draft-ietf-sfc-multi-layer-oam-02.txt   draft-ietf-sfc-multi-layer-oam-03.txt 
SFC WG G. Mirsky SFC WG G. Mirsky
Internet-Draft ZTE Corp. Internet-Draft ZTE Corp.
Updates: 8300 (if approved) W. Meng Updates: 8300 (if approved) W. Meng
Intended status: Standards Track ZTE Corporation Intended status: Standards Track ZTE Corporation
Expires: September 9, 2019 B. Khasnabish Expires: November 9, 2019 B. Khasnabish
Individual contributor
C. Wang C. Wang
March 8, 2019 Individual contributor
May 8, 2019
Active OAM for Service Function Chains in Networks Active OAM for Service Function Chains in Networks
draft-ietf-sfc-multi-layer-oam-02 draft-ietf-sfc-multi-layer-oam-03
Abstract Abstract
A set of requirements for active Operation, Administration and A set of requirements for active Operation, Administration and
Maintenance (OAM) of Service Function Chains (SFCs) in networks is Maintenance (OAM) of Service Function Chains (SFCs) in networks is
presented. Based on these requirements an encapsulation of active presented. Based on these requirements an encapsulation of active
OAM message in SFC and a mechanism to detect and localize defects OAM message in SFC and a mechanism to detect and localize defects
described. Also, this document updates RFC 8300 in the definition of described. Also, this document updates RFC 8300 in the definition of
O (OAM) bit in the Network Service Header (NSH) and defines how the O (OAM) bit in the Network Service Header (NSH) and defines how the
active OAM message identified in SFC NSH. active OAM message identified in SFC NSH.
skipping to change at page 1, line 40 skipping to change at page 1, line 40
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 9, 2019. This Internet-Draft will expire on November 9, 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 2, line 20 skipping to change at page 2, line 20
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Requirements for Active OAM in SFC Network . . . . . . . . . 4 3. Requirements for Active OAM in SFC Network . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Active OAM Identification in SFC NSH . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 4. Active OAM Identification in SFC NSH . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5. Echo Request/Echo Reply for SFC in Networks . . . . . . . . . 7 5. Echo Request/Echo Reply for SFC in Networks . . . . . . . . . 7
5.1. Return Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 5.1. Return Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.2. SFC Echo Request Transmission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5.2. SFC Echo Request Transmission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.3. SFC Echo Request Reception . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5.3. SFC Echo Request Reception . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.3.1. Errored TLVs TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.4. SFC Echo Reply Transmission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 5.4. SFC Echo Reply Transmission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.5. SFC Echo Reply Reception . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 5.5. SFC Echo Reply Reception . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
7. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 7. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
8.1. SFC Active OAM Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 8.1. SFC Active OAM Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
8.2. SFC Active OAM Message Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 8.2. SFC Active OAM Message Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
8.3. SFC Echo Request/Echo Reply Parameters . . . . . . . . . 13 8.3. SFC Echo Request/Echo Reply Parameters . . . . . . . . . 14
8.4. SFC Echo Request/Echo Reply Message Types . . . . . . . . 13 8.4. SFC Echo Request/Echo Reply Message Types . . . . . . . . 14
8.5. SFC Echo Reply Modes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 8.5. SFC Echo Reply Modes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
8.6. SFC Echo Return Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 8.6. SFC Echo Return Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
8.7. SFC TLV Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 8.7. SFC TLV Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
8.8. SFC OAM UDP Port . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 8.8. SFC OAM UDP Port . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
[RFC7665] defines components necessary to implement Service Function [RFC7665] defines components necessary to implement Service Function
Chain (SFC). These include a classifier which performs the Chain (SFC). These include a classifier which performs the
classification of incoming packets. A Service Function Forwarder classification of incoming packets. A Service Function Forwarder
(SFF) is responsible for forwarding traffic to one or more connected (SFF) is responsible for forwarding traffic to one or more connected
Service Functions (SFs) according to the information carried in the Service Functions (SFs) according to the information carried in the
SFC encapsulation. SFF also handles traffic coming back from the SF SFC encapsulation. SFF also handles traffic coming back from the SF
and transports the data packets to the next SFF. And the SFF serves and transports the data packets to the next SFF. And the SFF serves
skipping to change at page 9, line 44 skipping to change at page 10, line 7
of the following packet processing exceptions: NSH TTL expiration, of the following packet processing exceptions: NSH TTL expiration,
NSH Service Index (SI) expiration or the receiver is the terminal SFF NSH Service Index (SI) expiration or the receiver is the terminal SFF
for an SFP. for an SFP.
Firstly, the SFF that has received an SFC echo request verifies the Firstly, the SFF that has received an SFC echo request verifies the
general sanity of the received packet. If the packet is not well- general sanity of the received packet. If the packet is not well-
formed, the receiver SFF SHOULD send an SFC echo reply with the formed, the receiver SFF SHOULD send an SFC echo reply with the
Return Code set to "Malformed echo request received" and the Subcode Return Code set to "Malformed echo request received" and the Subcode
set to zero. If there are any TLVs not marked as "Ignore" (i.e., if set to zero. If there are any TLVs not marked as "Ignore" (i.e., if
the TLV type is less than 32768, see Section 3) that SFF does not the TLV type is less than 32768, see Section 3) that SFF does not
understand, the SFF SHOULD send an SFC echo reply with the Return understand, the SFF MUST send an SFC echo reply with the Return Code
Code set to "TLV not understood" and set the Subcode to zero. In the set to 2 ("One or more TLVs was not understood") and set the Subcode
latter case, the SFF SHOULD include an Errored TLVs TLV that as sub- to zero. In the latter case, the SFF MAY include an Errored TLVs TLV
TLVs contains only the misunderstood TLVs. The header field's (Section 5.3.1) that as sub-TLVs contains only the misunderstood
Sender's Handle, Sequence Number are not examined but are included in TLVs. The header field's Sender's Handle, Sequence Number are not
the SFC echo reply message. examined but are included in the SFC echo reply message.
5.3.1. Errored TLVs TLV
If the Return Code for the echo reply is determined as 2 ("One or
more TLVs was not understood"), then the Errored TLVs TLV MAY be
included in an echo reply. The use of this TLV allows to inform the
sender of an echo request of mandatory TLVs either not supported by
an implementation or parsed and found to be in error.
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Errored TLVs Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Value |
. .
. .
. .
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 4: Errored TLVs TLV
where
The Errored TLVs Type MUST be set to TBA11 Section 8.7.
The Value field contains the mandatory TLVs, encoded as sub-TLVs,
that were not understood or failed to be parsed correctly.
5.4. SFC Echo Reply Transmission 5.4. SFC Echo Reply Transmission
The Reply Mode field directs whether and how the echo reply message The Reply Mode field directs whether and how the echo reply message
should be sent. The sender of the echo request MAY use TLVs to should be sent. The sender of the echo request MAY use TLVs to
request that the corresponding echo reply is transmitted over the request that the corresponding echo reply is transmitted over the
specified path. Value TBA3 is referred to as "Do not reply" mode and specified path. Value TBA3 is referred to as "Do not reply" mode and
suppresses transmission of echo reply packet. The default value suppresses transmission of echo reply packet. The default value
(TBA6) for the Reply mode field requests the responder to send the (TBA6) for the Reply mode field requests the responder to send the
echo reply packet out-of-band as IPv4 or IPv6 UDP packet. echo reply packet out-of-band as IPv4 or IPv6 UDP packet.
Responder to the SFC echo request sends the echo reply over IP Responder to the SFC echo request sends the echo reply over IP
network if the Reply mode is Reply via an IPv4/IPv6 UDP Packet. network if the Reply mode is Reply via an IPv4/IPv6 UDP Packet.
Because SFC NSH does not identify the ingress of the SFP the echo Because SFC NSH does not identify the ingress of the SFP the echo
request, the source ID MUST be included in the message and used as request, the source ID MUST be included in the message and used as
the IP destination address for IP/UDP encapsulation of the SFC echo the IP destination address for IP/UDP encapsulation of the SFC echo
reply. The sender of the SFC echo request MUST include SFC Source reply. The sender of the SFC echo request MUST include SFC Source
TLV Figure 4. TLV Figure 5.
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| SFC OAM Source ID Type | Length | | SFC OAM Source ID Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Value | | Value |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 4: SFC Source TLV Figure 5: SFC Source TLV
where where
SFC OAM Source Id Type is two octets in length and has the value SFC OAM Source Id Type is two octets in length and has the value
of TBA9 Section 8.7. of TBA9 Section 8.7.
Length is two octets long field, and the value equals the length Length is two octets long field, and the value equals the length
of the Value field in octets. of the Value field in octets.
Value field contains the IP address of the sender of the SFC OAM Value field contains the IP address of the sender of the SFC OAM
skipping to change at page 15, line 32 skipping to change at page 16, line 32
Table 7: SFC TLV Type Registry Table 7: SFC TLV Type Registry
This document defines the following new value in SFC OAM TLV Type This document defines the following new value in SFC OAM TLV Type
registry: registry:
+-------+-------------------+---------------+ +-------+-------------------+---------------+
| Value | Description | Reference | | Value | Description | Reference |
+-------+-------------------+---------------+ +-------+-------------------+---------------+
| TBA9 | Source IP Address | This document | | TBA9 | Source IP Address | This document |
| TBA11 | Errored TLVs | This document |
+-------+-------------------+---------------+ +-------+-------------------+---------------+
Table 8: SFC OAM Source IP Address Type Table 8: SFC OAM Source IP Address Type
8.8. SFC OAM UDP Port 8.8. SFC OAM UDP Port
IANA is requested to allocate UDP port number according to IANA is requested to allocate UDP port number according to
+--------+-------+-----------+-------------+------------+-----------+ +--------+-------+-----------+-------------+------------+-----------+
| Servic | Port | Transport | Description | Semantics | Reference | | Servic | Port | Transport | Description | Semantics | Reference |
skipping to change at page 17, line 37 skipping to change at page 18, line 37
China China
Email: meng.wei2@zte.com.cn,vally.meng@gmail.com Email: meng.wei2@zte.com.cn,vally.meng@gmail.com
Bhumip Khasnabish Bhumip Khasnabish
Individual contributor Individual contributor
Email: vumip1@gmail.com Email: vumip1@gmail.com
Cui Wang Cui Wang
Individual contributor
Email: lindawangjoy@gmail.com Email: lindawangjoy@gmail.com
 End of changes. 13 change blocks. 
29 lines changed or deleted 61 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/