draft-ietf-sfc-ioam-nsh-03.txt   draft-ietf-sfc-ioam-nsh-04.txt 
SFC F. Brockners, Ed. SFC F. Brockners, Ed.
Internet-Draft S. Bhandari, Ed. Internet-Draft S. Bhandari, Ed.
Intended status: Standards Track Cisco Intended status: Standards Track Cisco
Expires: September 20, 2020 March 19, 2020 Expires: December 18, 2020 June 16, 2020
Network Service Header (NSH) Encapsulation for In-situ OAM (IOAM) Data Network Service Header (NSH) Encapsulation for In-situ OAM (IOAM) Data
draft-ietf-sfc-ioam-nsh-03 draft-ietf-sfc-ioam-nsh-04
Abstract Abstract
In-situ Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (IOAM) 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
skipping to change at page 1, line 34 skipping to change at page 1, line 34
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 September 20, 2020. This Internet-Draft will expire on December 18, 2020.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2020 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 2, line 12 skipping to change at page 2, line 12
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2. Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. IOAM data fields encapsulation in NSH . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. IOAM data fields encapsulation in NSH . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4. Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.1. Discussion of the encapsulation approach . . . . . . . . 4 4.1. Discussion of the encapsulation approach . . . . . . . . 4
4.2. IOAM and the use of the NSH O-bit . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4.2. IOAM and the use of the NSH O-bit . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
8. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 8. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
In-situ OAM (IOAM), as defined in [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data], records In-situ OAM (IOAM), as defined in [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data], records
OAM information within the packet while the packet traverses a OAM information within the packet while the packet traverses a
particular network domain. The term "in-situ" refers to the fact particular network domain. The term "in-situ" refers to the fact
that the OAM data is added to the data packets rather than is being that the OAM data is added to the data packets rather than is being
sent within packets specifically dedicated to OAM. This document sent within packets specifically dedicated to OAM. This document
defines how IOAM data fields are transported as part of the Network defines how IOAM data fields are transported as part of the Network
Service Header (NSH) [RFC8300] encapsulation for the Service Function Service Header (NSH) [RFC8300] encapsulation for the Service Function
skipping to change at page 3, line 11 skipping to change at page 3, line 11
OAM: Operations, Administration, and Maintenance OAM: Operations, Administration, and Maintenance
SFC: Service Function Chaining 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
The 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 MD context using a next protocol header which follows the NSH MD context
headers. An IOAM header is added containing the different IOAM-Data- headers. An IOAM header is added containing the different IOAM-Data-
Fields defined in [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data]. In an administrative Fields. The IOAM-Data-Fields MUST follow the definitions in
domain where IOAM is used, insertion of the IOAM header in NSH is [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data]. If "proof-of-transit" is used in
enabled at the NSH tunnel endpoints, which also serve as IOAM conjunction with NSH, the implementation of proof of transit MUST
encapsulating/decapsulating nodes by means of configuration. follow [I-D.ietf-sfc-proof-of-transit]. In an administrative domain
where IOAM is used, insertion of the IOAM header in NSH is enabled at
the NSH tunnel endpoints, which also serve as IOAM 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|U| TTL | Length |U|U|U|U|MD Type| NP = TBD_IOAM | | |Ver|O|U| TTL | Length |U|U|U|U|MD Type| NP = TBD_IOAM | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ N +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ N
| Service Path Identifier | Service Index | S | Service Path Identifier | Service Index | S
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ H +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ H
| ... | | | ... | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+<-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+<-+
skipping to change at page 6, line 26 skipping to change at page 6, line 34
+---------------+-------------+---------------+ +---------------+-------------+---------------+
6. Security Considerations 6. Security Considerations
IOAM is considered a "per domain" feature, where one or several IOAM is considered a "per domain" feature, where one or several
operators decide on leveraging and configuring IOAM according to operators decide on leveraging and configuring IOAM according to
their needs. Still, operators need to properly secure the IOAM their needs. Still, operators need to properly secure the IOAM
domain to avoid malicious configuration and use, which could include domain to avoid malicious configuration and use, which could include
injecting malicious IOAM packets into a domain. For additional IOAM injecting malicious IOAM packets into a domain. For additional IOAM
related security considerations, see Section 8 in related security considerations, see Section 8 in
[I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data]. [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data]. For proof of transit related security
considerations, see Section 7 in [I-D.ietf-sfc-proof-of-transit].
7. Acknowledgements 7. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Eric Vyncke, Nalini Elkins, Srihari The authors would like to thank Eric Vyncke, Nalini Elkins, Srihari
Raghavan, Ranganathan T S, Karthik Babu Harichandra Babu, Akshaya Raghavan, Ranganathan T S, Karthik Babu Harichandra Babu, Akshaya
Nadahalli, Stefano Previdi, Hemant Singh, Erik Nordmark, LJ Wobker, Nadahalli, Stefano Previdi, Hemant Singh, Erik Nordmark, LJ Wobker,
and Andrew Yourtchenko for the comments and advice. and Andrew Yourtchenko for the comments and advice.
8. Contributors 8. Contributors
skipping to change at page 8, line 19 skipping to change at page 8, line 19
9. References 9. References
9.1. Normative References 9.1. 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., remy@barefootnetworks.com, r., daniel.bernier@bell.ca, P., remy@barefootnetworks.com, r., daniel.bernier@bell.ca,
d., and J. Lemon, "Data Fields for In-situ OAM", draft- d., and J. Lemon, "Data Fields for In-situ OAM", draft-
ietf-ippm-ioam-data-08 (work in progress), October 2019. ietf-ippm-ioam-data-09 (work in progress), March 2020.
[I-D.ietf-sfc-proof-of-transit]
Brockners, F., Bhandari, S., Mizrahi, T., Dara, S., and S.
Youell, "Proof of Transit", draft-ietf-sfc-proof-of-
transit-05 (work in progress), May 2020.
[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, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>. May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
 End of changes. 8 change blocks. 
11 lines changed or deleted 20 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/