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

Versions: 00 01 02 03

NVO3  Working Group                                            G. Mirsky
Internet-Draft                                                 ZTE Corp.
Intended status: Standards Track                                N. Kumar
Expires: September 11, 2017                                     D. Kumar
                                                     Cisco Systems, Inc.
                                                                 M. Chen
                                                                   Y. Li
                                                     Huawei Technologies
                                                               D. Dolson
                                                                Sandvine
                                                          March 10, 2017


                 OAM Header for use in Overlay Networks
                   draft-ooamdt-rtgwg-ooam-header-03

Abstract

   This document introduces Overlay Operations, Administration, and
   Maintenance (OOAM) Header to be used in overlay networks to create
   Overlay Associated Channel (OAC) to ensure that OOAM control packets
   are in-band with user traffic and de-multiplex OOAM protocols.

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 http://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 September 11, 2017.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2017 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



Mirsky, et al.         Expires September 11, 2017               [Page 1]


Internet-Draft   OAM Header for use in Overlay Networks       March 2017


   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
     1.1.  Conventions used in this document . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
       1.1.1.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
       1.1.2.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   2.  General Requirements to OAM Protocols in Overlay Networks . .   3
   3.  Associated Channel in Overlay Networks  . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  Overlay OAM Header  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     4.1.  Use of OOAM Header in Active OAM  . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     4.2.  Use of OOAM Header in Hybrid OAM  . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   5.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     5.1.  OOAM Message Types  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     5.2.  OOAM Header Flags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   7.  Contributors  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   8.  Acknowledgement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   9.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     9.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     9.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10

1.  Introduction

   New protocols that support overlay networks like VxLAN-GPE
   [I-D.ietf-nvo3-vxlan-gpe], GUE [I-D.ietf-nvo3-gue], Geneve
   [I-D.ietf-nvo3-geneve], BIER [I-D.ietf-bier-mpls-encapsulation], and
   NSH [I-D.ietf-sfc-nsh] support multi-protocol payload, e.g.
   Ethernet, IPv4/IPv6, and recognize Operations, Administration, and
   Maintenance (OAM) as one of distinct types.  That ensures that
   Overlay OAM (OOAM)packets are sharing fate with Overlay data packet
   traversing the underlay.

   This document introduces generic requirements to OAM protocols used
   in overlay networks and defines OOAM Header to be used in overlay
   networks to de-multiplex OOAM protocols.








Mirsky, et al.         Expires September 11, 2017               [Page 2]


Internet-Draft   OAM Header for use in Overlay Networks       March 2017


1.1.  Conventions used in this document

1.1.1.  Terminology

   Term "Overlay OAM" used in this document interchangeably with longer
   version "set of OAM protocols, methods and tools for Overlay
   networks".

   NTP Network Time Protocol

   OAC Overlay Associated Channel

   OAM Operations, Administration, and Maintenance

   OOAM Overlay OAM

   PTP Precision Time 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
   [RFC2119].

2.  General Requirements to OAM Protocols in Overlay Networks

   OAM protocols, whether it is part of fault management or performance
   monitoring, intended to provide reliable information that can be used
   to identify defect, localize it and apply corrective actions.  One of
   the main challenges that network operators may encounter is
   interpretations of reports of the defect or service degradation and
   correlation to affected services.  In order to improve reliability of
   the correlation process we set forth the following requirements:

      REQ#1: Overlay OAM packets SHOULD be fate sharing with data
      traffic, i.e. in-band with the monitored traffic, i.e. follow
      exactly the same overlay and transport path as data plane traffic,
      in forward direction, i.e. from ingress toward egress end point(s)
      of the OAM test.

      REQ#2: Encapsulation of OAM control message and data packets in
      underlay network MUST be indistinguishable from underlay network
      forwarding point of view.

      REQ#3: Presence of OAM control message in overlay packet MUST be
      unambiguously identifiable.




Mirsky, et al.         Expires September 11, 2017               [Page 3]


Internet-Draft   OAM Header for use in Overlay Networks       March 2017


      REQ#4: It MUST be possible to express entropy for underlay Equal
      Cost Multipath in overlay encapsulation in order to avoid using
      data packet content by underlay transient nodes.

3.  Associated Channel in Overlay Networks

   Associated channel in the overlay network is the channel that, by
   using the same encapsulation as user traffic, follows the same path
   through the underlay network as user traffic.  In other words, the
   associated channel is in-band with user traffic.  Creating notion of
   the overlay associated channel (OAC) in the overlay network ensures
   that control packets of active OAM protocols carried in the OAC are
   in-band with user traffic.  Additionally, OAC allows development of
   OAM tools that, from operational point of view, function in
   essentially the same manner in any type of overlay.

4.  Overlay OAM Header

   OOAM Header immediately follows the header of the overlay and
   identifies OAC.  The format of the OOAM Header is:

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   | V |           Msg Type        |           Length              |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |             Flags             |    Reserved   |   Next Prot   |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   ~                  OOAM control message                         ~
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                    Figure 1: Overlay OAM Header format

   The OAM Header consists of the following fields:

   o  V - two bits long field indicates the current version of the
      Overlay OAM Header.  The current value is 0;

   o  Msg Type - 14 bits long field identifies OAM protocol, e.g.  Echo
      Request/Reply, BFD, Performance Measurement;

   o  Length - two octets long field that is length of the OOAM control
      packet in octets;

   o  Flags -two octets long field carries bit flags that define
      optional capability and thus processing of the OOAM control
      packet;




Mirsky, et al.         Expires September 11, 2017               [Page 4]


Internet-Draft   OAM Header for use in Overlay Networks       March 2017


   o  Reserved - one octet field that MUST be zeroed on transmit and
      ignored on receipt;

   o  Next Prot - one octet long field that defines optional payload
      that is present after the OOAM Control Packet.

   The format of the Flags field is:

     0                   1
    0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |T|          Reserved           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                       Figure 2: Flags field format

   where:

   o  T - Timestap block flag.

   o  Reserved - must be set to all zeroes on transmission and ignored
      on receipt.

   The OOAM header may be followed by the Timestamp control block
   Figure 3 and then by OOAM Control Packet identified by the Msg Type
   field.

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |  QTF  |  RTF  |                   Reserved                    |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                           Timestamp 1                         |
   |                                                               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   ~                                                               ~
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                           Timestamp 4                         |
   |                                                               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                     Figure 3: Timestamp block format

   where:

      QTF - Querier timestamp format

      RTF - Responder timestamp format



Mirsky, et al.         Expires September 11, 2017               [Page 5]


Internet-Draft   OAM Header for use in Overlay Networks       March 2017


      Timestamp 1-4 - 64-bit timestamp values

   Network Time Protocol (NTP), described in [RFC5905], is widely used
   and has long history of deployment.  But it is the IEEE 1588
   Precision Time Protocol (PTP) [IEEE.1588.2008] that is being broadly
   used to achieve high-quality clock synchronization.  Converging
   between NTP and PTP time formats is possible but is not trivial and
   does come with cost, particularly when it is required to be performed
   in real time without loss of accuracy.  And recently protocols that
   supported only NTP time format, like One-Way Active Measurement
   Protocol [RFC4656] and Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol [RFC5357],
   have been enhanced to support the PTP time format as well
   [I-D.ietf-ippm-twamp-time-format].  This document proposes to select
   PTP time format as default time format for Overlay OAM performance
   measurement.  Hence QTF, RTF fields MUST be set to 0 if querier or
   responder use PTP time format respectively.  If the querier or
   responder use the NTP time format, then QTF and/or RTF MUST be set to
   1.  Use of other values MUST be considered as error and MAY be
   reported.

4.1.  Use of OOAM Header in Active OAM

   Active OAM methods, whether used for fault management or performance
   monitoring, generate dedicated test packets [RFC7799].  Format of an
   OAM test packet in overlay network presented in Figure 4.

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   ~              Underlay network encapsulation                   ~
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   ~              Overlay network encapsulation                    ~
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                                                               |
   +                     OOAM Header               +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                                               |NextProt = None|
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   ~                  OOAM control message                         ~
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

         Figure 4: Overlay OAM Header in Active OAM Control Packet

   Because active OAM method uses only OAM protocol value of Next Prot
   field in the OOAM header is set to None indicating that there's no
   content from other protocol immediately after OOAM control message in
   the packet.





Mirsky, et al.         Expires September 11, 2017               [Page 6]


Internet-Draft   OAM Header for use in Overlay Networks       March 2017


4.2.  Use of OOAM Header in Hybrid OAM

   Hybrid OAM Type I methods, whether used for fault management or
   performance monitoring, modify user data packets [RFC7799].  Format
   of such modified packet in overlay network presented in Figure 5.

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   ~              Underlay network encapsulation                   ~
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   ~              Overlay network encapsulation                    ~
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                                                               |
   +                     OOAM Header               +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                                               |NextProt = Data|
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   ~                  OOAM control message                         ~
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   ~                         User data                             ~
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

         Figure 5: Overlay OAM Header in Hybrid OAM Control Packet

   In case when OOAM header used for Hybrid Type I OAM method value of
   the Next Prot field is set to the value associated with the protocol
   of the user data.

5.  IANA Considerations

   IANA is requested to create new registry called "Overlay OAM".

5.1.  OOAM Message Types

   IANA is requested to create new sub-registry called "Overlay OAM
   Protocol Types" in the "Overlay OAM" registry.  All code points in
   the range 1 through 15615 in this registry shall be allocated
   according to the "IETF Review" procedure as specified in [RFC5226] .
   Remaining code points are allocated according to the Table 1:












Mirsky, et al.         Expires September 11, 2017               [Page 7]


Internet-Draft   OAM Header for use in Overlay Networks       March 2017


        +---------------+--------------+-------------------------+
        | Value         | Description  | Reference               |
        +---------------+--------------+-------------------------+
        | 0             |   Reserved   |                         |
        | 1 - 15615     |  Unassigned  | IETF Review             |
        | 15616 - 16127 |  Unassigned  | First Come First Served |
        | 16128 - 16143 | Experimental | This document           |
        | 16144 - 16382 | Private Use  | This document           |
        | 16383         |   Reserved   | This document           |
        +---------------+--------------+-------------------------+

                    Table 1: Overlay OAM Protocol type

5.2.  OOAM Header Flags

   IANA is requested to create sub-registry "Overlay OAM Header Flags"
   in "Overlay OAM" registry.  Two flags are defined in this document.
   New values are assigned via Standards Action [RFC5226].

              +-----------+-----------------+---------------+
              | Flags bit |   Description   | Reference     |
              +-----------+-----------------+---------------+
              | Bit 0     | Timestamp field | This document |
              | Bit 1-15  |    Unassigned   |               |
              +-----------+-----------------+---------------+

                        Table 2: Overlay OAM Flags

6.  Security Considerations

   TBD

7.  Contributors

   Work on this documented started by Overlay OAM Design Team with
   contributions from:

   Carlos Pignataro

   Cisco Systems, Inc.

   cpignata@cisco.com

   Erik Nordmark

   Arista Networks

   nordmark@acm.org



Mirsky, et al.         Expires September 11, 2017               [Page 8]


Internet-Draft   OAM Header for use in Overlay Networks       March 2017


   Ignas Bagdonas

   ibagdona@gmail.com

   David Mozes

   Mellanox Technologies Ltd.

   davidm@mellanox.com

8.  Acknowledgement

   TBD

9.  References

9.1.  Normative References

   [IEEE.1588.2008]
              "Standard for a Precision Clock Synchronization Protocol
              for Networked Measurement and Control Systems",
              IEEE Standard 1588, July 2008.

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

   [RFC5905]  Mills, D., Martin, J., Ed., Burbank, J., and W. Kasch,
              "Network Time Protocol Version 4: Protocol and Algorithms
              Specification", RFC 5905, DOI 10.17487/RFC5905, June 2010,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5905>.

9.2.  Informative References

   [I-D.ietf-bier-mpls-encapsulation]
              Wijnands, I., Rosen, E., Dolganow, A., Tantsura, J.,
              Aldrin, S., and I. Meilik, "Encapsulation for Bit Index
              Explicit Replication in MPLS and non-MPLS Networks",
              draft-ietf-bier-mpls-encapsulation-06 (work in progress),
              December 2016.

   [I-D.ietf-ippm-twamp-time-format]
              Mirsky, G. and I. Meilik, "Support of IEEE-1588 time stamp
              format in Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (TWAMP)",
              draft-ietf-ippm-twamp-time-format-05 (work in progress),
              March 2017.




Mirsky, et al.         Expires September 11, 2017               [Page 9]


Internet-Draft   OAM Header for use in Overlay Networks       March 2017


   [I-D.ietf-nvo3-geneve]
              Gross, J., Ganga, I., and T. Sridhar, "Geneve: Generic
              Network Virtualization Encapsulation", draft-ietf-
              nvo3-geneve-03 (work in progress), September 2016.

   [I-D.ietf-nvo3-gue]
              Herbert, T., Yong, L., and O. Zia, "Generic UDP
              Encapsulation", draft-ietf-nvo3-gue-05 (work in progress),
              October 2016.

   [I-D.ietf-nvo3-vxlan-gpe]
              Maino, F., Kreeger, L., and U. Elzur, "Generic Protocol
              Extension for VXLAN", draft-ietf-nvo3-vxlan-gpe-03 (work
              in progress), October 2016.

   [I-D.ietf-sfc-nsh]
              Quinn, P. and U. Elzur, "Network Service Header", draft-
              ietf-sfc-nsh-12 (work in progress), February 2017.

   [RFC4656]  Shalunov, S., Teitelbaum, B., Karp, A., Boote, J., and M.
              Zekauskas, "A One-way Active Measurement Protocol
              (OWAMP)", RFC 4656, DOI 10.17487/RFC4656, September 2006,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4656>.

   [RFC5226]  Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
              IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC5226, May 2008,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5226>.

   [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,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5357>.

   [RFC7799]  Morton, A., "Active and Passive Metrics and Methods (with
              Hybrid Types In-Between)", RFC 7799, DOI 10.17487/RFC7799,
              May 2016, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7799>.

Authors' Addresses

   Greg Mirsky
   ZTE Corp.

   Email: gregimirsky@gmail.com







Mirsky, et al.         Expires September 11, 2017              [Page 10]


Internet-Draft   OAM Header for use in Overlay Networks       March 2017


   Nagendra Kumar
   Cisco Systems, Inc.

   Email: naikumar@cisco.com


   Deepak Kumar
   Cisco Systems, Inc.

   Email: dekumar@cisco.com


   Mach Chen
   Huawei Technologies

   Email: mach.chen@huawei.com


   Yizhou Li
   Huawei Technologies

   Email: liyizhou@huawei.com


   David Dolson
   Sandvine

   Email: ddolson@sandvine.com























Mirsky, et al.         Expires September 11, 2017              [Page 11]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.124, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/