PIM Null-Register packing

PIM Null-Registers are sent by the DR periodically for Multicast streams to keep the states active on the RP, as long as the multicast source is alive. As the number of multicast sources increases, the number of PIM Null-Register messages that are sent also increases. This results in more PIM packet processing at the RP and the DR. The control plane policing (COPP), monitors the packets that are processed by the control plane. The high rate at which Null-Registers are received at the RP can lead to COPP drops of Multicast PIM Null-Register messages. This draft proposes a method to efficiently pack multiple PIM Null-Registers (Section 4.4) and Register-Stops (Section 3.2) into a single message as these packets anyway do not contain encapsulated data. The draft also discusses interoperability with PIM routers that do not understand the new packet format.

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 when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.

Rendezvous Point Designated Router

A router (DR) can decide to pack multiple Null-Register messages based on the capability received from the RP as part of the PIM Register-Stop. This ensures compatibility with routers that do not support processing of the new format. The capability information can be indicated by the RP via the PIM Register-Stop message sent to the DR. Thus a DR will switch to the new format only when it learns that the RP is capable of handling the PIM Packed Null-Register messages. Conversely, a DR that does not support the packed format can continue generating the PIM Null-Register as defined in (Section 4.4). To exchange the capability information in the Register-Stop message, the "Reserved" field can be used to indicate this capability in those Register-Stop messages. One bit of the Reserved field is used to indicate the "packing" capability (P bit). The rest of the bits in the "Reserved" field will be retained for future use.

0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |PIM Ver| Type |P| Reserved | Checksum | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Group Address (Encoded-Group format) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Source Address (Encoded-Unicast format) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Figure 1: PIM Register-Stop message with capability option Same as (Section 4.9.4) Capability bit (flag bit 7) used to indicate support for the Packed Null-Register Capability

PIM Packed Null-Register message format includes a count to indicate the number of Null-Register records in the message.

0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |PIM Ver| Type |Subtype| FB | Checksum | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Count | Reserved | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Group Address[1] (Encoded-Group format) | | Source Address[1] (Encoded-Unicast format) | . . . . . . . . . Group Address[N] . | Source Address[N] | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Figure 2: PIM Packed Null-Register message format Same as (Section 4.9.3) The new packed Null-Register Type and SubType values TBD. The number of packed Null-Register records. A record consists of a Group Address and Source Address pair. Same as (Section 4.9.4)

The PIM Packed Register-Stop message includes a count to indicate the number of records that are present in the message.

0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |PIM Ver| Type |Subtype| FB | Checksum | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Count | Reserved | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Group Address[1] (Encoded-Group format) | | Source Address[1] (Encoded-Unicast format) | . . . . . . . . . Group Address[N] . | Source Address[N] | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Figure 3: PIM Packed Register-Stop message format Same as (Section 4.9.4) The new Register Stop Type and SubType values TBD The number of PIM packed Register-Stop records. A record consists of a Group Address and Source Address pair. Same as (Section 4.9.4)

The following combinations exist - DR and RP both support the PIM Packed Null-Register and PIM Packed Register-Stop formats: As specified in , the DR sends PIM Register messages towards the RP when a new source is detected. An RP supporting this specification MUST set the P-bit in the corresponding Register-Stop messages. When a Register-Stop message with the P-bit set is received, the DR SHOULD send PIM Packed Null-Register messages (Section 3) to the RP instead of multiple Register messages with the N-bit set . The RP, after receiving a PIM Packed Null-Register message SHOULD start sending PIM Packed Register-Stop messages (Section 4) to the corresponding DR instead of individual Register-Stop messages. DR supports but RP does not support the PIM Packed Null-Register and PIM Packed Register-Stop formats: As specified in , DR sends PIM Null-Registers towards the RP. After receiving DR's PIM Null-Register message, RP sends a normal Register-Stop without any capability information. DR then sends PIM Null-Registers in the unpacked format . RP supports but DR does not support the PIM Packed Null-Register and PIM Packed Register-Stop formats: As specified in , DR sends the PIM Null-Register towards the RP. After receiving DR's PIM Null-Register message, RP sends a PIM Packed Register-Stop towards the DR that includes capability information. Since DR does not support the new format, it sends PIM Null-Registers in the unpacked format .

In case the network manager disables the packed capability at the RP, the router should not advertise the capability. However, an implementation MAY choose to still parse any packed registers if they are received. This may be particularly useful in the transitional period after the network manager disables it.

The PIM Packed Null-Register format should be enabled only if it is supported by all PIM Anycast RP members in the RP set for the RP address. This consideration applies to PIM Anycast RP with MSDP as well.

Consider a PIM RP router that supports PIM Packed Null-Registers and PIM Packed Register-Stops. When this router downgrades to a software version which does not support PIM Packed Null-Registers and PIM Packed Register-Stops, the DR that sends the PIM Packed Null-Register message will not get a PIM Register-Stop message back from the RP. In such scenarios the DR can send an unpacked PIM Null-Register and check the PIM Register-Stop to see if the capability bit (P-bit) for PIM Packed Null-Register is set or not. If it is not set then the DR will continue sending unpacked PIM Null-Register messages.

When building a PIM Packed Null-Register message or PIM Packed Register-Stop message, a router should include as many records as possible based on the path MTU towards RP, if path MTU discovery is done. Otherwise, the number of records should be limited by the MTU of the outgoing interface.

General Register messages security considerations from apply. As mentioned in , PIM Null-Register messages and Register-Stop messages are forwarded by intermediate routers to their destination using normal IP forwarding. Without data origin authentication, an attacker who is located anywhere in the network may be able to forge a Null-Register or Register-Stop message. We next consider the effect of a forgery of each of these messages. By forging a Register message, an attacker can cause the RP to inject forged traffic onto the shared multicast tree. By forging a Register-Stop message, an attacker can prevent a legitimate DR from registering packets to the RP. This can prevent local hosts on that LAN from sending multicast packets. The above two PIM messages are not changed by intermediate routers and need only be examined by the intended receiver. Thus, these messages can be authenticated end-to-end. Attacks on Register and Register-Stop messages do not apply to a PIM-SSM-only implementation, as these messages are not used in PIM-SSM. There is another case where a spoofed Register-Stop can be sent to make it appear that is from the RP, and that the RP supports this new packed capability when it does not. This can cause Null-Registers to be sent to an RP that doesnt support this packed format. But standard methods to prevent spoofing should take care of this case. For example, uRPF can be used to filter out packets coming from the outside from addresses that belong to routers inside.

This document requires the assignment of Capability bit (P-bit), flag bit 7 in the PIM Register-Stop message. This document requires the assignment of 2 new PIM message types for the PIM Packed Null-Register and PIM Packed Register-Stop.

The authors would like to thank Stig Venaas, Anish Peter, Zheng Zhang and Umesh Dudani for their helpful comments on the draft.