Subject: [magma] draft-ietf-magma-igmp-proxy-01

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2002 10:45:23 -0400

Dear MAGMAers,

We have updated the IGMP Proxying draft. Sorry we did not make the
deadline. So I am sending the draft to the mailing list for comments.
And also it can be discussed in the meeting.

The only meaningful technical change is to clarify how to deal with
downstream interfaces' IGMPv3 subscriptions when merging them. In the
draft, the IGMPv3 subscription is defined as the IGMPv3 state
information maintained by each downstream interface which contains
timer. These timers as well as some source address information when in
EXCLUDE mode are not used for merge. We have clarified them in section
4.1.

Cheers,

Haixiang

Internet Engineering Task Force               Bill Fenner, AT&T Research
INTERNET-DRAFT                              Haixiang He, Nortel Networks
draft-ietf-magma-igmp-proxy-01.txt            Brian Haberman, Consultant
                                      Hal Sandick, Sheperd Middle School
Expire: January, 2003                                         July, 2002

           IGMP-based Multicast Forwarding ("IGMP Proxying")

Status of this Memo

   This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
   all provisions of Section 10 of RFC 2026.

   Internet Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other
   groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.

Abstract

   In certain topologies, it is not necessary to run a multicast routing
   protocol.  It is sufficient to learn and proxy group membership
   information and simply forward based upon that information.  This
   draft describes a mechanism for forwarding based solely upon IGMP
   membership information.

   This document is a product of the MAGMA working group within the
   Internet Engineering Task Force.  Comments are solicited and should
   be addressed to the working group's mailing list at [email-masked]
   and/or the authors.

Fenner, He, Haberman, Sandick                                   [Page 1]

Internet Draft     draft-ietf-magma-igmp-proxy-01.txt      January, 2003

1. Introduction

   This document applies spanning tree multicast routing[Deering91] to
   an IGMP-only environment.  The topology is limited to a tree, since
   we specify no protocol to build a spanning tree over a more complex
   topology.  The root of the tree is assumed to be connected to a wider
   multicast infrastructure.

1.1. Conventions

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED",  "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [Bradner97].

2. Definitions

2.1. Upstream Interface

   A router's interface in the direction of the root of the tree.  Also
   called the "Host interface".

2.2. Downstream Interface

   Each of a router's interfaces that is not in the direction of the
   root of the tree.  Also called the "Router interfaces".

2.3. Group Mode

   For each multicast group, a group is in IGMPv1 mode if an IGMPv1
   report is heard. A group is in IGMPv2 mode if an IGMPv2 report is
   heard but no IGMPv1 report is heard. A group is in IGMPv3 mode if an
   IGMPv3 is heard but no IGMPv1 or IGMPv2 report is heard.

2.4.  Subscription

   When a group is in IGMPv1 or IGMPv2 mode, the subscription is a group
   membership on an interface.  When a group is in IGMPv3 mode, the
   subscription is an IGMPv3 state entry (i.e. a (multicast address,
   group timer, filter-mode, source-element list) tuple) on an
   interface.

Fenner, He, Haberman, Sandick                                   [Page 2]

Internet Draft     draft-ietf-magma-igmp-proxy-01.txt      January, 2003

2.5.  Membership Database

   The database maintained at each router into which the membership
   information of each of its downstream interfaces is merged.

3.  Abstract protocol definition

   A router performing IGMP-based forwarding has a single upstream
   interface and one or more downstream interfaces.  These designations
   are explicitly configured; there is no protocol to determine what
   type each interface is.  It performs the router portion of the IGMP
   [Deering89, Fenner97, CDFKT02] protocol on its downstream interfaces,
   and the host portion of IGMP on its upstream interface.  The router
   MUST NOT perform the router portion of IGMP on its upstream
   interface.

   The router maintains a database consisting of the merger of all
   subscriptions on any downstream interface. Refer to section 4 for the
   details about the construction and maintenance of the membership
   database.

   The router sends IGMP membership reports on the upstream interface
   when queried, and sends unsolicited reports or leaves when the
   database changes.

   When the router receives a packet destined for a multicast group, it
   uses a list consisting of the upstream interface and any downstream
   interface which has a subscription pertaining to this packet and on
   which it is the IGMP Querier.  This list may be built dynamically or
   cached. It removes the interface on which this packet arrived from
   the list and forwards the packet to the remaining interfaces.

   Note that the rule that a router must be the querier in order to
   forward packets restricts the IP addressing scheme used; in
   particular, the IGMP-based forwarding routers must be given the
   lowest IP addresses of any potential IGMP Querier on the link, in
   order to win the IGMP Querier election.  If another device wins the
   IGMP Querier election, no packets will flow.

   Forwarder election is necessary for links which are considered to be
   downstream links by multiple IGMP-based forwarders. This rule
   "piggy-backs" forwarder election on IGMP Querier election.  On a link
   with only one IGMP-based forwarding router, this rule MAY be disabled
   (i.e. the router MAY be configured to forward packets to an interface
   on which it is not the querier).  However, the default configuration
   MUST include the querier rule.

   Note that this does not protect against an "upstream loop". For

Fenner, He, Haberman, Sandick                                   [Page 3]

Internet Draft     draft-ietf-magma-igmp-proxy-01.txt      January, 2003

   example, as shown in the figure below:

           LAN 1  --------------------------------------
                  Upstream |              | Downstream
                           A              B
                Downstream |              | Upstream
           LAN 2  --------------------------------------

   B will unconditionally forward packets from LAN 1 to LAN 2, and A
   will unconditionally forward packets from LAN 2 to LAN 1.  This will
   cause an upstream loop. A multicast routing protocol which employs a
   tree building algorithm is required to resolve loops like this.

3.1. Topology Restrictions

   This specification describes a protocol that works only in a simple
   tree topology.  The tree must be manually configured by designating
   upstream and downstream interfaces on each router, and the root of
   the tree is expected to be connected to a wider multicast
   infrastructure.

3.2. Supporting Senders

   In order for senders to send from inside the proxy tree, all traffic
   is forwarded towards the root.  The multicast router(s) connected to
   the wider multicast infrastructure should be configured to treat all
   systems inside the proxy tree as though they were directly connected
   -- e.g., for PIM-SM, these routers should Register-encapsulate
   traffic from new sources within the proxy tree just as they would
   directly-connected sources.

   This information is likely to be manually configured; IGMP-based
   multicast forwarding provides no way for the routers upstream of the
   proxy tree to know what networks are connected to the proxy tree.  If
   the proxy topology is congruent with some routing topology, this
   information MAY be learned from the routing protocol running on the
   topology; e.g. a router may be configured to treat multicast packets
   from all prefixes learned from routing protocol X via interface Y as
   though they were from a directly connected system.

4.  Router Behavior

   This section describes an IGMP-based multicast forwarding router's
   actions in more detail.

Fenner, He, Haberman, Sandick                                   [Page 4]

Internet Draft     draft-ietf-magma-igmp-proxy-01.txt      January, 2003

4.1.  Membership Database

   The router performs the router portion of the IGMP protocol on each
   downstream interface.  For each interface, the version of IGMP used
   is explicitly configured and default to the highest version supported
   by the system.

   The output of this protocol is a set of subscriptions; this set is
   maintained separately on each downstream interface.  In addition, the
   subscriptions on each downstream interface are merged into the
   membership database.

   The membership database is a set of membership records of the form:

           (multicast-address, filter-mode, source-list)

   Each record is the result of the merge of all subscriptions for that
   record's multicast-address on downstream interfaces. If some
   subscriptions are IGMPv1 or IGMPv2 subscriptions, these subscriptions
   are converted to IGMPv3 subscriptions. The IGMPv3 and the converted
   subscriptions are first preprocessed to remove the timers in the
   subscriptions, and if the filter mode is EXCLUDE, to remove every
   source whose source timer > 0. Then the preprocessed subscriptions
   are merged using the merging rules for multiple memberships on a
   single interface specified in the IGMPv3 specification[CDFKT02] to
   create the membership record. For example, there are two downstream
   interfaces I1 and I2 that have subscriptions for multicast address G.
   I1 has an IGMPv2 subscription that is (G). I2 has an IGMPv3
   subscription that has membership information (G, INCLUDE, (S1, S2)).
   The I1's subscription is converted to an IGMPv3 subscription that has
   membership information (G, EXCLUDE, NULL). Then the subscriptions are
   preprocessed and merged and final membership record is (G, EXCLUDE,
   NULL).

   The router performs the host portion of the IGMP protocol on upstream
   interface. If there is an IGMPv1 or IGMPv2 querier on upstream
   network, then the router will perform IGMPv1 or IGMPv2 on upstream
   interface accordingly. Otherwise, it will perform IGMPv3.

   If the router performs IGMPv3 on upstream interface, then when the
   composition of the membership database changes, the change in the
   database is reported on the upstream interface as though this router
   were a host performing the action. If the router performs IGMPv1 or
   IGMPv2 on upstream interface, then when the membership records are
   created or deleted, the changes are reported on the upstream
   interface.  All other changes are ignored. When the router reports
   using IGMPv1 or IGMPv2, only the multicast address field in the
   membership record is used.

Fenner, He, Haberman, Sandick                                   [Page 5]

Internet Draft     draft-ietf-magma-igmp-proxy-01.txt      January, 2003

4.2.  Forwarding Packets

   A router forwards packets received on its upstream interface to each
   downstream interface based upon the downstream interface's
   subscriptions and whether or not this router is the IGMP Querier on
   each interface.  A router forwards packets received on any downstream
   interface to the upstream interface, and to each downstream interface
   other than the incoming interface based upon the downstream
   interfaces' subscriptions and whether or not this router is the IGMP
   Querier on each interface.  A router MAY use a forwarding cache in
   order not to make this decision for each packet, but MUST update the
   cache using these rules any time any of the information used to build
   it changes.

4.3. SSM Considerations

   To support Source-Specific Multicast (SSM), the router should be
   compliant with the specification about using IGMPv3 for SSM [HC01].
   Note that the router should be compliant with both the IGMP Host
   Requirement and the IGMP Router Requirement for SSM since it performs
   IGMP Host Portion on upstream interface and IGMP Router Portion on
   each downstream interface.

   An interface can be configured to perform IGMPv1 or IGMPv2. In this
   scenario, the SSM semantic will not be maintained for that interface.
   However, a router that supports this document should ignore those
   IGMPv1 or IGMPv2 subscriptions sent to SSM addresses. And more
   importantly, the packets with source-specific addresses SHOULD not be
   forwarded to interfaces with IGMPv2 or IGMPv1 subscriptions for these
   addresses.

5. Security Considerations

   Since only the Querier forwards packets, the IGMP Querier election
   process may lead to black holes if a non-forwarder is elected
   Querier.  An attacker on a downstream LAN can cause itself to get
   elected Querier resulting in no packets being forwarded.

References

   Bradner97   Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
               Requirement Levels", RFC 2119/BCP 14, Harvard
               University, March 1997.

   CDFKT02     Cain, B., S. Deering, B. Fenner, I. Kouvelas and A.

Fenner, He, Haberman, Sandick                                   [Page 6]

Internet Draft     draft-ietf-magma-igmp-proxy-01.txt      January, 2003

               Thyagarajan, "Internet Group Management Protocol,
               Version 3", RFC XXXX, July 2002.

   Deering91   Deering, S., "Multicast Routing in a Datagram
                   Internetwork", Ph.D. Thesis, Stanford University,
                   December 1991.

   Fenner97    Fenner, W., "Internet Group Management Protocol,
               Version 2", RFC 2236, Xerox PARC, November 1997.

   Deering89   Deering, S., "Host Extensions for IP Multicasting",
               RFC 1112, August 1989.

   HC01        Holbrook, H., and Cain, B., "Using IGMPv3 For Source-
               Specific Multicast", draft-holbrook-idmr-igmpv3-
               ssm-01.txt, March 2001.

Author's  Address:

     William C. Fenner
     AT&T Labs - Research
     75 Willow Rd
     Menlo Park, CA 94025
     Phone: +1 650 330 7893
     Email: [email-masked]

     Haixiang He
     Nortel Networks
     600 Technology Park Drive
     Billerica, MA 01821
     Phone: +1 978 288-7482
     Email: [email-masked]

     Brian Haberman
     Consultant
     Phone: +1 919 949-4828
     Email: [email-masked]

     Hal Sandick
     Sheperd Middle School
     2401 Dakota St.
     Durham, NC 27707
     Email: [email-masked]

Fenner, He, Haberman, Sandick                                   [Page 7]

---

From: Marshall Eubanks <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2002 12:08:25 -0400

I have mirrored this as

http://www.multicasttech.com/papers/draft-ietf-magma-igmp-proxy-01.txt

> EXCLUDE mode are not used for merge. We have clarified them in section

                                  Regards
                                  Marshall Eubanks

T.M. Eubanks
Multicast Technologies, Inc
10301 Democracy Lane, Suite 410
Fairfax, Virginia 22030
Phone : 703-293-9624       Fax     : 703-293-9609
e-mail : [email-masked]
http://www.multicasttech.com

Test your network for multicast :
http://www.multicasttech.com/mt/
  Status of Multicast on the Web  :
  http://www.multicasttech.com/status/index.html

_______________________________________________
magma mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/magma

---

From: Haixiang He <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2002 13:09:34 -0400

Thanks a lot Marshall.

haixiang