[Docs] [txt|pdf|xml|html] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Nits]

Versions: 00

DetNet                                                     B. Varga, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                                 J. Farkas
Intended status: Standards Track                                Ericsson
Expires: November 6, 2019                                      L. Berger
                                                 LabN Consulting, L.L.C.
                                                                A. Malis
                                                               S. Bryant
                                                     Huawei Technologies
                                                             J. Korhonen
                                                             May 5, 2019


                    DetNet Data Plane: IP over MPLS
                   draft-ietf-detnet-ip-over-mpls-00

Abstract

   This document specifies the Deterministic Networking data plane when
   operating in an IP over MPLS packet switched network.

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 November 6, 2019.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2019 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 and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must



Varga, et al.           Expires November 6, 2019                [Page 1]


Internet-Draft    DetNet IP over DetNet MPLS Data Plane         May 2019


   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.1.  Terms Used In This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.2.  Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.3.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   3.  DetNet IP Data Plane Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  IP over DetNet MPLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     4.1.  IP Over DetNet MPLS Data Plane Scenarios  . . . . . . . .   5
     4.2.  DetNet IP over DetNet MPLS Encapsulation  . . . . . . . .   8
     4.3.  DetNet IP over DetNet MPLS Flow Identification
           Procedures  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     4.4.  DetNet IP over DetNet MPLS Traffic Treatment Procedures .  10
   5.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   6.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   7.  Contributors  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   8.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   9.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
     9.1.  Normative references  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
     9.2.  Informative references  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14

1.  Introduction

   Deterministic Networking (DetNet) is a service that can be offered by
   a network to DetNet flows.  DetNet provides these flows extremely low
   packet loss rates and assured maximum end-to-end delivery latency.
   General background and concepts of DetNet can be found in the DetNet
   Architecture [I-D.ietf-detnet-architecture].

   This document specifies the DetNet data plane operation for IP hosts
   and routers that provide DetNet service to IP encapsulated data.  No
   DetNet specific encapsulation is defined to support IP flows, rather
   existing IP and higher layer protocol header information is used to
   support flow identification and DetNet service delivery.

   The DetNet Architecture decomposes the DetNet related data plane
   functions into two sub-layers: a service sub-layer and a forwarding
   sub-layer.  The service sub-layer is used to provide DetNet service
   protection and reordering.  The forwarding sub-layer is used to
   provides congestion protection (low loss, assured latency, and
   limited reordering).  Since no DetNet specific headers are added to
   support DetNet IP flows, only the forwarding sub-layer functions are



Varga, et al.           Expires November 6, 2019                [Page 2]


Internet-Draft    DetNet IP over DetNet MPLS Data Plane         May 2019


   supported using the DetNet IP defined by this document.  Service
   protection can be provided on a per sub-net basis using technologies
   such as MPLS [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls] and IEEE802.1 TSN.

   This document provides an overview of the DetNet IP data plane over
   MPLS.

2.  Terminology

2.1.  Terms Used In This Document

   This document uses the terminology and concepts established in the
   DetNet architecture [I-D.ietf-detnet-architecture] and
   [I-D.ietf-detnet-data-plane-framework], and the reader is assumed to
   be familiar with these documents and their terminology.

2.2.  Abbreviations

   This document uses the abbreviations defined in the DetNet
   architecture [I-D.ietf-detnet-architecture] and
   [I-D.ietf-detnet-data-plane-framework].  This document uses the
   following abbreviations:

   CE            Customer Edge equipment.

   DetNet        Deterministic Networking.

   DF            DetNet Flow.

   DN            DetNet.

   L2            Layer-2.

   L3            Layer-3.

   LSP           Label-switched path.

   MPLS          Multiprotocol Label Switching.

   PE            Provider Edge.

   PREOF         Packet Replication, Ordering and Elimination Function.

   PSN           Packet Switched Network.

   PW            Pseudowire.

   TE            Traffic Engineering.



Varga, et al.           Expires November 6, 2019                [Page 3]


Internet-Draft    DetNet IP over DetNet MPLS Data Plane         May 2019


   TSN           Time-Sensitive Networking, TSN is a Task Group of the
                 IEEE 802.1 Working Group.

2.3.  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.

3.  DetNet IP Data Plane Overview

   Figure 1 illustrates an IP DetNet, with an MPLS based DetNet network
   as a sub-network between the relay nodes.  It shows a more complex
   DetNet enabled IP network where an IP flow is mapped to one or more
   PWs and MPLS (TE) LSPs.  The end systems still originate IP
   encapsulated traffic that is identified as DetNet flows.  The relay
   nodes follow procedures defined in Section 4 to map each DetNet flow
   to MPLS LSPs.  While not shown, relay nodes can provide service sub-
   layer functions such as PREOF using DetNet over MPLS, and this is
   indicated by the solid line for the MPLS facing portion of the
   Service component.  Note that the Transit node is MPLS (TE) LSP aware
   and performs switching based on MPLS labels, and need not have any
   specific knowledge of the DetNet service or the corresponding DetNet
   flow identification.  See Section 4 for details on the mapping of IP
   flows to MPLS, and [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls] for general support of
   DetNet services using MPLS.























Varga, et al.           Expires November 6, 2019                [Page 4]


Internet-Draft    DetNet IP over DetNet MPLS Data Plane         May 2019


    DetNet IP       Relay         Transit         Relay      DetNet IP
    End System      Node           Node           Node       End System

   +----------+                                              +---------+
   |   Appl.  |<-------------- End to End Service ---------->|  Appl.  |
   +----------+   .....-----+                  +-----.....   +---------+
   | Service  |<--: Service |-- DetNet flow ---| Service :-->| Service |
   |          |   :         |<- DN MPLS flow ->|         :   |         |
   +----------+   +---------+   +----------+   +---------+   +---------+
   |Forwarding|   |Fwd| |Fwd|   |Forwarding|   |Fwd| |Fwd|   |   Fwd   |
   +--------.-+   +-.-+ +-.-+   +---.----.-+   +-.-+ +-.-+   +----.----+
            :  Link :    /  ,-----.  \   :  Link :    /  ,-----.  \
            +.......+    +-[  Sub  ]-+   +.......+   +--[  Sub  ]--+
                           [Network]                    [Network]
                            `-----'                      `-----'

                          |<---- DetNet MPLS --->|
            |<--------------------- DetNet IP ------------------->|

               Figure 1: DetNet IP Over DetNet MPLS Network

4.  IP over DetNet MPLS

   This section defines how IP encapsulated flows are carried over a
   DetNet MPLS data plane as defined in [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls].  Since
   both Non-DetNet and DetNet IP packet are identical on the wire, this
   section is applicable to any node that supports IP over DetNet MPLS,
   and this section refers to both cases as DetNet IP over DetNet MPLS.

4.1.  IP Over DetNet MPLS Data Plane Scenarios

   An example use of IP over DetNet MPLS follows below.



















Varga, et al.           Expires November 6, 2019                [Page 5]


Internet-Draft    DetNet IP over DetNet MPLS Data Plane         May 2019


   IP  DetNet        Relay       Transit         Relay       IP DetNet
   End System        Node         Node           Node        End System
                     (T-PE)       (LSR)          (T-PE)
   +----------+                                             +----------+
   |   Appl.  |<------------ End to End Service ----------->|   Appl.  |
   +----------+   .....-----+                 +-----.....   +----------+
   | Service  |<--: Service |-- DetNet flow --| Service :-->| Service  |
   +----------+   +---------+  +----------+   +---------+   +----------+
   |Forwarding|   |Fwd| |Fwd|  |Forwarding|   |Fwd| |Fwd|   |Forwarding|
   +-------.--+   +-.-+ +-.-+  +----.---.-+   +-.-+ +-.-+   +---.------+
           :  Link  :    /  ,-----.  \   : Link :    /  ,-----.  \
           +........+    +-[  Sub  ]-+   +......+    +-[  Sub  ]-+
                           [Network]                   [Network]
                            `-----'                     `-----'

           |<- DN IP->| |<---- DetNet MPLS ---->| |< -DN IP ->|

                   Figure 2: DetNet IP Over MPLS Network

   Figure 2 illustrates DetNet enabled End Systems (hosts), connected to
   DetNet (DN) enabled IP networks, operating over a DetNet aware MPLS
   network.  In this figure, Relay nodes sit at the boundary of the MPLS
   domain since the non-MPLS domain is DetNet aware.  This figure is
   very similar to the DetNet MPLS Network figure in
   [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls].  The primary difference is that the Relay
   nodes are at the edges of the MPLS domain and therefore function as
   T-PEs, and that service sub-layer functions are not provided over the
   DetNet IP network.  The transit node functions show above are
   identical to those described in [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls].

   Figure 3 illustrates how relay nodes can provide service protection
   over an MPLS domain.  In this case, CE1 and CE2 are IP DetNet end
   systems which are interconnected via a MPLS domain such as described
   in [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls].  Note that R1 and R3 sit at the edges of
   an MPLS domain and therefore are similar to T-PEs, while R2 sits in
   the middle of the domain and is therefore similar to an S-PE.















Varga, et al.           Expires November 6, 2019                [Page 6]


Internet-Draft    DetNet IP over DetNet MPLS Data Plane         May 2019


         DetNet                                         DetNet
   IP    Service         Transit          Transit       Service  IP
   DetNet               |<-Tnl->|        |<-Tnl->|               DetNet
   End     |            V   1   V        V   2   V            |  End
   System  |   +--------+       +--------+       +--------+   |  System
   +---+   |   |   R1   |=======|   R2   |=======|   R3   |   |   +---+
   |   |-------|._X_....|..DF1..|.__ ___.|..DF3..|...._X_.|-------|   |
   |CE1|   |   |    \   |       |   X    |       |   /    |   |   |CE2|
   |   |   |   |     \_.|..DF2..|._/ \__.|..DF4..|._/     |   |   |   |
   +---+       |        |=======|        |=======|        |       +---+
       ^       +--------+       +--------+       +--------+       ^
       |        Relay Node       Relay Node       Relay Node      |
       |          (T-PE)           (S-PE)          (T-PE)         |
       |                                                          |
       |<-DN IP-> <-------- DetNet MPLS ---------------> <-DN IP->|
       |                                                          |
       |<-------------- End to End DetNet Service --------------->|

      -------------------------- Data Flow ------------------------->

       X   = Service protection (PRF, PREOF, PEF/POF)
       DFx = DetNet member flow x over a TE LSP

               Figure 3: DetNet IP Over DetNet MPLS Network

    IP               Edge                        Edge        IP
    End System       Node                        Node        End System
                    (T-PE)       (LSR)          (T-PE)
   +----------+   +....-----+                 +-----....+   +----------+
   |   Appl.  |<--:Svc Proxy|-- E2E Service --|Svc Proxy:-->|   Appl.  |
   +----------+   +.....+---+                 +---+.....+   +----------+
   |    IP    |<--:IP : |Svc|-- IP/DN Flow ---|Svc| :IP :-->|    IP    |
   +----------+   +---+ +---+  +----------+   +---+ +---+   +----------+
   |Forwarding|   |Fwd| |Fwd|  |Forwarding|   |Fwd| |Fwd|   |Forwarding|
   +-------.--+   +-.-+ +-.-+  +----.---.-+   +-.-+ +-.-+   +---.------+
           :  Link  :    /  ,-----.  \   : Link :    /  ,-----.  \
           +........+    +-[  Sub  ]-+   +......+    +-[  Sub  ]-+
                           [Network]                   [Network]
                            `-----'                     `-----'

         |<--- IP --->| |<----- DetNet MPLS ----->| |<--- IP --->|

          Figure 4: Non-DetNet Aware IP Over DetNet MPLS Network

   Figure 4 illustrates non-DetNet enabled End Systems (hosts),
   connected to DetNet (DN) enabled MPLS network.  It differs from
   Figure 2 in that the hosts and edge IP networks are not DetNet aware.
   In this case, edge nodes sit at the boundary of the MPLS domain since



Varga, et al.           Expires November 6, 2019                [Page 7]


Internet-Draft    DetNet IP over DetNet MPLS Data Plane         May 2019


   it is also a DetNet domain boundary.  The edge nodes provide DetNet
   service proxies for the end applications by initiating and
   terminating DetNet service for the application's IP flows.  While the
   node types differ, there is essentially no difference in data plane
   processing between relay and edges.  There are likely to be
   differences in controller plane operation, particularly when
   distributed control plane protocols are used.

   Figure 5 illustrates how it is still possible to provided DetNet
   service protection for non-DetNet aware end systems.  This figures is
   basically the same as Figure 3, with the exception that CE1 and CE2
   are non-DetNet aware end systems and E1 and E3 are edge nodes that
   replace the relay nodes R1 and R3.

         IP                                              IP
   Non   Service          Transit          Transit       Service Non
   DetNet                |<-Tnl->|        |<-Tnl->|              DetNet
   End     |             V   1   V        V   2   V            | End
   System  |    +--------+       +--------+       +--------+   | System
   +---+   |    |   E1   |=======|   R2   |=======|   E3   |   |  +---+
   |   |--------|._X_....|..DF1..|.__ ___.|..DF3..|...._X_.|------|   |
   |CE1|   |    |    \   |       |   X    |       |   /    |   |  |CE2|
   |   |   |    |     \_.|..DF2..|._/ \__.|..DF4..|._/     |   |  |   |
   +---+        |        |=======|        |=======|        |      +---+
                +--------+       +--------+       +--------+
                ^ Edge Node      Relay Node       Edge Node^
                | (T-PE)           (S-PE)          (T-PE)  |
                |                                          |
        <--IP-->| <-------- IP Over DetNet MPLS ---------> |<--IP-->
                |                                          |
                |<------ End to End DetNet Service ------->|

       X   = Optional service protection (none, PRF, PREOF, PEF/POF)
       DFx = DetNet member flow x over a TE LSP

             Figure 5: MPLS-Based DetNet (non-MPLS End System)

4.2.  DetNet IP over DetNet MPLS Encapsulation

   The basic encapsulation approach is to treat a DetNet IP flow as an
   app-flow from the DetNet MPLS app perspective.  The corresponding
   example DetNet Sub-Network format is shown in Figure 6.









Varga, et al.           Expires November 6, 2019                [Page 8]


Internet-Draft    DetNet IP over DetNet MPLS Data Plane         May 2019


                /->     +------+  +------+  +------+              ^
                |       |  X   |  |  X   |  |  X   | IP App-Flow  :
                |       +------+  +------+  +------+              :
     MPLS     <-+       |NProto|  |NProto|  |NProto|              :(1)
      App-Flow  |       +------+  +------+  +------+              :
                |       |  IP  |  |  IP  |  |  IP  |              v
                \-> +---+======+--+======+--+======+-----+
     DetNet-MPLS        | d-CW |  | d-CW |  | d-CW |              ^
                        +------+  +------+  +------+              :(2)
                        |Labels|  |Labels|  |Labels|              v
                    +---+======+--+======+--+======+-----+
     Sub-Network        |  L2  |  | TSN  |  | UDP  |
                        +------+  +------+  +------+
                                            |  IP  |
                                            +------+
                                            |  L2  |
                                            +------+
         (1) DetNet IP Flow
         (2) DetNet MPLS Flow


         Figure 6: Example DetNet IP over MPLS Sub-Network Formats

   In the figure, "IP App-Flow" indicates the payload carried by the
   DetNet IP data plane.  "IP" and "NProto" indicate the fields
   described in Section 7.1.1.  IP Header Information and Section 7.1.2.
   Other Protocol Header Information in [I-D.ietf-detnet-ip],
   respectively.  "MPLS App-Flow" indicates that an individual DetNet IP
   flow is the payload from the perspective of the DetNet MPLS data
   plane defined in [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls].

   Per [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls], the DetNet MPLS data plane uses a single
   S-Label to support a single app flow.  Section 7.1.  DetNet IP Flow
   Identification Procedures in [I-D.ietf-detnet-ip] states that a
   single DetNet flow is identified based on IP, and next level
   protocol, header information.  Section 7.4.  Aggregation
   Considerations in [I-D.ietf-detnet-ip] defines that aggregation is
   supported through the use of prefixes, wildcards, bitmasks, and port
   ranges.  Collectively, this results in the fairly straight forward
   procedures defined in this section.

   As shown in Figure 4, DetNet relay nodes are responsible for the
   mapping of a DetNet flow, at the service sub-layer, from the IP to
   MPLS DetNet data planes and back again.  Their related DetNet IP over
   DetNet MPLS data plane operation is comprised of two sets of
   procedures: the mapping of flow identifiers; and ensuring proper
   traffic treatment.




Varga, et al.           Expires November 6, 2019                [Page 9]


Internet-Draft    DetNet IP over DetNet MPLS Data Plane         May 2019


4.3.  DetNet IP over DetNet MPLS Flow Identification Procedures

   A relay node that sends a DetNet IP flow over a DetNet MPLS network
   MUST map that single DetNet IP flow into a single app-flow and MUST
   process that app-flow in accordance to the procedures defined in
   [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls] Section 6.1.  PRF MAY be supported for DetNet
   IP flows sent over an DetNet MPLS network.  Aggregation MAY be
   supported as defined in [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls] Section 5.4.
   Aggregation Considerations in [I-D.ietf-detnet-ip] MAY be used to
   identify an individual DetNet IP flow.  The provisioning of the
   mapping of DetNet IP flows to DetNet MPLS app-flows MUST be supported
   via configuration, e.g., via the controller plane.

   A relay node MAY be provisioned to handle packets received via the
   DetNet MPLS data plane as DetNet IP flows.  A single incoming MPLS
   app-flow MAY be treated as a single DetNet IP flow, without
   examination of IP headers.  Alternatively, packets received via the
   DetNet MPLS data plane MAY follow the normal DetNet IP flow
   identification procedures defined in [I-D.ietf-detnet-ip]
   Section 7.1.  An implementation MUST support the provisioning for
   handling any received DetNet MPLS data plane as DetNet IP flows via
   configuration.  Note that such configuration MAY include support from
   PEOF on the incoming DetNet MPLS flow.

4.4.  DetNet IP over DetNet MPLS Traffic Treatment Procedures

   The traffic treatment required for a particular DetNet IP flow is
   provisioned via configuration or the controller plane.  When an
   DetNet IP flow is sent over DetNet MPLS, a relay node MUST ensure
   that the provisioned DetNet IP traffic treatment is provided at the
   forwarding sub-layer as described in [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls]
   Section 5.2.  Note that the PRF function MAY be utilized when sending
   IP over MPLS.

   Traffic treatment for DetNet IP flows received over the DetNet MPLS
   data plane MUST follow Section 7.3 DetNet IP Traffic Treatment
   Procedures in [I-D.ietf-detnet-ip].

5.  Security Considerations

   The security considerations of DetNet in general are discussed in
   [I-D.ietf-detnet-architecture] and [I-D.ietf-detnet-security].  Other
   security considerations will be added in a future version of this
   draft.







Varga, et al.           Expires November 6, 2019               [Page 10]


Internet-Draft    DetNet IP over DetNet MPLS Data Plane         May 2019


6.  IANA Considerations

   TBD.

7.  Contributors

   RFC7322 limits the number of authors listed on the front page of a
   draft to a maximum of 5, far fewer than the 20 individuals below who
   made important contributions to this draft.  The editor wishes to
   thank and acknowledge each of the following authors for contributing
   text to this draft.  See also Section 8.








































Varga, et al.           Expires November 6, 2019               [Page 11]


Internet-Draft    DetNet IP over DetNet MPLS Data Plane         May 2019


      Loa Andersson
      Huawei
      Email: loa@pi.nu

      Yuanlong Jiang
      Huawei
      Email: jiangyuanlong@huawei.com

      Norman Finn
      Huawei
      3101 Rio Way
      Spring Valley, CA  91977
      USA
      Email: norman.finn@mail01.huawei.com

      Janos Farkas
      Ericsson
      Magyar Tudosok krt. 11
      Budapest  1117
      Hungary
      Email: janos.farkas@ericsson.com

      Carlos J. Bernardos
      Universidad Carlos III de Madrid
      Av. Universidad, 30
      Leganes, Madrid  28911
      Spain
      Email: cjbc@it.uc3m.es

      Tal Mizrahi
      Marvell
      6 Hamada st.
      Yokneam
      Israel
      Email: talmi@marvell.com

      Lou Berger
      LabN Consulting, L.L.C.
      Email: lberger@labn.net

      Andrew G. Malis
      Huawei Technologies
      Email: agmalis@gmail.com








Varga, et al.           Expires November 6, 2019               [Page 12]


Internet-Draft    DetNet IP over DetNet MPLS Data Plane         May 2019


8.  Acknowledgements

   The author(s) ACK and NACK.

   The following people were part of the DetNet Data Plane Solution
   Design Team:

      Jouni Korhonen

      Janos Farkas

      Norman Finn

      Balazs Varga

      Loa Andersson

      Tal Mizrahi

      David Mozes

      Yuanlong Jiang

      Andrew Malis

      Carlos J.  Bernardos

   The DetNet chairs serving during the DetNet Data Plane Solution
   Design Team:

      Lou Berger

      Pat Thaler

   Thanks to Stewart Bryant for his extensive review of the previous
   versions of the document.

9.  References

9.1.  Normative references

   [I-D.ietf-detnet-architecture]
              Finn, N., Thubert, P., Varga, B., and J. Farkas,
              "Deterministic Networking Architecture", draft-ietf-
              detnet-architecture-12 (work in progress), March 2019.






Varga, et al.           Expires November 6, 2019               [Page 13]


Internet-Draft    DetNet IP over DetNet MPLS Data Plane         May 2019


   [I-D.ietf-detnet-ip]
              Varga, B., Farkas, J., Berger L., MAlis A., Bryant S.,
              Korhonen J., "DetNet Data Plane IP", 2019.

   [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls]
              Varga, B., Farkas, J., Berger L., MAlis A., Bryant S.,
              Korhonen J., "DetNet MPLS", 2019.

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

   [RFC8174]  Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
              2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
              May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.

9.2.  Informative references

   [I-D.ietf-detnet-data-plane-framework]
              Varga, B., Farkas, J., Berger L., MAlis A., Bryant S.,
              Korhonen J., "DetNet Data Plane Framework", 2019.

   [I-D.ietf-detnet-security]
              Mizrahi, T., Grossman, E., Hacker, A., Das, S., Dowdell,
              J., Austad, H., Stanton, K., and N. Finn, "Deterministic
              Networking (DetNet) Security Considerations", draft-ietf-
              detnet-security-04 (work in progress), March 2019.

Authors' Addresses

   Balazs Varga (editor)
   Ericsson
   Magyar Tudosok krt. 11.
   Budapest  1117
   Hungary

   Email: balazs.a.varga@ericsson.com


   Janos Farkas
   Ericsson
   Magyar Tudosok krt. 11.
   Budapest  1117
   Hungary

   Email: janos.farkas@ericsson.com




Varga, et al.           Expires November 6, 2019               [Page 14]


Internet-Draft    DetNet IP over DetNet MPLS Data Plane         May 2019


   Lou Berger
   LabN Consulting, L.L.C.

   Email: lberger@labn.net


   Andrew G. Malis
   Huawei Technologies

   Email: agmalis@gmail.com


   Stewart Bryant
   Huawei Technologies

   Email: stewart.bryant@gmail.com


   Jouni Korhonen

   Email: jouni.nospam@gmail.com






























Varga, et al.           Expires November 6, 2019               [Page 15]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129c, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/