[Docs] [txt|pdf|xml|html] [Tracker] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: 00 01 draft-li-idr-sr-policy-path-segment

Interdomain Routing Working Group                                  C. Li
Internet-Draft                                                   M. Chen
Intended status: Standards Track                                 J. Dong
Expires: April 25, 2019                                            Z. Li
                                                     Huawei Technologies
                                                        October 22, 2018


    Segment Routing Policies for Path Segment and Bidirectional Path
          draft-li-idr-sr-policy-path-segment-distribution-01

Abstract

   An SR policy is a set of candidate SR paths consisting of one or more
   segment lists with necessary path attributes.  For each SR path, it
   may also have its own path attributes, and Path Segment is one of
   them.  A Path Segment is defined to identify an SR path, which can be
   used for performance measurement, path correlation, and end-2-end
   path protection.  Path Segment can be also used to correlate two
   unidirctional SR paths into a bidirectional SR path which is required
   in some scenarios, for example, mobile backhaul transport network.

   This document defines extensions to BGP to distribute SR policies
   carrying Path Segment and bidirectional path information.

Requirements Language

   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].

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 April 25, 2019.




Li, et al.               Expires April 25, 2019                 [Page 1]


Internet-Draft   Path ID and Bi-directional Path in BGP     October 2018


Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2018 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
   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
   3.  SR Policy for Path Identifier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.1.  SR Path Segment Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  SR Policy for Bidirectional Path  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     4.1.  SR Bidirectional Path Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     4.2.  SR Reverse Path Segment List Sub-TLV  . . . . . . . . . .   7
   5.  Operations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   6.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   7.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   8.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   9.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     9.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     9.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9

1.  Introduction

   Segment routing (SR) [RFC8402] is a source routing paradigm that
   explicitly indicates the forwarding path for packets at the ingress
   node.  The ingress node steers packets into a specific path according
   to the Segment Routing Policy ( SR Policy) as defined in
   [I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy].  For distributing SR
   policies to the headend, [I-D.ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy]
   specifies a mechanism by using BGP, and new sub-TLVs are defined for
   SR Policies in BGP UPDATE message.

   In many use cases such as performance measurement, the path to which
   the packets belong is required to be identified.  Futhermore, in some
   scenarios, for example, mobile backhaul transport network, there are
   requirements to support bidirectional path.  However, there is no



Li, et al.               Expires April 25, 2019                 [Page 2]


Internet-Draft   Path ID and Bi-directional Path in BGP     October 2018


   path identification information for each Segment List in the SR
   Policies defined in [I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy].  Also,
   the SR Policies defined in [I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy]
   only supports unidirectional SR paths.

   Therefore, this document defines the extension to SR policies that
   carry Path Segment in the Segment List and support bidirectional
   path.  The Path Segment can be a Path Segment in SR-MPLS
   [I-D.cheng-spring-mpls-path-segment] , or a Path Segment in SRv6
   [I-D.li-spring-srv6-path-segment], or other IDs that can identify a
   path.  Also, this document defines extensions to BGP to distribute SR
   policies carriying Path Segment and bidirectional path information.

2.  Terminology

   This memo makes use of the terms defined in [RFC8402] and
   [I-D.ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy].

3.  SR Policy for Path Identifier

   As defined in [I-D.ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy] , the SR
   Policy encoding structure is as follows:

      SR Policy SAFI NLRI: <Distinguisher, Policy-Color, Endpoint>
      Attributes:
         Tunnel Encaps Attribute (23)
            Tunnel Type: SR Policy
                Binding SID
                Preference
                Priority
                Policy Name
                Explicit NULL Label Policy (ENLP)
                Segment List
                    Weight
                    Segment
                    Segment
                    ...
                ...

   An SR path can be specified by an Segment List sub-TLV that contains
   a set of segment sub-TLVs and other sub-TLVs as shown above.  As
   defined in [I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy], a candidate path
   includes multiple SR paths specified by SID list.  The Path Segment
   can be used for idendifying an SR path(specified by SID list).  Also,
   it can be used for identifying an SR candidate path or an SR Policy
   in some use cases if needed.  New SR Policy encoding structure is
   expressed as below:




Li, et al.               Expires April 25, 2019                 [Page 3]


Internet-Draft   Path ID and Bi-directional Path in BGP     October 2018


      SR Policy SAFI NLRI: <Distinguisher, Policy-Color, Endpoint>
      Attributes:
         Tunnel Encaps Attribute (23)
            Tunnel Type: SR Policy
                Binding SID
                Preference
                Priority
                Policy Name
                Explicit NULL Label Policy (ENLP)
                Path Segment
                Segment List
                    Weight
                    Path Segment
                    Segment
                    Segment
                    ...
                Segment List
                    Weight
                    Path Segment
                    Segment
                    Segment
                    ...
                ...


3.1.  SR Path Segment Sub-TLV

   This section defines an SR Path Segment sub-TLV.

   An SR Path Segment sub-TLV can be included in the segment list sub-
   TLV to identify an SID list, and it MUST appear only once within a
   Segment List sub-TLV.  It 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     |    Flag       |      ST       |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                     Path Segment (Variable)                   |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
                         Figure 1. Path Segment sub-TLV

   Where:

   Type: to be assigned by IANA (suggested value 10).

   Length: the total length of the value field not including Type and
   Length fields.



Li, et al.               Expires April 25, 2019                 [Page 4]


Internet-Draft   Path ID and Bi-directional Path in BGP     October 2018


   Flag: 8 bits of flags.  Following flags are defined:

     0  1  2  3  4  5  6  7
   +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+
   |    Reserved        |G |
   +--+--+--+--+--+--+--+--+

   G-Flag: Global flag.  Set when the Path Segment is global within an
   SR domain.

   Reserved: 5 bits reserved and MUST be set to 0 on transmission and
   MUST be ignored on receipt.

   ST: Segment type, specifies the type of the Path Segment, and it has
   following types:

   o  0: SR-MPLS Path Segment

   o  1: SRv6 Path Segment

   o  2-255:Reserved

   Path Segment: The Path Segment of an SR path.  The Path Segment type
   is indicated by the Segment Type(ST) field.  It can be a Path Segment
   in SR-MPLS [I-D.cheng-spring-mpls-path-segment], or a Path Segment in
   SRv6 [I-D.li-spring-srv6-path-segment], or other IDs that can
   identify a path.

4.  SR Policy for Bidirectional Path

   In some scenarios, for example, mobile backhaul transport network,
   there are requirements to support bidirectional path.  In SR, a
   bidirectional path can be represented as a binding of two
   unidirectional SR paths.  This document also defines new sub-TLVs to
   describe an SR bidirectional path.  An SR policy carrying SR
   bidirectional path information is expressed as below:















Li, et al.               Expires April 25, 2019                 [Page 5]


Internet-Draft   Path ID and Bi-directional Path in BGP     October 2018


       SR Policy SAFI NLRI: <Distinguisher, Policy-Color, Endpoint>
           Attributes: Tunnel Encaps Attribute (23)
           Tunnel Type: SR Policy
               Binding SID
               Preference
               Priority
               Policy Name
               Explicit NULL Label Policy (ENLP)
               Bidirectioanl Path
                   Segment List
                       Weight
                       Path Segment
                       Segment
                       Segment
                       ...
                   Reverse Segment List
                       Weight
                       Path Segment
                       Segment
                       Segment
                       ...


4.1.  SR Bidirectional Path Sub-TLV

   This section defines an SR bidirectional path sub-TLV to specify a
   bidirectional path, which contains a Segment List sub-TLV
   [I-D.ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy] and an associated Reverse
   Path Segment List as defined at section 4.2.  The SR bidirectional
   path 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            |   RESERVED    |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                        Sub-TLVs (Variable)                    |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
                  Figure 2. SR Bidirectional path sub-TLV

   Where:

   Type: TBA, and the suggest value is 14.

   Length: the total length of the sub-TLVs encoded within the SR
   Bidirectional Path Sub-TLV not including Type and Length fields.





Li, et al.               Expires April 25, 2019                 [Page 6]


Internet-Draft   Path ID and Bi-directional Path in BGP     October 2018


   RESERVED: 1 octet of reserved bits.  SHOULD be unset on transmission
   and MUST be ignored on receipt.

   Sub-TLVs:

   o  An Segment List sub-TLV

   o  An associated Reverse Path Segment List sub-TLV

4.2.  SR Reverse Path Segment List Sub-TLV

   An SR Reverse Path Segment List sub-TLV is defined to specify an SR
   reverse path associated with the path specified by the Segment List
   in the same SR Bidirectional Path Sub-TLV, and it 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            |   RESERVED    |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |                        Sub-TLVs (Variable)                    |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
               Figure 2. SR Reverse Path Segment List Sub-TLV

   where:

   Type: TBA, and suggest value is 127.

   Length: the total length of the sub-TLVs encoded within the SR
   Reverse Path Segment List Sub-TLV not including the Type and Length
   fields.

   RESERVED: 1 octet of reserved bits.  SHOULD be unset on transmission
   and MUST be ignored on receipt.

   sub-TLVs, reuse the sub-TLVs in Segment List defined in
   [I-D.ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy].

   o  An optional single Weight sub-TLV.

   o  An mandatory SR Path Segment sub-TLV that contains the Path
      Segment of the reverse SR path.

   o  Zero or more Segment sub-TLVs to specify the reverse SR path.

   The Segment sub-TLVs in the Reverse Path Segment List sub-TLV
   provides the information of the reverse SR path, which can be used



Li, et al.               Expires April 25, 2019                 [Page 7]


Internet-Draft   Path ID and Bi-directional Path in BGP     October 2018


   for directing egress BFD peer to use specific path for the reverse
   direction of the BFD session [I-D.ietf-mpls-bfd-directed] or other
   applications.

5.  Operations

   The document does not bring new operation beyong the description of
   operations defined in [I-D.ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy].  The
   existing operations defined in
   [I-D.ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy] can apply to this document
   directly.

   Typically but not limit to, the unidirectional or bidirectional SR
   policies carrying path identification infomation are configured by a
   controller.

   After configuration, the unidirectional or bidirectional SR policies
   carrying path identification infomation will be advertised by BGP
   update messages.  The operation of advertisement is the same as
   defined in [I-D.ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy], as well as the
   receiption.

   The consumer of the unidirectional or bidirectional SR policies is
   not the BGP process, it can be any applications, such as performance
   measurement [I-D.gandhi-spring-udp-pm].  The operation of sending
   information to consumers is out of scope of this document.

6.  IANA Considerations

   TBA

7.  Security Considerations

   TBA

8.  Acknowledgements

   TBA

9.  References

9.1.  Normative References

   [I-D.cheng-spring-mpls-path-segment]
              Cheng, W., Wang, L., Li, H., Chen, M., Gandhi, R., Zigler,
              R., and S. Zhan, "Path Segment in MPLS Based Segment
              Routing Network", draft-cheng-spring-mpls-path-segment-03
              (work in progress), October 2018.



Li, et al.               Expires April 25, 2019                 [Page 8]


Internet-Draft   Path ID and Bi-directional Path in BGP     October 2018


   [I-D.ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy]
              Previdi, S., Filsfils, C., Jain, D., Mattes, P., Rosen,
              E., and S. Lin, "Advertising Segment Routing Policies in
              BGP", draft-ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy-04 (work in
              progress), July 2018.

   [I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-policy]
              Filsfils, C., Sivabalan, S., daniel.voyer@bell.ca, d.,
              bogdanov@google.com, b., and P. Mattes, "Segment Routing
              Policy Architecture", draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-
              policy-01 (work in progress), June 2018.

   [I-D.li-spring-srv6-path-segment]
              Li, C., Chen, M., Dhody, D., Li, Z., Dong, J., and R.
              Gandhi, "Path Segment for SRv6 (Segment Routing in IPv6)",
              draft-li-spring-srv6-path-segment-00 (work in progress),
              October 2018.

   [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>.

   [RFC8402]  Filsfils, C., Ed., Previdi, S., Ed., Ginsberg, L.,
              Decraene, B., Litkowski, S., and R. Shakir, "Segment
              Routing Architecture", RFC 8402, DOI 10.17487/RFC8402,
              July 2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8402>.

9.2.  Informative References

   [I-D.gandhi-spring-udp-pm]
              Gandhi, R., Filsfils, C., daniel.voyer@bell.ca, d.,
              Salsano, S., Ventre, P., and M. Chen, "UDP Path for In-
              band Performance Measurement for Segment Routing
              Networks", draft-gandhi-spring-udp-pm-02 (work in
              progress), September 2018.

   [I-D.ietf-mpls-bfd-directed]
              Mirsky, G., Tantsura, J., Varlashkin, I., and M. Chen,
              "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) Directed Return
              Path", draft-ietf-mpls-bfd-directed-10 (work in progress),
              September 2018.

Authors' Addresses







Li, et al.               Expires April 25, 2019                 [Page 9]


Internet-Draft   Path ID and Bi-directional Path in BGP     October 2018


   Cheng Li
   Huawei Technologies
   Huawei Campus, No. 156 Beiqing Rd.
   Beijing  100095
   China

   Email: chengli13@huawei.com


   Mach(Guoyi) Chen
   Huawei Technologies
   Huawei Campus, No. 156 Beiqing Rd.
   Beijing  100095
   China

   Email: Mach.chen@huawei.com


   Jie Dong
   Huawei Technologies
   Huawei Campus, No. 156 Beiqing Rd.
   Beijing  100095
   China

   Email: jie.dong@huawei.com


   Zhenbin Li
   Huawei Technologies
   Huawei Campus, No. 156 Beiqing Rd.
   Beijing  100095
   China

   Email: lizhenbin@huawei.com

















Li, et al.               Expires April 25, 2019                [Page 10]


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