Network Working Group JP. Vasseur
Request for Comments: 5029 S. Previdi
Category: Standards Track Cisco Systems, Inc
September 2007
Definition of an IS-IS Link Attribute Sub-TLV
Vasseur & Previdi Standards Track [Page 1]
RFC 5029 IS-IS Link Attribute September 2007 1. Introduction[IS-IS] specifies the IS-IS protocol (ISO 10589) with extensions to support IPv4 in [RFC1195]. A router advertises one or several Link State Protocol data units that are composed of variable length tuples called TLVs (Type-Length-Value).
1.1 Terminology
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 [RFC2119].
2. Link-Attributes Sub-TLV Format
The link-attribute sub-TLV is carried within the TLV 22 and has a format identical to the sub-TLV format used by the Traffic Engineering Extensions for IS-IS ([RFC3784]): 1 octet of sub-type, 1 octet of length of the value field of the sub-TLV followed by the value field -- in this case, a 16 bit flags field.
Vasseur & Previdi Standards Track [Page 2]
RFC 5029 IS-IS Link Attribute September 2007 3. Interoperability with Routers Not Supporting This CapabilityA router not supporting the link-attribute sub-TLV will just silently ignore this sub-TLV.
4. IANA Considerations
IANA has assigned codepoint 19 for the link-attribute sub-TLV defined in this document and carried within TLV 22.
Value Name Reference
----- ---- ---------
0x1 Local Protection Available [RFC5029]
0x2 Link Excluded from Local Protection [RFC5029]
5. Security Considerations
Any new security issues raised by the procedures in this document depend upon the opportunity for LSPs to be snooped and modified, the ease/difficulty of which has not been altered. As the LSPs may now contain additional information regarding router capabilities, this new information would also become available to an attacker. Specifications based on this mechanism need to describe the security considerations around the disclosure and modification of their information. Note that an integrity mechanism, such as one defined in [RFC3567], should be applied if there is high risk resulting from the modification of capability information.
6. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Mike Shand, Les Ginsberg, and Bill Fenner for their useful comments.
Vasseur & Previdi Standards Track [Page 3]
RFC 5029 IS-IS Link Attribute September 2007 7. References 7.1. Normative References[IS-IS] "Intermediate System to Intermediate System Intra-Domain
7.2. Informative References
[RFC3567] Li, T. and R. Atkinson, "Intermediate System to
Vasseur & Previdi Standards Track [Page 4]
RFC 5029 IS-IS Link Attribute September 2007
Authors' Addresses
Vasseur & Previdi Standards Track [Page 5]
RFC 5029 IS-IS Link Attribute September 2007
Full Copyright Statement