home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
Text File | 1991-04-20 | 183.5 KB | 4,763 lines |
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Network Working Working Group R. Callon
- Request for Comments: 1195 Digital Equipment Corporation
- December 1990
-
-
- Use of OSI IS-IS for Routing in TCP/IP and Dual Environments
-
- Status of this Memo
-
- This RFC specifies a protocol on the IAB Standards Track for the
- Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
- improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "IAB
- Official Protocol Standards" for the standardization state and status
- of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
-
- This RFC is available in both postscript and text versions. Where
- possible, use of the postscript version is recommended. For example,
- this text version may have figures which are less informative or
- missing.
-
- Abstract
-
- This RFC specifies an integrated routing protocol, based on the OSI
- Intra-Domain IS-IS Routing Protocol, which may be used as an interior
- gateway protocol (IGP) to support TCP/IP as well as OSI. This allows
- a single routing protocol to be used to support pure IP environments,
- pure OSI environments, and dual environments. This specification was
- developed by the IS-IS working group of the Internet Engineering Task
- Force.
-
- The OSI IS-IS protocol has reached a mature state, and is ready for
- implementation and operational use. The most recent version of the
- OSI IS-IS protocol is contained in ISO DP 10589 [1]. The proposed
- standard for using IS-IS for support of TCP/IP will therefore make
- use of this version (with a minor bug correction, as discussed in
- Annex B). We expect that future versions of this proposed standard
- will upgrade to the final International Standard version of IS-IS
- when available.
-
- Comments should be sent to "isis@merit.edu".
-
- Contents
-
- 1 Introduction: Overview of the Protocol
- 1.1 What the Integrated IS-IS offers
- 1.2 Overview of the ISO IS-IS Protocol
- 1.3 Overview of the Integrated IS-IS
- 1.4 Support of Mixed Routing Domains
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 1]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- 1.5 Advantages of Using Integrated IS-IS
-
- 2 Symbols and Abbreviations
-
- 3 Subnetwork Independent Functions
- 3.1 Exchange of Routing Information
- 3.2 Hierarchical Abbreviation of IP Reachability Information
- 3.3 Addressing Routers in IS-IS Packets
- 3.4 External Links
- 3.5 Type of Service Routing
- 3.6 Multiple LSPs and SNPs
- 3.7 IP-Only Operation
- 3.8 Encapsulation
- 3.9 Authentication
- 3.10 Order of Preference of Routes / Dijkstra Computation
-
- 4 Subnetwork Dependent Functions
- 4.1 Link Demultiplexing
- 4.2 Multiple IP Addresses per Interface
- 4.3 LANs, Designated Routers, and Pseudonodes
- 4.4 Maintaining Router Adjacencies
- 4.5 Forwarding to Incompatible Routers
-
- 5 Structure and Encoding of PDUs
- 5.1 Overview of IS-IS PDUs
- 5.2 Overview of IP-Specific Information for IS-IS
- 5.3 Encoding of IP-Specific Fields in IS-IS PDUs
-
- 6 Security Considerations
-
- 7 Author's Address
-
- 8 References
-
- A Inter-Domain Routing Protocol Information
- A.1 Inter-Domain Information Type
- A.2 Encoding
-
- B Encoding of Sequence Number Packets
- B.1 Level 1 Complete Sequence Numbers PDU
- B.2 Level 2 Complete Sequence Numbers PDU
- B.3 Level 1 Partial Sequence Numbers PDU
- B.4 Level 2 Partial Sequence Numbers PDU
-
- C Dijkstra Calculation and Forwarding
- C.1 SPF Algorithm for IP and Dual Use
- C.2 Forwarding of IP packets
-
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 2]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- D Use of the Authentication Field
- D.1 Authentication Field in IS-IS packets
- D.2 Authentication Type 1 - Simple Password
-
- E Interaction of the Integrated IS-IS with Brouters
- E.1 The Problem
- E.2 Possible Solutions
-
- Figures
- 1 ISO Hierarchical Address Structure
- 2 An Example
- 3 Encoding of Variable Length Fields
-
- 1 Introduction: Overview of the Protocol
-
- The TCP/IP protocol suite has been growing in importance as a multi-
- vendor communications architecture. With the anticipated emergence of
- OSI, we expect coexistence of TCP/IP and OSI to continue for an
- extended period of time. There is a critical need for routers to
- support both IP traffic and OSI traffic in parallel.
-
- There are two main methods that are available for routing protocols
- to support dual OSI and IP routers. One method, known as "Ships in
- the Night", makes use of completely independent routing protocols for
- each of the two protocol suites. This specification presents an
- alternate approach, which makes use of a single integrated protocol
- for interior routing (i.e., for calculating routes within a routing
- domain) for both protocol suites.
-
- This integrated protocol design is based on the OSI Intra-domain IS-
- IS routing protocol [1], with IP-specific functions added. This RFC
- is considered a companion to the OSI IS-IS Routing spec, and will
- only describe the required additional features.
-
- By supporting both IP and OSI traffic, this integrated protocol
- design supports traffic to IP hosts, OSI end systems, and dual end
- systems. This approach is "integrated" in the sense that the IS-IS
- protocol can be used to support pure-IP environments, pure-OSI
- environments, and dual environments. In addition, this approach
- allows interconnection of dual (IP and OSI) routing domains with
- other dual domains, with IP-only domains, and with OSI-only domains.
-
- The protocol specified here is based on the work of the IETF IS-IS
- working group.
-
- 1.1 What the Integrated IS-IS offers
-
- The integrated IS-IS provides a single routing protocol which will
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 3]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- simultaneously provide an efficient routing protocol for TCP/IP, and
- for OSI. This design makes use of the OSI IS-IS routing protocol,
- augmented with IP-specific information. This design provides explicit
- support for IP subnetting, variable subnet masks, TOS-based routing,
- and external routing. There is provision for authentication
- information, including the use of passwords or other mechanisms. The
- precise form of authentication mechanisms (other than passwords) is
- outside of the scope of this document.
-
- Both OSI and IP packets are forwarded "as is" -- i.e., they are
- transmitted directly over the underlying link layer services without
- the need for mutual encapsulation. The integrated IS-IS is a dynamic
- routing protocol, based on the SPF (Dijkstra) routing algorithm.
-
- The protocol described in this specification allows for mixing of
- IP-only, OSI-only, and dual (IP and OSI) routers, as defined below.
-
- An IP-only IS-IS router (or "IP-only" router) is defined to be a
- router which: (i) Uses IS-IS as the routing protocol for IP, as
- specified in this report; and (ii) Does not otherwise support OSI
- protocols. For example, such routers would not be able to forward OSI
- CLNP packets.
-
- An OSI-only router is defined to be a router which uses IS-IS as the
- routing protocol for OSI, as specified in [1]. Generally, OSI-only
- routers may be expected to conform to OSI standards, and may be
- implemented independent of this specification.
-
- A dual IS-IS router (or "dual" router) is defined to be a router
- which uses IS-IS as a single integrated routing protocol for both IP
- and OSI, as specified in this report.
-
- This approach does not change the way that IP packets are handled.
- IP-only and dual routers are required to conform to the requirements
- of Internet Gateways [4]. The integrated IS-IS protocol described in
- this report outlines an Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP) which will
- provide routing within a TCP/IP routing domain (i.e., autonomous
- system). Other aspects of router functionality (e.g., operation of
- ICMP, ARP, EGP, etc.) are not affected by this proposal.
-
- Similarly, this approach does not change the way that OSI packets are
- handled. There will be no change at all to the contents nor to the
- handling of ISO 8473 Data packets and Error Reports, nor to ISO 9542
- Redirects and ES Hellos. ISO 9542 IS Hellos transmitted on LANs are
- similarly unchanged. ISO 9542 IS Hellos transmitted on point-to-point
- links are unchanged except for the addition of IP-related
- information. Similarly, other OSI packets (specifically those
- involved in the IS-IS intra-domain routing protocol) remain unchanged
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 4]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- except for the addition of IP-related information.
-
- This approach makes use of the existing IS-IS packets, with IP-
- specific fields added. Specifically: (i) authentication information
- may be added to all IS-IS packets; (ii) the protocols supported by
- each router, as well as each router's IP addresses, are specified in
- ISO 9542 IS Hello, IS-IS Hello and Link State Packets; (iii)
- internally reachable IP addresses are specified in all Link State
- Packets; and (iv) externally reachable IP addresses, and external
- routing protocol information, may be specified in level 2 Link State
- Packets. The detailed encoding and interpretation of this in
- formation is specified in sections 3, 4, and 5 of this RFC.
-
- The protocol described in this report may be used to provide routing
- in an IP-only routing domain, in which all routers are IP-only.
- Similarly, this protocol may be used to provide routing in a pure
- dual domain, in which all routers are dual. Finally, this protocol
- may be used to provide routing in a mixed domain, in which some
- routers are IP-only, some routers are OSI-only, and some routers are
- dual. The specific topological restrictions which apply in this
- latter case are described in detail in section 1.4 ("Support of Mixed
- Routing Domains"). The use of IS-IS for support of pure OSI domains
- is specified in [1].
-
- This protocol specification does not constrain which network
- management protocol(s) may be used to manage IS-IS-based routers.
- Management information bases (MIBs) for managing IP-only, OSI-only,
- and dual routers, compatible with CMIP, CMOT, and/or SNMP, are the
- subject of a separate, companion document [8].
-
- 1.2 Overview of the ISO IS-IS Protocol
-
- The IS-IS Routing Protocol has been developed in ISO to provide
- routing for pure OSI environments. In particular, IS-IS is designed
- to work in conjunction with ISO 8473 (The ISO Connectionless Network
- Layer Protocol [2]), and ISO 9542 (The ISO End System to Intermediate
- System Protocol [3]). This section briefly describes the manner in
- which IS-IS is used to support pure OSI environments. Enhancements
- for support of IP and dual environments are specified elsewhere in
- this report.
-
- In IS-IS, the network is partitioned into "routing domains". The
- boundaries of routing domains are defined by network management, by
- setting some links to be "exterior links". If a link is marked as
- "exterior", no IS-IS routing messages are sent on that link.
-
- Currently, ISO does not have a standard for inter-domain routing
- (i.e., for routing between separate autonomous routing domains).
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 5]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- Instead, manual configuration is used. The link is statically
- configured with the set of address prefixes reachable via that link,
- and with the method by which they can be reached (such as the DTE
- address to be dialed to reach that address, or the fact that the DTE
- address should be extracted from the IDP portion of the ISO address).
-
- OSI IS-IS routing makes use of two-level hierarchical routing. A
- routing domain is partitioned into areas. Level 1 routers know the
- topology in their area, including all routers and end systems in
- their area. However, level 1 routers do not know the identity of
- routers or destinations outside of their area. Level 1 routers
- forward all traffic for destinations outside of their area to a level
- 2 router in their area. Similarly, level 2 routers know the level 2
- topology, and know which addresses are reachable via each level 2
- router. However, level 2 routers do not need to know the topology
- within any level 1 area, except to the extent that a level 2 router
- may also be a level 1 router within a single area. Only level 2
- routers can exchange data packets or routing information directly
- with external routers located outside of the routing domains.
-
- +----------------------+-------------------------------+
- | IDP | DSP |
- +----------------------+-------------------------------+
- . . .
- . . .
- . . .
- +-----+----------------+----------+--------------+-----+
- | AFI | IDI | HO-DSP | ID | SEL |
- +-----+----------------+----------+--------------+-----+
-
- Figure 1 - ISO Hierarchical Address Structure
-
-
- As illustrated in figure 1, ISO addresses are subdivided into the
- Initial Domain Part (IDP), and the Domain Specific Part (DSP). The
- IDP is the part which is standardized by ISO, and specifies the
- format and authority responsible for assigning the rest of the
- address. The DSP is assigned by whatever addressing authority is
- specified by the IDP. The DSP is further subdivided into a "High
- Order Part of DSP" (HO-DSP), a system identifier (ID), and an NSAP
- selector (SEL). The HO-DSP may use any format desired by the
- authority which is identified by the IDP. Together, the combination
- of [IDP, HO-DSP] identify both the routing domain and the area within
- the routing domain. The combination of [IDP,HO-DSP] may therefore be
- referred to as the "Area Address".
-
- Usually, all nodes in an area have the same area address. However,
- sometimes an area might have multiple addresses. Motivations for
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 6]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- allowing this are:
-
- - It might be desirable to change the address of an area. The most
- graceful way of changing an area from having address A to having
- address B is to first allow it to have both addresses A and B, and
- then after all nodes in the area have been modified to recognize
- both addresses, then one by one the nodes can be modified to
- "forget" address A.
-
- - It might be desirable to merge areas A and B into one area. The
- method for accomplishing this is to, one by one, add knowledge of
- address B into the A partition, and similarly add knowledge of
- address A into the B partition.
-
- - It might be desirable to partition an area C into two areas, A
- and B (where "A" might equal "C", in which case this example
- becomes one of removing a portion of an area). This would be
- accomplished by first introducing knowledge of address A into
- the appropriate nodes (those destined to become area A), and
- knowledge of address B into the appropriate nodes, and then one
- by one removing knowledge of address C.
-
- Since OSI addressing explicitly identifies the area, it is very easy
- for level 1 routers to identify packets going to destinations outside
- of their area, which need to be forwarded to level 2 routers.
-
- In IS-IS, there are two types of routers:
-
- - Level 1 intermediate systems -- these nodes route based on the ID
- portion of the ISO address. They route within an area. They
- recognize, based on the destination address in a packet, whether
- the destination is within the area. If so, they route towards
- the destination. If not, they route to the nearest level 2 router.
-
- - Level 2 intermediate systems -- these nodes route based on the area
- address (i.e., on the combination of [IDP, HO-DSP]). They route
- towards areas, without regard to the internal structure of an area.
- A level 2 IS may also be a level 1 IS in one area.
-
- A level 1 router will have the area portion of its address manually
- configured. It will refuse to become a neighbor with a node whose
- area addresses do not overlap its area addresses. However, if level 1
- router has area addresses A, B, and C, and a neighbor has area
- addresses B and D, then the level 1 router will accept the other node
- as a neighbor.
-
- A level 2 router will accept another level 2 router as a neighbor,
- regardless of area address. However, if the area addresses do not
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 7]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- overlap, the link would be considered by both routers to be "level 2
- only", and only level 2 LSPs would flow on the link. External links
- (to other routing domains) must be from level 2 routers.
-
- IS-IS provides an optional partition repair function. In the unlikely
- case that a level 1 area become partitioned, this function, if
- implemented, allows the partition to be repaired via use of level 2
- routes.
-
- IS-IS requires that the set of level 2 routers be connected. Should
- the level 2 backbone become partitioned, there is no provision for
- use of level 1 links to repair a level 2 partition.
-
- In unusual cases, a single level 2 router may lose connectivity to
- the level 2 backbone. In this case the level 2 router will indicate
- in its level 1 LSPs that it is not "attached", thereby allowing level
- 1 routers in the area to route traffic for outside of the domain to a
- different level 2 router. Level 1 routers therefore route traffic to
- destinations outside of their area only to level 2 routers which
- indicate in their level 1 LSPs that they are "attached".
-
- An end system may autoconfigure the area portion of its address by
- extracting the area portion of a neighboring router's address. If
- this is the case, then an endnode will always accept a router as a
- neighbor. Since the standard does not specify that the end system
- MUST autoconfigure its area address, an end system may be configured
- with an area address. In this case the end system would ignore router
- neighbors with non-matching area addresses.
-
- Special treatment is necessary for broadcast subnetworks, such as
- LANs. This solves two sets of issues: (i) In the absence of special
- treatment, each router on the subnetwork would announce a link to
- every other router on the subnetwork, resulting in n-squared links
- reported; (ii) Again, in the absence of special treatment, each
- router on the LAN would report the same identical list of end systems
- on the LAN, resulting in substantial duplication.
-
- These problems are avoided by use of a "pseudonode", which represents
- the LAN. Each router on the LAN reports that it has a link to the
- pseudonode (rather than reporting a link to every other router on the
- LAN). One of the routers on the LAN is elected "designated router".
- The designated router then sends out an LSP on behalf of the
- pseudonode, reporting links to all of the routers on the LAN. This
- reduces the potential n-squared links to n links. In addition, only
- the pseudonode LSP includes the list of end systems on the LAN,
- thereby eliminating the potential duplication (for further
- information on designated routers and pseudonodes, see [1]).
-
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 8]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- The IS-IS provides for optional Quality of Service (QOS) routing,
- based on throughput (the default metric), delay, expense, or residual
- error probability. This is described in greater detail in section
- 3.5, and in [1].
-
- 1.3 Overview of the Integrated IS-IS
-
- The integrated IS-IS allows a single routing protocol to be used to
- route both IP and OSI packets. This implies that the same two-level
- hierarchy will be used for both IP and OSI routing. Each area will be
- specified to be either IP-only (only IP traffic can be routed in that
- particular area), OSI-only (only OSI traffic can be routed in that
- area), or dual (both IP and OSI traffic can be routed in the area).
-
- This proposal does not allow for partial overlap of OSI and IP areas.
- For example, if one area is OSI-only, and an other area is IP-only,
- then it is not permissible to have some routers be in both areas.
- Similarly, a single backbone is used for the routing domain. There is
- no provision for independent OSI and IP backbones.
-
- Similarly, within an IP-only or dual area, the amount of knowledge
- maintained by routers about specific IP destinations will be as
- similar as possible as for OSI. For example, IP-capable level 1
- routers will maintain the topology within the area, and will be able
- to route directly to IP destinations within the area. However, IP-
- capable level 1 routers will not maintain information about
- destinations outside of the area. Just as in normal OSI routing,
- traffic to destinations outside of the area will be forwarded to the
- nearest level 2 router. Since IP routes to subnets, rather than to
- specific end systems, IP routers will not need to keep nor distribute
- lists of IP host identifiers (note that routes to hosts can be
- announced by using a subnet mask of all ones).
-
- The IP address structure allows networks to be partitioned into
- subnets, and allows subnets to be recursively subdivided into smaller
- subnets. However, it is undesireable to require any specific
- relationship between IP subnet addresses and IS-IS areas. For
- example, in many cases, the dual routers may be installed into
- existing environments, which already have assigned IP and/or OSI
- addresses. In addition, even if IP addresses are not already pre-
- assigned, the address limitations of IP constrain what addresses may
- be assigned. We therefore will not require any specific relationship
- between IP addresses and the area structure. The IP addresses can be
- assigned completely independently of the OSI addresses and IS-IS area
- structure. As will be described in section 3.2 ("Hierarchical
- Abbreviation of IP Reachability Information"), greater efficiency and
- scaling of the routing algorithm can be achieved if there is some
- correspondence between the IP address assignment structure and the
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 9]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- area structure.
-
- Within an area, level 1 routers exchange link state packets which
- identify the IP addresses reachable by each router. Specifically,
- zero or more [IP address, subnet mask, metric] combinations may be
- included in each Link State Packet. Each level 1 router is manually
- configured with the [IP address, subnet mask, metric] combinations
- which are reachable on each interface. A level 1 router routes as
- follows:
-
- - If a specified destination address matches an [IP address, subnet
- mask, metric] reachable within the area, the packet is routed via
- level 1 routing.
-
- - If a specified destination address does not match any [IP address,
- subnet mask, metric] combination listed as reachable within the
- area, the packet is routed towards the nearest level 2 router.
-
- Flexible use of the limited IP address space is important in order to
- cope with the anticipated growth of IP environments. Thus an area
- (and by implication a routing domain) may simultaneously make use of
- a variety of different address masks for different subnets in the
- area (or domain). Generally, if a specified destination address
- matches more than one [IP address, subnet mask] pair, the more
- specific address is the one routed towards (the one with more "1"
- bits in the mask -- this is known as "best match" routing).
-
- Level 2 routers include in their level 2 LSPs a complete list of [IP
- address, subnet mask, metric] specifying all IP addresses reachable
- in their area. As described in section 3, this information may be
- obtained from a combination of the level 1 LSPs (obtained from level
- 1 routers in the same area), and/or by manual configuration. In
- addition, Level 2 routers may report external reachability
- information, corresponding to addresses which can be reached via
- routers in other routing domains (autonomous systems)
-
- Default routes may be announced by use of a subnet mask containing
- all zeroes. Default routes should be used with great care, since they
- can result in "black holes". Default routes are permitted only at
- level 2 as external routes (i.e., included in the "IP External
- Reachability Information" field, as explained in sections 3 and 5).
- Default routes are not permitted at level 1.
-
- The integrated IS-IS provides optional Type of Service (TOS) routing,
- through use of the QOS feature from IS-IS.
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 10]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- 1.4 Support of Mixed Routing Domains
-
- The integrated IS-IS proposal specifically allows for three types of
- routing domains:
-
- - Pure IP
-
- - Pure OSI
-
- - Dual
-
- In a pure IP routing domain, all routers must be IP-capable. IP-only
- routers may be freely mixed with dual routers. Some fields
- specifically related to OSI operation may be included by dual
- routers, and will be ignored by IP-only routers. Only IP traffic will
- be routed in an pure IP domain. Any OSI traffic may be discarded
- (except for the IS-IS packets necessary for operation of the routing
- protocol).
-
- In a pure OSI routing domain, all routers must be OSI-capable. OSI-
- only routers may be freely mixed with dual routers. Some fields
- specifically related to IP operation may be included by dual routers,
- and will be ignored by OSI-only routers. Only OSI traffic will be
- routed in a pure OSI domain. Any IP traffic may be discarded.
-
- In a dual routing domain, IP-only, OSI-only, and dual routers may be
- mixed on a per-area basis. Specifically, each area may itself be
- defined to be pure IP, pure OSI, or dual.
-
- In a pure IP area within a dual domain, IP-only and dual routers may
- be freely mixed. Only IP traffic can be routed by level 1 routing
- within a pure-IP area.
-
- In a pure-OSI area within a dual domain, OSI-only and dual routers
- may be freely mixed. Only OSI traffic can be routed by level 1
- routing within a pure OSI area.
-
- In a dual area within a dual routing domain only dual routers may be
- used. Both IP and OSI traffic can be routed within a dual area.
-
- Within a dual domain, if both IP and OSI traffic are to be routed
- between areas then all level 2 routers must be dual.
-
- 1.5 Advantages of Using Integrated IS-IS
-
- Use of the integrated IS-IS protocol, as a single protocol for
- routing both IP and OSI packets in a dual environment, has
- significant advantages over using separate protocols for
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 11]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- independently routing IP and OSI traffic.
-
- An alternative approach is known as "Ships In the Night" (S.I.N.).
- With the S.I.N. approach, completely separate routing protocols are
- used for IP and for OSI. For example, OSPF [5] may be used for
- routing IP traffic, and IS-IS [1] may be used for routing OSI
- traffic. With S.I.N., the two routing protocols operate more or less
- independently. However, dual routers will need to implement both
- routing protocols, and therefore there will be some degree of
- competition for resources.
-
- Note that S.I.N. and the integrated IS-IS approach are not really
- completely separate options. In particular, if the integrated IS-IS
- is used within a routing domain for routing of IP and OSI traffic, it
- is still possible to use other independent routing protocols for
- routing other protocol suites.
-
- In the future, optional extensions to IS-IS may be defined for
- routing other common protocol suites. However, such future options
- are outside of the scope of this document. This section will compare
- integrated IS-IS and S.I.N. for routing of IP and OSI only.
-
- A primary advantage of the integrated IS-IS relates to the network
- management effort required. Since the integrated IS-IS provides a
- single routing protocol, within a single coordinated routing domain
- using a single backbone, this implies that there is less information
- to configure. This combined with a single coordinated MIB simplifies
- network management.
-
- Note that the operation of two routing protocols with the S.I.N.
- approach are not really independent, since they must share common
- resources. However, with the integrated IS-IS, the interactions are
- explicit, whereas with S.I.N., the interactions are implicit. Since
- the interactions are explicit, again it may be easier to manage and
- debug dual routers.
-
- Another advantage of the integrated IS-IS is that, since it requires
- only one routing protocol, it uses fewer resources. In particular,
- less implementation resources are needed (since only one protocol
- needs to be implemented), less CPU and memory resources are used in
- the router (since only one protocol needs to be run), and less
- network resources are used (since only one set of routing packets
- need to be transmitted). Primarily this translates into a financial
- savings, since each of these three types of resources cost money.
- This implies that dual routers based on the integrated IS-IS should
- be less expensive to purchase and operate than dual routers based on
- S.I.N.
-
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 12]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- Note that the operation of two routing protocols with the S.I.N.
- approach are not really independent, since they must share common
- resources. For example, if one routing protocol becomes unstable and
- starts to use excessive resources, the other protocol is likely to
- suffer. A bug in one protocol could crash the other. However, with
- the integrated IS-IS, the interactions are explicit and are defined
- into the protocol and software interactions. With S.I.N., the
- interactions are implicit.
-
- The use of a single integrated routing protocol similarly reduces the
- likely frequency of software upgrades. Specifically, if you have two
- different routing protocols in your router, then you have to upgrade
- the software any time EITHER of the protocols change. If you make use
- of a single integrated routing protocol, then software changes are
- still likely to be needed, but less frequently.
-
- Finally, routing protocols have significant real time requirements.
- In IS-IS, these real time requirements have been explicitly
- specified. In other routing protocols, these requirements are
- implicit. However, in all routing protocols, there are real time
- guarantees which must be met in order to ensure correct operation. In
- general, it is difficult enough to ensure compliance with real time
- requirements in the implementation of a single real time system. With
- S.I.N., implementation of two semi-independent real-time protocols in
- a single device makes this more difficult.
-
- Note that both integrated IS-IS and S.I.N. allow for independence of
- external routes (for traffic from/to outside of the routing domain),
- and allow for independent assignment of OSI and TCP/IP addresses.
-
- 2 Symbols and Abbreviations
-
- AA Administrative Authority
- (a three octet field in the GOSIP version 2.0 NSAP
- address format)
-
- AFI Authority and Format Identifier
- (the first octet of all OSI NSAP addresses -- identifies
- format of the rest of the address)
-
- CLNP Connection-Less Network Protocol
- (ISO 8473, the OSI connectionless network layer protocol
- -- very similar to IP)
-
- DFI DSP Format Identifier
- (a one octet field in the GOSIP version 2.0 NSAP address
- format)
-
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 13]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- ES End System
- (The OSI term for a host)
-
- ES-IS End System to Intermediate System Routeing Exchange
- Protocol (ISO 9542 -- OSI protocol between routers
- and end systems)
-
- ICD International Code Designator
- (ISO standard for identifying organizations)
-
- IP Internetwork Protocol
- (an Internet Standard Network Layer Protocol)
-
- IS Intermediate System
- (The OSI term for a router)
-
- IS-IS Intermediate System to Intermediate System Routeing
- Exchange Protocol
- (the ISO protocol for routing within a single
- routing domain)
-
- IS-IS Hello An Hello packet defined by the IS-IS protocol
- (a type of packet used by the IS-IS protocol)
-
- ISH An Hello packet defined by ISO 9542 (ES-IS protocol).
- (not the same as IS-IS Hello)
-
- ISO International Organization for Standardization
- (an international body which is authorized to write
- standards of many kinds)
-
- LSP Link State Packet
- (a type of packet used by the IS-IS protocol)
-
- NLPID Network Layer Protocol ID
- (A one-octet field identifying a network layer protocol)
-
- NSAP Network Service Access Point
- (a conceptual interface point at which the network
- service is made available)
-
- SEL NSAP Selector
- (the last octet of NSAP addresses, also called NSEL)
-
- OSI Open Systems Interconnection
- (an international standard protocol architecture)
-
-
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 14]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- RD Routing Domain
- (the set of routers and end systems using a single
- instance of a routing protocol such as IS-IS)
-
- SNPA Subnetwork Point of Attachment
- (a conceptual interface at which a subnetwork service
- is provided)
-
- TCP Transmission Control Protocol
- (an Internet Standard Transport Layer Protocol)
-
- TCP/IP The protocol suite based on TCP, IP, and related
- protocols (the Internet standard protocol
- architecture)
-
- 3 Subnetwork Independent Functions
-
- 3.1 Exchange of Routing Information
-
- The exchange of routing information between routers makes use of the
- normal routing packet exchange as defined in the OSI IS-IS routing
- spec, with additional IP-specific information added to the IS-IS
- routing packets.
-
- The IS-IS protocol provides for the inclusion of variable length
- fields in all IS-IS packets. These fields are encoded using a "Code,
- Length, Value" triplet, where the code and length are encoded in one
- octet each, and the value has the length specified (from 0 to 254
- octets). IS-IS requires that: "Any codes in a received PDU that are
- not recognised are ignored and passed through unchanged". This
- requirement applies to all routers implementing IS-IS, including
- OSI-only, IP-only, and dual routers. This allows IP-specific
- information to be encoded in a manner which OSI-only routers will
- ignore, and also allows OSI-specific information to be encoded in a
- manner which IP-only routers will ignore.
-
- IP-capable (i.e., all IP-only and dual) routers need to know what
- network layer protocols are supported by other routers in their area.
- This information is made available by inclusion of a "protocols
- supported" field in all IS-IS Hello and Link State Packets. This
- field makes use of the NLPID (Network Layer Protocol Identifier),
- which is a one-octet value assigned by ISO to identify network level
- protocols. NLPID values have been assigned to ISO 8473 and to IP.
-
- IP-capable routers need to know the IP address of the adjacent
- interface of neighboring routers. This is required for sending ICMP
- redirects (when an IP-capable router sends an ICMP redirect to a
- host, it must include the IP address of the appropriate interface of
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 15]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- the correct next-hop router). This information is made available by
- inclusion of the IP interface address in the IS-IS Hello packets.
- Specifically, each IS-IS Hello packet contains the IP address(es) of
- the interface over which the Hello is transmitted. The IS-IS allows
- multiple IP addresses to be assigned to each physical interface.
-
- In some cases, it will be useful for IP-capable routers to be able to
- determine an IP address(es) of all other routers at their level
- (i.e., for level 1 routers: all other routers in their area; for
- level 2 routers: all other level 2 routers in the routing domain).
- This is useful whenever an IP packet is to be sent to a router, such
- as for encapsulation or for transmission of network management
- packets. This information is made available by inclusion of IP
- address in LSPs. Specifically, each IS-IS LSP includes one or more IP
- addresses of the router which transmits the LSP. An IP-capable router
- is required to include at least one of its IP addresses in its LSPs,
- and may optionally include several or all of its IP addresses. Where
- a single router operates as both a level 1 and a level 2 router, it
- is required to include the same IP address(es) in its level 1 and
- level 2 LSPs.
-
- IP-capable routers need to know, for any given IP destination
- address, the correct route to that destination. Specifically, level 1
- routers need to know what IP addresses are reachable from each level
- 1 router in their area. In addition, level 1 routers need to find
- level 2 routers (for traffic to IP addresses outside of their area).
- Level 2 routers need to know what IP addresses are reachable
- internally (either directly, or via level 1 routing) from other level
- 2 routers, and what addresses are reachable externally from other
- level 2 routers. All of this information is made available by
- inclusion of IP reachable address information in the Link State
- Packets.
-
- Internal (within the routing domain) and external (outside the
- domain) reachability information is announced separately in level 2
- LSPs. Reachable IP addresses include a default metric, and may
- include multiple TOS-specific metrics. In general, for external
- routes, metrics may be of type "internal" (i.e., directly comparable
- with internal metrics) or of type "external" (i.e., not comparable
- with the internal metric). A route using internal metrics (i.e.,
- either announced as "IP internal reachability information", or
- announced as "IP external reachability information" with an internal
- metric) is always preferred to a route using external metrics (i.e.,
- announced as "IP external reachability information", with an external
- metric).
-
- The detailed encoding of the IP-specific information included in
- routing packets is provided in section 5 (Structure and Encoding of
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 16]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- PDUs).
-
- 3.2 Hierarchical Abbreviation of IP Reachability Information
-
- Level 2 routers include in their level 2 LSPs a list of all [IP
- address, subnet mask, metric] combinations reachable in their area.
- In general, this information may be determined from the level 1 LSPs
- from all routers in the area. If we ignore resource constraints, then
- it would be permissible for a level 2 router to simply duplicate all
- [IP address, subnet mask, metric] entries from all level 1 routers in
- its area (with appropriate metric adjustment), for inclusion in its
- level 2 LSP. However, in order for hierarchical routing to scale to
- large routing domain sizes, it is highly desired to abbreviate the
- reachable address information.
-
- This is accomplished by manual configuration of summary addresses.
- Each level 2 router may be configured with one or more [IP address,
- subnet mask, metric] entries for announcement in their level 2 LSPs.
-
- The set of reachable addresses obtained from level 1 LSPs is compared
- with the configured reachable addresses. Redundant information
- obtained from level 1 LSPs is not included in level 2 LSPs. Generally
- it is expected that the level 2 configured information will specify
- more inclusive addresses (corresponding to a subnet mask with fewer
- bits set to 1). This will therefore allow one configured
- address/submask pair (or a small number of such pairs) to
- hierarchically supercede the information corresponding to multiple
- entries in level 1 LSPs.
-
- The manually configured addresses are included in level 2 LSPs only
- if they correspond to at least one address which is reachable in the
- area. For manually configured level 2 addresses, the associated
- metric values to announce in level 2 LSPs are also manually
- configured. The configured addresses will supercede reachable address
- entries from level 1 LSPs based only on the IP address and subnet
- mask -- metric values are not considered when determining if a given
- configured address supercedes an address obtained from a level 1 LSP.
-
- Any address obtained from a level 1 LSP which is not superceded by
- the manually configured information is included in the level 2 LSPs.
- In this case, the metric value announced in the level 2 LSPs is
- calculated from the sum of the metric value announced in the
- corresponding level 1 LSP, plus the distance from the level 2 router
- to the appropriate level 1 router. Note: If this sum results in a
- metric value greater than 63 (the maximum value that can be reported
- in level 2 LSPs), then the value 63 must be used. Delay, expense, and
- error metrics (i.e., those TOS metrics other than the default metric)
- will be included only if (i) the level 2 router supports the specific
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 17]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- TOS; (ii) the path from the level 2 router to the appropropriate
- level 1 router is made up of links which support the specific TOS;
- and (iii) the level 1 router which can reach the address directly
- also supports the specific TOS for this route, as indicated in its
- level 1 LSP.
-
- In general, the same [IP address, subnet mask] pair may be announced
- in level 1 LSPs sent by multiple level 1 routers in the same area. In
- this case (assuming the entry is not superceded by a manually
- configured entry), then only one such entry shall be included in the
- level 2 LSP. The metric value(s) announced in level 2 LSPs correspond
- to the minimum of the metric value(s) that would be calculated for
- each of the level 1 LSP entries.
-
- A level 2 router will have IP addresses which are directly reachable
- via its own interfaces. For purposes of inclusion of IP reachable
- address information in level 2 LSPs, these "directly reachable"
- addresses are treated exactly the same as addresses received in level
- 1 LSPs.
-
- Manually configured addresses may hierarchically supercede multiple
- level 1 reachable address entries. However, there may be some IP
- addresses which match the manually configured addresses, but which
- are not reachable via level 1 routing. If a level 2 router receives
- an IP packet whose IP address matches a manually configured address
- which it is including in its level 2 LSP, but which is not reachable
- via level 1 routing in the area, then the packet must be discarded.
- In this case, an error report may be returned (as specified in RFC
- 1009), with the reason for discard specifying destination
- unreachable.
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Figure 2 - An Example Routing Domain (not shown)
-
- An example is illustrated in figure 2. Suppose that the network
- number for the entire routing domain is 17 (a class A network).
- Suppose each area is assigned a subnet number consisting of the next
- 8 bits. The area may be further subdivided by assigning the next
- eight bits to each LAN in the area, giving each a 24 bit subnet mask
- (counting the network and subnet fields). Finally 8 bits are left for
- the host field. Suppose that for a particular area (given subnet
- number 17.133) there are a number of IP capable level 1 routers
- announcing (in the special IP entry in their level 1 LSPs) subnets
- 17.133.5, 17.133.43, and 17.133.57.
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 18]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- Suppose that in this example, in order to save space in level 2 LSPs,
- the level 2 routers in this area are configured to announce subnet
- 17.133. Only this one address needs to be announced in level 2 LSPs.
- Thus if an IP packet comes along for an address in subnet 17.133.5,
- 17.133.43 or 17.133.57, then other level 2 routers, in other areas,
- will know to pass the traffic to this area.
-
- The inclusion of 17.133 in level 2 LSPs means that the three subnet
- addresses starting with 17.133 do not all have to be listed
- separately in level 2 LSPs.
-
- If any traffic comes along that is for an unreachable address such as
- 17.133.124.7, then level 2 routers in other areas in this particular
- domain will think that this area can handle this traffic, will
- forward traffic to level 2 routers in this area, which will have to
- discard this traffic.
-
- Suppose that subnet number 17.133.125 was actually reachable via some
- other area, such as the lower right hand area. In this case, the
- level 2 router in the left area would be announcing (in its level 2
- LSPs according to manually configured information) reachability to
- subnet 17.133. However, the level 2 router in the lower right area
- would be announcing (in its level 2 LSPs according to information
- taken from its received level 1 LSPs), reachability to subnet
- 17.133.125. Due to the use of best match routing, this works
- correctly. All traffic from other areas destined to subnet 17.133.125
- would be sent to the level 2 router in the lower right area, and all
- other traffic to subnet 17.133 (i.e., traffic to any IP address
- starting with 17.133, but not starting with 17.133.125) would be sent
- to the level 2 router in the leftmost area.
-
- 3.3 Addressing Routers in IS-IS Packets
-
- The IS-IS packet formats explicitly require that OSI-style addresses
- of routers appear in the IS-IS packets. For example, these addresses
- are used to determine area membership of routers. It is therefore
- necessary for all routers making use of the IS-IS protocol to have
- OSI style addresses assigned. For IP-only routers, these addresses
- will be used only in the operation of the IS-IS protocol, and are not
- used for any other purpose (such as the operation of EGP, ICMP, or
- other TCP/IP protocols).
-
- For OSI-only and dual routers, assignment of NSAP addresses is
- straight forward, but is outside of the scope of this specification.
- Address assignment mechanisms are being set up by standards bodies
- which allow globally unique OSI NSAP addresses to be assigned. All
- OSI-only and dual routers may therefore make use of normal OSI
- addresses in the operation of the IS-IS protocol.
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 19]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- For IP-only routers, there are two ways in which NSAP addresses may
- be obtained for use with the IS-IS protocol.
-
- 1) For those environments in which OSI is being used, or in which it
- is anticipated that OSI will be used in the future, it is
- permissible to obtain NSAP address assignments in the normal
- manner, assign normal NSAP addresses to IP-only routers, and use
- these addresses in the operation of IS-IS. This approach is
- recommended even for pure IP routing domains, as it will simplify
- future migration from IP-only to dual operation.
-
- 2) In some cases, routers may have only TCP/IP addresses, and it may
- be undesireable to have to go through the normal mechanisms for
- assignment of NSAP addresses. Instead, an alternate mechanim is
- provided below for algorithmically generating a valid OSI style
- address from existing IP address and autonomous system number
- assignments.
-
- Where desired, for IP-only routers, for use in IS-IS packet formats
- only, OSI-style addresses (compatible with the USA GOSIP version 2.0
- NSAP address format [9]) may be derived as follows:
-
- AFI 1 octet value "47" (specifies ICD format)
-
- ICD 2 octet value "00 05" (specifies Internet/Gosip)
-
- DFI 1 octet value "xx"
-
- AA 3 octets value "xx xx xx" (specifies special
- IP-only use of NSAPs)
-
- Reserved 2 octets must be "00 00"
-
- RD 2 octets contains autonomous system number
-
- Area 2 octets must be assigned as described below
-
- ID 6 octets must be assigned as described below
-
- SEL 1 octet used as described below
-
- The AFI value of "47" and the ICD value of "00 05" specifies the
- Gosip Version 2.0 addressing format. The DFI number of "xx" and the
- AA of "xx xx xx" specify that this special NSAP address format is
- being used, solely for IS-IS packet formats in an IP-only
- environment. The reserved field must contain "00 00", as specified in
- GOSIP version 2.0.
-
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 20]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- The routing domain field contains the Autonomous System number.
- Strictly speaking, this is not necessary, since the IS-IS packets are
- exchanged within a single AS only. However, inclusion of the AS
- number in this address format will ensure correct operation in the
- event that routers from separate routing domains/ASs are incorrectly
- placed on the same link. The AS number in this context is used only
- for definition of unique NSAP addresses, and does not imply any
- coupling with exterior routing protocols.
-
- The Area field must be assigned by the authority responsible for the
- routing domain, such that each area in the routing domain must have a
- unique Area value.
-
- The ID must be assigned by the authority responsible for the routing
- domain. The ID must be assigned such that every router in the routing
- domain has a unique value. It is recommended that one of the
- following methods is used:
-
- 1)use a unique IEEE 802 48 bit station ID
-
- 2)use the value hex "02 00" prepended to an IP address of the router.
-
- IEEE 802 addresses, if used, must appear in IEEE canonical format.
-
- Since the IEEE 802 station IDs are assigned to be globally unique,
- use of these values clearly assures uniqueness in the area. Also, all
- assigned IEEE 802 station IDs have the global/local bit set to zero.
- Prepending the indicated pattern to the front of the IP address
- therefore assures that format (2) illustrated above cannot produce
- addresses which collide with format (1). Finally, to the extent that
- IP addresses are also globally unique, format (2) will produce unique
- IDs for routers.
-
- The indicated hex value is specified in IEEE 802 canonical form [10].
- In IEEE 802 addresses, the multicast bit is the least significant bit
- of the first byte. The global/local bit is the next least significant
- bit of the first byte. The indicated prefix therefore sets the
- global/local bit to 1, and all other bits in the first two octets to
- 0.
-
- Note that within an area, whether ISO addresses are configured into
- the routers through ISO address assignment, or whether the ISO-style
- address is generated directly from the AS number and IP address, all
- routers within an area must have the same high order part of address
- (AFI, ICD, DFI, AA, RD, and Area). This ISO-style address is used in
- IS-IS Hello messages and is the basis by which routers recognize
- whether neighbor nodes are in or out of their area.
-
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 21]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- 3.4 External Links
-
- External connectivity (i.e., communications with routers outside of
- the routing domain) is done only by level 2 routers. The ISO version
- of IS-IS allows external OSI routes to be reported as "reachable
- address prefixes" in level 2 LSPs. The integrated IS-IS also allows
- external IP reachable addresses (i.e., IP addresses reachable via
- inter-domain routing) to be reported in level 2 LSPs in the "IP
- external reachability information" field. External OSI and external
- IP routes are handled independently.
-
- The routes announced in IP external reachability information entries
- include all routes to outside of the routing domain. This includes
- routes learned from OSPF, EGP, RIP, or any other external protocol.
-
- External routes may make use of "internal" or "external" metrics.
- Internal metrics are comparable with the metrics used for internal
- routes. Thus in choosing between an internal route, and an external
- route using internal metrics, the metric values may be directly
- compared. In contrast, external metrics cannot be directly compared
- with internal metrics. Any route defined solely using internal
- metrics is always preferred to any route defined using external
- metrics. When an external route using external metrics must be used,
- the lowest value of the external metric is preferred regardless of
- the internal cost to reach the appropriate exit point.
-
- It is useful, in the operation of external routing protocols, to
- provide a mechanism for border routers (i.e., routers in the same
- routing domain, which have the ability to route externally to other
- domains) to determine each other's existence, and to exchange
- external information (in a form understood only by the border routers
- themselves). This is made possible by inclusion of "inter-domain
- routing protocol information" fields in level 2 LSPs. The inter-
- domain routing protocol information field is not included in
- pseudonode LSPs.
-
- In general there may be multiple types of external inter-domain
- routing protocol information exchanged between border routers. The
- IS-IS therefore specifies that each occurance of the inter-domain
- routing protocol information field include a "type" field, which
- indicates the type of inter-domain routing protocol information
- enclosed. Values to be used in the type field will be specified in
- future versions of the "Assigned Numbers" RFC. Initial values for
- this field are specified in Annex A of this specification.
-
- Information contained in the inter-domain routing protocol
- information field will be carried in level 2 LSPs, and will therefore
- need to be stored by all level 2 routers in the domain. However, only
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 22]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- those level 2 routers which are directly involved in external routing
- will use this information. In designing the use of this field, it is
- important to carefully consider the implications that this may have
- on storage requirements in level 2 routers (including those level 2
- routers which are not directly involved in external routing).
-
- The protocols used to exchange routing information directly between
- border routers, and external routers (in other routing domains /
- autonomous systems) are outside of the scope of this specification.
-
- 3.5 Type of Service Routing
-
- The integrated IS-IS protocol provides IP Type of Service (TOS)
- routing, through use of the Quality of Service (QOS) feature of IS-
- IS. This allows for routing on the basis of throughput (the default
- metric), delay, expense, or residual error probability. Note than any
- particular packet may be routed on the basis of any one of these four
- metrics. Routing on the basis of general combinations of metrics is
- not supported.
-
- The support for TOS/QOS is optional. If a particular packet calls for
- a specific TOS, and the correct path from the source to destination
- is made up of routers all of which support that particular TOS, then
- the packet will be routed on the optimal path. However, if there is
- no path from the source to destination made up of routers which
- support that particular type of service, then the packet will be
- forwarded using the default metric instead. This allows for TOS
- service in those environments where it is needed, while still
- providing acceptable service in the case where an unsupported TOS is
- requested.
-
- NOTE - IP does not have a cost TOS. There is therefore no mapping of
- IP TOS metrics which corresponds to the minimum cost metric.
-
- The IP TOS field is mapped onto the four available metrics as
- follows:
-
- Bits 0-2 (Precedence): This field does not affect the route, but
- rather may affect other aspects of packet
- forwarding.
-
- Bits 3 (Delay), 4 (Throughput) and 5 (Reliability):
-
- 000 (all normal) Use default metric
-
- 100 (low delay) Use delay metric
-
- 010 (high throughput) Use default metric
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 23]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- 001 (high reliabiity) Use reliability metric
-
- other Use default metric
-
- 3.6 Multiple LSPs and SNPs
-
- In some cases, IS-IS packets (specifically Link State Packets and
- Complete Sequence Number Packets) may be too large to fit into one
- packet. The OSI IS-IS [1] allows for LSPs and CSNPs to be split into
- multiple packets. This is independent of ISO 8473 segmentation, and
- is also independent of IP fragmentation. Use of independent multiple
- packets has the advantages (with respect to segmentation or
- fragmentation) that: (i) when information in the IS-IS changes, only
- those packets effected need to be re-issued; (ii) when a single
- packet is received, it can be processed without the need to receive
- all other packets of the same type from the same router before
- beginning processing.
-
- The Integrated IS-IS makes use of the same multiple packet function,
- as defined in [1]. IP-specific fields in IS-IS packets may be split
- across multiple packets. As specified in section 5 ("Structure and
- Encoding of PDUs"), some of the IP-specific fields (those which may
- be fairly long) may be split into several occurences of the same
- field, thereby allowing splitting of the fields across different
- packets.
-
- Multiple LSPs from the same router are distinguished by LSP number.
- Generally, most variable length fields may occur in an LSP with any
- LSP number. Some specific variable length fields may be required to
- occur in LSP number 0. Except where explicitly stated otherwise, when
- an IS-IS router issues multiple LSPs, the IP-specific fields may
- occur in an LSP with any LSP number.
-
- Complete Sequence Number Packets may be split into multiple packets,
- with the range to which each packet applies explicitly reported in
- the packet. Partial Sequence Number Packets are inherently partial,
- and so can easily be split into multiple packets if this is
- necessary. Again, where applicable, IP-specific fields may occur in
- any SNP.
-
- 3.7 IP-Only Operation
-
- For IP-only routers, the format for IS-IS packets remains unchanged.
- However, there are some variable length fields from the IS-IS packets
- that can be omitted. Specifically:
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 24]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- IS-IS Hello Packets:
-
- - no change
-
- IS-IS Link State Packets:
-
- - the "End Systems Neighbours" entries are omitted
-
- - the "Prefix Neighbours" entries are omitted
-
- IS-IS Sequence Number Packets:
-
- - no change
-
- 3.8 Encapsulation
-
- Future versions of the Integated IS-IS may specify optional
- encapsulation mechanisms for partition repair, and for forwarding
- packets through incompatible routers (i.e., for forwarding OSI
- packets through IP-only routers, and forwarding IP packets through
- OSI-only routers). The details of encapsulation and decapsulation are
- for further study. Routers complying with the Integrated IS-IS are
- not required to implement encapsulation nor decapsulation.
-
- 3.9 Authentication
-
- The authentication field allows each IS-IS packet to contain
- information used to authenticate the originator and/or contents of
- the packet. The authentication information contained in each packet
- is used to authenticate the entire packet, including OSI and IP
- parts. If a packet is received which contains invalid authentication
- information, then the entire packet is discarded. If an LSP or SNP is
- split into multiple packets (as described in section 3.6), then each
- is authenticated independently.
-
- Use of the authentication field is optional. Routers are not required
- to be able to interpret authentication information. As with other
- fields in the integrated IS-IS, if a router does not implement
- authentication then it will ignore any authentication field that may
- be present in an IS-IS packet.
-
- Annex D specifies a proposed use of the authentication field.
-
- 3.10 Order of Preference of Routes / Dijkstra Computation
-
- We define the term "IP reachability entry" to mean the combination of
- the [IP address, subnet mask]. The Dijkstra calculation must
- calculate routes to each distinct IP reachability entry. For the
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 25]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- Dijkstra calculation, each IP reachability entry can be treated in
- much the same manner as an OSI end system. Naturally, each IP
- reachability entry is treated as distinct from any OSI end systems
- which may also be reachable in the same area or routing domain.
-
- For any particular IP reachability entry, this is the same as another
- entry if and only if: (i) the subnet masks are identical; and (ii)
- for each bit in the subnet mask which has the value "1", the IP
- address is identical. This can easily be tested by zeroing those bits
- in the IP address which correspond to a zero bit in the mask, and
- then treating the entry as a 64 bit quantity, and testing for
- equality between different 64 bit quantities. The actual calculation
- of routes to IP reachability entries is therefore no more complex
- than calculation of routes to OSI end systems (except for the
- replacement of a 48-bit test with a 64-bit test).
-
- The Dijkstra computation does not take into consideration whether a
- router is IP-only, OSI-only, or dual. The topological restrictions
- specified in section 1.4 ensure that IP packets will only be sent via
- IP-capable routers, and OSI packets will only be sent via OSI-capable
- routers.
-
- The Integrated IS-IS prefers routes within the area (via level 1
- routing) whenever possible. If level 2 routes must be used, then
- routes within the routing domain (specifically, those routes using
- internal metrics) are prefered to routes outside of the routing
- domain (using external metrics).
-
- The Integrated IS-IS protocol makes use of "best match" routing of IP
- packets. This implies that a particular destination address may match
- more than one entry in the forwarding database. If a particular IP
- packet has a destination address which matches two different IP
- reachability entries, then the entry who's mask contains the most "1"
- bits is preferred.
-
- IP packets whose destination is a router are routed the same way as
- any other IP packet, by forwarding first to the appropriate subnet,
- and then forwarding on that subnet to the destination host (which
- just happens to be a router in this case). In particular, the IP
- forwarding database does not contain explicit routes to the
- individual "IP interface addresses" listed by each router in its LSP.
-
- However, host routes (routes with a subnet mask of all ones) may of
- course be included in the IP reachability entries, and will be
- handled in the same manner as other IP reachability entries.
-
- In order to ensure correct interoperation of different router
- implementations, it is necessary to specify the order of preference
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 26]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- of possible routes. For OSI destinations, this is outside of the
- scope of this report. For IP destinations, this is specified in
- section 3.10.1 and 3.10.2 below. Annex C specifies a detailed
- Dijkstra calculation and forwarding algorithm which is compatible
- with the order of preference of routes specified here.
-
- With IS-IS, if a route to a given destination is advertised, or a
- link between routers is advertised, then metric values associated
- with some or all of the specified TOS metric types may be associated
- with that destination or link. However, the default metric must
- always be available. Normally this ensures that if a route using any
- TOS metric is available, then a route using the default metric will
- also be available. The only exception to this is where the
- corresponding route using the default metric has a total cost (within
- the area, or within the level 2 backbone) greater than MaxPathMetric.
-
- In determining the route to a particular destination for a specified
- TOS, only routes using either the requested TOS metric, or the
- default TOS metric, are considered.
-
- 3.10.1 Order of Preference of Routes In Level 1 Routing
-
- If a given destination is reachable within an area via a route using
- either the requested TOS or the default TOS, then the IS-IS will
- always make use of a path within the area (via level 1 routing),
- regardless of whether an alternate path exists outside of the area
- (via level 2 routing). In this case, routes within the area are
- selected as follows:
-
- 1) Amongst routes in the area, if the specified destination
- address matches more than one [IP address, subnet mask] pair,
- then the more specific address match (the one with more "1"
- bits in the mask) is prefered.
-
- 2) Amongst routes in the area to equally specific address
- matches, routes on which the requested TOS (if any) is
- supported are always prefered to routes on which the
- requested TOS is not supported.
-
- 3) Amongst routes in the area of the same TOS to equally
- specific address matches, the shortest routes are prefered.
- For determination of the shortest path, if a route on which
- the specified TOS is supported is available, then the
- specified TOS metric is used, otherwise the default metric
- is used. Amongst routes of equal cost, load splitting may
- be performed as specified in [1].
-
- For a level 1 only router (i.e., a router which does not take part in
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 27]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- level 2 routing, or a level 2 router which is not "attached"), if a
- given destination is not reachable within an area, level 1 routing
- will always route to a level 2 router as follows:
-
- 1) Amongst routes in the area to attached level 2 routers,
- routes on which the requested TOS (if any) is supported
- are always prefered to routes on which the requested TOS
- is not supported.
-
- 2) Amongst routes in the area of the same TOS to attached
- level 2 routers, the shortest routes are prefered. For
- determination of the shortest path, if a route on which
- the specified TOS is supported is available, then the
- specified TOS metric is used, otherwise the default
- metric is used. Amongst routes of equal cost,
- loadsplitting may be performed as specified in [1].
-
- 3.10.2 Order of Preference of Routes in Level 2 Routing
-
- For those level 2 routers which also take part in level 1 routing,
- routes learned via level 1 routing, using either the requested TOS or
- the default TOS, are always prefered to routes learned through level
- 2 routing. For destinations which are not reachable via level 1
- routing, or for level 2 only routers (routers which do not take part
- in level 1 routing), then level 2 routes are selected as follows:
-
- 1) Routes using internal metrics only are always preferred
- to routes using external metrics.
-
- 2) If a route using internal metrics only is available:
-
- a) If the specified destination address matches more
- than one [IP address, subnet mask] pair, then the more
- specific address match (i.e., the largest number of
- "1"s present in the subnet mask) is prefered.
-
- b) Amongst routes with equally specific address matches
- (i.e., an equal number of "1"s present in the subnet
- mask), routes on which the requested TOS (if any) is
- supported are always preferred to routes on which the
- requested TOS is not supported.
-
- c) Amongst routes of the same TOS with an equally specific
- address matches, the shortest path is prefered. For
- determination of the shortest path, if a route on which
- the specified TOS is supported is available, then the
- specified TOS metric is used, otherwise the default
- metric is used. Amongst routes of equal cost,
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 28]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- loadsplitting may be performed as specified in [1].
-
- NOTE: Internal routes (routes to destinations announced
- in the "IP Internal Reachability Information" field),
- and external routes using internal metrics (routes to
- destinations announced in the "IP External Reachability
- Information" field, with a metric of type "internal")
- are treated identically for the purpose of the order of
- preference of routes, and the Dijkstra calculation.
-
- 3) If a route using internal metrics only is not available,
- but a route using external metrics is available:
-
- a) If the specified destination address matches more than
- one [IP address, subnet mask] pair, then the more
- specific address match is prefered.
-
- NOTE: For external routes, the subnet mask will normally
- correspond precisely to the network number. This implies
- that this test will always discover equal length matching
- strings. However, this test is included to allow future
- migration to more general handling of external addresses.
-
- b) Amongst routes with equally specific matches, routes on
- which the requested TOS (if any) is supported are always
- preferred to routes on which the requested TOS is not
- supported. NOTE: for external routes, the route is
- considered to support the requested TOS only if the
- internal route to the appropriate border router
- supports the requested TOS, and the external route
- reported by the border router also supports the
- requested TOS.
-
- c) Amongst routes of the same TOS with an equal length
- matching address string, the shortest path is prefered.
- For determination of the shortest path:
-
- (i) Routes with a smaller announced external metric
- are always prefered.
-
- (ii) Amongst routes with an equal external metric,
- routes with a shorter internal metric are prefered.
- Amongst routes of equal cost, loadsplitting may be
- performed as specified in [1].
-
- For level 2 routers which are announcing manually configured summary
- addresses in their level 2 LSPs, in some cases there will exist IP
- addresses which match the manually configured addresses, but which do
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 29]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- not match any addresses which are actually reachable via level 1
- routing in the area. Generally, packets to such addresses are handled
- according to the following rules:
-
- 1) If the specified destination is reachable via level 1 routing,
- then according to the order of preference of routes specified
- above, the packet will be delivered via level 1 routing.
-
- 2) If the specified destination is not reachable via level 1 routing,
- but is reachable via 2 routing, and there are other level 2
- routers which offer more desireable routes according to the
- rules specified above (for example a route with a more specific
- match, or a route with an equally specific match which supports
- the correct TOS), then level 2 routing will forward the packet
- according to the more desireable route.
-
- 3) If the specified destination is not reachable via level 1 routing,
- and the manually configured summary address advertised by this
- router (the router which has received the packet and is trying
- to forward it) represents the most desireable route, then the
- destination is unreachable and the packet must be discarded.
-
- 4 Subnetwork Dependent Functions
-
- 4.1 Link Demultiplexing
-
- Dual routers may receive a combination of OSI packets, and IP
- packets. It is necessary for the dual routers to be able to clearly
- and unambiguously distinguish the two protocol suites.
-
- This problem is not unique to the integrated IS-IS routing protocol.
- In fact, this problem will occur in any multi-protocol environment.
- This problem is currently being worked on independently, and is
- outside of the scope of this specification.
-
- In general, the link type is a configuration parameter. For example,
- whether to use PPP, HDLC, or some other point-to-point protocol over
- a point-to-point link would be configured. For any particular link
- type, a method must be defined for encapsulation of both OSI and IP
- packets. Definition of such methods for common link types is outside
- of the scope of this specification.
-
- IP packets are encapsulated directly over the underlying link layer
- service, using the normal method for transmssion of IP packets over
- each type of link. Similarly OSI packets are encapsulated directly
- over the underlying link layer service, using the normal method for
- transmission of OSI packets over each type of link. Finally, note
- that IS-IS packets are encapsulated using the normal method for
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 30]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- transmission of OSI packets over any particular link type. This
- implies that all IS-IS routers, including IP-only routers, must be
- able to receive IS-IS packets using the normal encapsulation for OSI
- packets.
-
- 4.2 Multiple IP Addresses per Interface
-
- The integrated IS-IS allows each router to have multiple IP addresses
- for each physical interface, up to the maximum number which may be
- contained in a single "IP Interface Address" field (i.e., up to a
- maximum of 63 addresses per interface). For example, where there are
- two logical subnets on the same LAN, the interface may have two IP
- addresses, one corresponding to each logical subnet. Each IS-IS Hello
- packet contains a list of IP addresses associated with the physical
- interface over which the Hello is transmitted.
-
- It is permissible to implement routers which conform to the
- Integrated IS-IS specification which restrict the number of IP
- addresses per interface. However, IP-capable routers must be able to
- interact correctly with other routers which assign multiple IP
- addresses per physical interface (up to the maximum of 63 addresses
- per interface).
-
- Where appropriate (for example, in some cases on point-to-point
- links), some interfaces may have no IP addresses assigned. In this
- case, the IS-IS Hello transmitted on that interface may omit the IP
- Interface Address field, or may include the IP Interface Address
- field with zero entries.
-
- 4.3 LANs, Designated Routers, and Pseudonodes
-
- The maintenance of designated routers and pseudonodes is specified in
- [1], and is not changed by this proposal. In the case that IP-only
- and dual routers (or OSI-only and dual routers) are mixed on the same
- LAN in a pure IP area (or a pure OSI area, respectively), any router
- on the LAN may be elected designated router.
-
- However, there is a fundamental difference in the way that OSI and
- TCP/IP deal with LANs, and other broadcast subnetworks.
-
- With OSI, the use of the ES-IS protocol (ISO 9542) allows the end
- systems and routers to automatically determine their connectivity,
- thereby allowing all end systems on the LAN to potentially route via
- any of the routers on the LAN.
-
- In contract, TCP/IP explictly assigns subnet identifiers to each
- local area network. In some cases, a single physical LAN could have
- multiple subnet identifiers assigned to it. In this case, end systems
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 31]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- (hosts) which have an address on one logical subnet are explicitly
- precluded from sending IP packets directly to a router whose address
- places it on a different logical subnet. Each router is manually
- configured to know which subnets it can reach on each interface. In
- the case that there are multiple logical subnets on the same LAN,
- each router can only exchange IP packets with those end systems which
- are on the same logical subnet. This implies that it is not
- sufficient for the pseudonode LSP to announce all subnets on the LAN
- (i.e., all [IP address, subnet mask] pairs reachable on the LAN).
-
- It is therefore necessary for each router to announce in its LSPs
- those subnets which it can reach on each interface, including
- interfaces to broadcast subnetworks such as LANs. The pseudonode LSP
- does not specify the IP addresses which are reachable on the LAN
- (i.e., does not contain the the IP reachability field).
-
- As specified elsewhere (see the forthcoming update to the
- "Requirements of IP Gateways" [4]), routers may send ICMP redirects
- only if: (i) the IP packet is being forwarded over the same physical
- interface over which it arrived; and (ii) the source address of the
- forwarded IP packet, the IP address of this router's interface (as
- indicated by the source address of the ICMP redirect), and the IP
- address of the router to which the packet is being redirected (again,
- as indicated in the ICMP redirect) are all on the same IP subnet.
-
- 4.4 Maintaining Router Adjacencies
-
- The IS-IS determines whether an adjacency is to be established
- between two routers using means which are independent of the IP
- interface addresses of the routers. Where multiple logical subnets
- occur on the same physical LAN, this potentially allows adjacencies
- to be brought up between two routers which share physical
- connectivity to each other, but which don't have a logical subnet in
- common. IP-capable IS-IS routers therefore must be able to forward IP
- packets over existing adjacencies to routers with which they share
- physical connectivity, even when the IP address of the adjacent
- interface of the neighboring router is on a different logical IP
- subnet.
-
- For point-to-point links, IS-IS requires exchange of ISO 9542 ISHs,
- as the first step in establishing the link between routers. All IS-IS
- routers are therefore required to transmit and receive ISO 9542 ISH
- packets on point-to-point links.
-
- The "protocols supported" field (defined in section 5 below) must be
- present in all IS-IS Hello packets sent by dual and IP-only routers.
- If this field is missing, then it is assumed that the packet was
- transmitted by an OSI-only router. Similarly, those 9542 ISHs sent
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 32]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- over point-to-point links, where there is (or may be) another IS-IS
- router at the other end of the point-to-point link, must also
- contains the "protocols supported" field. Note that if this field is
- mistakenly sent in a 9542 ISH where there is an ordinary OSI-only End
- System at the other end of the link, then (in accordance to ISO 9542)
- the End System is required to ignore the field and interpret the ISH
- correctly. It is therefore safe to always include this field in ISHs
- sent over point-to-point links.
-
- Dual routers must operate in a dual fashion on every link in the
- routing domain over which they are running IS-IS. Thus, the value of
- the "protocols supported" field must be identical on every link
- (i.e., for any one router running IS-IS, all of the Hellos and LSPs
- transmitted by it must contain the same "protocols supported"
- values).
-
- 4.5 Forwarding to Incompatible Routers
-
- There may be times when a dual router has to forward an IP packet to
- an OSI-only router, or forward an OSI packet to an IP-only router. In
- this case the packet must be discarded. An error report may be
- transmitted, in accordance with the IP or ISO 8473 specification
- (respectively). The reason for discard specified in the error report
- should specify "destination host unreachable" (for IP), or
- "destination unreachable" (for OSI).
-
- Similarly, due to errors, in some cases an IP-only router may have to
- forward an IP packet to an OSI-only router. Again, the packet must be
- discarded, as specified above. This may only occur if IP-only and
- OSI-only routers occur in the same area, which is a configuration
- error.
-
- 5 Structure and Encoding of PDUs
-
- This clause describes the additional packet fields for use of the ISO
- IS-IS Intra-Domain Routing protocol in pure IP and dual environments.
- Specifically, the same packet types are used as in IS-IS [1], and all
- fixed fields remain the same. Additional variable length fields are
- defined in this section.
-
- 5.1 Overview of IS-IS PDUs
-
- The packets used in IS-IS routing protocol fall into three main
- classes: (i) Hello Packets; (ii) Link State Packets (LSPs); and (iii)
- Sequence Number Packets (SNPs).
-
- Hello packets are used to initialize and maintain adjacencies between
- neighboring routers. There are three types of IS-IS Hello packets:
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 33]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- (i) "Level 1 LAN IS to IS Hello PDUs" are used by level 1 routers on
- broadcast LANs. (ii) "Level 2 LAN IS to IS Hello PDUs" are used by
- level 2 routers on broadcast LANs. (iii) "Point-to-Point IS to IS
- Hello PDUs" are used on non-broadcast media, such as point-to-point
- links, or general topology subnetworks.
-
- On point-to-point links, the exchange of ISO 9542 ISHs (intermediate
- system Hellos) is used to initialize the link, and to allow each
- router to know if there is a router on the other end of the link,
- before IS-IS Hellos are exchanged. All routers implementing IS-IS
- (whether IP-only, OSI-only, or dual), if they have any interfaces on
- point-to-point links, must therefore be able to transmit ISO 9542
- ISHs on their point-to-point links.
-
- Link State Packets (LSPs) are used to exchange link state
- information. There are two types of LSPs: (i) "Level 1 Link State
- PDUs" are transmitted by level 1 routers. (ii) "Level 2 Link State
- PDUs" are transmitted by level 2 routers. Note that level 2 routers
- will, in most cases, also be level 1 routers, and will therefore
- transmit both sorts of LSPs.
-
- Sequence number PDUs are used to ensure that neighboring routers have
- the same notion of what is the most recent LSP from each other
- router. The sequence number PDUs therefore serve a similar function
- to acknowledgement packets, but allow more efficient operation. There
- are four types of sequence number packets: (i) "Level 1 Complete
- Sequence Numbers PDU"; (ii) "Level 2 Complete Sequence Numbers PDU";
- (iii) "Level 1 Partial Sequence Numbers PDU"; and (iv) "Level 2
- Partial Sequence Numbers PDU". A partial sequence number packet lists
- the most recent sequence number of one or more LSPs, and operates
- much like an acknowlegement. A partial sequence number packet differs
- from an conventional acknowledgement in the sense that it may
- acknowlege multiple LSPs at once, and in the sense that it may act as
- a request for information. A complete sequence number packet contains
- the most recent sequence number of all LSPs in the database. A
- complete sequence number packet may therefore be used to ensure
- synchronization of the database between adjacent routers either
- periodically, or when a link first comes up.
-
- 5.2 Overview of IP-Specific Information for IS-IS
-
- There are six new fields defined for the Integrated IS-IS: (i)
- "Protocols Supported"; (ii) "IP Interface Address"; (iii)
- "Authentication Information"; (iv) "IP Internal Reachability
- Information"; (v) "IP External Reachability Information"; and (vi)
- "Inter-Domain Routing Protocol Information".
-
- The "Protocols Supported" field identifies the protocols which are
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 34]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- supported by each router. This field must be included in all IS-IS
- Hello packets and all LSPs with LSP number 0 transmitted by IP-
- capable routers. If this field is not included in an IS-IS Hello
- packet or an LSP with LSP number 0, it may be assumed that the packet
- was transmitted by an OSI-only router. The "Protocols Supported"
- field must also be included in ISO 9542 ISHs send by IP-capable
- routers over point-to-point links to other IS-IS routers.
-
- The "IP Interface Address" is included in all IS-IS Hello packets and
- LSPs transmitted by IP-only and dual routers. In the Hello packets,
- this field occurs once only, and contains the IP address(es) of the
- interface on which the Hello packet is transmitted (up to a maximum
- of 63 IP addresses on each interface). If an IS-IS Hello is
- transmitted over an interface which does not have an IP address
- assigned, then this field may be omitted, or may be included with
- zero entries. In Link State Packets, this field contains a list of
- one or more IP addresses corresponding to one or more interfaces of
- the router which originates the LSP. Each IP-capable router must
- include this field in its LSPs. This field may occur multiple times
- in an LSP, and may occur in an LSP with any LSP number.
-
- The "Authentication Information" field is optional in all IS-IS PDUs.
- If used, it contains information used to authenticate the packet. All
- IS-IS packets (including 9542 IS Hellos) may be authenticated by use
- of this field.
-
- The "IP Internal Reachability Information" field may be present in
- all LSPs transmitted by IP-capable routers. If present, it identifies
- a list of zero or more [IP address, subnet mask, metrics] reachable
- by the router which originates the LSP. Each entry must contain a
- default metric, and may contain delay, expense, and error metrics. If
- an IP-capable router does not directly reach any IP addresses, then
- it may omit this field, or may include the field with zero [IP
- address, subnet mask, metrics] entries. If included in level 1 LSPs,
- this field includes only entries directly reachable by the router
- which originates the LSP, via one of its interfaces. If included in
- level 2 LSPs, this field includes only entries reachable by the
- router which originates the LSP, either via one of its interfaces, or
- indirectly via level 1 routing. This field may occur multiple times
- in an LSP, and may occur in an LSP with any LSP number.
-
- The "IP External Reachability Information" field may be present in
- level 2 LSPs transmitted by level 2 IP-capable routers. If present,
- it identifies a list of zero or more [IP address, subnet mask,
- metrics] entries reachable by the router which originates the level 2
- LSP. Each entry must contain a default metric, and may contain delay,
- expense, and error metrics. Each entry may contain metrics of type
- "internal", or of type "external". If a level 2 router does not have
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 35]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- any external routes (via neighboring routers in other routing
- domains), when it may omit this field, or may include the field with
- zero entries. This field includes only entries reachable by the
- router which originates the LSP, via a direct link to an external
- router. This field may occur multiple times in a level 2 LSP, and may
- occur in an LSP with any LSP number.
-
- The "Inter-Domain Routing Protocol Information" field may be present
- in level 2 LSPs transmitted by level 2 IP-capable routers. This field
- is transmitted for the convenience of the external routing protocol,
- and is not used by the IS-IS. For example, this may be used to allow
- border routers to find each other. This field may occur multiple
- times in a level 2 LSP, and may occur in an LSP with any LSP number.
-
- The DP 10589 version of the OSI IS-IS does not currently allow
- addition of TLV-encoded variable length fields to Sequence Number
- Packets. However, this is being corrected in future versions of
- 10589. In addition, this is expected to be the only correction to
- future versions of 10589 that is not backward-compatible with the DP
- version. The Integrated IS-IS therefore makes use of a corrected
- version of DP 10589, such that the encoding of SNPs has been fixed.
- The correct encoding of sequence number packets (as is expected to
- appear in future versions of ISO 10589) is given in Annex B of this
- specification.
-
- All IP-specific information is encoded in IS-IS packets as variable
- length fields. All variable length fields in IS-IS are encoded as
- follows:
-
- No. of Octets
- +---------------------------+
- | CODE | 1
- +---------------------------+
- | LENGTH | 1
- +---------------------------+
- | VALUE | LENGTH
- +---------------------------+
-
- Figure 3 - Encoding of Variable Length Fields
-
- Any codes in a received PDU that are not recognised shall be ignored
- and, for those packets which are forwarded (specifically Link State
- Packets), passed on unchanged.
-
- In general, an IS-IS PDU may contain multiple variable length fields,
- some of which contain OSI-specific information (specified in [1]) and
- some of which contain IP-specific information (specified below).
- Except where explicitly stated otherwise, these variable length
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 36]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- fields may occur in any order.
-
- 5.3 Encoding of IP-Specific Fields in IS-IS PDUs
-
- This section specifies the detailed encoding of all IP-specific
- fields in IS-IS PDUs. Where a particular field may be present in more
- than one type of PDU, the field is repeated for each type of PDU to
- which it applies.
-
- Bit and octet numbering is the same as in [1]. In particular, octets
- in a PDU are numbered starting from 1, in increasing order. Bits in
- an octet are numbered from 1 to 8, where bit 1 is the least
- significant bit and is pictured on the right. When consecutive octets
- are used to represent a number, the lower octet number has the most
- significant value.
-
- 5.3.1 Level 1 LAN IS to IS Hello PDU
-
- - Additional codes for IP support are:
-
- 7 Protocols Supported -- the set Network Layer Protocol Identifiers
- for Network Layer protocols that this Intermediate System is
- capable of relaying
-
- x CODE - 129
-
- x LENGTH - total length of the value field (one octet per
- protocol supported).
-
- x VALUE - one octet NLPID (as assigned by ISO/TR 9577) for
- each supported data protocol.
- No. of Octets
- +---------------------------+
- | NLPID | 1
- +---------------------------+
- : :
- : :
- |---------------------------|
- | NLPID | 1
- +---------------------------+
- NLPID - ISO/TR 9577 registered Network Layer Protocol Identifier.
-
- 7 IP Interface Address -- the IP address(es) of the interface
- corresponding to the SNPA over which this PDU is to be transmitted.
-
- x CODE - 132
-
- x LENGTH - total length of the value field (four octets per address).
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 37]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- x VALUE -
- No. of Octets
- +----------------------------+
- | IP ADDRESS | 4
- +----------------------------+
- : :
- : :
- +----------------------------+
- | IP ADDRESS | 4
- +----------------------------+
- IP ADDRESS - 4 octet IP Address of the Interface.
-
- 7 Authentication Information -- Information used to authenticate the
- PDU
-
- x CODE - 133
-
- x LENGTH - total length of the value field.
-
- x VALUE - TBD.
-
- 5.3.2 Level 2 LAN IS to IS Hello PDU
-
- - Additional codes for IP support are:
-
- 7 Protocols Supported -- the set Network Layer Protocol Identifiers
- for Network Layer protocols that this Intermediate System is
- capable of relaying
-
- x CODE - 129
-
- x LENGTH - total length of the value field (one octet per protocol
- supported).
-
- x VALUE - one octet NLPID (as assigned by ISO/TR 9577) for each
- supported data protocol.
- No. of Octets
- +----------------------------+
- | NLPID | 1
- +----------------------------+
- : :
- : :
- +----------------------------+
- | NLPID | 1
- +----------------------------+
- NLPID - ISO/TR 9577 registered Network Layer Protocol Identifier.
-
- 7 IP Interface Address -- The IP address(es) of the interface
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 38]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- corresponding to the SNPA over which this PDU is to be transmitted.
-
- x CODE - 132
-
- x LENGTH - total length of the value field (four octets per address).
-
- x VALUE -
- No. of Octets
- +----------------------------+
- | IP ADDRESS | 4
- +----------------------------+
- : :
- : :
- +----------------------------+
- | IP ADDRESS | 4
- +----------------------------+
- IP ADDRESS - 4 octet IP Address of the Interface.
-
- 7 Authentication Information -- Information used to authenticate
- the PDU
-
- x CODE - 133
-
- x LENGTH - total length of the value field
-
- x VALUE - TBD
-
- 5.3.3 Point-to-Point IS to IS Hello PDU
-
- - Additional codes for IP support are:
-
- 7 Protocols Supported -- the set Network Layer Protocol Identifiers
- for Network Layer protocols that this Intermediate System is
- capable of relaying
-
- x CODE - 129
-
- x LENGTH - total length of the value field (one octet per protocol
- supported).
-
- x VALUE - one octet NLPID (as assigned by ISO/TR 9577) for each
- supported data protocol.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 39]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- No. of Octets
- +----------------------------+
- | NLPID | 1
- +----------------------------+
- : :
- : :
- +----------------------------+
- | NLPID | 1
- +----------------------------+
- NLPID - ISO/TR 9577 registered Network Layer Protocol Identifier.
-
- 7 IP Interface Address -- The IP address(es) of the interface
- corresponding to the SNPA over which this PDU is to be transmitted.
-
- x CODE - 132
-
- x LENGTH - total length of the value field (four octets per address).
-
- x VALUE -
- No. of Octets
- +----------------------------+
- | IP ADDRESS | 4
- +----------------------------+
- : :
- : :
- +----------------------------+
- | IP ADDRESS | 4
- +----------------------------+
- IP ADDRESS - 4 octet IP Address of the Interface.
-
- 7 Authentication Information -- Information used to authenticate
- the PDU
-
- x CODE - 133
-
- x LENGTH - total length of the value field
-
- x VALUE - TBD
-
- 5.3.4 Level 1 Link State PDU
-
- - Additional codes for IP support are:
-
- 7 Protocols Supported -- the set Network Layer Protocol Identifiers
- for Network Layer protocols that this Intermediate System is
- capable of relaying.
-
- This must appear once in LSP number 0.
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 40]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- x CODE - 129
-
- x LENGTH - total length of the value field (one octet per protocol
- supported).
-
- x VALUE - one octet NLPID (as assigned by ISO/TR 9577) for each
- supported data protocol.
- No. of Octets
- +----------------------------+
- | NLPID | 1
- +----------------------------+
- : :
- : :
- +----------------------------+
- | NLPID | 1
- +----------------------------+
- NLPID - ISO/TR 9577 registered Network Layer Protocol Identifier.
-
- 7 IP Interface Addresses -- The IP addresss of one or more interfaces
- corresponding to the SNPAs enabled on this Intermediate system
- (i.e., one or more IP addresses of this router).
-
- This is permitted to appear multiple times, and in an LSP with
- any LSP number.
-
- x CODE - 132
-
- x LENGTH - total length of the value field (four octets per address).
-
- x VALUE -
- No. of Octets
- +----------------------------+
- | IP ADDRESS | 4
- +----------------------------+
- : :
- : :
- +----------------------------+
- | IP ADDRESS | 4
- +----------------------------+
- IP ADDRESS - 4 octet IP Address
-
- 7 Authentication Information -- Information used to authenticate
- the PDU
-
- x CODE - 133
-
- x LENGTH - total length of the value field
-
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 41]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- x VALUE - TBD
-
- 7 IP Internal Reachability Information -- IP addresses within the
- routing domain reachable directly via one or more interfaces on
- this Intermediate system.
-
- This is permitted to appear multiple times, and in an LSP with any
- LSP number. However, this field must not appear in pseudonode LSPs.
-
- x CODE - 128.
-
- x LENGTH - a multiple of 12.
-
- x VALUE -
- No. of Octets
- +----------------------------+
- | 0 |I/E| DEFAULT METRIC | 1
- +----------------------------+
- | S | R | DELAY METRIC | 1
- +----------------------------+
- | S | R | EXPENSE METRIC | 1
- +----------------------------+
- | S | R | ERROR METRIC | 1
- +----------------------------+
- | IP ADDRESS | 4
- +----------------------------+
- | SUBNET MASK | 4
- +----------------------------+
- : :
- : :
- +----------------------------+
- | 0 |I/E| DEFAULT METRIC | 1
- +----------------------------+
- | S | R | DELAY METRIC | 1
- +----------------------------+
- | S | R | EXPENSE METRIC | 1
- +----------------------------+
- | S | R | ERROR METRIC | 1
- +----------------------------+
- | IP ADDRESS | 4
- +----------------------------+
- | SUBNET MASK | 4
- +----------------------------+
-
- DEFAULT METRIC is the value of the default metric for the link
- to the listed neighbor. Bit 8 of this field is reserved, and
- must be set to zero on tranmission and ignored on reception.
- Bit 7 of this field (marked I/E) indicates the metric type
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 42]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- (internal or external) for all four TOS metrics, and must be
- set to zero indicating internal metrics.
-
- DELAY METRIC is the value of the delay metric for the link to the
- listed neighbor. If this IS does not support this metric it shall
- set the bit "S" to 1 to indicate that the metric is unsupported.
- Bit 7 of this field is reserved, and must be set to zero on
- transmission and ignored on reception.
-
- EXPENSE METRIC is the value of the expense metric for the link to
- the listed neighbor. If this IS does not support this metric it
- shall set the bit "S" to 1 to indicate that the metric is
- unsupported. Bit 7 of this field is reserved, and must be set to
- zero on transmission and ignored on reception.
-
- ERROR METRIC is the value of the error metric for the link to
- the listed neighbor. If this IS does not support this metric it
- shall set the bit "S" to 1 to indicate that the metric is
- unsupported. Bit 7 of this field is reserved, and must be set
- to zero on transmission and ignored on reception.
-
- IP ADDRESS is a 4-octet Internet address
-
- SUBNET MASK is a 4 octet IP subnet mask.
-
- 5.3.5 Level 2 Link State PDU
-
- - Additional codes for IP support are:
-
- 7 Protocols Supported -- the set Network Layer Protocol Identifiers
- for Network Layer protocols that this Intermediate System is
- capable of relaying.
-
- This must appear once in LSP number 0.
-
- x CODE - 129
-
- x LENGTH - total length of the value field (one octet per
- protocol supported).
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 43]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- x VALUE - one octet NLPID (as assigned by ISO/TR 9577) for
- each supported data protocol.
- No. of Octets
- +----------------------------+
- | NLPID | 1
- +----------------------------+
- : :
- : :
- +----------------------------+
- | NLPID | 1
- +----------------------------+
- NLPID - ISO/TR 9577 registered Network Layer Protocol Identifier.
-
- 7 IP Interface Addresses -- The IP addresss of one or more interfaces
- corresponding to the SNPAs enabled on this Intermediate system
- (i.e., one or more IP addresses of this router).
-
- This is permitted to appear multiple times, and in an LSP with
- any LSP number. Where a router is both a level 1 and level 2 router,
- it must include the same IP addresses in its level 1 and level 2 LSPs.
-
- x CODE - 132
-
- x LENGTH - total length of the value field (four octets per address).
-
- x VALUE-
- No. of Octets
- +----------------------------+
- | IP ADDRESS | 4
- +----------------------------+
- : :
- : :
- +----------------------------+
- | IP ADDRESS | 4
- +----------------------------+
- IP ADDRESS - 4 octet IP Address
-
- 7 Authentication Information -- Information used to authenticate
- the PDU
-
- x CODE - 133
-
- x LENGTH - total length of the value field
-
- x VALUE - TBD
-
- 7 IP Internal Reachability Information -- IP addresses within the
- routing domain reachable directly via one or more interfaces on
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 44]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- this Intermediate system.
-
- This is permitted to appear multiple times, and in an LSP with
- any LSP number. However, this field must not appear in pseudonode
- LSPs.
-
- x CODE - 128.
-
- x LENGTH - a multiple of 12.
-
- x VALUE -
- No. of Octets
- +----------------------------+
- | 0 |I/E| DEFAULT METRIC | 1
- +----------------------------+
- | S | R | DELAY METRIC | 1
- +----------------------------+
- | S | R | EXPENSE METRIC | 1
- +----------------------------+
- | S | R | ERROR METRIC | 1
- +----------------------------+
- | IP ADDRESS | 4
- +----------------------------+
- | SUBNET MASK | 4
- +----------------------------+
- : :
- : :
- +----------------------------+
- | 0 |I/E| DEFAULT METRIC | 1
- +----------------------------+
- | S | R | DELAY METRIC | 1
- +----------------------------+
- | S | R | EXPENSE METRIC | 1
- +----------------------------+
- | S | R | ERROR METRIC | 1
- +----------------------------+
- | IP ADDRESS | 4
- +----------------------------+
- | SUBNET MASK | 4
- +----------------------------+
-
- DEFAULT METRIC is the value of the default metric for the link
- to the listed neighbor. Bit 8 of this field is reserved, and must
- be set to zero on transmission and ignored on reception. Bit 7
- of this field indicates the metric type (internal or external)
- for all four TOS metrics, and must be set to zero indicating
- internal metrics.
-
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 45]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- DELAY METRIC is the value of the delay metric for the link to
- the listed neighbor. If this IS does not support this metric it
- shall set the bit "S" to 1 to indicate that the metric is
- unsupported. Bit 7 of this field is reserved, and must be set
- to zero on transmission and ignored on reception.
-
- EXPENSE METRIC is the value of the expense metric for the link to
- the listed neighbor. If this IS does not support this metric it
- shall set the bit "S" to 1 to indicate that the metric is
- unsupported. Bit 7 of this field is reserved, and must be set
- to zero on transmission and ignored on reception.
-
- ERROR METRIC is the value of the error metric for the link to the
- listed neighbor. If this IS does not support this metric it shall
- set the bit "S" to 1 to indicate that the metric is unsupported.
- Bit 7 of this field is reserved, and must be set to zero on
- transmission and ignored on reception.
-
- IP ADDRESS is a 4-octet Internet address
-
- SUBNET MASK is a 4 octet IP subnet mask.
-
- 7 IP External Reachability Information -- IP addresses outside the
- routing domain reachable via interfaces on this Intermediate
- system.
-
- This is permitted to appear multiple times, and in an LSP with
- any LSP number. However, this field must not appear in pseudonode LSPs.
-
- x CODE - 130.
-
- x LENGTH - a multiple of 12.
-
- x VALUE -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 46]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- No. of Octets
- +----------------------------+
- | 0 |I/E| DEFAULT METRIC | 1
- +----------------------------+
- | S | R | DELAY METRIC | 1
- +----------------------------+
- | S | R | EXPENSE METRIC | 1
- +----------------------------+
- | S | R | ERROR METRIC | 1
- +----------------------------+
- | IP ADDRESS | 4
- +----------------------------+
- | SUBNET MASK | 4
- +----------------------------+
- : :
- : :
- +----------------------------+
- | 0 |I/E| DEFAULT METRIC | 1
- +----------------------------+
- | S | R | DELAY METRIC | 1
- +----------------------------+
- | S | R | EXPENSE METRIC | 1
- +----------------------------+
- | S | R | ERROR METRIC | 1
- +----------------------------+
- | IP ADDRESS | 4
- +----------------------------+
- | SUBNET MASK | 4
- +----------------------------+
-
- DEFAULT METRIC is the value of the default metric for the
- path to the listed IP addresses. Bit 8 of this field is
- reserved, and must be set to zero on transmission and ignored
- on reception. Bit 7 of this field indicates the metric type
- (internal or external) for all four TOS metrics, and may be
- set to zero indicating internal metrics, or may be set to 1
- indicating external metrics.
-
- DELAY METRIC is the value of the delay metric for the path
- to the listed IP addresses. If this IS does not support this
- metric it shall set the bit "S" to 1 to indicate that the metric
- is unsupported. Bit 7 of this field is reserved, and must be
- set to zero on transmission and ignored on reception.
-
- EXPENSE METRIC is the value of the expense metric for the link
- to the listed IP addresses. If this IS does not support this
- metric it shall set the bit "S" to 1 to indicate that the metric
- is unsupported. Bit 7 of this field is reserved, and must be
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 47]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- set to zero on transmission and ignored on reception.
-
- ERROR METRIC is the value of the error metric for the link to
- the listed IP addresses. If this IS does not support this metric
- it shall set the bit "S" to 1 to indicate that the metric is
- unsupported. Bit 7 of this field is reserved, and must be set to
- zero on transmission and ignored on reception.
-
- IP ADDRESS is a 4-octet Internet address
-
- SUBNET MASK is a 4 octet IP subnet mask
-
- 7 Inter-Domain Routing Protocol Information -- Inter-domain routing
- protocol information carried transparently through level 2 for
- the convenience of any Inter-Domain protocol that may be running
- in the boundary ISs.
-
- This is permitted to appear multiple times, and in an LSP with
- any LSP number.
-
- x CODE - 131.
-
- x LENGTH - total length of the value field
-
- x VALUE -
- No. of Octets
- +-------------------------------+
- | Inter-Domain Information Type | 1
- +-------------------------------+
- | External Information | VARIABLE
- +-------------------------------+
-
- INTER-DOMAIN INFORMATION TYPE indicates the type of the
- external information which is encoded in the field.
-
- EXTERNAL INFORMATION contains inter-domain routing protocol
- information, and is passed transparently by the IS-IS protocol.
-
- 5.3.6 Level 1 Complete Sequence Numbers PDU
-
- - Additional codes for IP support are:
-
- 7 Authentication Information -- Information used to authenticate
- the PDU
-
- x CODE - 133
-
- x LENGTH - total length of the value field
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 48]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- x VALUE - TBD
-
- 5.3.7 Level 2 Complete Sequence Numbers PDU
-
- - Additional codes for IP support are:
-
- 7 Authentication Information -- Information used to authenticate
- the PDU
-
- x CODE - 133
-
- x LENGTH - total length of the value field
-
- x VALUE - TBD
-
- 5.3.8 Level 1 Partial Sequence Numbers PDU
-
- - Additional codes for IP support are:
-
- 7 Authentication Information -- Information used to authenticate
- the PDU
-
- x CODE - 133
-
- x LENGTH - total length of the value field
-
- x VALUE - TBD
-
- 5.3.9 Level 2 Partial Sequence Numbers PDU
-
- - Additional codes for IP support are:
-
- 7 Authentication Information -- Information used to authenticate
- the PDU
-
- x CODE - 133
-
- x LENGTH - total length of the value field
-
- x VALUE - TBD
-
- 5.3.10 ISO 9542 ISH PDU
-
- - Additional codes for IP support are:
-
- 7 Protocols Supported -- the set Network Layer Protocol Identifiers
- for Network Layer protocols that this Intermediate System is
- capable of relaying.
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 49]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- This appears in ISO 9542 ISH PDUs transmitted on point-to-point
- links.
-
- x CODE - 129
-
- x LENGTH - total length of the value field (one octet per
- protocol supported).
-
- x VALUE - one octet NLPID (as assigned by ISO/TR 9577) for
- each supported data protocol.
- No. of Octets
- +----------------------------+
- | NLPID | 1
- +----------------------------+
- : :
- : :
- +----------------------------+
- | NLPID | 1
- +----------------------------+
- NLPID - ISO/TR 9577 registered Network Layer Protocol Identifier.
-
- 7 Authentication Information -- Information used to authenticate
- the PDU
-
- x CODE - 133
-
- x LENGTH - total length of the value field
-
- x VALUE - TBD
-
- 6 Security Considerations
-
- The integrated IS-IS has a provision for carrying authentication
- information in all IS-IS packets. This is extensible to multiple
- authentication mechanisms. However, currently the only defined
- mechanism is a simple password, transmitted in the clear without
- encryption (see Annex D). The use of a simple password does not
- provide useful protection against intentional misbehavior. Rather,
- this should be thought of as a weak protection against accidental
- errors such as accidental mis-configuration. Definition of other
- authentication mechanisms is beyond the scope of this document.
-
- Other aspects of security are not discussed in this document.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 50]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- 7 Author's Address
-
- Ross Callon
- Digital Equipment Corporation
- 550 King Street, LKG 1-2/A19
- Littleton, MA 01460-1289
- 508-486-5009
-
- 8 References
-
- [1] "Intermediate System to Intermediate System Intra-Domain
- Routeing Exchange Protocol for use in Conjunction with the
- Protocol for Providing the Connectionless-mode Network Service
- (ISO 8473)", ISO DP 10589, February 1990.
-
- [2] "Protocol for Providing the Connectionless-Mode Network
- Service", ISO 8473, March 1987.
-
- [3] "End System to Intermediate System Routeing Exchange Protocol
- for Use in Conjunction with the Protocol for Providing the
- Connectionless-Mode Network Service (ISO 8473)", ISO 9542,
- March 1988.
-
- [4] Braden,R., and Postel,J., "Requirements for Internet Gateways",
- RFC 1009, June 1987.
-
- [5] Moy,J., "The OSPF Specification", RFC 1131, October 1989.
-
- [6] Postel,J., "Internetwork Protocol", RFC 791, September 1981.
-
- [7] Postel,J., "Internet Control Message Protocol", RFC 792,
- September 1981.
-
- [8] "MIB for Use with the Extended OSI IS-IS in TCP/IP and Dual
- Environments", forthcoming.
-
- [9] GOSIP Advanced Requirements Group, "Government Open Systems
- Interconnection Profile (GOSIP) Version 2.0 [Final Text]",
- Federal Information Processing Standard, U.S. Department of
- Commerce, National Institute of Standards and Technology,
- Gaithersburg, MD, October 1990.
-
- [10] "Standard for Local Area Networks and Metropolitan Area
- Networks: Overview and Architecture of Network Standards",
- IEEE Standard 802.1a-1990.
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 51]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- Annex A
- Inter-Domain Routing Protocol Information
-
- This annex specifies the contents and encoding of the Inter-Domain
- Routing Protocol Information (IDRPI) field. This annex is an integral
- part of the Integrated IS-IS specification. However, it is expected
- that this annex may be augmented or superceded by future efforts
- outside of the scope of the IS-IS specification.
-
- A.1 Inter-Domain Information Type
-
- As specified in sections 3.4 and 5.3, the IDRPI field consists of a
- one-octet inter-domain information type field, plus a variable
- external information field. This section specifies initial values for
- the inter-domain information type field. Other values for inter-
- domain information type will be assigned and maintained in future
- versions of the "Assigned Numbers" RFC.
-
- The following types have been assigned:
-
- Type = 0 reserved
-
- Type = 1 local (uses routing-domain specific format)
-
- Type = 2 AS Number Tag
-
- Type = 1 indicates that the inter-domain routing protocol information
- uses a format which is local to the routing domain.
-
- Type = 2 indicates that the inter-domain routing protocol information
- includes autonomous system information used to tag IP external
- reachability information. In this case the inter-domain routing
- protocol information entry must include a single AS number, which is
- used to tag all subsequent External IP Reachability entries until the
- end of the LSP, or until the next occurence of the Inter-Domain
- Routing Protocol Information field.
-
- A.2 Encoding
-
- As specified in section 5.3.5, the IDPRI entry is encoded as a
- variable length field, as follows:
-
- x CODE - 131
-
- x LENGTH - total length of the value field
-
- x VALUE -
-
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 52]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- No. of Octets
- +-------------------------------+
- | Inter-Domain Information Type | 1
- +-------------------------------+
- | External Information | VARIABLE
- +-------------------------------+
-
- INTER-DOMAIN INFORMATION TYPE indicates the type of the
- external information which is encoded in the field.
-
- EXTERNAL INFORMATION contains inter-domain routing protocol
- information, and is passed transparently by the IS-IS protocol.
-
- The Inter-domain information type field indicates the type of
- information which is contained in the external information field, as
- follow:
-
- Type = 0 is reserved (must not be sent, and must be ignored on receipt).
-
- Type = 1 indicates that the external information field contains
- information which follows a locally specified format.
-
- Type = 2 indicates that the external information field contains an
- autonomous system number tag, to be applied to subsequent IP external
- reachability information entries. In this case, this "inter-domain
- routing protocol information" entry must contain precisely one 2
- octet AS number. The AS tag is associated with subsequent IP External
- Reachability entries, until the end of the LSP, or until the next
- occurence of the Inter-Domain Routing Protocol Information field.
- In this case, the VALUE contains the following:
-
- x VALUE -
- No. of Octets
- +---------------------------------+
- | Inter-Domain Information Type=2 | 1
- +---------------------------------+
- | Autonomous System Number | 2
- +---------------------------------+
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 53]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- Annex B
- Encoding of Sequence Number Packets
-
- The Integrated IS-IS protocol defined in this specification makes use
- of the ISO Draft Proposed standard for Intra-domain routing (ISO DP
- 10589 [1]) as the base routing protocol, upon which IP support may be
- added.
-
- However, DP 10589 contains a bug regarding encoding of the variable
- length fields in Sequence Number Packets. In particular, DP 10589
- encodes the variable length fields in SNPs in a manner which is not
- flexible (additional variable length fields cannot be defined for
- sequence number packets), and which is inconsistent with the encoding
- of the variable length fields in all other IS-IS and ES-IS packets.
-
- The encoding of the variable length fields in SNPs is expected to be
- fixed in future versions of 10589. Also, this bug represents the only
- expected change to 10589 which cannot be made backward compatible
- with existing DP 10589 implementations. For these reasons, the
- current version of the Integrated IS-IS will use the anticipated
- future encoding of the variable length part of the SNPs. This should
- allow future versions of this specification to be compatible with
- implementations based on this specification.
-
- This annex specifies the encoding of SNPs, as amended to fix the
- encoding of variable length fields. This annex is an integral part of
- the Integrated IS-IS specification.
-
- The encoding of SNPs for OSI-only use is shown in this section. For
- IP-only or Integrated use, the additional variable length fields
- specified in sections 5.3.6 through 5.3.9 are also applicable to
- SNPs.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 54]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- B.1 Level 1 Complete Sequence Numbers PDU
-
- No. of Octets
- +--------------------------------+
- | INTRA-DOMAIN ROUTEING | 1
- | PROTOCOL DISCRIMINATOR |
- +--------------------------------+
- | LENGTH INDICATOR | 1
- +--------------------------------+
- | VERSION/PROTOCOL ID EXT | 1
- +--------------------------------+
- | RESERVED | 1
- +--------------------------------+
- | R | R | R | TYPE | 1
- +--------------------------------+
- | VERSION | 1
- +--------------------------------+
- | ECO | 1
- +--------------------------------+
- | USER ECO | 1
- +--------------------------------+
- | PDU LENGTH | 2
- +--------------------------------+
- | SOURCE ID | 7
- +--------------------------------+
- | START LSP ID | 8
- +--------------------------------+
- | END LSP ID | 8
- +================================+====================
- | VARIABLE LENGTH FIELDS | VARIABLE
- +--------------------------------+
-
-
- - INTRADOMAIN ROUTEING PROTOCOL DISCRIMINATOR - architectural constant
-
- - LENGTH INDICATOR - Header Length in octets (33.)
-
- - VERSION/PROTOCOL ID EXTENSION - 1
-
- - RESERVED - transmitted as 0, ignored on receipt
-
- - TYPE (bits 1 through 5) - 24. Note bits 6, 7 and 8 are Reserved,
- which means they are transmitted as 0 and ignored on receipt.
-
- - VERSION - 1
-
- - ECO - transmitted as zero, ignored on receipt
-
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 55]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- - USER ECO - transmitted as zero, ignored on receipt
-
- - PDU LENGTH - Entire Length of this PDU, in octets, including header
-
- - SOURCE ID - 7 octet ID of Intermediate System (with zero Circuit ID)
- generating this Sequence Numbers PDU.
-
- - START LSP ID - 8 octet ID of first LSP in the range covered by this
- Complete Sequence Numbers PDU.
-
- - END LSP ID - 8 octet ID of last LSP in the range covered by this
- Complete Sequence Numbers PDU.
-
- - VARIABLE LENGTH FIELDS - fields of the form:
-
- No. of Octets
- +--------------------------------+
- | CODE | 1
- +--------------------------------+
- | LENGTH | 1
- +--------------------------------+
- | VALUE | LENGTH
- +--------------------------------+
-
- Any codes in a received CSNP that are not recognised are ignored.
-
- Currently defined codes are:
-
- 7 LSP Entries -- This may appear multiple times. The option fields,
- if they appear more than once, shall appear sorted into ascending
- LSPID order.
-
- x CODE - 9
-
- x LENGTH - total length of the value field.
-
- x VALUE - a list of LSP entries of the form:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 56]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
-
- No. of Octets
- +--------------------------------+
- | REMAINING LIFETIME | 2
- +--------------------------------+
- | LSP ID | 8
- +--------------------------------+
- | LSP SEQ NUMBER | 4
- +--------------------------------+
- | CHECKSUM | 2
- +--------------------------------+
- : :
- : :
- +--------------------------------+
- | REMAINING LIFETIME | 2
- +--------------------------------+
- | LSP ID | 8
- +--------------------------------+
- | LSP SEQ NUMBER | 4
- +--------------------------------+
- | CHECKSUM | 2
- +--------------------------------+
-
- 7 REMAINING LIFETIME - Remaining Lifetime of LSP.
-
- 7 LSP ID - 8 octet ID of the LSP to which this entry refers.
-
- 7 LSP SEQ NUMBER - Sequence number of LSP.
-
- 7 CHECKSUM - Checksum reported in LSP.
-
- The entries shall be sorted into ascending LSPID order (the LSP
- number octet of the LSPID is the least significant octet).
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 57]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- B.2 Level 2 Complete Sequence Numbers PDU
-
- No. of Octets
- +--------------------------------+
- | INTRA-DOMAIN ROUTEING | 1
- | PROTOCOL DISCRIMINATOR |
- +--------------------------------+
- | LENGTH INDICATOR | 1
- +--------------------------------+
- | VERSION/PROTOCOL ID EXT | 1
- +--------------------------------+
- | RESERVED | 1
- +--------------------------------+
- | R | R | R | TYPE | 1
- +--------------------------------+
- | VERSION | 1
- +--------------------------------+
- | ECO | 1
- +--------------------------------+
- | USER ECO | 1
- +--------------------------------+
- | PDU LENGTH | 2
- +--------------------------------+
- | SOURCE ID | 7
- +--------------------------------+
- | START LSP ID | 8
- +--------------------------------+
- | END LSP ID | 8
- +================================+====================
- | VARIABLE LENGTH FIELDS | VARIABLE
- +--------------------------------+
-
-
- - INTRADOMAIN ROUTEING PROTOCOL DISCRIMINATOR - architectural constant
-
- - LENGTH INDICATOR - Header Length in octets (33.)
-
- - VERSION/PROTOCOL ID EXTENSION - 1
-
- - RESERVED - transmitted as 0, ignored on receipt
-
- - TYPE (bits 1 through 5) - 25. Note bits 6, 7 and 8 are Reserved,
- which means they are transmitted as 0 and ignored on receipt.
-
- - VERSION - 1
-
- - ECO - transmitted as zero, ignored on receipt
-
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 58]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- - USER ECO - transmitted as zero, ignored on receipt
-
- - PDU LENGTH - Entire Length of this PDU, in octets, including header
-
- - SOURCE ID - 7 octet ID of Intermediate System (with zero Circuit ID)
- generating this Sequence Numbers PDU.
-
- - START LSP ID - 8 octet ID of first LSP in the range covered by this
- Complete Sequence Numbers PDU.
-
- - END LSP ID - 8 octet ID of last LSP in the range covered by this
- Complete Sequence Numbers PDU.
-
- - VARIABLE LENGTH FIELDS - fields of the form:
-
- No. of Octets
- +--------------------------------+
- | CODE | 1
- +--------------------------------+
- | LENGTH | 1
- +--------------------------------+
- | VALUE | LENGTH
- +--------------------------------+
-
- Any codes in a received CSNP that are not recognised are ignored.
-
- Currently defined codes are:
-
- 7 LSP Entries -- this may appear multiple times. The option fields,
- if they appear more than once, shall appear sorted into ascending
- LSPID order.
-
- x CODE - 9
-
- x LENGTH - total length of the value field.
-
- x VALUE - a list of LSP entries of the form:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 59]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- No. of Octets
- +--------------------------------+
- | REMAINING LIFETIME | 2
- +--------------------------------+
- | LSP ID | 8
- +--------------------------------+
- | LSP SEQ NUMBER | 4
- +--------------------------------+
- | CHECKSUM | 2
- +--------------------------------+
- : :
- : :
- +--------------------------------+
- | REMAINING LIFETIME | 2
- +--------------------------------+
- | LSP ID | 8
- +--------------------------------+
- | LSP SEQ NUMBER | 4
- +--------------------------------+
- | CHECKSUM | 2
- +--------------------------------+
-
- 7 REMAINING LIFETIME - Remaining Lifetime of LSP.
-
- 7 LSP ID - 8 octet ID of the LSP to which this entry refers.
-
- 7 LSP SEQ NUMBER - Sequence number of LSP.
-
- 7 CHECKSUM - Checksum reported in LSP.
-
- The entries shall be sorted into ascending LSPID order (the LSP
- number octet of the LSPID is the least significant octet).
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 60]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- B.3 Level 1 Partial Sequence Numbers PDU
-
- No. of Octets
- +--------------------------------+
- | INTRA-DOMAIN ROUTEING | 1
- | PROTOCOL DISCRIMINATOR |
- +--------------------------------+
- | LENGTH INDICATOR | 1
- +--------------------------------+
- | VERSION/PROTOCOL ID EXT | 1
- +--------------------------------+
- | RESERVED | 1
- +--------------------------------+
- | R | R | R | TYPE | 1
- +--------------------------------+
- | VERSION | 1
- +--------------------------------+
- | ECO | 1
- +--------------------------------+
- | USER ECO | 1
- +--------------------------------+
- | PDU LENGTH | 2
- +--------------------------------+
- | SOURCE ID | 7
- +================================+====================
- | VARIABLE LENGTH FIELDS | VARIABLE
- +--------------------------------+
-
- - INTRADOMAIN ROUTEING PROTOCOL DISCRIMINATOR - architectural constant
-
- - LENGTH INDICATOR - Header Length in octets (17.)
-
- - VERSION/PROTOCOL ID EXTENSION - 1
-
- - RESERVED - transmitted as 0, ignored on receipt
-
- - TYPE (bits 1 through 5) 26. Note bits 6, 7 and 8 are Reserved,
- which means they are transmitted as 0 and ignored on receipt.
-
- - VERSION - 1
-
- - ECO - transmitted as zero, ignored on receipt
-
- - USER ECO - transmitted as zero, ignored on receipt
-
- - PDU LENGTH - Entire Length of this PDU, in octets, including header
-
- - SOURCE ID - 7 octet ID of Intermediate system (with zero Circuit ID)
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 61]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- generating this Sequence Numbers PDU.
-
- - VARIABLE LENGTH FIELDS - fields of the form:
-
- No. of Octets
- +--------------------------------+
- | CODE | 1
- +--------------------------------+
- | LENGTH | 1
- +--------------------------------+
- | VALUE | LENGTH
- +--------------------------------+
-
- Any codes in a received PSNP that are not recognised are ignored.
-
- Currently defined codes are:
-
- 7 LSP Entries - this may appear multiple times. The option fields,
- if they appear more than once, shall appear sorted into ascending
- LSPID order.
-
- x CODE - 9
-
- x LENGTH - total length of the value field.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 62]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- x VALUE - a list of LSP entries of the form:
-
- No. of Octets
- +--------------------------------+
- | REMAINING LIFETIME | 2
- +--------------------------------+
- | LSP ID | 8
- +--------------------------------+
- | LSP SEQ NUMBER | 4
- +--------------------------------+
- | CHECKSUM | 2
- +--------------------------------+
- : :
- : :
- +--------------------------------+
- | REMAINING LIFETIME | 2
- +--------------------------------+
- | LSP ID | 8
- +--------------------------------+
- | LSP SEQ NUMBER | 4
- +--------------------------------+
- | CHECKSUM | 2
- +--------------------------------+
-
- 7 REMAINING LIFETIME - Remaining Lifetime of LSP.
-
- 7 LSP ID - 8 octet ID of the LSP to which this entry refers.
-
- 7 LSP SEQ NUMBER - Sequence number of LSP.
-
- 7 CHECKSUM - Checksum reported in LSP.
-
- The entries shall be sorted into ascending LSPID order (the LSP number
- octet of the LSPID is the least significant octet).
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 63]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- B.4 Level 2 Partial Sequence Numbers PDU
-
- No. of Octets
- +--------------------------------+
- | INTRA-DOMAIN ROUTEING | 1
- | PROTOCOL DISCRIMINATOR |
- +--------------------------------+
- | LENGTH INDICATOR | 1
- +--------------------------------+
- | VERSION/PROTOCOL ID EXT | 1
- +--------------------------------+
- | RESERVED | 1
- +--------------------------------+
- | R | R | R | TYPE | 1
- +--------------------------------+
- | VERSION | 1
- +--------------------------------+
- | ECO | 1
- +--------------------------------+
- | USER ECO | 1
- +--------------------------------+
- | PDU LENGTH | 2
- +--------------------------------+
- | SOURCE ID | 7
- +================================+====================
- | VARIABLE LENGTH FIELDS | VARIABLE
- +--------------------------------+
-
- - INTRADOMAIN ROUTEING PROTOCOL DISCRIMINATOR - architectural constant
-
- - LENGTH INDICATOR - Header Length in octets (17.)
-
- - VERSION/PROTOCOL ID EXTENSION - 1
-
- - RESERVED - transmitted as 0, ignored on receipt
-
- - TYPE (bits 1 through 5) - 27. Note bits 6, 7 and 8 are Reserved,
- which means they are transmitted as 0 and ignored on receipt.
-
- - VERSION - 1
-
- - ECO - transmitted as zero, ignored on receipt
-
- - USER ECO - transmitted as zero, ignored on receipt
-
- - PDU LENGTH - Entire Length of this PDU, in octets, including header
-
- - SOURCE ID - 7 octet ID of Intermediate system (with zero Circuit ID)
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 64]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- generating this Sequence Numbers PDU.
-
- - VARIABLE LENGTH FIELDS - fields of the form:
-
- No. of Octets
- +--------------------------------+
- | CODE | 1
- +--------------------------------+
- | LENGTH | 1
- +--------------------------------+
- | VALUE | LENGTH
- +--------------------------------+
-
- Any codes in a received PSNP that are not recognised are ignored.
-
- Currently defined codes are:
-
- 7 LSP Entries -- this may appear multiple times. The option fields,
- if they appear more than once, shall appear sorted into ascending
- LSPID order.
-
- x CODE - 9
-
- x LENGTH - total length of the value field.
-
- x VALUE - a list of LSP entries of the form:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 65]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- No. of Octets
- +--------------------------------+
- | REMAINING LIFETIME | 2
- +--------------------------------+
- | LSP ID | 8
- +--------------------------------+
- | LSP SEQ NUMBER | 4
- +--------------------------------+
- | CHECKSUM | 2
- +--------------------------------+
- : :
- : :
- +--------------------------------+
- | REMAINING LIFETIME | 2
- +--------------------------------+
- | LSP ID | 8
- +--------------------------------+
- | LSP SEQ NUMBER | 4
- +--------------------------------+
- | CHECKSUM | 2
- +--------------------------------+
-
- 7 REMAINING LIFETIME - Remaining Lifetime of LSP.
-
- 7 LSP ID - 8 octet ID of the LSP to which this entry refers.
-
- 7 LSP SEQ NUMBER -Sequence number of LSP.
-
- 7 CHECKSUM - Checksum reported in LSP.
-
- The entries shall be sorted into ascending LSPID order (the LSP
- number octet of the LSPID is the least significant octet).
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 66]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- Annex C
- Dijkstra Calculation and Forwarding
-
- Annex C.2 of ISO DP 10589 [1] specifies the SPF (Dikskstra) algorithm
- for calculating routes with the IS-IS routing protocol. This annex
- specifies modifications to the SPF algorithm for supporting IP and
- dual routing, and specifies a compatible method for forwarding IP
- packets. This will result in an order of preference of routes which
- is compatible with that specified in section 3.10.
-
- This annex is included for informational purposes.
-
- C.1 SPF Algorithm for IP and Dual Use
-
- This section specifies an SPF Algorithm for calculating routes with
- the IS-IS routing protocol, for support of both TCP/IP and OSI. This
- is based on an extention to the algorithm specified in annex C.2 of
- ISO DP 10589 [1].
-
- An algorithm invented by Dijkstra known as shortest path first (SPF)
- is used as the basis for the route calculation. It has a
- computational complexity of the square of the number of nodes, which
- can be decreased to the number of links in the domain times the log
- of the number of nodes for sparse networks (networks which are not
- highly connected).
-
- A number of additional optimizations are possible:
-
- 1) If the routing metric is defined over a small finite field (as in
- this standard), the factor of log n may be removed by using data
- structures which maintain a separate list of systems for each value
- of the metric rather than sorting the systems by logical distance.
-
- 2) Updates can be performed incrementally without requiring a complete
- recalculation. However, a full update must be done periodically to
- ensure recovery from data corruption, and studies suggest that with
- a very small number of link changes (perhaps 2) the expected
- computation complexity of the incremental update exceeds the
- complete recalculation. Thus, this annex specifies the algorithm
- only for the full update.
-
- 3) If only End System LSP information has changed, it is not necessary
- to re-compute the entire Dijkstra tree. If the proper data
- structures are used, End Systems (including IP reachability
- entries) may be attached and detached as leaves of the tree and
- their forwarding information base entries altered as appropriate.
-
- The original SPF algorithm does not support load splitting over
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 67]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- multiple paths. The algorithm in this annex does permit load
- splitting by identifying a set of equal cost paths to each
- destination rather than a single least cost path.
-
- C.1.1 Databases
-
- PATHS -- This represents an acyclic directed graph of shortest paths
- from the system S performing the calculation. It is stored as a set
- of triples of the form <N,d(N),{Adj(N)}>, where:
-
- N is a system identifier. In the level 1 algorithm, N is a
- 6 octet ID for OSI end systems, a 7 octet ID for routers, or
- an 8 octet IP Internal Reachability Information entry. For a
- router which is not a pseudonode, it is the 6 octet system ID,
- with a 0 appended octet. For a pseudonode it is a true 7 octet
- quantity, comprised of the 6 octet Designated Intermediate
- System ID and the extra octet assigned by the Destinated Router.
- The IP Internal Reachability Information entries consist of a
- 4 octet IP address plus a 4 octet subnet mask, and will always
- be a leaf, i.e., "End System" in PATHS.
-
- In the level 2 algorithm, N is either a 7 octet router or
- pseudonode ID (as in the level 1 algorithm); a variable
- length OSI address prefix; an 8 octet IP Internal Reachability
- Information Entry, or an 8 octet IP External Reachability
- Information entry. The variable length OSI address prefixes,
- and 8 octet IP Reachability Information entries will always
- be a leaf, i.e., "End System" in PATHS. As above, the IP
- Reachability Information entries consist of an [IP address,
- subnet mask] combination.
-
- d(N) is N's distance from S (i.e., the total metric value
- from N to S).
-
- {Adj(N)} is a set of valid adjacencies that S may use for
- forwarding to N.
-
- When a system is placed on PATHS, the path(s) designated by its
- position in the graph is guaranteed to be a shortest path.
-
- TENT -- This is a list of triples of the form <N,d(N),{Adj(N)}>,
- where N, d(N), and {Adj(N)} are as defined above for PATHS.
-
- TENT can intuitively be thought of as a tentative placement
- of a system in PATHS. In other words, the triple <N,x,{A}>
- in TENT means that if N were placed in PATHS, d(N) would be x,
- but N cannot be placed on PATHS until is is guaranteed that
- no path shorter than x exists.
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 68]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- Similarly, the triple <N,x,{A,B}> in TENT means that if N
- were placed in PATHS, then d(N) would be x via either
- adjacency A or B.
-
- Note: It is suggested that the implementation maintain the database
- TENT as a set of list of triples of the form <*,Dist,*>, sorted by
- distance Dist. In addition, it is necessary to be able to process
- those systems which are pseudonodes before any non-pseudonodes at the
- same distance Dist.
-
- The 8 octet system identifiers which specify IP reachability entries
- must always be distinguishable from other system identifiers. As
- specified in section 3.10, two IP reachability entries which differ
- only in the subnet mask are still considered to be separate, and will
- therefore have distinct system identifiers N. The SPF algorithm will
- therefore calculate routes to each such entry, and the correct entry
- will be selected in the forwarding process.
-
- C.1.2 Use of Metrics in the SPF Algorithm
-
- Internal metrics are not comparable to external metrics. For external
- routes (routes to destinations outside of the routing domain), the
- cost d(N) of the path from N to S may include both internal and
- external metrics. d(N) may therefore be maintained as a two-
- dimensioned vector quantity (specifying internal and external metric
- values).
-
- d(N) is initialized to [internal metric = 0, external metric = 0].
-
- In incrementing d(N) by 1, if the internal metric value is less than
- the maximum value MaxPathMetric, then the internal metric value is
- incremented by one and the external metric value left unchanged; if
- the internal metric value is equal to the maximum value
- MaxPathMetric, then the internal metric value is set to 0 and the
- external metric value is incremented by 1. Note that this can be
- implemented in a straightforward manner by maintaining the external
- metric as the high order bits of the distance.
-
- In the code of the algorithm below, the current path length is held
- in the variable "tentlength". This variable is a two-dimensional
- quantity tentlength=[internal metric, external metric], and is used
- for comparing the current path length with d(N) as described above.
- Tentlength is incremented in the same manner as d(N).
-
- C.1.3 Overview of the Algorithm
-
- The basic algorithm, which builds PATHS from scratch, starts out by
- putting the system doing the computation on PATHS (no shorter path to
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 69]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- SELF can possibly exist). TENT is then pre-loaded from the local
- adjacency database.
-
- Note that a system is not placed on PATHS unless no shorter path to
- that system exists. When a system N is placed on PATHS, the path to
- each neighbor M of N, through N, is examined, as the path to N plus
- the link from N to M. If <M,*,*> is in PATHS, this new path will be
- longer, and thus ignored.
-
- If <M,*,*> is in TENT, and the new path is shorter, the old entry is
- removed from TENT and the new path is placed in TENT. If the new path
- is the same length as the one in TENT, then the set of potential
- adjacencies {Adj(M)} is set to the union of the old set (in TENT) and
- the new set {Adj(N)}. If M is not in TENT, then the path is added to
- TENT.
-
- Next the algorithm finds the triple <N,x,{Adj(N)}> in TENT, with
- minimal x. Note: This is done efficiently because of the optimization
- described above. When the list of triples for distance Dist is
- exhausted, the algorithm then increments Dist until it finds a list
- with a triple of the form <*,Dist,*>.
-
- N is placed in PATHS. We know that no path to N can be shorter than x
- at this point because all paths through systems already in PATHS have
- already been considered, and paths through systems in TENT still have
- to be greater than x because x is minimal in TENT.
-
- When TENT is empty, PATHS is complete.
-
- Note that external metrics can only occur in "IP External
- Reachability Information" entries, which correspond to a leaf (i.e.,
- End System in PATHS). Any route utilizing an entry with an external
- metric will always be considered to be less desireable than any entry
- which uses an internal metric. This implies that in the addition of
- systems to PATHS, all systems reachable via internal routes are
- always added before any system reachable via external routes.
-
- C.1.4 The Algorithm
-
- The Decision Process Algorithm must be run once for each supported
- routing metric (i.e., for each supported Type of Service). A level 1
- router runs the algorithm using the level 1 LSP database to compute
- level 1 paths (for those level 1 routers which are not level 2
- routers, this includes the path to the nearest attached level 2
- router). Level 2 routers also separately run the algorithm using the
- level 2 LSP database to compute level 2 paths. IP-capable level 2
- routers must keep level 2 internal IP routes separate from level 2
- external IP routes.
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 70]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- Note that this implies that routers which are both level 1 and level
- 2 routers, and which support all four routing metrics, must run the
- SPF algorithm 8 times (assuming partition repair is not implemented).
-
- If this system is a Level 2 Router which supports the partition
- repair optional function the Decision Process algorithm for computing
- Level 1 paths must be run twice for the default metric. This first
- execution is done to determine which of the area's
- manualAreaAddresses are reachable in this partition, and to elect a
- Partition Designated Level 2 Router for the partition. The partition
- Designated Level 2 Router will determine if the area is partitioned
- and will create virtual Level 1 links to the other Partition
- Designated Level 2 Routers in the area in order to repair the Level 1
- partition. This is further described in section 7.2.10 of [1].
-
- The SPF algorithm specified here will calculate routes for both OSI
- and IP. In particular, routes are calculated to all system
- identifiers N, where N may specify an OSI End System, the OSI address
- of a router, or an IP reachability entry. In computing the forwarding
- database, it is an implementation specific issue whether the IP
- forwarding database is kept separately from the OSI forwarding
- database. Where appropriate, this annex will refer separately to
- entries in these two forwarding data bases. This is not meant to
- preclude any specific implementation method.
-
- OSI and IP use separate mechanisms to determine whether a packet is
- in the area (in particular, OSI makes use of area addresses, and IP
- determines that a destination is not in an area by looking in the
- level 1 forwarding database and determining that no entry exists for
- that destination within the area). The route to the nearest level 2
- router will result in separate entries in the forwarding database for
- OSI and IP. For IP, the route to the nearest attached level 2 router
- may be entered in the forwarding database as a default route (i.e., a
- route with a subnet mask of all 0).
-
- One approach would be to put the results of each Dijkstra algorithm
- in a separate forwarding database. For a router which supports both
- level 1 and level 2 routing (including level 2 internal and level 2
- external routes), and which supports all four types of service, this
- would result in twelve separate forwarding databases for IP.
- Implementations may choose to minimize the number of forwarding
- databases by combining the information from the multiple Dijkstra
- calculations into a single database per supported TOS. This is
- discussed in section C.2 below.
-
- The SPF algorithm specified in section C.2.3 of [1] is amended to
- appear as follows:
-
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 71]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- Step 0: Initialize TENT and PATHS to empty. Initialize tentlength to
- [internalmetric=0, externalmetric=0].
-
- (tentlength is the pathlength of elements in TENT that we are
- examining.)
-
- 1) Add <SELF,0,W> to PATHS, where W is a special value indicating
- traffic to SELF is passed up to internal processes (rather than
- forwarded).
-
- 2) Now pre-load TENT with the local adjacency database (Each
- entry made to TENT must be marked as being either an End System
- or a router to enable the check at the end of Step 2 to be made
- correctly - Note that each local IP reachability entry is
- included as an adjacency, and is marked as being an End System).
- For each adjacency Adj(N) (including level 1 OSI Manual
- Adjacencies, or level 2 OSI enabled reachable addresses, and
- IP reachability entries) on enabled circuits, to system N of
- SELF in state "Up" compute:
-
- d(N) = cost of the parent circuit of the adjacency (N),
- obtained from metric.k , where k = one of {default metric,
- delay metric, monetary metric, error metric}
-
- Adj(N) = the adjacency number of the adjacency to N
-
- 3) If a triple <N,x,{Adj(M)}> is in TENT, then:
-
- If x = d(N), then {Adj(M)} <--- {Adj(M)} U {Adj(N)}.
-
- 4) If N is a router or an OSI End System entry, and there are now
- more adjacencies in {Adj(M)} than maximumPathSplits, then remove
- excess adjacencies as described in Clause 7.2.7 of [1]. If N
- is an IP Reachability Entry, then excess adjacencies may be
- removed as desired. This will not effect the correctness of
- routing, but may eliminate the determinism for IP routes (i.e.,
- IP packets still follow optimal routes within an area, but
- where multiple equally good routes exist, will not necessarily
- follow precisely the route that any one particular router
- would have anticipated).
-
- 5) If x < d(N), do nothing.
-
- 6) If x > d(N), remove <N,x,{Adj(M)}> from TENT and add the triple
- <N,d(N),{Adj(N)}>.
-
- 7) If no triple <N,x,{Adj(M)}> is in TENT, then add <N,d(N),{Adj(N)}>
- to TENT.
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 72]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- 8) Now add systems to which the local router does not have adjacencies,
- but which are mentioned in neighboring pseudonode LSPs. The
- adjacency for such systems is set to that of the designated router.
- Note that this does not include IP reachability entries from
- neighboring pseudonode LSPs. In particular, the pseudonode LSPs
- do not include IP reachability entries.
-
- 9) For all broadcast circuits in state "On", find the pseudonode
- LSP for that circuit (specifically, the LSP with number zero and
- with the first 7 octets of LSPID equal to LnCircuitID for that
- circuit, where n is 1 (for level 1 routing) or 2 (level 2
- routing)). If it is present, for all the neighbors N reported in
- all the LSPs of this pseudonode which do not exist in TENT add
- an entry <N,d(N),{Adj(N)}> to TENT, where:
-
- d(N) = metric.k of the circuit.
- Adj(N) = the adjacency number of the adjacency to the DR.
-
- 10) Go to Step 2.
-
- Step 1: Examine the zeroeth link state PDU of P, the system just
- placed on PATHS (i.e., the LSP with the same first 7 octets of LSPID
- as P, and LSP number zero).
-
- 1) If this LSP is present, and the "Infinite Hippity Cost" bit is
- clear, then for each LSP of P (i.e., all LSPs with the same
- first 7 octets of LSPID and P, irrespective of the value of
- LSP number) compute:
-
- dist(P,N) = d(P) + metric.k(P,N)
-
- for each neighbor N (both End System and router) of the system P. If
- the "Infinite Hippity Cost" bit is set, only consider the End System
- neighbors of the system P. Note that the End Systems neighbors of the
- system P includes IP reachable address entries included in the LSPs
- from system P. Here, d(P) is the second element of the triple
-
- <P,d(P),{Adj(P)}>
-
- and metric.k(P,N) is the cost of the link from P to N as reported in
- P's link state PDU.
-
- 2) If dist(P,N) > MaxPathMetric, then do nothing.
-
- 3) If <N,d(N),{Adj(N)}> is in PATHS, then do nothing.
-
- Note: d(N) must be less than dist(P,N), or else N would not
- have been put into PATHS. An additional sanity check may be
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 73]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- done here to ensure that d(N) is in fact less than dist(P,N)
-
- 4) If a triple <N,x,{Adj(N)}> is in TENT, then:
-
- a) If x = dist(P,N), then {Adj(N)} <-- {Adj(N)} U {Adj(P)}.
-
- b) If N is a router or an OSI end system, and there are now more
- adjacencies in {Adj(N)} than maximumPath Splits, then remove
- excess adjacencies, as described in clause 7.2.7 of [1]. For
- IP Reachability Entries, excess adjacencies may be removed as
- desired. This will not effect the correctness of routing, but
- may eliminate the determinism for IP routes (i.e., IP packets
- will still follow optimal routes within an area, but where
- multiple equally good routes exist, will not necessarily follow
- precisely the route that any one particular router would have
- anticipated).
-
- c) if x < dist(P,N), do nothing.
-
- d) if x > dist(P,N), remove <N,x,{Adj(N)}> from TENT, and add
- <N,dist(P,N),{Adj(P)}>
-
- 5) if no triple <N,x,{Adj(N)}> is in TENT, then add
- <N,dist(P,N),{Adj(P)}> to TENT.
-
- Step 2: If TENT is empty, stop. Else:
-
- 1) Find the element <P,x,{Adj(P)}>, with minimal x as follows:
-
- a) If an element <*,tentlength,*> remains in TENT in the list for
- tentlength, choose that element. If there are more than one
- elements in the list for tentlength, choose one of the elements
- (if any) for a system which is a pseudonode in preference to one
- for a non-pseudonode. If there are no more elements in the list
- for tentlength, increment tentlength and repeat Step 2.
-
- b) Remove <P,tentlength,{Adj(P)}> from TENT.
-
- c) Add <P,d(P),{Adj(P)}> to PATHS.
-
- d) If this is the Level 2 Decision Process running, and the system
- just added to PATHS listed itself as Partition Designated Level 2
- Intermediate system, then additionally add <AREA.P,d(P),{Adj(P)}>
- to PATHS, where AREA.P is the Network Entity Title of the other
- end of the Virtual Link, obtained by taking the first AREA
- listed in P's LSP and appending P's ID.
-
- e) If the system just added to PATHS was an end system, go to
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 74]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- step 2. Else go to Step 1.
-
- NOTE - In the level 2 context, the "End Systems" are the set of
- Reachable Address Prefixes (for OSI), the set of Area Addresses with
- zero cost (again, for OSI), plus the set of IP reachability entries
- (including both internal and external).
-
- C.2 Forwarding of IP packets
-
- The SPF algorithm specified in section C.1 may be used to calculate
- (logically) separate IP forwarding tables for each type of service,
- and for level 1, level 2 internal, and level 2 external routes.
- Section C.2.1 describes how to forward IP packets, based on these
- multiple forwarding databases. Section C.2.2 describes how the
- multiple forwarding databases can be combined into a single
- forwarding database per supported TOS.
-
- C.2.1 Basic Method for Forwarding IP packets
-
- For level 1-only routers:
-
- - Determine if the IP destination address matches any entry in the
- level 1 forwarding table for the specified TOS.
-
- - Determine if the IP destination address matches any entry in the
- level 1 forwarding table for the default TOS.
-
- - If default TOS resulted in more specific entry, forward according
- to default TOS.
-
- - If equally specific entries found, or specified TOS resulted in
- more specific entry, forward according to specified TOS
-
- - If no entry was found (which includes no default route entry), then
- destination is unreachable.
-
- Note: For level 1 only routers, the route to the nearest attached
- level 2 router will be entered into the forwarding database as a
- default route (i.e., a route with a subnet mask which is all 0). Thus
- this last event (no entry found) can occur only if there is no
- attached level 2 router reachable in the area.
-
- For routers which are both level 1 and level 2 routers:
-
- - Determine if the IP destination address matches any entry in the
- level 1 forwarding table for the specified TOS.
-
- - Determine if the IP destination address matches any entry in the
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 75]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- level 1 forwarding table for the default TOS.
-
- - If default TOS resulted in more specific entry (i.e., more bits in
- the subnet mask take the value 1), forward according to default TOS.
-
- - If equally specific entries found, or specified TOS resulted in
- more specific entry, forward according to specified TOS
-
- - If no entry found:
-
- - Determine if the IP destination address matches any entry in the
- level 2 internal forwarding table for the specified TOS.
-
- - Determine if the IP destination address matches any entry in the
- level 2 internal forwarding table for the default TOS.
-
- - If default TOS resulted in more specific entry, forward according
- to default TOS.
-
- - If equally specific entries found, or specified TOS resulted in
- more specific entry, forward according to specified TOS
-
- - If no entry found:
-
- - Determine if the IP destination address matches any entry in the
- level 2 external forwarding table for the specified TOS.
-
- - Determine if the IP destination address matches any entry in the
- level 2 external forwarding table for the default TOS.
-
- - If default TOS resulted in more specific entry, forward according
- to default TOS.
-
- - If equally specific entries found, or specified TOS resulted in
- more specific entry, forward according to specified TOS
-
- - If no entry is found, then destination is unreachable
-
- For level 2-only routers, the above algorithm can be used, except
- since there is no level 1 forwarding database, the corresponding
- steps can be skipped.
-
- As discussed in section 3.10.2, for level 2 routers which are
- announcing manually configured summary addresses in their level 2
- LSPs, in some cases there will exist IP addresses which match the
- manually configured addresses, but which do not match any addresses
- which are reachable via level 1 routing in the area. Packets to such
- addresses are handled according to the rules specified in section
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 76]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- 3.10.2. This may be accomplished by adding the manually configured
- [IP address, subnet mask] entry to the level 2 forwarding database
- (for the appropriate TOS), with a special "next hop" address which
- specifies that packets for which this entry is selected are to be
- discarded. This will work correctly because more desireable entries
- (such as delivering the packet via level 1 routing to the correct
- destination, or a more specific level 2 route) will automatically
- take precedence according to the forwarding rules specified above.
- Less desireable routes (such as using a level 2 external route to the
- "default route" entry) are not possible because other level 2 routers
- will believe the summary addresses advertised by this router.
-
- C.2.2 Reduction of IP Forwarding Databases
-
- The multiple forwarding databases used in the basic forwarding method
- in section C.2.1 can be reduced, by combining the multiple databases
- into one database for each supported TOS.
-
- For reduction of IP forwarding databases, it is assumed that for any
- two overlapping address entries, either the entries are identical, or
- one range contains the other. In other words, for any two [IP
- address, subnet mask] entries A and B, if there is at least one IP
- address which matches both entries, then either: (i) the two entries
- are identical; or (ii) entry A contains entry B (i.e., any IP address
- which matches entry B also matches entry A); or (iii) entry B
- contains entry A (any IP address which matches entry A also matches
- entry B).
-
- Non-contiguous subnet masks can be configured to violate this
- assumption. For example, consider the two entries:
-
- - A=[address="01010101 00000101 00000000 00000000",
- mask="11111111 00001111 00000000 00000000"]
-
- - B=[address="01010101 01010000 00000000 00000000",
- mask="11111111 11110000 00000000 00000000"]
-
- In this case neither entry contains the other. Specifically;
-
- - there are IP addresses which match both A and B (e.g.,
- "01010101 01010101 xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx"),
-
- - there are IP addresses which match A but not B (e.g.,
- "01010101 11110101 xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx")
-
- - there are IP addresses which match B but not A (e.g.,
- "01010101 01011111 xxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx").
-
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 77]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- The reduction of the multiple forwarding databases for each TOS to a
- single database for each TOS is based on the use of "best match"
- routing, combined with reduction of the entries placed in the
- forwarding database in order to eliminate entries which are not to be
- selected (based on the order of preference of routes specified in
- section 3.10). The specific algorithm for creation of the IP
- forwarding database can be described as follows:
-
- 1) Make use of the the Dijkstra algorithm described in section C.1 to
- create separate forwarding databases for each supported TOS for
- level 1 routes, level 2 internal routes, and level 2 external
- routes. (Note that each entry in the forwarding database will
- specify an [IP address, subnet mask] combination, as well as the
- next hop router for IP packets which match that entry).
-
- 2) For each level 1 route entry which has been placed in the level 1
- IP forwarding database for a specific TOS, copy that entry into
- the overall IP forwarding database for that TOS.
-
- 3) For each route entry X which has been placed in the level 2 internal
- IP forwarding database for a specific TOS, search for overlapping
- entries in the level 1 IP forwarding database for the specific TOS,
- and also for the default TOS:
-
- a) If there is any overlapping entry Y in the level 1 forwarding
- database (for the specfic TOS, or for the default TOS) such
- that either (i) Y contains X; or (ii) Y is identically specific
- to X; then ignore entry X.
-
- b) Otherwise, copy entry X into the overall IP forwarding database
- for the specific TOS.
-
- 4) For each route entry X which has been placed in the level 2
- external IP forwarding database for a specific TOS, search for
- overlapping entries in the level 1 IP forwarding database for
- the specific TOS, and for the default TOS, and the level 2
- internal IP forwarding database for the specific TOS, and for
- the default TOS.
-
- a) If there is an overlapping entry Y such that either (i) Y
- contains X; or (ii) Y is identically specific to X; then
- ignore entry X.
-
- b) Otherwise, copy entry X into the overall IP forwarding database
- for the specific TOS.
-
- This method will result in one forwarding database for each supported
- TOS. The forwarding of packets can then be simplified to be as follows:
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 78]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- 1) For IP packets which map to the default TOS metric (or to an
- unsupported TOS metric), search the default TOS forwarding
- database and select the entry which has the most specific match.
- Forward the packet accordingly.
-
- 2) For packets which map to a specific (non-default) TOS metric,
- search the specific TOS forwarding database and select the entry
- j which has the most specific match. Also search the default TOS
- forwarding database and select the entry k which has the most
- specific match. Forward the packet as follows:
-
- a) If k is more specific than j, forward according to entry k
-
- b) If j and k are equally specific, forward according to entry j
-
- c) If j is more specific than k, forward according to entry j
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 79]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- Annex D
- Use of the Authentication Field
-
- The use of the Authentication field is outside of the scope of this
- specification. However, there is a urgent need for simple error
- detection/authentication mechanisms (such as a simple password) to
- protect against certain types of errors. This annex therefore
- proposes a possible use of this field.
-
- This annex is included for informational purposes.
-
- D.1 Authentication Field in IS-IS packets
-
- All IS-IS packets may optionally include the authentication field, as
- described in sections 3.9 and 5 of this specification. As described
- in section 5, the authentication field is encoded as a (Code, Length,
- Value) triplet. This annex proposes that the contents of the Value
- field consist of a one octet "Authentication Type" field, plus a
- variable length "Authentication Information" field. A specific value
- of the "Authentication Type" is assigned to passwords, transmitted in
- the clear without encryption. The authentication field is encoded as
- follows:
-
- 7 Authentication Information -- Information used to authenticate
- the PDU
-
- x CODE - 133
-
- x LENGTH - total length of the value field
-
- x VALUE -
- No. of Octets
- +--------------------------------+
- | Authentication Type | 1
- +--------------------------------+
- | Authentication Information | VARIABLE
- +--------------------------------+
-
- The Authentication Type is assigned as follows:
-
- Type = 0 reserved
-
- Type = 1 simple password
-
- Type > 1 reserved
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 80]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- D.2 Authentication Type 1 - Simple Password
-
- Using this authentication type, a variable length password is passed
- in the clear (i.e., not encrypted) in the Authentication Information
- field.
-
- WARNING: The use of a simple password does not provide useful
- protection against intentional misbehavior. In particular, since the
- password is transmitted in the clear without encryption, it is easy
- for a hostile system to intercept the passwords, and to transmit
- authenticated packets. The use of simple passwords should be
- considered only as a weak protection against accidental errors such
- as accidental misconfiguration.
-
- The password shall be configured on a per-link, per-area, and per-
- domain basis. Specifically, when this form of authentication is used:
-
- - IS-IS Hello and 9542 IS Hello packets shall contain the
- per-link password
-
- - Level 1 Link State Packets shall contain the per-area password
-
- - Level 2 Link State Packets shall contain the per-domain password
-
- - Level 1 Sequence Number Packets shall contain the per-area password
-
- - Level 2 Sequence Number Packets shall contain the per-domain
- password
-
- Also, each of these three passwords shall be configured with: (i)
- "Transmit Password", whose value is a single password, and (ii)
- "Receive Passwords", whose value is a set of passwords. The transmit
- password value is always transmitted. However, any password contained
- in the receive password set will be accepted on receipt. This method
- allows the graceful changing of passwords without temporary loss of
- connectivity.
-
- For example, consider the case that an area has the configured area
- password "OLDAREAPASSWORD". In this case, the per-area transmit
- password value is set to OLDAREAPASSWORD, and the per-area receive
- password value is set to {OLDAREAPASSWORD}. Suppose that it is
- desired to change the per-area password to "NEWERPASSWORD". The
- first step would be to manually configure all of the routers in the
- area to set the per-area receive password value to {OLDAREAPASSWORD,
- NEWERPASSWORD}. When this step is complete, then all routers in the
- area will still be using the old password OLDAREAPASSWORD in their
- level 1 LSPs and SNPs. However, they will also accept the alternate
- password NEWERPASSWORD. The second step would be to configure the
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 81]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- routers in the area to set the per-area transmit password to
- NEWERPASSWORD. When the second step is complete, then all routers
- will be using the new value of the per-area password, but will accept
- the old value as well. Finally, the third step is to change all
- routers in the area to have the per-area receive password set to
- {NEWERPASSWORD}.
-
- By configuring transmit and receive values for the passwords in this
- manner, it is possible to maintain continuous correct operation. For
- example, in the middle of the second step in the above example, some
- of the routers in the area will be transmitting level 1 LSPs and SNPs
- using the old password OLDAREAPASSWORD, and some will be transmitting
- level 1 LSPs and SNPs using the new password NEWERPASSWORD. However,
- during the second step of the transition all routers in the area will
- accept level 1 LSPs and SNPs using either password.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 82]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- Annex E
- Interaction of the Integrated IS-IS with Brouters
-
- A "brouter" is a device which operates an both a bridge and a router.
- One possible type of brouter acts as a router for IP traffic, and
- acts as a bridge for all other types of traffic.
-
- Depending upon the manner in which a brouter is implemented, and
- depending upon the network topology, there is an obscure bug which
- can result from the interaction of the Integrated IS-IS protocol, and
- brouters. This appendix gives an example of the bug, and proposes a
- simple correction to the operation of brouters to correct the
- problem.
-
- This annex is included for informational purposes.
-
- E.1 The Problem
-
- Suppose that we have a brouter which treats IP packets as if it were
- a normal IP router, and which treats all other packets as if it is a
- bridge.
-
- Suppose that two routers "X" and "Y" (which implement the integrated
- IS-IS protocol), two Ethernets, and a brouter B are all connected as
- follows:
-
-
- | |
- +----+---+ +----+---+
- | Router | | Router |
- | X | | Y |
- +----+---+ +----+---+
- | |
- -----+------------+- -+------------+----
- | |
- +-+-----+-+
- | Brouter |
- | B |
- +---------+
-
-
- Here suppose that X and Y are running the Integrated IS-IS protocol,
- and are both level 1 routers in the same area. Thus X and Y send IS-
- IS Hello packets on the LAN. These Hello packets are received and
- forwarded by the brouter (using normal bridge functions). Similarly,
- X and Y receive each other's IS-IS LSP packets. In this way, it
- appears to the Brouter that X and Y are exchanging OSI packets, and
- so they are forwarded using normal bridge functions. It appears to X
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 83]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- and Y as if they are on the same LAN, and so they learn each others
- 48-bit Ethernet addresses and exchange routing information.
-
- Now, suppose that X receives an IP packet, which it needs to forward
- via Y. Since X thinks that it and Y are on the same Ethernet, it just
- forwards the IP packet directly, using normal Ethernet encapsulation
- and using the 48-bit Ethernet address of Y as the destination address
- in the Ethernet header. Brouter B, when thinking as a bridge says:
- "this is an IP packet, I don't forward this as a bridge". Brouter B,
- when thinking like an IP router says: "this is an IP packet, I know
- how to forward IP packets. However, this is sent to an Ethernet
- address which is not me, thus I will ignore it". The result is that
- the IP packet does not get forwarded.
-
- This problem relates directly to the fact that X and Y are exchanging
- OSI packets to determine the connectivity of the path between them,
- but then are trying to send IP packets over the path. Also, there is
- a device between X and Y on the path which treats OSI and IP packets
- differently.
-
- Also note that this problem can also occur in more complex
- topologies, whenever a brouter is treating OSI and IP packets in a
- fundamentally different manner.
-
- E.2 Possible Solutions
-
- E.2.1 More Sophisticated Brouter
-
- One solution is that brouter B needs to be a little more
- sophisticated. In particular, it needs to use the following rules:
-
- - For packets which are not IP packets, act as a bridge (this is the
- same as before).
-
- - For IP packets sent to an Ethernet broadcast or multicast address,
- act as an IP router (this is also the same as before).
-
- - For IP packets sent to my own Ethernet 48-bit address(es), act as
- an IP router (this is also the same as before).
-
- - For IP packets sent to a single station 48-bit address which is not
- one of my addresses, act at a bridge (THIS IS NEW).
-
- With this change, the IP packet transmitted from X to Y is forwarded
- by the brouter, acting as a bridge. This allows the Brouter and the
- multiprotocol routers to interoperate properly.
-
-
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 84]
-
- RFC 1195 OSI ISIS for IP and Dual Environments December 1990
-
-
- E.2.2 Dual Router / Brouter
-
- An alternate solution would be for the Brouter to route both OSI and
- IP equally. If the Brouter used the integrated IS-IS for this
- purpose, then it could be part of the same routing domain and
- interoperate like any other dual router (except for the ability to
- bridge other protocol suites). If it used other protocols for
- routing OSI and IP, then it would need to be part of another routing
- domain, and could interoperate with integrated IS-IS routers like any
- other external router.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- Callon [Page 85]
-