[Docs] [txt|pdf] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits] [IPR]

Versions: (draft-dunbar-trill-directory-assisted-edge) 00 01 02 04 05 06 07 RFC 7067

TRILL working group                                           L. Dunbar
Internet Draft                                              D. Eastlake
Category: Informational                                          Huawei
                                                          Padia Perlman
                                                                  Intel
                                                         Igor Gashinsky
                                                                  Yahoo

Expires: December 2013                                    July 7, 2012


                 TRILL Edge Directory Assistance Framework

                  draft-ietf-trill-directory-framework-00

Status of this Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with
   the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
   other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
   Drafts.

   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."

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.

   This Internet-Draft will expire on November 30, 2012.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2009 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
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document. Please review these documents



Dunbar, et al           Expires November 2013                 [Page 1]


Internet-Draft       TRILL Directory Assistance Framework     July 2012

   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with
   respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this
   document must 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.

Abstract

   Edge RBridges currently learn the mapping between MAC addresses and
   their egress RBridges by observing the data packets traversed
   through. When ingress RBridge receives a data frame with its
   destination address (MAC&VLAN) unknown, the data frame is flooded
   across the TRILL campus. When there are more than one RBridge ports
   connected to one bridged LAN, only one of them can be designated as
   AF port for forwarding/receiving traffic for each LAN, the rest have
   to be blocked for that LAN.

   This draft describes the framework for using directory service to
   assist edge RBridges to improve TRILL network scalability in data
   center environment.

Conventions used in this document

   The terms ''Subnet'' and ''VLAN'' are used interchangeably in this
   document because it is common to map one subnet to one VLAN. The
   terms ''TRILL switch'' and ''RBridge'' are used interchangeably in
   this document.

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in RFC-2119 [RFC2119].

Table of Contents


   1. Introduction ................................................ 4
   2. Terminology ................................................. 4
   3. Impact on RBridge Campus of Massive Number of stations in a DC 5
      3.1. Issues of Flooding Based Learning in DCs ................ 5
      3.2. Some Examples .......................................... 7
   4. Benefits of Directory Assisted Edge RBridge in DC ............ 8
   5. Generic operation of Directory Assistance .................... 9
      5.1. Information in Directory for Edge Bridges ............... 9
      5.2. Push Model ............................................. 9
      5.3. Pull Model ............................................ 11
   6. Conclusion and Recommendation............................... 12
   7. Security Considerations..................................... 12
   8. IANA Considerations ........................................ 12



Dunbar, et al           Expires December 2013                 [Page 2]


Internet-Draft       TRILL Directory Assistance Framework     July 2012

   9. Acknowledgements ........................................... 12
   10. References ................................................ 13
   Authors' Addresses ............................................ 13













































Dunbar, et al           Expires December 2013                 [Page 3]


Internet-Draft       TRILL Directory Assistance Framework     July 2012

1. Introduction

   Data center networks are different from enterprise campus networks
   in several ways, in particular:

   1) Data centers, especially Internet or multi-tenant data centers
     tend to have a large number of end stations with a wide variety of
     applications.
   2) Topology is usually based on racks and rows.
         - Guest OSs assignment to Servers, Racks, and Rows is
          orchestrated by a Server/VM Management system, not at random.
   3) Rapid workload shifting in data centers can accelerate the
     frequency of the physical servers being re-loaded with different
     applications. Sometimes, the applications loaded to one physical
     server at different times can belong to different subnets.
   4) With server virtualization, there is an ever-increasing trend to
     dynamically create or delete VMs when demand for resource changes,
     to move VMs from overloaded servers to less loaded servers, or to
     aggregate VMs onto fewer servers when demand is light.

   Both 3) and 4) above can lead to applications in one subnet being
   placed in different locations (racks or rows) or one rack having
   applications belonging to different subnets.

   This draft describes why and how Data Center TRILL networks can be
   optimized by utilizing a directory assisted approach.



2. Terminology

   AF      Appointed Forwarder [RBridge-AF]

   Bridge:  IEEE 802.1Q compliant device. In this draft, Bridge is used
             interchangeably with Layer 2 switch.

   DA:     Destination Address

   DC:      Data Center

   EoR:    End of Row switches in data center. Also known as
             Aggregation switches in some data centers

   FDB:    Filtering Database for Bridge or Layer 2 switch

   End Station:    Guest OS running on a physical server or on a
             virtual machine. An end station has at least one IP address


Dunbar, et al           Expires December 2013                 [Page 4]


Internet-Draft       TRILL Directory Assistance Framework     July 2012

             and at least one MAC address, which could be in DA or SA
             field of a data frame.

   RBridge: A device implementing the TRILL protocol [RBridge]

   RSTP:    Rapid Spanning Tree Protocol

   SA:     Source Address

   Station: A node, or a virtual node, with IP and/or MAC addresses,
             which could be in the DA or SA of a data frame.

   STP:    Spanning Tree Protocol

   ToR:    Top of Rack Switch in data center. It is also known as
             access switches in some data centers.

   VM:     Virtual Machines

3. Impact on RBridge Campus of Massive Number of stations in a DC

   3.1. Issues of Flooding Based Learning in DCs

   It is common for Data Center networks to have multiple tiers of
   switches, for example, one or two Access Switches for each server
   rack (ToR), aggregation switches for some rows (or EoR switches),
   and some core switches to interconnect the aggregation switches.
   Many aggregation switches deployed in data centers have high port
   density. It is not uncommon to see aggregation switches
   interconnecting hundreds of ToR switches.



















Dunbar, et al           Expires December 2013                 [Page 5]


Internet-Draft       TRILL Directory Assistance Framework     July 2012

                         +-------+         +------+
                       +/------+ |       +/-----+ |
                       | Aggr11| + ----- |AggrN1| +      EoR Switches
                       +---+---+/        +------+/
                        /     \            /      \
                       /       \          /        \
                    +---+    +---+      +---+     +---+
                    |T11|... |T1x|      |T21| ..  |T2y|  ToR switches
                    +---+    +---+      +---+     +---+
                      |        |          |         |
                    +-|-+    +-|-+      +-|-+     +-|-+
                    |   |... |   |      |   | ..  |   |
                    +---+    +---+      +---+     +---+  Server racks
                    |   |... |   |      |   | ..  |   |
                    +---+    +---+      +---+     +---+
                    |   |... |   |      |   | ..  |   |
                    +---+    +---+      +---+     +---+
               Figure 1: Typical Data Center Network Design

   The following problems could occur when TRILL is deployed in a data
   center with large number of end stations, and the end stations in
   one subnet/VLAN could be placed under multiple edge RBridges:

      - Unnecessary filling of slots in MAC table of edge RBridges RB1,
        due to RB1 receiving broadcast/multicast traffic (e.g. ARP/ND,
        cluster multicast, etc.) from end stations under other edge
        RBridges that are not actually communicating with any end
        stations attached to RB1.
      - Some edge RBridge ports being blocked for user traffic when
        there are more than one RBridge ports connected to an edge
        bridged LAN. When there are multiple RBridge ports connected to
        a bridged LAN, only one (the AF port) can forward/receive
        traffic for that bridged LAN or VLAN. The rest have to be
        blocked for forwarding/receiving traffic for that VLAN. When a
        rack has dual uplinks to two different ToR switches (or edge
        RBridges), some links may not be fully utilized.
      - Packets being flooded across TRILL campus when their DAs are
        not in ingress RBridge's cache.
      - In an environment where VMs migrates, there is higher chance of
        cached entries becoming invalid, causing traffic to be black
        holed by the egress RBridge. If VMs send out gratuitous ARP/ND
        or IEEE802.1Qbg's VDP upon arriving at new locations, the
        ingress nodes might not have the MAC entries for the newly
        arrived VMs, causing more unknown flooding.


Dunbar, et al           Expires December 2013                 [Page 6]


Internet-Draft       TRILL Directory Assistance Framework     July 2012

   3.2. Some Examples

   Consider a data center with 1600 server racks. Each server rack has
   at least one ToR switch. The ToR switches are further divided into 8
   groups, with each group being connected by a set of aggregation
   switches.  There could be 4 to 8 aggregation switches in each set to
   achieve load sharing for traffic to/from server racks. If TRILL is
   deployed in this data center environment, let's consider the
   following two scenarios for the TRILL campus boundary:

      -  Scenario #1: TRILL campus boundary starts at ToR switches:

         If each server rack has one uplink to one ToR, there are 1600
         edge RBridges. If each rack has dual uplinks to two ToR
         switches, then there will be 3200 edge RBridges

         In this scenario, the RBridge domain will have more than 1600
         (or 3200) + 8*4 (or 8*8) nodes, which is quite a large IS-IS
         domain. Even though a mesh IS-IS domain can scale up to
         thousands of nodes, it is very challenging for aggregation
         switches to handle IS-IS link state advertisement among
         hundreds of parallel ports.

       - Scenario #2: TRILL campus boundary starts at the aggregation
        switches:

         With the same assumption as before, the number of nodes in the
         TRILL campus will be less than 100, and aggregation switches
         don't have to handle IS-IS link state advisements among
         hundreds of parallel ports.

         But bridged LANs are formed under the aggregation switches in
         this scenario.  With aggregation switches being the RBridge
         edge nodes, multiple RBridge edge ports could be connected to
         one bridged LAN. To avoid potential loops, TRILL requires only
         one of multiple RBridge edge ports connected to each VLAN being
         designated as Appointed Forwarder (AF port), and other ports
         being blocked for native frames in that VLAN.

         There is also the possibility of loops on the bridged LAN
         attached to RBridge edge ports unless STP/RSTP is running.
         Running traditional Layer 2 STP/RSTP on the bridged LAN in this
         environment may be overkill because the topology among the ToR
         switches and aggregation switches is very simple.




Dunbar, et al           Expires December 2013                 [Page 7]


Internet-Draft       TRILL Directory Assistance Framework     July 2012

         In addition, the number of MAC&VLAN<->Egress RBridge Mapping
         entries to be learned and managed by RBridge edge node can be
         very large. In the example above, each edge RBridge has 200
         edge ports facing the ToR switches. If each ToR has 40
         downstream ports facing servers and each server has 10 VMs,
         there could be 200*40*10 = 80000 end stations attached. If all
         those end stations belong to 1600 VLANs (i.e. 50 per VLAN) and
         each VLAN has 200 end stations, then under the worst-case
         scenario, the total number of MAC&VLAN entries to be learned by
         the edge RBridge can be 1600*200=320000, which is very large.

4. Benefits of Directory Assisted Edge RBridge in DC

   In data center environment, applications placement to servers,
   racks, and rows is orchestrated by Server (or VM) Management
   System(s). That is, there is a database or multiple databases
   (distributed model) that have the knowledge of where each
   application is placed. If the application location information can
   be fed to RBridge edge nodes, in some form of Directory Service,
   then RBridge edge nodes won't need to flood data frames with unknown
   DA across the TRILL campus.

   Avoiding unknown DA flooding to TRILL campus is especially valuable
   in data center environment because there is higher chance of an edge
   RBridge receiving packets with unknown DA and broadcast/multicast
   messages due to VM migration and servers being loaded with different
   applications.  When a VM is moved to a new location or a server is
   loaded with a new application with different IP/MAC addresses, it is
   more likely that the DA of data packets sent out from those VMs are
   unknown to their attached edge RBridges.  In addition, gratuitous
   ARP (IPv4) or Unsolicited Neighbor Advertisement (IPv6) sent out
   from those newly migrated or activated VMs have to be flooded to
   other edge RBridges that have VMs in the same subnets.

   The benefits of using directory assistance include:

      - Avoid flooding unknown DA across TRILL campus. The Directory
        enforced MAC&VLAN <-> Egress RBridge mapping table can
        determine if a data packet needs to be forwarded across TRILL
        campus.

         When multiple RBridge edge ports are connected via a bridged
         LAN to end stations (servers/VMs), a directory assisted edge
         RBridge won't need to flood unknown DA data frames to all ports
         of the edge RBridges in the frame's VLAN. Therefore, it is no
         longer necessary to designate one Appointed Forwarder among all


Dunbar, et al           Expires December 2013                 [Page 8]


Internet-Draft       TRILL Directory Assistance Framework     July 2012

         the RBridge Edge ports connected to a bridge LAN.  All edge
         RBridge ports can forward/receive native traffic.

      - Reduce flooding of decapsulated Ethernet frames with unknown
        MAC-DA to a bridged LAN connected to RBridge edge ports.

         When an RBridge receives a TRILL frame whose destination
         Nickname matches with its own, the normal procedure is for the
         RBridge to decapsulate the TRILL header and forward the
         decapsulated Ethernet frame to the directly attached bridged
         LAN. If the destination MAC is unknown, the normal
         Ethernet switch's flooding will occurs to the decapsulated
         Ethernet frame. With directory assistance, the egress RBridge
         can determine if DA in a frame matches with any end stations
         attached via the bridged LAN. Frames can be discarded if their
         DAs do not match.

      - Reduce the amount of MAC&VLAN <-> Egress RBridge mapping
        maintained by edge RBridges. There is no need for an edge
        RBridge to keep MAC entries of remote end stations which don't
        communicate with the end stations locally attached.

5. Generic operation of Directory Assistance

   5.1. Information in Directory for Edge Bridges

   To achieve the benefits of directory service for TRILL, the
   corresponding directory server will need, at a minimum, the
   following attributes:

   [IP, MAC, attached RBridge nickname, {list of interested RBridges}]

   The {list of interested RBridges} would get populated when an
   RBridge queries for information, or pushed down from management
   systems. The list is used to notify those RBridges whose
   connectivity to VMs changes due to VM migration or link failures.

   There can be two different models for RBridge edge node to be
   assisted by Directory Service: Push Model and Pull Model.

   5.2. Push Model

   Under this model, Directory Server(s) push down the MAC&VLAN <->
   Egress RBridge mapping for all the end stations which might
   communicate with end stations attached to an RBridge edge node.


Dunbar, et al           Expires December 2013                 [Page 9]


Internet-Draft       TRILL Directory Assistance Framework     July 2012

   Under this model, it is recommended that the ingress RBridge simply
   drops a data packet (instead of flooding to TRILL campus) if the
   packet's destination address can't be found in the MAC&VLAN<->Egress
   RBridge mapping table.

   It may not be necessary for every edge RBridge to get the entire
   mapping table for all the end stations in a data center. There are
   many ways to narrow the full set down to a smaller set of remote end
   stations that communicate with end stations attached to an edge
   RBridge. A simple approach of only pushing down the mapping for the
   VLANs which have active end stations under an edge RBridge can
   reduce the number of mapping entries being pushed down.

   However, the Push Model usually will push down more entries of
   MAC&VLAN<->Egress RBridge mapping to edge RBridges. Under the normal
   process of edge RBridge cache aging and unknown DA flooding, rarely
   used mapping entries would have been removed. But it can be
   difficult for Directory Servers to predict the communication
   patterns among applications within one VLAN. Therefore, it is likely
   that the Directory Servers will push down all the MAC&VLAN entries
   if there are end stations in the VLAN being attached to the edge
   RBridge. This is a major disadvantage of the Push Model.

   In the Push Model, it is necessary to have a message for an RBridge
   node to request directory server(s) to start pushing down the
   mapping entries. This message should at least include the VLANs
   enabled on the RBridge, so that directory server doesn't need to
   push down the entire mapping entries for all the end stations in the
   data center. An RBridge node can use this message to get mapping
   entries when it is initialized or restarted.

   The detailed message format and hand-shake mechanism between RBridge
   and Directory Server(s) is beyond the scope of this framework draft.

   When directory server needs to push down a very large number of
   entries to edge RBridges, summarization should be considered. For
   example, with one edge RBridge Nickname being associated with all
   attached end stations' MAC addresses and VLANs as shown below:











Dunbar, et al           Expires December 2013                [Page 10]


Internet-Draft       TRILL Directory Assistance Framework     July 2012

     +------------+-------+--------------------------------+
     | Nickname1  |VID-1  | MAC1, MAC2, ..MACn             |
     |            |------ +--------------------------------+
     |            |VID-2  | MAC1, MAC2, ..MACn             |
     |            |------ +--------------------------------+
     |            |.....  | MAC1, MAC2, ......MACn         |
     +-------------+------+--------------------------------+
     | Nickname2   |VID-1 | MAC1, MAC2, ... MACn           |
     |             |------+--------------------------------+
     |             |VID-2 | MAC1, MAC2, ... MACn           |
     |             |------+--------------------------------+
     |             |......| MAC1, MAC2, .. MACn            |
     +-------------+------+--------------------------------+
     | -------     |------+--------------------------------+
     |             |..... | MAC1, MAC2, ...MACn            |
     +-------------+------ +-------------------------------+
            Table 1: Summarized table pushed down from directory

   Whenever there is any change in MAC&VLAN <-> Egress RBridge mapping,
   that can be triggered by end stations being added, moved, or de-
   commissioned, an incremental update can be sent to the edge RBridges
   which are impacted by the change. Therefore, something like a
   sequence number has to be maintained by directory servers and
   RBridges. Detailed mechanisms will be described in a separate draft.

   5.3. Pull Model

   Under this model, an RBridge pulls the MAC&VLAN<->Egress RBridge
   mapping entry from the directory server when its cache doesn't have
   the entry. There are several options to trigger the pulling process.
   For example, the RBridge edge node can send a pulling request
   whenever it receives an unknown DA, or the RBridge edge node can
   simply intercept all ARP/ND requests and forward them to the
   Directory Server(s) that has the information on where the target
   stations are located. The ingress RBridge can cache the mapping
   pulled down from the directory.

   One advantage of the Pull Model is that edge RBridge can age out
   MAC&VLAN entries if they haven't been used for a certain period of
   time. Therefore, each edge RBridge will only keep the entries which
   are frequently used, so mapping table size can be smaller. Edge
   RBridges would query the Directory Server(s) for unknown DAs in data
   frames or ARP/ND and cache the response. When end stations attached
   to remote edge RBridges rarely communicate with the locally attached
   end stations, the corresponding MAC&VLAN entries would be aged out
   from the RBridge's cache.




Dunbar, et al           Expires December 2013                [Page 11]


Internet-Draft       TRILL Directory Assistance Framework     July 2012

   RBridge waiting for response from Directory Servers upon receiving a
   data frame with unknown DA is similar to a L2/L3 boundary router
   waiting for ARP/ND response upon receiving an IP data frame whose DA
   is not in the router's IP/MAC cache table. Most deployed routers
   today do hold the packets and send an ARP/ND requests to the target
   upon receiving a packet with DA not in its IP-MAC cache. When ARP/ND
   replies are received, the router will send the data frame to the
   target. This practice is to minimize flooding when targets don't
   exist in the subnet.

   When the target doesn't exist in the subnet, routers generally re-
   send ARP/ND request a few more times before dropping the packets.
   Therefore, the holding time by routers to wait for ARP/ND response
   can be longer than the time taken by the Pull Model to get IP-MAC
   mapping from directory if target doesn't exist in the subnet.

   A separate draft will describe the detailed messages and mechanism
   for edge RBridge to pull information from directory server(s).

6. Conclusion and Recommendation

    The traditional RBridge learning approach of observing data plane
    can no longer keep pace with the ever growing number of end stations
    in Data center.

    Therefore, we suggest TRILL consider directory assisted approach(es).
    This draft only describes the basic framework of using directory
    assisted approach for RBridge edge nodes. More complete mechanisms
    will be described in separate drafts.



7. Security Considerations

   TBD

8. IANA Considerations

   This document requires no IANA actions. RFC Editor: please delete
   this section before publication.

9. Acknowledgements

   This document was prepared using 2-Word-v2.0.template.dot.






Dunbar, et al           Expires December 2013                [Page 12]


Internet-Draft       TRILL Directory Assistance Framework     July 2012

10. References

    [RBridges] Perlman, et, al ''RBridge: Base Protocol Specification'',
   <draft-ietf-trill-rbridge-protocol-16.txt>, March, 2010


   [RBridges-AF]   Perlman, et, al ''RBridges: Appointed Forwarders'',
   <draft-ietf-trill-rbridge-af-02.txt>, April 2011



   [ARMD-Problem] Dunbar, et,al, ''Address Resolution for Large Data
             Center Problem Statement'', Oct 2010.

   [ARP reduction] Shah, et. al., "ARP Broadcast Reduction for Large Data
             Centers", Oct 2010



   [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
             Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997



 Authors' Addresses

   Linda Dunbar
   Huawei Technologies
   5430 Legacy Drive, Suite #175
   Plano, TX 75024, USA
   Phone: (469) 277 5840
   Email: ldunbar@huawei.com


   Donald Eastlake
   Huawei Technologies
   155 Beaver Street
   Milford, MA 01757 USA
   Phone: 1-508-333-2270
   Email: d3e3e3@gmail.com









Dunbar, et al           Expires December 2013                [Page 13]


Internet-Draft       TRILL Directory Assistance Framework     July 2012

   Radia Perlman
   Intel Labs
   2200 Mission College Blvd.
   Santa Clara, CA 95054-1549 USA
   Phone: +1-408-765-8080
   Email: Radia@alum.mit.edu


   Igor Gashinsky
   Yahoo
   45 West 18th Street 6th floor
   New York, NY 10011
   Email: igor@yahoo-inc.com




































Dunbar, et al           Expires December 2013                [Page 14]


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