<?xml version="1.0" encoding="US-ASCII"?>
<!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd">
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="rfc2629.xslt" ?>
<?rfc strict="yes" ?>
<?rfc toc="yes"?>
<?rfc tocdepth="4"?>
<?rfc symrefs="yes"?>
<?rfc sortrefs="yes" ?>
<?rfc compact="yes" ?>
<?rfc subcompact="no" ?>
<rfc category="std" docName="draft-hb-pim-light-02" ipr="trust200902">
  <front>
    <title abbrev="PIM Light">PIM Light</title>

    <author fullname="Hooman Bidgoli" initials="H" role="editor"
            surname="Bidgoli">
      <organization>Nokia</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street/>

          <city>Ottawa</city>

          <region/>

          <code/>

          <country>Canada</country>
        </postal>

        <phone/>

        <email>hooman.bidgoli@nokia.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Stig" initials="S." surname="Venaas">
      <organization>Cisco System, Inc.</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street/>

          <city>San Jose</city>

          <region/>

          <code/>

          <country>US</country>
        </postal>

        <phone/>

        <email>stig@cisco.com</email>

        <uri/>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Mankamana Mishra" initials="M." surname="Mishra">
      <organization>Cisco System</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street/>

          <city>Milpitas</city>

          <region/>

          <code/>

          <country>USA</country>
        </postal>

        <phone/>

        <facsimile/>

        <email>mankamis@cisco.com</email>

        <uri/>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Zhaohui Zhang" initials="Z." surname="Zhang">
      <organization>Juniper Networks</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street/>

          <city>Boston</city>

          <region/>

          <code/>

          <country>USA</country>
        </postal>

        <phone/>

        <facsimile/>

        <email>zzhang@juniper.com</email>

        <uri/>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Mike" initials="M." surname="McBride">
      <organization>Futurewei Technologies Inc.</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street/>

          <city>Santa Clara</city>

          <region/>

          <code/>

          <country>USA</country>
        </postal>

        <phone/>

        <facsimile/>

        <email>michael.mcbride@futurewei.com</email>

        <uri/>
      </address>
    </author>

    <date day="25" month="July" year="2022"/>

    <abstract>
      <t>This document specifies a new Protocol Independent Multicast
      interface which does not need PIM Hello to accept PIM Join/Prunes or PIM
      Asserts.</t>
    </abstract>
  </front>

  <middle>
    <section title="Introduction">
      <!-- 1 -->

      <t>It might be desirable to create a PIM interface between routers where
      only PIM Join/Prunes packets are triggered over it without having a full
      PIM neighbor discovery. As an example, this type of PIM interface can be
      useful in some scenarios where the multicast state needs to be signaled
      over a network or medium which is not capable of or has no need for
      creating full PIM neighborship between its Peer Routers. These type of
      PIM interfaces are called PIM Light Interfaces (PLI).</t>
    </section>

    <section title="Conventions used in this document">
      <!-- 2 -->

      <t>The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
      "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
      "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14
      <xref target="RFC2119"/> <xref target="RFC8174"/> when, and only when,
      they appear in all capitals, as shown here.</t>

      <section title="Definitions">
        <!-- 2.1 -->

        <t>This draft uses definitions used in <xref target="RFC7761"/></t>
      </section>
    </section>

    <section title="PIM Light Interface">
      <!--  3 -->

      <t>RFC <xref target="RFC7761"/> section 4.3.1 describes the PIM neighbor
      discovery via Hello messages. It also describes that PIM Join/Prune are
      not accepted from a router unless a Hello message has been heard from
      that router.</t>

      <t>In some scenarios it is desired to communicate and build multicast
      states between two directly or non directly attach routers without
      establishing a PIM neighborship. There could be many reasons for this
      desired, but one example is the desired to signal multicast states
      upstream, between two or more PIM Domains via a network or medium that
      is not optimized for PIM or does not require PIM Neighbor establishment.
      An example is a BIER network connecting multiple PIM domains. In these
      BIER networks PIM Join/prune messages are tunneled via bier as per <xref
      target="draft-ietf-bier-pim-signaling"/>.</t>

      <t>A PIM Light Interface (PLI) does ONLY accept Join/Prune messages from
      an unknown PIM router and it accepts it without receiving a PIM Hello
      message form the router. Lack of Hello Messages on a PLI means there is
      no mechanism to learn about the neighboring PIM routers on each
      interface and there is no DR Priority options communicated between
      Routers either. As such the router doesn't create any General-Purpose
      state for neighboring PIM routers and it accepts and installs each Join
      message from upstream routers in its multicast routing table.</t>

      <t>Because of this a PLI needs to be created in very especial cases and
      the application that is using these PLIs should ensure there is no
      multicast duplication of packets. As an example, multiple upstream
      routers sending the same multicast stream to a single downstream
      router.</t>

      <t>As an example, in a BIER domain which is connecting 2 PIM networks a
      PLI can be used between the BIER edge routers. The PLI will be used for
      only multicast states communicated via by transmitting ONLY PIM
      Join/prunes over the BIER domain. In this case to ensure there is no
      multicast stream duplication the PIM routers attached on each side of
      the BIER domain might want to establish PIM Adjacency via <xref
      target="RFC7761"/> to ensure DR selection on the edge of the BIER
      router, while PLI is used in the BIER Domain between BIER edge routers.
      When the Join or Prune message arrives from a PIM domain to the down
      stream BIER edge router, it can be send over the BIER tunnel to the
      upstream BIER edge router. These BIER edge routers have PLI established
      between them hence PIM Join/Prunes can be accepted on these routers to
      build their multicast state. After the multicast states are build the
      traffic will flow as per <xref
      target="draft-ietf-bier-pim-signaling"/></t>

      <t/>

      <section title="PLI Configuration">
        <!-- 3.1 -->

        <t>Since a PLI doesn't require PIM Hello Messages and PIM neighbor
        adjacency is not checked for join/prune messages, there needs to be a
        mechanism to enable PLI on interfaces for security purpose, while on
        some other interfaces this may be enabled automatically. An example of
        the latter is the logical interface for a BIER sub-domain <xref
        target="draft-ietf-bier-pim-signaling"/>.</t>

        <t>If a system explicitly needs a PLI to be configured, then this
        system should not accepts the Join/Prune messages on interfaces that
        the PLI is not configured on, and it should drop these messages on a
        non PLI interface. If the system automatically enables PLI on some
        special interfaces, as an example interfaces facing a BIER domain,
        then it should accept Join/Prune messages on these interfaces
        only.</t>
      </section>
    </section>

    <section title="IANA Considerations">
      <!-- 7 -->

      <t/>
    </section>

    <section title="Security Considerations">
      <!-- 8 -->

      <t/>
    </section>

    <section title="Acknowledgments">
      <!-- 9 -->

      <t/>
    </section>
  </middle>

  <back>
    <references title="Normative References">
      <!-- 10.1 -->

      <reference anchor="RFC2119">
        <front>
          <title>S. Brandner, "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
          Requirement Levels"</title>

          <author>
            <organization/>
          </author>

          <date month="March" year="1997"/>
        </front>
      </reference>

      <reference anchor="RFC8174">
        <front>
          <title>B. Leiba, "ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119
          Key Words"</title>

          <author>
            <organization/>
          </author>

          <date month="May" year="2017"/>
        </front>
      </reference>

      <reference anchor="RFC7761">
        <front>
          <title>B.Fenner, M.Handley, H. Holbrook, I. Kouvelas, R. Parekh,
          Z.Zhang "PIM Sparse Mode"</title>

          <author>
            <organization/>
          </author>

          <date month="March" year="2016"/>
        </front>
      </reference>

      <reference anchor="draft-ietf-bier-pim-signaling">
        <front>
          <title>H.Bidgoli, F.XU, J. Kotalwar, I. Wijnands, M.Mishra, Z.
          Zhang, "PIM Signaling Through BIER Core"</title>

          <author>
            <organization/>
          </author>

          <date month="July" year="2021"/>
        </front>
      </reference>
    </references>

    <references title="Informative References">
      <!-- 10.2 -->

      <reference anchor="RFC8279">
        <front>
          <title>Wijnands, IJ., Rosen, E., Dolganow, A., Przygienda, T. and S.
          Aldrin, "Multicast using Bit Index Explicit Replication"</title>

          <author>
            <organization/>
          </author>

          <date month="October" year="2016"/>
        </front>
      </reference>
    </references>
  </back>
</rfc>
<!-- generated from file C:\Users\hbidgoli\Downloads\draft-ietf-bier-pim-signaling-08.nroff with nroff2xml 0.1.0 by Tomek Mrugalski -->
