< draft-ietf-sfc-ioam-nsh-00.txt   draft-ietf-sfc-ioam-nsh-01.txt >
sfc F. Brockners SFC F. Brockners
Internet-Draft S. Bhandari Internet-Draft S. Bhandari
Intended status: Standards Track V. Govindan Intended status: Standards Track V. Govindan
Expires: December 2, 2018 C. Pignataro Expires: September 12, 2019 C. Pignataro
Cisco Cisco
H. Gredler H. Gredler
RtBrick Inc. RtBrick Inc.
J. Leddy J. Leddy
Comcast Comcast
S. Youell S. Youell
JMPC JPMC
T. Mizrahi T. Mizrahi
Marvell Huawei Network.IO Innovation Lab
D. Mozes D. Mozes
P. Lapukhov P. Lapukhov
Facebook Facebook
R. Chang R. Chang
Barefoot Networks Barefoot Networks
May 31, 2018 March 11, 2019
NSH Encapsulation for In-situ OAM Data Network Service Header (NSH) Encapsulation for In-situ OAM (IOAM) Data
draft-ietf-sfc-ioam-nsh-00 draft-ietf-sfc-ioam-nsh-01
Abstract Abstract
In-situ Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) records In-situ Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (IOAM) records
operational and telemetry information in the packet while the packet operational and telemetry information in the packet while the packet
traverses a path between two points in the network. This document traverses a path between two points in the network. This document
outlines how IOAM data fields are encapsulated in the Network Service outlines how IOAM data fields are encapsulated in the Network Service
Header (NSH). Header (NSH).
Status of This Memo Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on December 2, 2018. This Internet-Draft will expire on September 12, 2019.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
skipping to change at page 2, line 39 skipping to change at page 2, line 39
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
In-situ OAM (IOAM) records OAM information within the packet while In-situ OAM (IOAM), as defined in [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data], records
the packet traverses a particular network domain. The term "in-situ" OAM information within the packet while the packet traverses a
refers to the fact that the OAM data is added to the data packets particular network domain. The term "in-situ" refers to the fact
rather than is being sent within packets specifically dedicated to that the OAM data is added to the data packets rather than is being
OAM. This document defines how IOAM data fields are transported as sent within packets specifically dedicated to OAM. This document
part of the Network Service Header (NSH) [RFC8300] encapsulation. defines how IOAM data fields are transported as part of the Network
The IOAM data fields are defined in [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data]. An Service Header (NSH) [RFC8300] encapsulation for the Service Function
implementation of IOAM which leverages NSH to carry the IOAM data is Chaining (SFC) [RFC7665]. The IOAM data fields are defined in
available from the FD.io open source software project [FD.io]. [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data]. An implementation of IOAM which leverages
NSH to carry the IOAM data is available from the FD.io open source
software project [FD.io].
2. Conventions 2. Conventions
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. "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.
Abbreviations used in this document: Abbreviations used in this document:
IOAM: In-situ Operations, Administration, and Maintenance IOAM: In-situ Operations, Administration, and Maintenance
NSH: Network Service Header NSH: Network Service Header
OAM: Operations, Administration, and Maintenance OAM: Operations, Administration, and Maintenance
SFC: Service Function Chaining
TLV: Type, Length, Value TLV: Type, Length, Value
3. IOAM data fields encapsulation in NSH 3. IOAM data fields encapsulation in NSH
NSH is defined in [RFC8300]. IOAM data fields are carried in NSH The NSH is defined in [RFC8300]. IOAM data fields are carried in NSH
using a next protocol header which follows the NSH MDx metadata TLVs. using a next protocol header which follows the NSH MD context
An IOAM header is added containing the different IOAM data fields headers. An IOAM header is added containing the different IOAM data
defined in [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data]. In an administrative domain fields defined in [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data]. In an administrative
where IOAM is used, insertion of the IOAM header in NSH is enabled at domain where IOAM is used, insertion of the IOAM header in NSH is
the NSH tunnel endpoints, which also serve as IOAM encapsulating/ enabled at the NSH tunnel endpoints, which also serve as IOAM
decapsulating nodes by means of configuration. encapsulating/decapsulating nodes by means of configuration.
0 1 2 3 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 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+<-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+<-+
|Ver|O|C|R|R|R|R|R|R| Length | MD Type | NP = TBD_IOAM | | |Ver|O|U| TTL | Length |U|U|U|U|MD Type| NP = TBD_IOAM | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ N +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ N
| Service Path Identifer | Service Index | S | Service Path Identifier | Service Index | S
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ H +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ H
| ... | | | ... | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+<-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+<-+
| IOAM-Type | IOAM HDR len | Reserved | Next Protocol | | | IOAM-Type | IOAM HDR len | Reserved | Next Protocol | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ I +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ I
! | O ! | O
! | A ! | A
~ IOAM Option and Data Space ~ M ~ IOAM Option and Data Space ~ M
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
skipping to change at page 4, line 36 skipping to change at page 4, line 36
| | | |
| | | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
The NSH header and fields are defined in [RFC8300]. The "NSH Next The NSH header and fields are defined in [RFC8300]. The "NSH Next
Protocol" value (referred to as "NP" in the diagram above) is Protocol" value (referred to as "NP" in the diagram above) is
TBD_IOAM. TBD_IOAM.
The IOAM related fields in NSH are defined as follows: The IOAM related fields in NSH are defined as follows:
IOAM-Type: 8-bit field defining the IOAM Option type, as defined in IOAM-Type: 8-bit field defining the IOAM Option type, as defined
Section 7.2 of [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data]. in Section 7.2 of [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data].
IOAM HDR Len: 8 bit Length field contains the length of the IOAM IOAM HDR Len: 8 bit Length field contains the length of the IOAM
header in 4-octet units. header in 4-octet units.
Reserved bits: Reserved bits are present for future use. The Reserved bits: Reserved bits are present for future use. The
reserved bits MUST be set to 0x0 upon transmission and ignored reserved bits MUST be set to 0x0 upon transmission and ignored
upon receipt. upon receipt.
Next Protocol: 8-bit unsigned integer that determines the type of Next Protocol: 8-bit unsigned integer that determines the type of
header following IOAM protocol. header following IOAM protocol. The semantics of this field
are identical to the Next Protocol field in [RFC8300].
IOAM Option and Data Space: IOAM option header and data is present IOAM Option and Data Space: IOAM option header and data is
as specified by the IOAM-Type field, and is defined in Section 4 present as specified by the IOAM-Type field, and is defined in
of [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data]. Section 4 of [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data].
Multiple IOAM options MAY be included within the NSH encapsulation. Multiple IOAM options MAY be included within the NSH encapsulation.
For example, if a NSH encapsulation contains two IOAM options before For example, if a NSH encapsulation contains two IOAM options before
a data payload, the Next Protocol field of the first IOAM option will a data payload, the Next Protocol field of the first IOAM option will
contain the value of TBD_IOAM, while the Next Protocol field of the contain the value of TBD_IOAM, while the Next Protocol field of the
second IOAM option will contain the "NSH Next Protocol" number second IOAM option will contain the "NSH Next Protocol" number
indicating the type of the data payload. indicating the type of the data payload.
4. Considerations 4. Considerations
skipping to change at page 6, line 9 skipping to change at page 6, line 13
timestamp seconds, timestamps nanoseconds at every hop, then a timestamp seconds, timestamps nanoseconds at every hop, then a
total of 20 octets would be added to the packet at every hop. In total of 20 octets would be added to the packet at every hop. In
case this particular deployment would have a maximum path length case this particular deployment would have a maximum path length
of 15 hops in the IOAM domain, then a maximum of 300 octets of of 15 hops in the IOAM domain, then a maximum of 300 octets of
IOAM data were to be encapsulated in the packet. IOAM data were to be encapsulated in the packet.
Different approaches for encapsulating IOAM data fields in NSH could Different approaches for encapsulating IOAM data fields in NSH could
be considered: be considered:
1. Encapsulation of IOAM data fields as "NSH MD Type 2" (see 1. Encapsulation of IOAM data fields as "NSH MD Type 2" (see
[RFC8300], section 2.5). Each IOAM data field option (trace, [RFC8300], Section 2.5). Each IOAM data field option (trace,
proof-of-transit, and edge-to-edge) would be specified by a type, proof-of-transit, and edge-to-edge) would be specified by a type,
with the different IOAM data fields being TLVs within this the with the different IOAM data fields being TLVs within this the
particular option type. NSH MD Type 2 offers support for particular option type. NSH MD Type 2 offers support for
variable length meta-data. The length field is 6-bits, resulting variable length meta-data. The length field is 6-bits, resulting
in a maximum of 256 (2^6 x 4) octets. in a maximum of 256 (2^6 x 4) octets.
2. Encapsulation of IOAM data fields using the "Next Protocol" 2. Encapsulation of IOAM data fields using the "Next Protocol"
field. Each IOAM data field option (trace, proof-of-transit, and field. Each IOAM data field option (trace, proof-of-transit, and
edge-to-edge) would be specified by its own "next protocol". edge-to-edge) would be specified by its own "next protocol".
skipping to change at page 7, line 29 skipping to change at page 7, line 35
8. References 8. References
8.1. Normative References 8.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data] [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data]
Brockners, F., Bhandari, S., Pignataro, C., Gredler, H., Brockners, F., Bhandari, S., Pignataro, C., Gredler, H.,
Leddy, J., Youell, S., Mizrahi, T., Mozes, D., Lapukhov, Leddy, J., Youell, S., Mizrahi, T., Mozes, D., Lapukhov,
P., Chang, R., daniel.bernier@bell.ca, d., and J. Lemon, P., Chang, R., daniel.bernier@bell.ca, d., and J. Lemon,
"Data Fields for In-situ OAM", draft-ietf-ippm-ioam- "Data Fields for In-situ OAM", draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-
data-02 (work in progress), March 2018. data-04 (work in progress), October 2018.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, <https://www.rfc- DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, <https://www.rfc-
editor.org/info/rfc2119>. editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC2784] Farinacci, D., Li, T., Hanks, S., Meyer, D., and P. [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
Traina, "Generic Routing Encapsulation (GRE)", RFC 2784, 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2784, March 2000, <https://www.rfc- May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
editor.org/info/rfc2784>.
[RFC3232] Reynolds, J., Ed., "Assigned Numbers: RFC 1700 is Replaced
by an On-line Database", RFC 3232, DOI 10.17487/RFC3232,
January 2002, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3232>.
[RFC8300] Quinn, P., Ed., Elzur, U., Ed., and C. Pignataro, Ed., [RFC8300] Quinn, P., Ed., Elzur, U., Ed., and C. Pignataro, Ed.,
"Network Service Header (NSH)", RFC 8300, "Network Service Header (NSH)", RFC 8300,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8300, January 2018, <https://www.rfc- DOI 10.17487/RFC8300, January 2018, <https://www.rfc-
editor.org/info/rfc8300>. editor.org/info/rfc8300>.
8.2. Informative References 8.2. Informative References
[FD.io] "Fast Data Project: FD.io", <https://fd.io/>. [FD.io] "Fast Data Project: FD.io", <https://fd.io/>.
skipping to change at page 9, line 18 skipping to change at page 9, line 18
Stephen Youell Stephen Youell
JP Morgan Chase JP Morgan Chase
25 Bank Street 25 Bank Street
London E14 5JP London E14 5JP
United Kingdom United Kingdom
Email: stephen.youell@jpmorgan.com Email: stephen.youell@jpmorgan.com
Tal Mizrahi Tal Mizrahi
Marvell Huawei Network.IO Innovation Lab
6 Hamada St.
Yokneam 20692
Israel Israel
Email: talmi@marvell.com Email: tal.mizrahi.phd@gmail.com
David Mozes David Mozes
Email: mosesster@gmail.com Email: mosesster@gmail.com
Petr Lapukhov Petr Lapukhov
Facebook Facebook
1 Hacker Way 1 Hacker Way
Menlo Park, CA 94025 Menlo Park, CA 94025
US US
 End of changes. 25 change blocks. 
56 lines changed or deleted 56 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.47. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/