Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) A. Sajassi, Ed. Request for Comments: 7623 S. Salam Category: Standards Track Cisco ISSN: 2070-1721 N. Bitar
Verizon A. Isaac Juniper W. Henderickx Alcatel-Lucent September 2015
Provider Backbone Bridging Combined with Ethernet VPN (PBB-EVPN)
This document discusses how Ethernet Provider Backbone Bridging (PBB) can be combined with Ethernet VPN (EVPN) in order to reduce the number of BGP MAC Advertisement routes by aggregating Customer/Client MAC (C-MAC) addresses via Provider Backbone MAC (B-MAC) address, provide client MAC address mobility using C-MAC aggregation, confine the scope of C-MAC learning to only active flows, offer per-site policies, and avoid C-MAC address flushing on topology changes. The combined solution is referred to as PBB-EVPN.
Status of This Memo
This is an Internet Standards Track document.
This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has received public review and has been approved for publication by the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 5741.
Information about the current status of this document, any errata, and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7623.
Sajassi, et al. Standards Track [Page 1] RFC 7623 PBB-EVPN September 2015
Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction ....................................................3 2. Terminology .....................................................4 3. Requirements ....................................................4 3.1. MAC Advertisement Route Scalability ........................5 3.2. C-MAC Mobility Independent of B-MAC Advertisements .........5 3.3. C-MAC Address Learning and Confinement .....................5 3.4. Per-Site Policy Support ....................................6 3.5. No C-MAC Address Flushing for All-Active Multihoming .......6 4. Solution Overview ...............................................6 5. BGP Encoding ....................................................7 5.1. Ethernet Auto-Discovery Route ..............................7 5.2. MAC/IP Advertisement Route .................................7 5.3. Inclusive Multicast Ethernet Tag Route .....................8 5.4. Ethernet Segment Route .....................................8 5.5. ESI Label Extended Community ...............................8 5.6. ES-Import Route Target .....................................9 5.7. MAC Mobility Extended Community ............................9 5.8. Default Gateway Extended Community .........................9 6. Operation .......................................................9 6.1. MAC Address Distribution over Core .........................9 6.2. Device Multihoming .........................................9 6.2.1. Flow-Based Load-Balancing ...........................9 188.8.131.52. PE B-MAC Address Assignment ...............10 184.108.40.206. Automating B-MAC Address Assignment .......11 220.127.116.11. Split Horizon and Designated Forwarder Election ........................12 6.2.2. Load-Balancing based on I-SID ......................12 18.104.22.168. PE B-MAC Address Assignment ...............12 22.214.171.124. Split Horizon and Designated Forwarder Election ........................13 126.96.36.199. Handling Failure Scenarios ................13
Sajassi, et al. Standards Track [Page 2] RFC 7623 PBB-EVPN September 2015
6.3. Network Multihoming .......................................14 6.4. Frame Forwarding ..........................................14 6.4.1. Unicast ............................................15 6.4.2. Multicast/Broadcast ................................15 6.5. MPLS Encapsulation of PBB Frames ..........................16 7. Minimizing ARP/ND Broadcast ....................................16 8. Seamless Interworking with IEEE 802.1aq / 802.1Qbp .............17 8.1. B-MAC Address Assignment ..................................17 8.2. IEEE 802.1aq / 802.1Qbp B-MAC Address Advertisement .......17 8.3. Operation: ................................................17 9. Solution Advantages ............................................18 9.1. MAC Advertisement Route Scalability .......................18 9.2. C-MAC Mobility Independent of B-MAC Advertisements ........18 9.3. C-MAC Address Learning and Confinement ....................19 9.4. Seamless Interworking with 802.1aq Access Networks ........19 9.5. Per-Site Policy Support ...................................20 9.6. No C-MAC Address Flushing for All-Active Multihoming ......20 10. Security Considerations .......................................20 11. IANA Considerations ...........................................20 12. References ....................................................21 12.1. Normative References .....................................21 12.2. Informative References ...................................21 Acknowledgements ..................................................22 Contributors ......................................................22 Authors' Addresses ................................................23
[RFC7432] introduces a solution for multipoint Layer 2 Virtual Private Network (L2VPN) services, with advanced multihoming capabilities, using BGP for distributing customer/client MAC address reachability information over the core MPLS/IP network. [PBB] defines an architecture for Ethernet Provider Backbone Bridging (PBB), where MAC tunneling is employed to improve service instance and MAC address scalability in Ethernet as well as VPLS networks [RFC7080].
In this document, we discuss how PBB can be combined with EVPN in order to: reduce the number of BGP MAC Advertisement routes by aggregating Customer/Client MAC (C-MAC) addresses via Provider Backbone MAC (B-MAC) address, provide client MAC address mobility using C-MAC aggregation, confine the scope of C-MAC learning to only active flows, offer per-site policies, and avoid C-MAC address flushing on topology changes. The combined solution is referred to as PBB-EVPN.
Sajassi, et al. Standards Track [Page 3] RFC 7623 PBB-EVPN September 2015
ARP: Address Resolution Protocol BEB: Backbone Edge Bridge B-MAC: Backbone MAC B-VID: Backbone VLAN ID CE: Customer Edge C-MAC: Customer/Client MAC ES: Ethernet Segment ESI: Ethernet Segment Identifier EVI: EVPN Instance EVPN: Ethernet VPN I-SID: Service Instance Identifier (24 bits and global within a PBB network see [RFC7080]) LSP: Label Switched Path MP2MP: Multipoint to Multipoint MP2P: Multipoint to Point NA: Neighbor Advertisement ND: Neighbor Discovery P2MP: Point to Multipoint P2P: Point to Point PBB: Provider Backbone Bridge PE: Provider Edge RT: Route Target VPLS: Virtual Private LAN Service
Single-Active Redundancy Mode: When only a single PE, among a group of PEs attached to an Ethernet segment, is allowed to forward traffic to/from that Ethernet segment, then the Ethernet segment is defined to be operating in Single-Active redundancy mode.
All-Active Redundancy Mode: When all PEs attached to an Ethernet segment are allowed to forward traffic to/from that Ethernet segment, then the Ethernet segment is defined to be operating in All-Active redundancy mode.
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 BCP 14 [RFC2119].
The requirements for PBB-EVPN include all the requirements for EVPN that were described in [RFC7209], in addition to the following:
Sajassi, et al. Standards Track [Page 4] RFC 7623 PBB-EVPN September 2015
3.1. MAC Advertisement Route Scalability
In typical operation, an EVPN PE sends a BGP MAC Advertisement route per C-MAC address. In certain applications, this poses scalability challenges, as is the case in data center interconnect (DCI) scenarios where the number of virtual machines (VMs), and hence the number of C-MAC addresses, can be in the millions. In such scenarios, it is required to reduce the number of BGP MAC Advertisement routes by relying on a 'MAC summarization' scheme, as is provided by PBB.
3.2. C-MAC Mobility Independent of B-MAC Advertisements
Certain applications, such as virtual machine mobility, require support for fast C-MAC address mobility. For these applications, when using EVPN, the virtual machine MAC address needs to be transmitted in BGP MAC Advertisement route. Otherwise, traffic would be forwarded to the wrong segment when a virtual machine moves from one ES to another. This means MAC address prefixes cannot be used in data center applications.
In order to support C-MAC address mobility, while retaining the scalability benefits of MAC summarization, PBB technology is used. It defines a B-MAC address space that is independent of the C-MAC address space, and aggregates C-MAC addresses via a single B-MAC address.
3.3. C-MAC Address Learning and Confinement
In EVPN, all the PE nodes participating in the same EVPN instance are exposed to all the C-MAC addresses learned by any one of these PE nodes because a C-MAC learned by one of the PE nodes is advertised in BGP to other PE nodes in that EVPN instance. This is the case even if some of the PE nodes for that EVPN instance are not involved in forwarding traffic to, or from, these C-MAC addresses. Even if an implementation does not install hardware forwarding entries for C-MAC addresses that are not part of active traffic flows on that PE, the device memory is still consumed by keeping record of the C-MAC addresses in the routing information base (RIB) table. In network applications with millions of C-MAC addresses, this introduces a non- trivial waste of PE resources. As such, it is required to confine the scope of visibility of C-MAC addresses to only those PE nodes that are actively involved in forwarding traffic to, or from, these addresses.
Sajassi, et al. Standards Track [Page 5] RFC 7623 PBB-EVPN September 2015
3.4. Per-Site Policy Support
In many applications, it is required to be able to enforce connectivity policy rules at the granularity of a site (or segment). This includes the ability to control which PE nodes in the network can forward traffic to, or from, a given site. Both EVPN and PBB- EVPN are capable of providing this granularity of policy control. In the case where the policy needs to be at the granularity of per C-MAC address, then the C-MAC address should be learned in the control plane (in BGP) per [RFC7432].
3.5. No C-MAC Address Flushing for All-Active Multihoming
Just as in [RFC7432], it is required to avoid C-MAC address flushing upon link, port, or node failure for All-Active multihomed segments.
4. Solution Overview
The solution involves incorporating IEEE Backbone Edge Bridge (BEB) functionality on the EVPN PE nodes similar to PBB-VPLS, where BEB functionality is incorporated in the VPLS PE nodes. The PE devices would then receive 802.1Q Ethernet frames from their attachment circuits, encapsulate them in the PBB header, and forward the frames over the IP/MPLS core. On the egress EVPN PE, the PBB header is removed following the MPLS disposition, and the original 802.1Q Ethernet frame is delivered to the customer equipment.
BEB +--------------+ BEB || | | || \/ | | \/ +----+ AC1 +----+ | | +----+ +----+ | CE1|-----| | | | | |---| CE2| +----+\ | PE1| | IP/MPLS | | PE3| +----+ \ +----+ | Network | +----+ \ | | AC2\ +----+ | | \| | | | | PE2| | | +----+ | | /\ +--------------+ || BEB <-802.1Q-> <------PBB over MPLS------> <-802.1Q->
Figure 1: PBB-EVPN Network
Sajassi, et al. Standards Track [Page 6] RFC 7623 PBB-EVPN September 2015
The PE nodes perform the following functions:
circuits in the data plane, per normal bridge operation.
received from the core per the bridging operation described in
all other PE nodes in the same set of service instances. Note
that every PE has a set of B-MAC addresses that uniquely identifies the device. B-MAC address assignment is described in details in Section 6.2.2.
associating remote B-MAC addresses with remote PE IP addresses and
the associated MPLS label(s).
5. BGP Encoding
PBB-EVPN leverages the same BGP routes and attributes defined in [RFC7432], adapted as described below.
5.1. Ethernet Auto-Discovery Route
This route and all of its associated modes are not needed in PBB-EVPN because PBB encapsulation provides the required level of indirection for C-MAC addresses -- i.e., an ES can be represented by a B-MAC address for the purpose of data-plane learning/forwarding.
The receiving PE knows that it need not wait for the receipt of the Ethernet A-D (auto-discovery) route for route resolution by means of the reserved ESI encoded in the MAC Advertisement route: the ESI values of 0 and MAX-ESI indicate that the receiving PE can resolve the path without an Ethernet A-D route.
5.2. MAC/IP Advertisement Route
The EVPN MAC/IP Advertisement route is used to distribute B-MAC addresses of the PE nodes instead of the C-MAC addresses of end- stations/hosts. This is because the C-MAC addresses are learned in the data plane for traffic arriving from the core. The MAC Advertisement route is encoded as follows:
Sajassi, et al. Standards Track [Page 7] RFC 7623 PBB-EVPN September 2015
single-homed segments or multihomed segments with per-I-SID load-
balancing) or to MAX-ESI (for multihomed segments with per-flow load-balancing). All other values are not permitted.
This route is tagged with the RT corresponding to its EVI. This EVI is analogous to a B-VID.
5.3. Inclusive Multicast Ethernet Tag Route
This route is used for multicast pruning per I-SID. It is used for auto-discovery of PEs participating in a given I-SID so that a multicast tunnel (MP2P, P2P, P2MP, or MP2MP LSP) can be set up for that I-SID. [RFC7080] uses multicast pruning per I-SID based on [MMRP], which is a soft-state protocol. The advantages of multicast pruning using this BGP route over [MMRP] are that a) it scales very well for a large number of PEs and b) it works with any type of LSP (MP2P, P2P, P2MP, or MP2MP); whereas, [MMRP] only works over P2P pseudowires. The Inclusive Multicast Ethernet Tag route is encoded as follows:
This route is tagged with an RT. This RT SHOULD be set to a value corresponding to its EVI (which is analogous to a B-VID). The RT for this route MAY also be auto-derived from the corresponding Ethernet Tag (I-SID) based on the procedure specified in Section 188.8.131.52 of [OVERLAY].
5.4. Ethernet Segment Route
This route is used for auto-discovery of PEs belonging to a given redundancy group (e.g., attached to a given ES) per [RFC7432].
5.5. ESI Label Extended Community
This extended community is not used in PBB-EVPN. In [RFC7432], this extended community is used along with the Ethernet A-D route to advertise an MPLS label for the purpose of split-horizon filtering. Since in PBB-EVPN, the split-horizon filtering is performed natively using B-MAC source address, there is no need for this extended community.
Sajassi, et al. Standards Track [Page 8] RFC 7623 PBB-EVPN September 2015
5.6. ES-Import Route Target
This RT is used as defined in [RFC7432].
5.7. MAC Mobility Extended Community
This extended community is defined in [RFC7432] and it is used with a MAC route (B-MAC route in case of PBB-EVPN). The B-MAC route is tagged with the RT corresponding to its EVI (which is analogous to a B-VID). When this extended community is used along with a B-MAC route in PBB-EVPN, it indicates that all C-MAC addresses associated with that B-MAC address across all corresponding I-SIDs must be flushed.
When a PE first advertises a B-MAC, it MAY advertise it with this extended community where the sticky/static flag is set to 1 and the sequence number is set to zero. In such cases where the PE wants to signal the stickiness of a B-MAC, then when a flush indication is needed, the PE advertises the B-MAC along with the MAC Mobility extended community where the sticky/static flag remains set and the sequence number is incremented.
5.8. Default Gateway Extended Community
This extended community is not used in PBB-EVPN.
This section discusses the operation of PBB-EVPN, specifically in areas where it differs from [RFC7432].
6.1. MAC Address Distribution over Core
In PBB-EVPN, host MAC addresses (i.e., C-MAC addresses) need not be distributed in BGP. Rather, every PE independently learns the C-MAC addresses in the data plane via normal bridging operation. Every PE has a set of one or more unicast B-MAC addresses associated with it, and those are the addresses distributed over the core in MAC Advertisement routes.
6.2. Device Multihoming
6.2.1. Flow-Based Load-Balancing
This section describes the procedures for supporting device multihoming in an All-Active redundancy mode (i.e., flow-based load- balancing).
Sajassi, et al. Standards Track [Page 9] RFC 7623 PBB-EVPN September 2015
184.108.40.206. PE B-MAC Address Assignment
In [PBB], every BEB is uniquely identified by one or more B-MAC addresses. These addresses are usually locally administered by the service provider. For PBB-EVPN, the choice of B-MAC address(es) for the PE nodes must be examined carefully as it has implications on the proper operation of multihoming. In particular, for the scenario where a CE is multihomed to a number of PE nodes with All-Active redundancy mode, a given C-MAC address would be reachable via multiple PE nodes concurrently. Given that any given remote PE will bind the C-MAC address to a single B-MAC address, then the various PE nodes connected to the same CE must share the same B-MAC address. Otherwise, the MAC address table of the remote PE nodes will keep oscillating between the B-MAC addresses of the various PE devices. For example, consider the network of Figure 1, and assume that PE1 has B-MAC address BM1 and PE2 has B-MAC address BM2. Also, assume that both links from CE1 to the PE nodes are part of the same Ethernet link aggregation group. If BM1 is not equal to BM2, the consequence is that the MAC address table on PE3 will keep oscillating such that the C-MAC address M1 of CE1 would flip-flop between BM1 or BM2, depending on the load-balancing decision on CE1 for traffic destined to the core.
Considering that there could be multiple sites (e.g., CEs) that are multihomed to the same set of PE nodes, then it is required for all the PE devices in a redundancy group to have a unique B-MAC address per site. This way, it is possible to achieve fast convergence in the case where a link or port failure impacts the attachment circuit connecting a single site to a given PE.
+---------+ +-------+ PE1 | IP/MPLS | / | | CE1 | Network | PEr M1 \ | | +-------+ PE2 | | /-------+ | | / | | CE2 | | M2 \ | | \ | | +------+ PE3 +---------+
Figure 2: B-MAC Address Assignment
In the example network shown in Figure 2 above, two sites corresponding to CE1 and CE2 are dual-homed to PE1/PE2 and PE2/PE3, respectively. Assume that BM1 is the B-MAC used for the site
Sajassi, et al. Standards Track [Page 10] RFC 7623 PBB-EVPN September 2015
corresponding to CE1. Similarly, BM2 is the B-MAC used for the site corresponding to CE2. On PE1, a single B-MAC address (BM1) is required for the site corresponding to CE1. On PE2, two B-MAC addresses (BM1 and BM2) are required, one per site. Whereas on PE3, a single B-MAC address (BM2) is required for the site corresponding to CE2. All three PE nodes would advertise their respective B-MAC addresses in BGP using the MAC Advertisement routes defined in [RFC7432]. The remote PE, PEr, would learn via BGP that BM1 is reachable via PE1 and PE2, whereas BM2 is reachable via both PE2 and PE3. Furthermore, PEr establishes, via the PBB bridge learning procedure, that C-MAC M1 is reachable via BM1, and C-MAC M2 is reachable via BM2. As a result, PEr can load-balance traffic destined to M1 between PE1 and PE2, as well as traffic destined to M2 between both PE2 and PE3. In the case of a failure that causes, for example, CE1 to be isolated from PE1, the latter can withdraw the route it has advertised for BM1. This way, PEr would update its path list for BM1 and will send all traffic destined to M1 over to PE2 only.
220.127.116.11. Automating B-MAC Address Assignment
The PE B-MAC address used for single-homed or Single-Active sites can be automatically derived from the hardware (using for example the backplane's address and/or PE's reserved MAC pool ). However, the B-MAC address used for All-Active sites must be coordinated among the redundancy group members. To automate the assignment of this latter address, the PE can derive this B-MAC address from the MAC address portion of the CE's Link Aggregation Control Protocol (LACP) System Identifier by flipping the 'Locally Administered' bit of the CE's address. This guarantees the uniqueness of the B-MAC address within the network, and ensures that all PE nodes connected to the same All- Active CE use the same value for the B-MAC address.
Note that with this automatic provisioning of the B-MAC address associated with All-Active CEs, it is not possible to support the uncommon scenario where a CE has multiple link bundles within the same LACP session towards the PE nodes, and the service involves hair-pinning traffic from one bundle to another. This is because the split-horizon filtering relies on B-MAC addresses rather than Site-ID Labels (as will be described in the next section). The operator must explicitly configure the B-MAC address for this fairly uncommon service scenario.
Whenever a B-MAC address is provisioned on the PE, either manually or automatically (as an outcome of CE auto-discovery), the PE MUST transmit a MAC Advertisement route for the B-MAC address with a downstream assigned MPLS label that uniquely identifies that address
Sajassi, et al. Standards Track [Page 11] RFC 7623 PBB-EVPN September 2015
on the advertising PE. The route is tagged with the RTs of the associated EVIs as described above.
18.104.22.168. Split Horizon and Designated Forwarder Election
[RFC7432] relies on split-horizon filtering for a multi-homed ES, where the ES label is used for egress filtering on the attachment circuit in order to prevent forwarding loops. In PBB-EVPN, the B-MAC source address can be used for the same purpose, as it uniquely identifies the originating site of a given frame. As such, ES labels are not used in PBB-EVPN, and the egress split-horizon filtering is done based on the B-MAC source address. It is worth noting here that [PBB] defines this B-MAC address-based filtering function as part of the I-Component options; hence, no new functions are required to support split-horizon filtering beyond what is already defined in [PBB].
The Designated Forwarder (DF) election procedures are defined in [RFC7432].
6.2.2. Load-Balancing based on I-SID
This section describes the procedures for supporting device multihoming in a Single-Active redundancy mode with per-I-SID load- balancing.
22.214.171.124. PE B-MAC Address Assignment
In the case where per-I-SID load-balancing is desired among the PE nodes in a given redundancy group, multiple unicast B-MAC addresses are allocated per multihomed ES: Each PE connected to the multihomed segment is assigned a unique B-MAC. Every PE then advertises its B-MAC address using the BGP MAC Advertisement route. In this mode of operation, two B-MAC address-assignment models are possible:
segments and/or all its multi-homed Single-Active segments (e.g.,
segments operating in per-I-SID load-balancing mode).
with per-I-SID load-balancing mode.
A PE implementation MAY choose to support either the shared B-MAC address model or the dedicated B-MAC address model without causing any interoperability issues. The advantage of the dedicated B-MAC over the shared B-MAC address for multi-homed Single-Active segments, is that when C-MAC flushing is needed, fewer C-MAC addresses are impacted. Furthermore, it gives the disposition PE the ability to
Sajassi, et al. Standards Track [Page 12] RFC 7623 PBB-EVPN September 2015
avoid C-MAC destination address lookup even though source C-MAC learning is still required in the data plane. Its disadvantage is that there are additional B-MAC advertisements in BGP.
A remote PE initially floods traffic to a destination C-MAC address, located in a given multihomed ES, to all the PE nodes configured with that I-SID. Then, when reply traffic arrives at the remote PE, it learns (in the data path) the B-MAC address and associated next-hop PE to use for said C-MAC address.
126.96.36.199. Split Horizon and Designated Forwarder Election
The procedures are similar to the flow-based load-balancing case, with the only difference being that the DF filtering must be applied to unicast as well as multicast traffic, and in both core-to-segment as well as segment-to-core directions.
188.8.131.52. Handling Failure Scenarios
When a PE connected to a multihomed ES loses connectivity to the segment, due to link or port failure, it needs to notify the remote PEs to trigger C-MAC address flushing. This can be achieved in one of two ways, depending on the B-MAC assignment model:
segments, then the C-MAC flushing is signaled by means of having
the failed PE re-advertise the MAC Advertisement route for the associated B-MAC, tagged with the MAC Mobility extended community attribute. The value of the Counter field in that attribute must be incremented prior to advertisement. This causes the remote PE nodes to flush all C-MAC addresses associated with the B-MAC in question. This is done across all I-SIDs that are mapped to the EVI of the withdrawn MAC route.
under per-I-SID load-balancing mode, the failed PE simply
withdraws the B-MAC route previously advertised for that segment. This causes the remote PE nodes to flush all C-MAC addresses associated with the B-MAC in question. This is done across all I-SIDs that are mapped to the EVI of the withdrawn MAC route.
When a PE connected to a multihomed ES fails (i.e., node failure) or when the PE becomes completely isolated from the EVPN network, the remote PEs will start purging the MAC Advertisement routes that were advertised by the failed PE. This is done either as an outcome of the remote PEs detecting that the BGP session to the failed PE has gone down, or by having a Route Reflector withdrawing all the routes that were advertised by the failed PE. The remote PEs, in this case,
Sajassi, et al. Standards Track [Page 13] RFC 7623 PBB-EVPN September 2015
will perform C-MAC address flushing as an outcome of the MAC Advertisement route withdrawals.
For all failure scenarios (link/port failure, node failure, and PE node isolation), when the fault condition clears, the recovered PE re-advertises the associated ES route to other members of its redundancy group. This triggers the backup PE(s) in the redundancy group to block the I-SIDs for which the recovered PE is a DF. When a backup PE blocks the I-SIDs, it triggers a C-MAC address flush notification to the remote PEs by re-advertising the MAC Advertisement route for the associated B-MAC, with the MAC Mobility extended community attribute. The value of the Counter field in that attribute must be incremented prior to advertisement. This causes the remote PE nodes to flush all C-MAC addresses associated with the B-MAC in question. This is done across all I-SIDs that are mapped to the EVI of the withdrawn/re-advertised MAC route.
6.3. Network Multihoming
When an Ethernet network is multihomed to a set of PE nodes running PBB-EVPN, Single-Active redundancy model can be supported with per- service instance (i.e., I-SID) load-balancing. In this model, DF election is performed to ensure that a single PE node in the redundancy group is responsible for forwarding traffic associated with a given I-SID. This guarantees that no forwarding loops are created. Filtering based on DF state applies to both unicast and multicast traffic, and in both access-to-core as well as core-to- access directions just like a Single-Active multihomed device scenario (but unlike an All-Active multihomed device scenario where DF filtering is limited to multi-destination frames in the core-to- access direction). Similar to a Single-Active multihomed device scenario, with load-balancing based on I-SID, a unique B-MAC address is assigned to each of the PE nodes connected to the multihomed network (segment).
6.4. Frame Forwarding
The frame-forwarding functions are divided in between the Bridge Module, which hosts the [PBB] BEB functionality, and the MPLS Forwarder which handles the MPLS imposition/disposition. The details of frame forwarding for unicast and multi-destination frames are discussed next.
Sajassi, et al. Standards Track [Page 14] RFC 7623 PBB-EVPN September 2015
Known unicast traffic received from the Attachment Circuit (AC) will be PBB-encapsulated by the PE using the B-MAC source address corresponding to the originating site. The unicast B-MAC destination address is determined based on a lookup of the C-MAC destination address (the binding of the two is done via transparent learning of reverse traffic). The resulting frame is then encapsulated with an LSP tunnel label and an EVPN label associated with the B-MAC destination address. If per flow load-balancing over ECMPs in the MPLS core is required, then a flow label is added below the label associated with the B-MAC address in the label stack.
For unknown unicast traffic, the PE forwards these frames over the MPLS core. When these frames are to be forwarded, then the same set of options used for forwarding multicast/broadcast frames (as described in next section) are used.
Multi-destination frames received from the AC will be PBB- encapsulated by the PE using the B-MAC source address corresponding to the originating site. The multicast B-MAC destination address is selected based on the value of the I-SID as defined in [PBB]. The resulting frame is then forwarded over the MPLS core using one of the following two options:
Option 1: the MPLS Forwarder can perform ingress replication over a set of MP2P or P2P tunnel LSPs. The frame is encapsulated with a tunnel LSP label and the EVPN ingress replication label advertised in the Inclusive Multicast Ethernet Tag [RFC7432].
Option 2: the MPLS Forwarder can use P2MP tunnel LSP per the procedures defined in [RFC7432]. This includes either the use of Inclusive or Aggregate Inclusive trees. Furthermore, the MPLS Forwarder can use MP2MP tunnel LSP if Inclusive trees are used.
Note that the same procedures for advertising and handling the Inclusive Multicast Ethernet Tag defined in [RFC7432] apply here.
Sajassi, et al. Standards Track [Page 15] RFC 7623 PBB-EVPN September 2015
6.5. MPLS Encapsulation of PBB Frames
The encapsulation for the transport of PBB frames over MPLS is similar to that of classical Ethernet, albeit with the additional PBB header, as shown in the figure below:
+------------------+ | IP/MPLS Header | +------------------+ | PBB Header | +------------------+ | Ethernet Header | +------------------+ | Ethernet Payload | +------------------+ | Ethernet FCS | +------------------+
Figure 3: PBB over MPLS Encapsulation
7. Minimizing ARP/ND Broadcast
The PE nodes MAY implement an ARP/ND-proxy function in order to minimize the volume of ARP/ND traffic that is broadcasted over the MPLS network. In case of ARP proxy, this is achieved by having each PE node snoop on ARP request and response messages received over the access interfaces or the MPLS core. The PE builds a cache of IP/MAC address bindings from these snooped messages. The PE then uses this cache to respond to ARP requests ingress on access ports and target hosts that are in remote sites. If the PE finds a match for the IP address in its ARP cache, it responds back to the requesting host and drops the request. Otherwise, if it does not find a match, then the request is flooded over the MPLS network using either ingress replication or P2MP LSPs. In case of ND proxy, this is achieved similar to the above but with ND/NA messages per [RFC4389].
Sajassi, et al. Standards Track [Page 16] RFC 7623 PBB-EVPN September 2015
8. Seamless Interworking with IEEE 802.1aq / 802.1Qbp
+--------------+ | | +---------+ | MPLS | +---------+ +----+ | | +----+ +----+ | | +----+ |SW1 |--| | | PE1| | PE2| | |--| SW3| +----+ | 802.1aq |---| | | |--| 802.1aq | +----+ +----+ | .1Qbp | +----+ +----+ | .1Qbp | +----+ |SW2 |--| | | Backbone | | |--| SW4| +----+ +---------+ +--------------+ +---------+ +----+
|<------ IS-IS -------->|<-----BGP----->|<------ IS-IS ------>| CP
|<------------------------- PBB -------------------------->| DP |<----MPLS----->|
Legend: CP = Control-Plane View DP = Data-Plane View
Figure 4: Interconnecting 802.1aq / 802.1Qbp Networks with PBB-EVPN
8.1. B-MAC Address Assignment
The B-MAC addresses need to be globally unique across all networks including PBB-EVPN and IEEE 802.1aq / 802.1Qbp networks. The B-MAC addresses used for single-homed and Single-Active Ethernet segments should be unique because they are typically auto-derived from the PE's pools of reserved MAC addresses that are unique. The B-MAC addresses used for All-Active Ethernet segments should also be unique given that each network operator typically has its own assigned Organizationally Unique Identifier (OUI) and thus can assign its own unique MAC addresses.
8.2. IEEE 802.1aq / 802.1Qbp B-MAC Address Advertisement
B-MAC addresses associated with 802.1aq / 802.1Qbp switches are advertised using the EVPN MAC/IP route advertisement already defined in [RFC7432].
When a PE receives a PBB-encapsulated Ethernet frame from the access side, it performs a lookup on the B-MAC destination address to identify the next hop. If the lookup yields that the next hop is a remote PE, the local PE would then encapsulate the PBB frame in MPLS. The label stack comprises of the VPN label (advertised by the remote
Sajassi, et al. Standards Track [Page 17] RFC 7623 PBB-EVPN September 2015
PE), followed by an LSP/IGP label. From that point onwards, regular MPLS forwarding is applied.
On the disposition PE, assuming penultimate-hop-popping is employed, the PE receives the MPLS-encapsulated PBB frame with a single label: the VPN label. The value of the label indicates to the disposition PE that this is a PBB frame, so the label is popped, the TTL field (in the 802.1Qbp F-Tag) is reinitialized, and normal PBB processing is employed from this point onwards.
9. Solution Advantages
In this section, we discuss the advantages of the PBB-EVPN solution in the context of the requirements set forth in Section 3.
9.1. MAC Advertisement Route Scalability
In PBB-EVPN, the number of MAC Advertisement routes is a function of the number of Ethernet segments (e.g., sites) rather than the number of hosts/servers. This is because the B-MAC addresses of the PEs, rather than C-MAC addresses (of hosts/servers), are being advertised in BGP. As discussed above, there's a one-to-one mapping between All-Active multihomed segments and their associated B-MAC addresses; there can be either a one-to-one or many-to-one mapping between Single-Active multihomed segments and their associated B-MAC addresses; and finally there is a many-to-one mapping between single- home sites and their associated B-MAC addresses on a given PE. This means a single B-MAC is associated with one or more segments where each segment can be associated with many C-MAC addresses. As a result, the volume of MAC Advertisement routes in PBB-EVPN may be multiple orders of magnitude less than EVPN.
9.2. C-MAC Mobility Independent of B-MAC Advertisements
As described above, in PBB-EVPN, a single B-MAC address can aggregate many C-MAC addresses. Given that B-MAC addresses are associated with segments attached to a PE or to the PE itself, their locations are fixed and thus not impacted what so ever by C-MAC mobility. Therefore, C-MAC mobility does not affect B-MAC addresses (e.g., any re-advertisements of them). This is because the association of C-MAC address to B-MAC address is learned in the data-plane and C-MAC addresses are not advertised in BGP. Aggregation via B-MAC addresses in PBB-EVPN performs much better than EVPN.
Sajassi, et al. Standards Track [Page 18] RFC 7623 PBB-EVPN September 2015
To illustrate how this compares to EVPN, consider the following example:
If a PE running EVPN advertises reachability for N MAC addresses via a particular segment, and then 50% of the MAC addresses in that segment move to other segments (e.g., due to virtual machine mobility), then N/2 additional MAC Advertisement routes need to be sent for the MAC addresses that have moved. With PBB-EVPN, on the other hand, the B-MAC addresses that are statically associated with PE nodes are not subject to mobility. As C-MAC addresses move from one segment to another, the binding of C-MAC to B-MAC addresses is updated via data-plane learning in PBB-EVPN.
9.3. C-MAC Address Learning and Confinement
In PBB-EVPN, C-MAC address reachability information is built via data-plane learning. As such, PE nodes not participating in active conversations involving a particular C-MAC address will purge that address from their forwarding tables. Furthermore, since C-MAC addresses are not distributed in BGP, PE nodes will not maintain any record of them in the control-plane routing table.
9.4. Seamless Interworking with 802.1aq Access Networks
Consider the scenario where two access networks, one running MPLS and the other running 802.1aq, are interconnected via an MPLS backbone network. The figure below shows such an example network.
+--------------+ | | +---------+ | MPLS | +---------+ +----+ | | +----+ +----+ | | +----+ | CE |--| | | PE1| | PE2| | |--| CE | +----+ | 802.1aq |---| | | |--| MPLS | +----+ +----+ | | +----+ +----+ | | +----+ | CE |--| | | Backbone | | |--| CE | +----+ +---------+ +--------------+ +---------+ +----+
Figure 5: Interoperability with 802.1aq
If the MPLS backbone network employs EVPN, then the 802.1aq data- plane encapsulation must be terminated on PE1 or the edge device connecting to PE1. Either way, all the PE nodes that are part of the associated service instances will be exposed to all the C-MAC addresses of all hosts/servers connected to the access networks. However, if the MPLS backbone network employs PBB-EVPN, then the 802.1aq encapsulation can be extended over the MPLS backbone, thereby maintaining C-MAC address transparency on PE1. If PBB-EVPN is also
Sajassi, et al. Standards Track [Page 19] RFC 7623 PBB-EVPN September 2015
extended over the MPLS access network on the right, then C-MAC addresses would be transparent to PE2 as well.
9.5. Per-Site Policy Support
In PBB-EVPN, the per-site policy can be supported via B-MAC addresses via assigning a unique B-MAC address for every site/segment (typically multihomed but can also be single-homed). Given that the B-MAC addresses are sent in BGP MAC/IP route advertisement, it is possible to define per-site (i.e., B-MAC) forwarding policies including policies for E-TREE service.
9.6. No C-MAC Address Flushing for All-Active Multihoming
Just as in [RFC7432], with PBB-EVPN, it is possible to avoid C-MAC address flushing upon topology change affecting an All-Active multihomed segment. To illustrate this, consider the example network of Figure 1. Both PE1 and PE2 advertise the same B-MAC address (BM1) to PE3. PE3 then learns the C-MAC addresses of the servers/hosts behind CE1 via data-plane learning. If AC1 fails, then PE3 does not need to flush any of the C-MAC addresses learned and associated with BM1. This is because PE1 will withdraw the MAC Advertisement routes associated with BM1, thereby leading PE3 to have a single adjacency (to PE2) for this B-MAC address. Therefore, the topology change is communicated to PE3 and no C-MAC address flushing is required.
10. Security Considerations
All the security considerations in [RFC7432] apply directly to this document because this document leverages the control plane described in [RFC7432] and their associated procedures -- although not the complete set but rather a subset.
This document does not introduce any new security considerations beyond that of [RFC7432] and [RFC4761] because advertisements and processing of B-MAC addresses follow that of [RFC7432] and processing of C-MAC addresses follow that of [RFC4761] -- i.e, B-MAC addresses are learned in the control plane and C-MAC addresses are learned in data plane.
11. IANA Considerations
There are no additional IANA considerations for PBB-EVPN beyond what is already described in [RFC7432].
Sajassi, et al. Standards Track [Page 20] RFC 7623 PBB-EVPN September 2015
12.1. Normative References
[PBB] IEEE, "IEEE Standard for Local and metropolitan area networks - Media Access Control (MAC) Bridges and Virtual Bridged Local Area Networks", Clauses 25 and 26, IEEE Std 802.1Q, DOI 10.1109/IEEESTD.2011.6009146.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC7432] Sajassi, A., Ed., Aggarwal, R., Bitar, N., Isaac, A., Uttaro, J., Drake, J., and W. Henderickx, "BGP MPLS-Based Ethernet VPN", RFC 7432, DOI 10.17487/RFC7432, February 2015, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7432>.
12.2. Informative References
[MMRP] IEEE, "IEEE Standard for Local and metropolitan area networks - Media Access Control (MAC) Bridges and Virtual Bridged Local Area Networks", Clause 10, IEEE Std 802.1Q, DOI 10.1109/IEEESTD.2011.6009146.
[OVERLAY] Sajassi, A., Ed., Drake, J., Ed., Bitar, N., Isaac, A., Uttaro, J., Henderickx, W., Shekhar, R., Salam, S., Patel, K., Rao, D., and S. Thoria, "A Network Virtualization Overlay Solution using EVPN", draft-ietf-bess-evpn-overlay-01, February 2015.
[RFC4389] Thaler, D., Talwar, M., and C. Patel, "Neighbor Discovery Proxies (ND Proxy)", RFC 4389, DOI 10.17487/RFC4389, April 2006, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4389>.
[RFC4761] Kompella, K., Ed., and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "Virtual Private LAN Service (VPLS) Using BGP for Auto-Discovery and Signaling", RFC 4761, DOI 10.17487/RFC4761, January 2007, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4761>.
[RFC7080] Sajassi, A., Salam, S., Bitar, N., and F. Balus, "Virtual Private LAN Service (VPLS) Interoperability with Provider Backbone Bridges", RFC 7080, DOI 10.17487/RFC7080, December 2013, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7080>.
Sajassi, et al. Standards Track [Page 21] RFC 7623 PBB-EVPN September 2015
[RFC7209] Sajassi, A., Aggarwal, R., Uttaro, J., Bitar, N., Henderickx, W., and A. Isaac, "Requirements for Ethernet VPN (EVPN)", RFC 7209, DOI 10.17487/RFC7209, May 2014, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7209>.
The authors would like to thank Jose Liste and Patrice Brissette for their reviews and comments of this document. We would also like to thank Giles Heron for several rounds of reviews and providing valuable inputs to get this document ready for IESG submission.
In addition to the authors listed, the following individuals also contributed to this document.
Lizhong Jin, ZTE Sami Boutros, Cisco Dennis Cai, Cisco Keyur Patel, Cisco Sam Aldrin, Huawei Himanshu Shah, Ciena Jorge Rabadan, ALU
Sajassi, et al. Standards Track [Page 22] RFC 7623 PBB-EVPN September 2015
Ali Sajassi, editor Cisco 170 West Tasman Drive San Jose, CA 95134 United States Email: email@example.com
Samer Salam Cisco 595 Burrard Street, Suite # 2123 Vancouver, BC V7X 1J1 Canada Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
Nabil Bitar Verizon Communications Email: email@example.com
Aldrin Isaac Juniper Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
Wim Henderickx Alcatel-Lucent Email: email@example.com
Sajassi, et al. Standards Track [Page 23]