 apply to this use- 1262 case. 1263 1264 S1(ESI-1) S2(ESI-2) 1265 | | 1266 (S1,G1)| (S2,G1)| 1267 | | 1268 PE1 | PE2 | 1269 +--------v---+ +--------v---+ 1270 | +---+ | | +---+ | S-PMSI 1271 S-PMSI | +---|BD1| | | +---|BD2| | (*,G1) 1272 (*,G1) | |VRF+---+ | | |VRF+---+ | SFG 1273 SFG |+---+ | | | |+---+ | | | ESI2 1274 ESI1 +---||SBD|--+ | |-----------||SBD|--+ | |---+ | 1275 | | |+---+ | | EVPN |+---+ | | | v 1276 v | +---------|--+ OISM +---------|--+ | 1277 | | | | 1278 | | (S1,G1) | | 1279 SMET | +---------+------------------+ | | SMET 1280 (*,G1) | | | | | (*,G1) 1281 ^ | | +--------------------------------+----+ | ^ 1282 | | | | (S2,G1) | | | | 1283 | | | | | | | | 1284 PE3 | | | PE4 | | | PE5 1285 +-------v-v--+ +------------+ | +------v-----+ 1286 | +---+ | | +---+ | | | +---+ | 1287 | +---|SBD| |-------| +---|SBD| |--|---| +---|SBD| | 1288 | |VRF+---+ | | |VRF+---+ | | | |VRF+---+ | 1289 |+---+ | | |+---+ | | | |+---+ | | 1290 ||BD3|--+ | ||BD4|--+ | +--->|BD1|--+ | 1291 |+---+ | |+---+ | |+---+ | 1292 +------------+ +------------+ +------------+ 1293 | ^ | ^ 1294 | | IGMP | | IGMP 1295 R1 | J(*,G1) R3 | J(*,G1) 1296 1297 Figure 8: HS Solution for single-homed Redundant G-Sources in OISM GV> Proposed readability rewrite: " 5.4. Hot Standby Example in an OISM Network This section describes the Hot Standby model applied in an Optimized Inter-Subnet Multicast (OISM) network. Figures 7 and 8 illustrate scenarios with multi-homed and single-homed redundant G-sources, respectively. Multi-Homed Redundant G-Sources Scenario (Figure 7): - S1 and S2 are redundant G-sources for the Single Flow Group (*,G1), connected to Broadcast Domain BD1. - S1 and S2 are all-active multi-homed to upstream PEs (PE1 and PE2). - Receivers are connected to downstream PEs (PE3 and PE5) in Broadcast Domains BD3 and BD1, respectively. - S1 and S2 are connected to the multi-homing PEs using a LAG. Multicast traffic can traverse either link. - In this model, downstream PEs receive duplicate G-traffic for (*,G1) and must use RPF checks to avoid delivering duplicate packets to receivers. S1(ESI-1) S2(ESI-2) | | | +----------------------+ (S1,G1)| | (S2,G1)| +----------------------+ | PE1 | | PE2 | | +--------v---+ +--------v---+ | +---+ | | +---+ | S-PMSI S-PMSI | +---|BD1| | | +---|BD1| | (*,G1) (*,G1) | |VRF+---+ | | |VRF+---+ | SFG SFG |+---+ | | | |+---+ | | | ESI1,2 ESI1,2 +---||SBD|--+ | |-----------||SBD|--+ | |---+ | | | |+---+ | | EVPN |+---+ | | | v v | +---------|--+ OISM +---------|--+ | | | | | | | (S1,G1) | | SMET | +---------+------------------+ | | SMET (*,G1) | | | | | (*,G1) ^ | | +----------------------------+---+ | ^ | | | | (S2,G1) | | | | | | | | | | | | PE3 | | | PE4 | | | PE5 +-------v-v--+ +------------+ | | +------------+ | +---+ | | +---+ | | | | +---+ | | +---|SBD| +-------| +---|SBD| |--|-|-| +---|SBD| | | |VRF+---+ | | |VRF+---+ | | | | |VRF+---+ | |+---+ | | |+---+ | | | | |+---+ | | ||BD3|--+ | ||BD4|--+ | | +->|BD1|--+ | |+---+ | |+---+ | +--->+---+ | +------------+ +------------+ +------------+ | ^ | ^ | | IGMP | | IGMP R1 | J(*,G1) R3 | J(*,G1) Figure 7: HS Solution for Multi-homed Redundant G-Sources in OISM Procedure: 1. Configuration of Upstream PEs (PE1 and PE2): - PE1 and PE2 are configured to recognize (*,G1) as a Single Flow Group. - Redundant G-sources use S-ESIs: ESI-1 for S1 and ESI-2 for S2. - The Ethernet Segments (ES-1 and ES-2) are configured on both PEs. ESI-labels are allocated from a Domain-wide Common Block (DCB) [RFC9573] — ESI-label-1 for ESI-1 and ESI-label-2 for ESI-2. 2. Advertisement of EVPN Routes: - PE1 and PE2 advertise S-PMSI A-D routes for (*,G1), including: - Route Targets: BD1-RT and SBD-RT. - ESI Label Extended Communities for ESI-1 and ESI-2. - The SFG flag indicating that (*,G1) represents a Single Flow Group. - EVPN ES and A-D per ES/EVI routes are also advertised for ESI-1 and ESI-2. These include SBD-RT for downstream PE import. 3. RPF Check on Downstream PEs: - Downstream PEs (e.g., PE3 and PE5) use EVPN A-D per ES/EVI routes to configure RPF checks. - The primary S-ESI is selected based on local policy (e.g., lowest ESI value). For example: - Packets with ESI-label-2 are discarded if ESI-label-1 is selected as the primary label. 4. Traffic Forwarding and Fault Detection: - PE1 forwards (S1,G1) traffic with ESI-label-1. This traffic passes RPF checks on downstream PEs and is delivered to receivers. - PE2 forwards (S2,G1) traffic with ESI-label-2. This traffic fails RPF checks and is discarded. - If the link between S1 and PE1 fails, PE1 withdraws EVPN routes for ESI-1. PE2 continues forwarding (S1,G1) traffic using ESI-label-2. - If all links to S1 fail, downstream PEs update RPF checks to accept ESI-label-2 traffic. Single-Homed Redundant G-Sources Scenario (Figure 8): - S1 is single-homed to PE1 using ESI-1, and S2 is single-homed to PE2 using ESI-2. - The scenario is a subset of the multi-homed case. Only one PE advertises EVPN A-D per ES/EVI routes for each S-ESI. S1(ESI-1) S2(ESI-2) | | (S1,G1)| (S2,G1)| | | PE1 | PE2 | +--------v---+ +--------v---+ | +---+ | | +---+ | S-PMSI S-PMSI | +---|BD1| | | +---|BD2| | (*,G1) (*,G1) | |VRF+---+ | | |VRF+---+ | SFG SFG |+---+ | | | |+---+ | | | ESI2 ESI1 +---||SBD|--+ | |-----------||SBD|--+ | |---+ | | | |+---+ | | EVPN |+---+ | | | v v | +---------|--+ OISM +---------|--+ | | | | | | | (S1,G1) | | SMET | +---------+------------------+ | | SMET (*,G1) | | | | | (*,G1) ^ | | +--------------------------------+----+ | ^ | | | | (S2,G1) | | | | | | | | | | | | PE3 | | | PE4 | | | PE5 +-------v-v--+ +------------+ | +------v-----+ | +---+ | | +---+ | | | +---+ | | +---|SBD| |-------| +---|SBD| |--|---| +---|SBD| | | |VRF+---+ | | |VRF+---+ | | | |VRF+---+ | |+---+ | | |+---+ | | | |+---+ | | ||BD3|--+ | ||BD4|--+ | +--->|BD1|--+ | |+---+ | |+---+ | |+---+ | +------------+ +------------+ +------------+ | ^ | ^ | | IGMP | | IGMP R1 | J(*,G1) R3 | J(*,G1) Figure 8: HS Solution for single-homed Redundant G-Sources in OISM Procedure: - The procedures follow the same logic as described in the multi-homed scenario, with the distinction that each ESI is specific to a single PE. Figures 7 and 8 demonstrate the application of the Hot Standby solution, ensuring seamless traffic forwarding while avoiding duplication in the presence of redundant G-sources. " [jorge] I took the text but had to modify some paragraphs. Please check it out. 1299 5.5. Hot Standby Example in a Single-BD Tenant Network 1300 1301 Irrespective of the redundant G-sources being multi-homed or single- 1302 homed, if the tenant network has only one Broadcast Domain, e.g., 1303 BD1, the procedures of Section 5.4 still apply, only that routes do 1304 not include any SBD route target, i.e.,: SBD-RT, and all the 1305 procedures apply to Broadcast Domain BD1 only. GV> Proposed readability rewrite: " 5.5. Hot Standby Example in a Single-Broadcast Domain Tenant Network The Hot Standby procedures described in Section 5.4 apply equally to scenarios where the tenant network comprises a single Broadcast Domain (e.g., BD1), irrespective of whether the redundant G-sources are multi-homed or single-homed. In such cases: - The advertised routes do not include the Supplementary Broadcast Domain Route Target (SBD-RT). - All procedures are confined to the single Broadcast Domain (BD1). The absence of the SBD simplifies the configuration and limits the scope of the Hot Standby solution to BD1, while maintaining the integrity of the procedures for managing redundant G-sources. " [jorge] took it all, thx 1319 7. IANA Considerations 1320 1321 IANA is requested to allocate a bit in the Multicast Flags Extended 1322 Community registry that was introduced by [RFC9251]. This bit 1323 indicates that a given (*,G) or (S,G) in an S-PMSI A-D route is 1324 associated with an SFG (Single Flow Group). This bit is called 1325 "Single Flow Group" bit and it is defined as follows: 1326 1327 +=====+===================+===============+ 1328 | Bit | Name | Reference | 1329 +=====+===================+===============+ 1330 | 4 | Single Flow Group | This Document | 1331 +-----+-------------------+---------------+ 1332 1333 Table 1 GV> Oddly on line 1092 the following was written "This document defines the bit 5 in the Flags octet of the ESI Label" Is this bit 4 or bit 5 that is defined? [jorge] as discussed at the top, it was an oversight. The new IANA section reflects the two requests now. Brgds, G/
- [bess] [Shepherding AD review] review of draft-ie… Gunter van de Velde (Nokia)
- [bess] Re: [Shepherding AD review] review of draf… Jorge Rabadan (Nokia)
- [bess] Re: [Shepherding AD review] review of draf… Gunter van de Velde (Nokia)
- [bess] Re: [Shepherding AD review] review of draf… Gunter van de Velde (Nokia)
- [bess] Re: [Shepherding AD review] review of draf… Jorge Rabadan (Nokia)