RTGWG G. Mirsky Internet-Draft Individual Intended status: Standards Track J. Tantsura Expires: 3 February 2027 NVIDIA G. Mishra Individual 2 August 2026 Applicability of Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) for Multi- point Networks in Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol (VRRP) draft-ietf-rtgwg-vrrp-p2mp-bfd-15 Abstract This document specifies the applicability of Bidirectional Forwarding Detection in multipoint networks to support sub-second failure detection for Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol Router Role election. The mechanism enables faster determination of the Active Router without requiring any modification to the protocol behavior or message formats defined in RFC 9568. 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 3 February 2027. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2026 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 (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 Mirsky, et al. Expires 3 February 2027 [Page 1] Internet-Draft Applicability of BFD P2MP in VRRP August 2026 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. Conventions used in this document . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.1.1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.1.2. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Applicability of p2mp BFD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.1. Multipoint BFD Encapsulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 5. Operational Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5.1. Mixed-mode Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5.2. Scaling Considerations in Multi-tenant Environment . . . 6 6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 7. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 8. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 1. Introduction The [RFC9568] is the current Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol (VRRP) specification for IPv4 and IPv6 networks. VRRPv3 allows for a faster switchover to a Backup Router. A router may be part of several Virtual Router Redundancy groups, such as Active in some and Backup in others. Supporting sub-second mode for VRRPv3 [RFC9568] for all these roles without specialized support in the data plane may prove challenging because of the increased load on the control plane. However, it may still be possible to deploy VRRP and provide sub- second detection of Active Router failure by Backup Routers. Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) [RFC5880] had been originally defined to detect failure of point-to-point paths: single- hop [RFC5881], multihop [RFC5883]. Single-hop BFD may enable a Backup router to detect an Active router failure within sub-seconds. But this approach may present a scaling challenge in a multi-Backup router environment. [RFC8562] extends [RFC5880] for multipoint and multicast networks, which matches the deployment scenarios for VRRP over the LAN segment. This document demonstrates how point-to-multipoint (p2mp) BFD can enable faster detection of the Active Router failure and thus minimize service disruption in a VRRP domain. Mirsky, et al. Expires 3 February 2027 [Page 2] Internet-Draft Applicability of BFD P2MP in VRRP August 2026 1.1. Conventions used in this document 1.1.1. Terminology BFD: Bidirectional Forwarding Detection p2mp: Point-to-Multipoint VRRP: Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol 1.1.2. 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. Applicability of p2mp BFD [RFC8562] may provide an efficient and scalable solution for a fast- converging environment that uses the default route rather than dynamic routing. Each redundancy group presents itself as a p2mp BFD session, with its Active Router being the head and Backup Routers being the tails of the p2mp BFD session. The Active Router, configured to use p2mp BFD to support faster convergence of VRRP, starts transmitting BFD control packets with IPvX address associated with the Virtual Router [RFC9568] as a source IP address and the value of the My Discriminator field ([RFC5880]) locally selected according to the following rules: For IPv4, the Active Router uses 32 bits of the IPv4 source address as described in Section 5.1.1.1 of [RFC9568]. For IPv6, the Active Router uses the 32 least-significant bits of IPv6 source address, as described in Section 5.1.2.1 of [RFC9568]. A Backup Router demultiplexes p2mp BFD test sessions based on IPvX address associated with the Virtual Router that it has been configured with and the non-zero My Discriminator value, it deduces from the received VRRP Advertisement packet according to the rules listed above. When a Backup router detects the failure of the Active Router, according to Section 5.11 [RFC8562], it re-evaluates its role in the Virtual Router. As a result, the Backup Router may become the Active router of the given Virtual Router or continue as a Backup Router. Mirsky, et al. Expires 3 February 2027 [Page 3] Internet-Draft Applicability of BFD P2MP in VRRP August 2026 If the former is the case, then the new Active router will start transmitting p2mp BFD control packets using the Active Router IP address as the source IP address for p2mp BFD control packets and thus bootstraps a new p2mp BFD session on a Backup Router. If the latter is the case, the Backup Router MUST close and remove the p2mp BFD session associated with the failed Active Router. The VRRP Advertisement packet from the new VRRP Active Router will bootstrap the new p2mp BFD session. 2.1. Multipoint BFD Encapsulation The MultipointHead of p2mp BFD session when transmitting BFD control packet: Set the source MAC address according to rules in Section 7.3 of [RFC9568]; MUST set TTL or Hop Limit value to 255 (Section 5 [RFC5881]). Similarly, all received BFD Control packets that are demultiplexed to the session MUST be discarded if the received TTL or Hop Limit is not equal to 255; SHOULD use group address VRRP ('224.0.0.18' for IPv4 and 'FF02:0:0:0:0:0:0:12' for IPv6) as destination IP address; MAY use network broadcast address for IPv4 or link-local all nodes multicast group for IPv6 as destination IP address; MUST set destination UDP port value to 3784 when transmitting BFD control packets, as defined in [RFC8562]; Source UDP port value selection follows the rules defined in Section 4 of [RFC5881]; MUST use the Active Router IP address as the source IP address. 3. IANA Considerations This document makes no requests for IANA allocations. This section may be deleted by RFC Editor. 4. Security Considerations This document defines an alternative mechanism, complementary to the one specified in [RFC9568], for accelerating the detection of failures that affect VRRP functionality by using p2mp BFD. The operation of either protocol is not modified. Mirsky, et al. Expires 3 February 2027 [Page 4] Internet-Draft Applicability of BFD P2MP in VRRP August 2026 Security considerations discussed in [RFC9568], [RFC5880], [RFC5881], and [RFC8562], apply to this document. Using p2mp BFD in the VRRP context does not introduce additional security considerations beyond those already covered in the referenced RFCs. 5. Operational Considerations 5.1. Mixed-mode Operation In deployments where a VRRP group contains routers that support the use of p2mp BFD as described in this specification and others that do not, the mechanism continues to operate correctly, but convergence characteristics will differ among routers. Routers that support p2mp BFD will detect failure of the Active Router based on BFD session state and may transition to Active more quickly than routers relying solely on VRRP Advertisement timers. Conversely, if the Active Router does not support p2mp BFD, all routers, regardless of BFD capability, will converge based on VRRP Advertisement timeout. In a VRRP group where both VRRP-native and BFD-based mechanisms are used for detecting failure of the Active Router, the system can be viewed as a multi-layer OAM environment, with p2mp BFD operating as a lower-layer and faster failure-detection mechanism. In such an environment, operators should ensure that VRRP Advertisement intervals and BFD timer values are coordinated so that the expected convergence behavior is well understood. Consistent with multi-layer OAM design principles, the failure- detection interval at the lower layer is typically configured to be at least three times shorter than the failure-detection interval at the layer above it. This relationship ensures that the faster mechanism (p2mp BFD) reliably triggers failover before the VRRP- native mechanism, while still allowing VRRP Advertisements to provide a backup detection method. In mixed-mode deployments, routers within the VRRP group may detect failure of the Active Router at different times, depending on whether they rely on p2mp BFD or VRRP Advertisements. From the host's perspective, however, failover is determined by the fastest detection mechanism that results in a new Active Router being elected and advertising the virtual router address. Mirsky, et al. Expires 3 February 2027 [Page 5] Internet-Draft Applicability of BFD P2MP in VRRP August 2026 5.2. Scaling Considerations in Multi-tenant Environment In multi-tenant deployments, multiple VRRP groups may exist on the same segment, each maintaining its own p2mp BFD session. The scaling impact depends primarily on the operator's convergence objectives. If sub-second convergence is required, an operator may choose either sub-second VRRP Advertisement intervals or sub-second BFD transmission intervals. Using p2mp BFD for failure detection allows VRRP Advertisement intervals to remain relatively large (e.g., one second), thereby reducing the overall volume of VRRP control traffic even when many VRRP groups are present. Because p2mp BFD uses a single multipoint session per VRRP group, the incremental overhead scales linearly with the number of groups. In environments with a large number of VRRP groups, operators should ensure that BFD transmission intervals and VRRP Advertisement intervals are configured to balance convergence requirements with the control plane load. 6. Acknowledgements The authors appreciate the comments and suggestions provided by Acee Lindem and Alexander "Sasha" Vainshtein, which helped simplify and improve the solution. The authors also express their gratitude to Joe Clarke for his valuable insights into the application and deployment aspects of p2mp BFD in VRRP. 7. 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, . [RFC5880] Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD)", RFC 5880, DOI 10.17487/RFC5880, June 2010, . [RFC5881] Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) for IPv4 and IPv6 (Single Hop)", RFC 5881, DOI 10.17487/RFC5881, June 2010, . [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, May 2017, . Mirsky, et al. Expires 3 February 2027 [Page 6] Internet-Draft Applicability of BFD P2MP in VRRP August 2026 [RFC8562] Katz, D., Ward, D., Pallagatti, S., Ed., and G. Mirsky, Ed., "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) for Multipoint Networks", RFC 8562, DOI 10.17487/RFC8562, April 2019, . [RFC9568] Lindem, A. and A. Dogra, "Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol (VRRP) Version 3 for IPv4 and IPv6", RFC 9568, DOI 10.17487/RFC9568, April 2024, . 8. Informative References [RFC5883] Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) for Multihop Paths", RFC 5883, DOI 10.17487/RFC5883, June 2010, . Authors' Addresses Greg Mirsky Individual Email: gregimirsky@gmail.com Jeff Tantsura NVIDIA Email: jefftant.ietf@gmail.com Gyan Mishra Individual Email: hayabusagsm@gmail.com Mirsky, et al. Expires 3 February 2027 [Page 7]