draft-ietf-mpls-sr-over-ip-05.txt | draft-ietf-mpls-sr-over-ip-06.txt | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Network Working Group X. Xu | Network Working Group X. Xu | |||
Internet-Draft Alibaba, Inc | Internet-Draft Alibaba, Inc | |||
Intended status: Standards Track S. Bryant | Intended status: Standards Track S. Bryant | |||
Expires: November 11, 2019 Huawei | Expires: November 24, 2019 Huawei | |||
A. Farrel | A. Farrel | |||
Old Dog Consulting | Old Dog Consulting | |||
S. Hassan | S. Hassan | |||
Cisco | Cisco | |||
W. Henderickx | W. Henderickx | |||
Nokia | Nokia | |||
Z. Li | Z. Li | |||
Huawei | Huawei | |||
May 10, 2019 | May 23, 2019 | |||
SR-MPLS over IP | SR-MPLS over IP | |||
draft-ietf-mpls-sr-over-ip-05 | draft-ietf-mpls-sr-over-ip-06 | |||
Abstract | Abstract | |||
MPLS Segment Routing (SR-MPLS) is an MPLS data plane-based source | MPLS Segment Routing (SR-MPLS) is an MPLS data plane-based source | |||
routing paradigm in which the sender of a packet is allowed to | routing paradigm in which the sender of a packet is allowed to | |||
partially or completely specify the route the packet takes through | partially or completely specify the route the packet takes through | |||
the network by imposing stacked MPLS labels on the packet. SR-MPLS | the network by imposing stacked MPLS labels on the packet. SR-MPLS | |||
can be leveraged to realize a source routing mechanism across MPLS, | can be leveraged to realize a source routing mechanism across MPLS, | |||
IPv4, and IPv6 data planes by using an MPLS label stack as a source | IPv4, and IPv6 data planes by using an MPLS label stack as a source | |||
routing instruction set while making no changes to SR-MPLS | routing instruction set while making no changes to SR-MPLS | |||
skipping to change at page 2, line 4 ¶ | skipping to change at page 2, line 4 ¶ | |||
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 https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. | Drafts is at https://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 November 11, 2019. | This Internet-Draft will expire on November 24, 2019. | |||
Copyright Notice | Copyright Notice | |||
Copyright (c) 2019 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 | |||
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | (https://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 | |||
skipping to change at page 3, line 37 ¶ | skipping to change at page 3, line 37 ¶ | |||
capitals, as shown here. | capitals, as shown here. | |||
2. Use Cases | 2. Use Cases | |||
Tunneling SR-MPLS using IPv4 and/or IPv6 tunnels is useful at least | Tunneling SR-MPLS using IPv4 and/or IPv6 tunnels is useful at least | |||
in the use cases listed below. In all cases, this can be enabled | in the use cases listed below. In all cases, this can be enabled | |||
using an IP tunneling mechanism such as MPLS-in-UDP as described in | using an IP tunneling mechanism such as MPLS-in-UDP as described in | |||
[RFC7510]. The tunnel selected MUST have its remote end point | [RFC7510]. The tunnel selected MUST have its remote end point | |||
(destination) address equal to the address of the next SR-MPLS | (destination) address equal to the address of the next SR-MPLS | |||
capable node identified as being on the SR path (i.e., the egress of | capable node identified as being on the SR path (i.e., the egress of | |||
the active node segment). The local end point (source) address is | the active segment). The local end point (source) address is set to | |||
set to an address of the encapsulating node. [RFC7510] gives further | an address of the encapsulating node. [RFC7510] gives further advice | |||
advice on how to set the source address if the UDP zero-checksum mode | on how to set the source address if the UDP zero-checksum mode is | |||
is used with MPLS-in-UDP. | used with MPLS-in-UDP. | |||
o Incremental deployment of the SR-MPLS technology may be | o Incremental deployment of the SR-MPLS technology may be | |||
facilitated by tunneling SR-MPLS packets across parts of a network | facilitated by tunneling SR-MPLS packets across parts of a network | |||
that are not SR-MPLS as shown in Figure 1. This demonstrates how | that are not SR-MPLS as shown in Figure 1. This demonstrates how | |||
islands of SR-MPLS may be connected across a legacy network. It | islands of SR-MPLS may be connected across a legacy network. It | |||
may be particularly useful for joining sites (such as data | may be particularly useful for joining sites (such as data | |||
centers). | centers). | |||
________________________ | ________________________ | |||
_______ ( ) _______ | _______ ( ) _______ | |||
skipping to change at page 6, line 16 ¶ | skipping to change at page 6, line 16 ¶ | |||
Global Block (SRGB). The SRGB is defined in [RFC8402]. There are | Global Block (SRGB). The SRGB is defined in [RFC8402]. There are | |||
a number of ways that the advertisement can be achieved including | a number of ways that the advertisement can be achieved including | |||
IGPs, BGP, configuration/management protocols. For example, see | IGPs, BGP, configuration/management protocols. For example, see | |||
[I-D.ietf-bess-datacenter-gateway]. | [I-D.ietf-bess-datacenter-gateway]. | |||
o When Router E advertises the prefix-SID SID(E) of prefix P(E) it | o When Router E advertises the prefix-SID SID(E) of prefix P(E) it | |||
MUST also advertise the encapsulation endpoint and the tunnel type | MUST also advertise the encapsulation endpoint and the tunnel type | |||
of any tunnel used to reach E. This information is flooded domain | of any tunnel used to reach E. This information is flooded domain | |||
wide. | wide. | |||
o If A and E are in different IGP domains then the information MUST | o If A and E are in different routing domains then the information | |||
be flooded into both domains. How this is achieved depends on the | MUST be flooded into both domains. How this is achieved depends | |||
advertisement mechanism being used. The objective is that router | on the advertisement mechanism being used. The objective is that | |||
A knows the characteristics of router E that originated the | router A knows the characteristics of router E that originated the | |||
advertisement of SID(E). | advertisement of SID(E). | |||
o Router A programs the FIB entry for prefix P(E) corresponding to | o Router A programs the FIB entry for prefix P(E) corresponding to | |||
the SID(E) according to whether a pop or swap action is advertised | the SID(E) according to whether a pop or swap action is advertised | |||
for the prefix. The resulting action may be: | for the prefix. The resulting action may be: | |||
* pop the top label | * pop the top label | |||
* swap the top label to a value equal to SID(E) plus the lower | * swap the top label to a value equal to SID(E) plus the lower | |||
bound of the SRGB of E | bound of the SRGB of E | |||
skipping to change at page 16, line 32 ¶ | skipping to change at page 16, line 32 ¶ | |||
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>. | May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>. | |||
[RFC8402] Filsfils, C., Ed., Previdi, S., Ed., Ginsberg, L., | [RFC8402] Filsfils, C., Ed., Previdi, S., Ed., Ginsberg, L., | |||
Decraene, B., Litkowski, S., and R. Shakir, "Segment | Decraene, B., Litkowski, S., and R. Shakir, "Segment | |||
Routing Architecture", RFC 8402, DOI 10.17487/RFC8402, | Routing Architecture", RFC 8402, DOI 10.17487/RFC8402, | |||
July 2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8402>. | July 2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8402>. | |||
8.2. Informative References | 8.2. Informative References | |||
[I-D.ietf-6man-segment-routing-header] | [I-D.ietf-6man-segment-routing-header] | |||
Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Leddy, J., Matsushima, S., and | Filsfils, C., Dukes, D., Previdi, S., Leddy, J., | |||
d. daniel.voyer@bell.ca, "IPv6 Segment Routing Header | Matsushima, S., and d. daniel.voyer@bell.ca, "IPv6 Segment | |||
(SRH)", draft-ietf-6man-segment-routing-header-18 (work in | Routing Header (SRH)", draft-ietf-6man-segment-routing- | |||
progress), April 2019. | header-19 (work in progress), May 2019. | |||
[I-D.ietf-bess-datacenter-gateway] | [I-D.ietf-bess-datacenter-gateway] | |||
Farrel, A., Drake, J., Rosen, E., Patel, K., and L. Jalil, | Farrel, A., Drake, J., Rosen, E., Patel, K., and L. Jalil, | |||
"Gateway Auto-Discovery and Route Advertisement for | "Gateway Auto-Discovery and Route Advertisement for | |||
Segment Routing Enabled Domain Interconnection", draft- | Segment Routing Enabled Domain Interconnection", draft- | |||
ietf-bess-datacenter-gateway-02 (work in progress), | ietf-bess-datacenter-gateway-02 (work in progress), | |||
February 2019. | February 2019. | |||
[I-D.ietf-isis-encapsulation-cap] | [I-D.ietf-isis-encapsulation-cap] | |||
Xu, X., Decraene, B., Raszuk, R., Chunduri, U., Contreras, | Xu, X., Decraene, B., Raszuk, R., Chunduri, U., Contreras, | |||
L., and L. Jalil, "Advertising Tunnelling Capability in | L., and L. Jalil, "Advertising Tunnelling Capability in | |||
IS-IS", draft-ietf-isis-encapsulation-cap-01 (work in | IS-IS", draft-ietf-isis-encapsulation-cap-01 (work in | |||
progress), April 2017. | progress), April 2017. | |||
[I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions] | [I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions] | |||
Previdi, S., Ginsberg, L., Filsfils, C., Bashandy, A., | Previdi, S., Ginsberg, L., Filsfils, C., Bashandy, A., | |||
Gredler, H., and B. Decraene, "IS-IS Extensions for | Gredler, H., and B. Decraene, "IS-IS Extensions for | |||
Segment Routing", draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing- | Segment Routing", draft-ietf-isis-segment-routing- | |||
extensions-24 (work in progress), April 2019. | extensions-25 (work in progress), May 2019. | |||
[I-D.ietf-mpls-spring-entropy-label] | [I-D.ietf-mpls-spring-entropy-label] | |||
Kini, S., Kompella, K., Sivabalan, S., Litkowski, S., | Kini, S., Kompella, K., Sivabalan, S., Litkowski, S., | |||
Shakir, R., and J. Tantsura, "Entropy label for SPRING | Shakir, R., and J. Tantsura, "Entropy label for SPRING | |||
tunnels", draft-ietf-mpls-spring-entropy-label-12 (work in | tunnels", draft-ietf-mpls-spring-entropy-label-12 (work in | |||
progress), July 2018. | progress), July 2018. | |||
[I-D.ietf-ospf-encapsulation-cap] | [I-D.ietf-ospf-encapsulation-cap] | |||
Xu, X., Decraene, B., Raszuk, R., Contreras, L., and L. | Xu, X., Decraene, B., Raszuk, R., Contreras, L., and L. | |||
Jalil, "The Tunnel Encapsulations OSPF Router | Jalil, "The Tunnel Encapsulations OSPF Router | |||
End of changes. 8 change blocks. | ||||
17 lines changed or deleted | 17 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/ |