draft-ietf-spring-ipv6-use-cases-06.txt   draft-ietf-spring-ipv6-use-cases-07.txt 
Spring J. Brzozowski Spring J. Brzozowski
Internet-Draft J. Leddy Internet-Draft J. Leddy
Intended status: Informational Comcast Intended status: Informational Comcast
Expires: September 4, 2016 I. Leung Expires: January 23, 2017 M. Townsley
Rogers Communications
S. Previdi
M. Townsley
C. Martin
C. Filsfils C. Filsfils
R. Maglione, Ed. R. Maglione, Ed.
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
March 3, 2016 July 22, 2016
IPv6 SPRING Use Cases IPv6 SPRING Use Cases
draft-ietf-spring-ipv6-use-cases-06 draft-ietf-spring-ipv6-use-cases-07
Abstract Abstract
Source Packet Routing in Networking (SPRING) architecture leverages Source Packet Routing in Networking (SPRING) architecture leverages
the source routing paradigm. A node steers a packet through a the source routing paradigm. A node steers a packet through a
controlled set of instructions, called segments, by prepending the controlled set of instructions, called segments, by prepending the
packet with SPRING header. A segment can represent any instruction, packet with SPRING header. A segment can represent any instruction,
topological or service-based. A segment can have a local semantic to topological or service-based. A segment can have a local semantic to
the SPRING node or global within the SPRING domain. SPRING allows to the SPRING node or global within the SPRING domain. SPRING allows to
enforce a flow through any topological path and service chain while enforce a flow through any topological path and service chain while
skipping to change at page 2, line 4 skipping to change at page 1, line 45
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 September 4, 2016.
This Internet-Draft will expire on January 23, 2017.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2016 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
skipping to change at page 2, line 31 skipping to change at page 2, line 30
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. IPv6 SPRING use cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. IPv6 SPRING use cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. SPRING in the Home Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.1. SPRING in the Home Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.2. SPRING in the Access Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2.2. SPRING in the Access Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.3. SPRING in the Data Center . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2.3. SPRING in the Data Center . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.3.1. VM isolation in a Data Center . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2.3.1. VM isolation in a Data Center . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2.4. SPRING in the Content Delivery Networks . . . . . . . . . 8 2.4. SPRING in the Content Delivery Networks . . . . . . . . . 8
2.5. SPRING in the Core networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 2.5. SPRING in the Core networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 3. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 7. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
Source Packet Routing in Networking (SPRING) architecture leverages Source Packet Routing in Networking (SPRING) architecture leverages
the source routing paradigm. An ingress node steers a packet through the source routing paradigm. An ingress node steers a packet through
a controlled set of instructions, called segments, by prepending the a controlled set of instructions, called segments, by prepending the
packet with SPRING header. A segment can represent any instruction, packet with SPRING header. A segment can represent any instruction,
topological or service-based. A segment can represent a local topological or service-based. A segment can represent a local
semantic on the SPRING node, or a global semantic within the SPRING semantic on the SPRING node, or a global semantic within the SPRING
domain. SPRING allows one to enforce a flow through any topological domain. SPRING allows one to enforce a flow through any topological
skipping to change at page 5, line 7 skipping to change at page 5, line 4
used to address such use cases, particularly, when an MPLS data plane used to address such use cases, particularly, when an MPLS data plane
is neither present nor desired. is neither present nor desired.
The use cases described in the section do not constitute an The use cases described in the section do not constitute an
exhaustive list of all the possible scenarios; this section only exhaustive list of all the possible scenarios; this section only
includes some of the most common envisioned deployment models for includes some of the most common envisioned deployment models for
IPv6 Segment Routing. IPv6 Segment Routing.
In addition to the use cases described in this document the SPRING In addition to the use cases described in this document the SPRING
architecture can be applied to all the use cases described in architecture can be applied to all the use cases described in
[I-D.ietf-spring-problem-statement] for the SPRING MPLS data plane,
when an IPv6 data plane is present. Here there is a summary of those [RFC7855] for the SPRING MPLS data plane, when an IPv6 data plane is
use cases: present. Here there is a summary of those use cases:
1. Traffic Engineering 1. Traffic Engineering
2. Disjoint paths in dual-plane networks 2. Disjoint paths in dual-plane networks
3. Fast Reroute: Protecting node and adjacency segments 3. Fast Reroute: Protecting node and adjacency segments
4. OAM/monitoring 4. OAM/monitoring
5. Egress Peering Engineering 5. Egress Peering Engineering
skipping to change at page 10, line 29 skipping to change at page 10, line 26
not the intent of this document to address the IPv4 scenario, both not the intent of this document to address the IPv4 scenario, both
because this may create a lot of backward compatibility issues with because this may create a lot of backward compatibility issues with
currently deployed networks and for the security issues that may currently deployed networks and for the security issues that may
raise. raise.
The described use cases could be addressed with the SPRING The described use cases could be addressed with the SPRING
architecture by having the Edge nodes of network to impose a Segment architecture by having the Edge nodes of network to impose a Segment
List on specific traffic flows, based on certain classification List on specific traffic flows, based on certain classification
criteria that would include source IPv6 address. criteria that would include source IPv6 address.
3. Acknowledgements 3. Contributors
Many people contributed to this document. The authors of this
document would like to thank and recognize them and their
contributions. These contributors provided invaluable concepts and
content for this document's creation.
Ida Leung
Rogers Communications
8200 Dixie Road
Brampton, ON L6T 0C1
CANADA
Email: Ida.Leung@rci.rogers.com
Stefano Previdi
Cisco Systems
Via Del Serafico, 200
Rome 00142
Italy
Email: sprevidi@cisco.com
Christian Martin
Cisco Systems
Email: martincj@cisco.com
4. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Brian Field, Robert Raszuk, Wes The authors would like to thank Brian Field, Robert Raszuk, Wes
George, Eric Vyncke, Fred Baker, John G. Scudder and Yakov Rekhter George, Eric Vyncke, Fred Baker, John G. Scudder and Yakov Rekhter
for their valuable comments and inputs to this document. for their valuable comments and inputs to this document.
4. IANA Considerations 5. IANA Considerations
This document does not require any action from IANA. This document does not require any action from IANA.
5. Security Considerations 6. Security Considerations
There are a number of security concerns with source routing at the IP There are a number of security concerns with source routing at the IP
layer [RFC5095]. Security mechanisms applied to Segment Routing over layer [RFC5095]. Security mechanisms applied to Segment Routing over
IPv6 networks are detailed in section 9 of IPv6 networks are detailed in section 9 of
[I-D.previdi-6man-segment-routing-header] [I-D.previdi-6man-segment-routing-header]
6. Informative References 7. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-mif-mpvd-dhcp-support] [I-D.ietf-mif-mpvd-dhcp-support]
Krishnan, S., Korhonen, J., and S. Bhandari, "Support for Krishnan, S., Korhonen, J., and S. Bhandari, "Support for
multiple provisioning domains in DHCPv6", draft-ietf-mif- multiple provisioning domains in DHCPv6", draft-ietf-mif-
mpvd-dhcp-support-02 (work in progress), October 2015. mpvd-dhcp-support-02 (work in progress), October 2015.
[I-D.ietf-rtgwg-dst-src-routing] [I-D.ietf-rtgwg-dst-src-routing]
Lamparter, D., "Destination/Source Routing", draft-ietf- Lamparter, D. and A. Smirnov, "Destination/Source
rtgwg-dst-src-routing-00 (work in progress), October 2015. Routing", draft-ietf-rtgwg-dst-src-routing-02 (work in
progress), May 2016.
[I-D.ietf-sfc-dc-use-cases] [I-D.ietf-sfc-dc-use-cases]
Surendra, S., Tufail, M., Majee, S., Captari, C., and S. Surendra, S., Tufail, M., Majee, S., Captari, C., and S.
Homma, "Service Function Chaining Use Cases In Data Homma, "Service Function Chaining Use Cases In Data
Centers", draft-ietf-sfc-dc-use-cases-04 (work in Centers", draft-ietf-sfc-dc-use-cases-04 (work in
progress), January 2016. progress), January 2016.
[I-D.ietf-sfc-nsh] [I-D.ietf-sfc-nsh]
Quinn, P. and U. Elzur, "Network Service Header", draft- Quinn, P. and U. Elzur, "Network Service Header", draft-
ietf-sfc-nsh-02 (work in progress), January 2016. ietf-sfc-nsh-05 (work in progress), May 2016.
[I-D.ietf-spring-problem-statement]
Previdi, S., Filsfils, C., Decraene, B., Litkowski, S.,
Horneffer, M., and R. Shakir, "SPRING Problem Statement
and Requirements", draft-ietf-spring-problem-statement-07
(work in progress), March 2016.
[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing] [I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing]
Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Decraene, B., Litkowski, S., Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Decraene, B., Litkowski, S.,
and R. Shakir, "Segment Routing Architecture", draft-ietf- and R. Shakir, "Segment Routing Architecture", draft-ietf-
spring-segment-routing-07 (work in progress), December spring-segment-routing-09 (work in progress), July 2016.
2015.
[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-mpls] [I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-mpls]
Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Bashandy, A., Decraene, B., Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Bashandy, A., Decraene, B.,
Litkowski, S., Horneffer, M., Shakir, R., Tantsura, J., Litkowski, S., Horneffer, M., Shakir, R.,
and E. Crabbe, "Segment Routing with MPLS data plane", jefftant@gmail.com, j., and E. Crabbe, "Segment Routing
draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-mpls-03 (work in with MPLS data plane", draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-
progress), February 2016. mpls-05 (work in progress), July 2016.
[I-D.previdi-6man-segment-routing-header] [I-D.previdi-6man-segment-routing-header]
Previdi, S., Filsfils, C., Field, B., Leung, I., Linkova, Previdi, S., Filsfils, C., Field, B., Leung, I., Linkova,
J., Kosugi, T., Vyncke, E., and D. Lebrun, "IPv6 Segment J., Kosugi, T., Vyncke, E., and D. Lebrun, "IPv6 Segment
Routing Header (SRH)", draft-previdi-6man-segment-routing- Routing Header (SRH)", draft-previdi-6man-segment-routing-
header-08 (work in progress), October 2015. header-08 (work in progress), October 2015.
[RFC4798] De Clercq, J., Ooms, D., Prevost, S., and F. Le Faucheur, [RFC4798] De Clercq, J., Ooms, D., Prevost, S., and F. Le Faucheur,
"Connecting IPv6 Islands over IPv4 MPLS Using IPv6 "Connecting IPv6 Islands over IPv4 MPLS Using IPv6
Provider Edge Routers (6PE)", RFC 4798, Provider Edge Routers (6PE)", RFC 4798,
skipping to change at page 12, line 20 skipping to change at page 13, line 10
[RFC7439] George, W., Ed. and C. Pignataro, Ed., "Gap Analysis for [RFC7439] George, W., Ed. and C. Pignataro, Ed., "Gap Analysis for
Operating IPv6-Only MPLS Networks", RFC 7439, Operating IPv6-Only MPLS Networks", RFC 7439,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7439, January 2015, DOI 10.17487/RFC7439, January 2015,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7439>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7439>.
[RFC7498] Quinn, P., Ed. and T. Nadeau, Ed., "Problem Statement for [RFC7498] Quinn, P., Ed. and T. Nadeau, Ed., "Problem Statement for
Service Function Chaining", RFC 7498, Service Function Chaining", RFC 7498,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7498, April 2015, DOI 10.17487/RFC7498, April 2015,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7498>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7498>.
[RFC7855] Previdi, S., Ed., Filsfils, C., Ed., Decraene, B.,
Litkowski, S., Horneffer, M., and R. Shakir, "Source
Packet Routing in Networking (SPRING) Problem Statement
and Requirements", RFC 7855, DOI 10.17487/RFC7855, May
2016, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7855>.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
John Brzozowski John Brzozowski
Comcast Comcast
Email: john_brzozowski@cable.comcast.com Email: john_brzozowski@cable.comcast.com
John Leddy John Leddy
Comcast Comcast
Email: John_Leddy@cable.comcast.com Email: John_Leddy@cable.comcast.com
Ida Leung
Rogers Communications
8200 Dixie Road
Brampton, ON L6T 0C1
CANADA
Email: Ida.Leung@rci.rogers.com
Stefano Previdi
Cisco Systems
Via Del Serafico, 200
Rome 00142
Italy
Email: sprevidi@cisco.com
Mark Townsley Mark Townsley
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
Email: townsley@cisco.com Email: townsley@cisco.com
Christian Martin
Cisco Systems
Email: martincj@cisco.com
Clarence Filsfils Clarence Filsfils
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
Brussels Brussels
BE BE
Email: cfilsfil@cisco.com Email: cfilsfil@cisco.com
Roberta Maglione (editor) Roberta Maglione (editor)
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
Via Torri Bianche 8 Via Torri Bianche 8
 End of changes. 17 change blocks. 
55 lines changed or deleted 61 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.45. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/