Internet Engineering Task Force M. Jethanandani, Ed. Internet-Draft D. Yeung, Ed. Intended status: Standards Track A. Lindem, Ed. Expires: 7 August 2026 Arrcus, Inc R. Rahman, Ed. N. Strina Equinix, Inc 3 February 2026 Advertising IGP Measurement Group using TLV draft-admnr-lsr-igp-measurement-group-00 Abstract This document defines an IS-IS capability sub-TLV for advertising measurement group membership for Active Measurement Protocols (AMPs) such as TWAMP and STAMP. The mechanism allows IGP routers to discover other routers participating in different measurement groups, enabling automatic discovery of measurement endpoints across IGP areas. The solution uses interface addresses (IPv4 or IPv6) to identify measurement group membership, where the same interface address may be used for multiple measurement groups. Status of This Memo This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 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." This Internet-Draft will expire on 7 August 2026. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2026 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. Jethanandani, et al. Expires 7 August 2026 [Page 1] Internet-Draft IGP Measurement Group February 2026 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://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 Revised BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License. Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Use Case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. IS-IS Active Measurement Protocol Measurement Group Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3.1. Protocol Flags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4. Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5.1. IS-IS Router Capability TLV Sub-TLVs . . . . . . . . . . 6 5.2. AMP Measurement Group Protocol Flags Registry . . . . . . 6 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 1. Introduction In network deployments, different IGP routers may participate in different measurement groups for various purposes. For example, one measurement group may be used for TWAMP (Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol), another for STAMP (Simple Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol), and yet another for other measurement or operational purposes. To enable automatic discovery and configuration of these measurement groups, there is a need for IGP routers to discover which other routers are participating in which measurement groups. This discovery mechanism must work whether the participating routers are in the same IGP area or not, which implies that the information must be leakable across area boundaries. This document defines an IS-IS capability sub-TLV, similar to the seamless BFD discriminators mechanism defined in [RFC7883], that allows routers to advertise their measurement group membership. The mechanism uses interface addresses (IPv4 or IPv6) to identify Jethanandani, et al. Expires 7 August 2026 [Page 2] Internet-Draft IGP Measurement Group February 2026 measurement group membership, where the interface address may be associated with either a physical interface or a loopback interface. The same interface address may be used to indicate membership in multiple measurement groups. 1.1. Requirements Language 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 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here. 2. Use Case At a high level, different IGP routers participate in different measurement groups. For example, measurement group A may be used for TWAMP, measurement group B for STAMP, and measurement group C for another purpose. The requirements for measurement group discovery are: * IGP routers MUST be able to discover which routers are participating in which measurement groups. * Discovery MUST work whether participating routers are in the same IGP area or not, which implies that the information MUST be leakable across area boundaries. * An interface address (IPv4 or IPv6) is used to identify the membership of a particular measurement group. * The interface address MAY be associated with either a physical interface or a loopback interface. * The same interface address MAY be used for multiple measurement groups. Since loopback support is required, and there is no adjacency created over loopback interfaces to carry Adjacency Segment Identifier (ASLA) information, the solution uses an IS-IS capability sub-TLV similar to seamless BFD discriminators [RFC7883]. This approach allows the advertisement of measurement group membership information in the Router Capability TLV, which is propagated across area boundaries. Jethanandani, et al. Expires 7 August 2026 [Page 3] Internet-Draft IGP Measurement Group February 2026 3. IS-IS Active Measurement Protocol Measurement Group Sub-TLV This document defines a new IS-IS capability sub-TLV for advertising Active Measurement Protocol (AMP) measurement group membership. The sub-TLV is carried in the IS-IS Router Capability TLV (TLV 242) as defined in [RFC7981]. The Active Measurement Protocol Measurement Group sub-TLV has the following format: 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type | Length | Protocol Flags| Reserved | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | | IPv4 or IPv6 Host Address (4 or 16 octets) | | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Figure 1: AMP Measurement Group Sub-TLV Format Fields: Type: TBD (to be assigned by IANA) Length: 1 octet. The length of the value field in octets. For IPv4 addresses, the length MUST be 6. For IPv6 addresses, the length MUST be 18. Protocol Flags: 1 octet. A bit field indicating which Active Measurement Protocols are supported on this endpoint. Bit definitions are specified in Section 3.1. Reserved: 1 octet. MUST be set to zero on transmission and MUST be ignored on receipt. IPv4 or IPv6 Host Address: 4 octets for IPv4 or 16 octets for IPv6. The interface address (IPv4 or IPv6) that identifies this endpoint's membership in the measurement groups indicated by the Protocol Flags field. This address MAY be associated with a physical interface or a loopback interface. Jethanandani, et al. Expires 7 August 2026 [Page 4] Internet-Draft IGP Measurement Group February 2026 Multiple instances of this sub-TLV MAY be included in the Router Capability TLV to advertise multiple endpoints, each potentially supporting different combinations of Active Measurement Protocols. 3.1. Protocol Flags The Protocol Flags field is an 8-bit field where each bit indicates support for a specific Active Measurement Protocol. The bit assignments are as follows: +=====+==========+===============================+ | Bit | Protocol | Reference | +=====+==========+===============================+ | 0 | TWAMP | [RFC5357] | +-----+----------+-------------------------------+ | 1 | STAMP | [RFC8762] | +-----+----------+-------------------------------+ | 2-7 | Reserved | For future assignment by IANA | +-----+----------+-------------------------------+ Table 1 Bits are numbered from 0 (most significant bit) to 7 (least significant bit). A bit value of 1 indicates that the endpoint supports the corresponding protocol for the measurement group identified by the Host Address. A bit value of 0 indicates that the endpoint does not support that protocol. Multiple bits MAY be set to indicate that the endpoint supports multiple protocols, meaning the same interface address is used for multiple measurement groups. 4. Operations A router that participates in one or more Active Measurement Protocol measurement groups MUST advertise the AMP Measurement Group sub-TLV in its Router Capability TLV. For each endpoint (interface address) that participates in measurement groups, the router MUST include one instance of the sub-TLV with the appropriate Protocol Flags bits set. If an endpoint supports multiple protocols (e.g., both TWAMP and STAMP), the router MAY either: * Include a single sub-TLV instance with multiple Protocol Flags bits set, or * Include multiple sub-TLV instances, each with a single Protocol Flags bit set. Jethanandani, et al. Expires 7 August 2026 [Page 5] Internet-Draft IGP Measurement Group February 2026 Routers receiving the AMP Measurement Group sub-TLV MUST process the information to build their measurement group membership database. This information is used to discover other routers participating in the same measurement groups, enabling automatic configuration of measurement sessions. The Router Capability TLV, and thus the AMP Measurement Group sub- TLV, is propagated across IS-IS area boundaries when area leaking is configured, satisfying the requirement for cross-area discovery. If a router's measurement group membership changes, it MUST update its Router Capability TLV advertisement accordingly. Routers receiving updated information MUST process the changes and update their measurement group membership database. 5. IANA Considerations 5.1. IS-IS Router Capability TLV Sub-TLVs IANA is requested to assign a new sub-TLV type from the "IS-IS Router Capability TLV sub-TLVs" registry for the Active Measurement Protocol Measurement Group sub-TLV defined in this document. 5.2. AMP Measurement Group Protocol Flags Registry IANA is requested to create a new registry called "AMP Measurement Group Protocol Flags" under the "Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP) Parameters" registry group. The registry should track bit assignments for Active Measurement Protocols in the Protocol Flags field of the AMP Measurement Group sub-TLV. The initial assignments are: +=====+============+==========================+ | Bit | Protocol | Reference | +=====+============+==========================+ | 0 | TWAMP | [RFC5357], this document | +-----+------------+--------------------------+ | 1 | STAMP | [RFC8762], this document | +-----+------------+--------------------------+ | 2-7 | Unassigned | | +-----+------------+--------------------------+ Table 2 Future assignments are to be made through IETF Review [RFC8126]. Jethanandani, et al. Expires 7 August 2026 [Page 6] Internet-Draft IGP Measurement Group February 2026 6. Security Considerations This document defines a mechanism for advertising measurement group membership in IS-IS. The security considerations for IS-IS as specified in [RFC1195] and [RFC5304] apply. An attacker that can inject false AMP Measurement Group sub-TLVs could cause routers to attempt to establish measurement sessions with incorrect endpoints, potentially leading to: * Failed measurement sessions * Misconfiguration of measurement infrastructure * Resource exhaustion if many false endpoints are advertised To mitigate these risks, implementations SHOULD authenticate IS-IS protocol exchanges using the mechanisms defined in [RFC5304] for IS- IS authentication. Additionally, operators SHOULD configure appropriate access controls and monitoring to detect and prevent unauthorized advertisements. The information advertised in the AMP Measurement Group sub-TLV reveals which routers are participating in measurement groups and which interface addresses are used for measurement purposes. This information may be considered sensitive in some deployments. Operators should consider the implications of this information disclosure when deploying this mechanism. 7. References 7.1. Normative References [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, . [RFC7883] Ginsberg, L., Akiya, N., and M. Chen, "Advertising Seamless Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (S-BFD) Discriminators in IS-IS", RFC 7883, DOI 10.17487/RFC7883, July 2016, . [RFC7981] Ginsberg, L., Previdi, S., and M. Chen, "IS-IS Extensions for Advertising Router Information", RFC 7981, DOI 10.17487/RFC7981, October 2016, . Jethanandani, et al. Expires 7 August 2026 [Page 7] Internet-Draft IGP Measurement Group February 2026 [RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017, . [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, May 2017, . 7.2. Informative References [RFC1195] Callon, R., "Use of OSI IS-IS for routing in TCP/IP and dual environments", RFC 1195, DOI 10.17487/RFC1195, December 1990, . [RFC5304] Li, T. and R. Atkinson, "IS-IS Cryptographic Authentication", RFC 5304, DOI 10.17487/RFC5304, October 2008, . [RFC5357] Hedayat, K., Krzanowski, R., Morton, A., Yum, K., and J. Babiarz, "A Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (TWAMP)", RFC 5357, DOI 10.17487/RFC5357, October 2008, . [RFC8762] Mirsky, G., Jun, G., Nydell, H., and R. Foote, "Simple Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol", RFC 8762, DOI 10.17487/RFC8762, March 2020, . Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank the participants in the IETF discussions that led to this document. Authors' Addresses Mahesh Jethanandani (editor) Arrcus, Inc Street City, Region Postal code United States of America Phone: Phone Email: mjethanandani@gmail.com URI: URI Jethanandani, et al. Expires 7 August 2026 [Page 8] Internet-Draft IGP Measurement Group February 2026 Derek Yeung (editor) Arrcus, Inc Street City, Region Postal code United States of America Phone: Phone Email: derek@arrcus.com URI: URI Acee Lindem (editor) Arrcus, Inc Street City, Region Postal code United States of America Phone: Phone Email: acee.ietf@gmail.com URI: URI Reshad Rahman (editor) Equinix, Inc Street City Region Postal code Canada Phone: Phone Email: reshad@yahoo.com URI: URI Nico Strina Equinix, Inc Street City, Region Postal code United States of America Phone: Phone Email: nstrina@equinix.com URI: URI Jethanandani, et al. Expires 7 August 2026 [Page 9]