draft-ietf-spring-ipv6-use-cases-08.txt   draft-ietf-spring-ipv6-use-cases-09.txt 
Spring J. Brzozowski Spring J. Brzozowski
Internet-Draft J. Leddy Internet-Draft J. Leddy
Intended status: Informational Comcast Intended status: Informational Comcast
Expires: August 3, 2017 M. Townsley Expires: August 14, 2017 C. Filsfils
C. Filsfils
R. Maglione, Ed. R. Maglione, Ed.
M. Townsley
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
January 30, 2017 February 10, 2017
IPv6 SPRING Use Cases IPv6 SPRING Use Cases
draft-ietf-spring-ipv6-use-cases-08 draft-ietf-spring-ipv6-use-cases-09
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 while maintaining per- enforce a flow through any topological path and service chain while
flow state only at the ingress node to the SPRING domain. maintaining per-flow state only at the ingress node to the SPRING
domain.
The objective of this document is to illustrate some use cases that The objective of this document is to illustrate some use cases that
need to be taken into account by the Source Packet Routing in need to be taken into account by the Source Packet Routing in
Networking (SPRING) architecture. Networking (SPRING) architecture.
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 August 3, 2017. This Internet-Draft will expire on August 14, 2017.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2017 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 28 skipping to change at page 2, line 28
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. 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
2.4. SPRING in the Content Delivery Networks . . . . . . . . . 7 2.4. SPRING in the Content Delivery Networks . . . . . . . . . 7
2.5. SPRING in the Core networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2.5. SPRING in the Core networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 4. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
7. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 7. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
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
path while maintaining per-flow state only at the ingress node to the path and service chain while maintaining per-flow state only at the
SPRING domain. ingress node to the SPRING domain.
The SPRING architecture is described in The SPRING architecture is described in
[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing]. The SPRING control plane is [I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing]. The SPRING control plane is
agnostic to the dataplane, thus it can be applied to both MPLS and agnostic to the dataplane, thus it can be applied to both MPLS and
IPv6. In case of MPLS the (list of) segment identifiers are carried IPv6. In case of MPLS the (list of) segment identifiers are carried
in the MPLS label stack, while for the IPv6 dataplane, a new type of in the MPLS label stack, while for the IPv6 dataplane, a new type of
routing extension header is required. routing extension header is required.
The details of the new routing extension header are described in The details of the new routing extension header are described in
[I-D.ietf-6man-segment-routing-header] which also covers the security [I-D.ietf-6man-segment-routing-header] which also covers the security
skipping to change at page 3, line 41 skipping to change at page 3, line 41
because they do not possess enough IPv4 addresses resources to number because they do not possess enough IPv4 addresses resources to number
all the endpoints and other network elements on which they desire to all the endpoints and other network elements on which they desire to
run MPLS. run MPLS.
In such scenario the support for MPLS operations on an IPv6-only In such scenario the support for MPLS operations on an IPv6-only
network would be required. However today's IPv6-only networks are network would be required. However today's IPv6-only networks are
not fully capable of supporting MPLS. There is ongoing work in the not fully capable of supporting MPLS. There is ongoing work in the
MPLS Working Group, described in [RFC7439] to identify gaps that must MPLS Working Group, described in [RFC7439] to identify gaps that must
be addressed in order to allow MPLS-related protocols and be addressed in order to allow MPLS-related protocols and
applications to be used with IPv6-only networks. This is an another applications to be used with IPv6-only networks. This is an another
example of scenario where a solution relaying on IPv6 without example of scenario where a solution relying on IPv6 without
requiring the use of MPLS could represent a valid option to solve the requiring the use of MPLS could represent a valid option to solve the
problem and meet operators' requirements. problem and meet operators' requirements.
It is important to clarify that today, it is possible to run IPv6 on It is important to clarify that today, it is possible to run IPv6 on
top of an IPv4 MPLS network by using the mechanism called 6PE, top of an IPv4 MPLS network by using the mechanism called 6PE,
described in [RFC4798]. However this approach does not fulfill the described in [RFC4798]. However this approach does not fulfill the
requirement of removing the need of IPv4 addresses in the network, as requirement of removing the need of IPv4 addresses in the network, as
requested in the above use case. Another way to run IPv6 on top of requested in the above use case. Another way to run IPv6 on top of
an MPLS network is to use Segment Routing MPLS which provides the an MPLS network is to use Segment Routing MPLS which provides the
support for the IPv6 FEC. Obviously such approach is applicable only support for the IPv6 FEC. Obviously such approach is applicable only
skipping to change at page 4, line 42 skipping to change at page 4, line 42
boundaries. This is very simple and is a basic property of IP boundaries. This is very simple and is a basic property of IP
routing. MPLS node segments are not summarizable. To reach the routing. MPLS node segments are not summarizable. To reach the
same scale, an operator would need to introduce additional same scale, an operator would need to introduce additional
complexity, such as mechanisms known with the industry term complexity, such as mechanisms known with the industry term
Seamless MPLS. Seamless MPLS.
In any environment with requirements such as those listed above, an In any environment with requirements such as those listed above, an
IPv6 data plane provides a powerful combination of capabilities for a IPv6 data plane provides a powerful combination of capabilities for a
network operator to realize benefits in explicit routing, protection network operator to realize benefits in explicit routing, protection
and restoration, high routing scalability, traffic engineering, and restoration, high routing scalability, traffic engineering,
service differentiation and application flexibility via service chaining, service differentiation and application flexibility
programmability. via programmability.
This section will describe some scenarios where MPLS may not be This section will describe some scenarios where MPLS may not be
present and it will highlight how the SPRING architecture could be present and it will highlight how the SPRING architecture could be
used to address such use cases. used to address such use cases.
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. In addition to the use cases described in this IPv6 Segment Routing. In addition to the use cases described in this
document the SPRING architecture can be applied to all the use cases document the SPRING architecture can be applied to all the use cases
skipping to change at page 7, line 9 skipping to change at page 7, line 9
pipes. Information carried in a packet's SPRING header could provide pipes. Information carried in a packet's SPRING header could provide
the target pipe for this specific packet. The access device would the target pipe for this specific packet. The access device would
not need to know specific details about the packet to perform this not need to know specific details about the packet to perform this
mapping; instead the access device would only need to know how to map mapping; instead the access device would only need to know how to map
the SR SID value to the target pipe. the SR SID value to the target pipe.
2.3. SPRING in the Data Center 2.3. SPRING in the Data Center
Some Data Center operators are transitioning their Data Center Some Data Center operators are transitioning their Data Center
infrastructure from IPv4 to native IPv6 only, in order to cope with infrastructure from IPv4 to native IPv6 only, in order to cope with
IPv4 address depletion and the achieve larger scale. In such IPv4 address depletion and to achieve larger scale. In such
environment, Segment Routing IPv6 can be used to steer traffic across environment, source routing (through Segment Routing IPv6) can be
specific paths. used to steer traffic across specific paths.
Another use case for SPRING in the datacenter is to cause a packet to
follow a specific path through the network. The specific path may
also include a given function one or more nodes in the path are
requested to perform. In such scenario Segment Routing can be used
to steer the packet across a specific list of nodes, tenants and
functions. Each node, tenant and function will be identified by a
Segment Routing Identifier (SID), thus the list of SID's will specify
how the traffic will have to traverse a specific path.
One of the fundamental requirements for Data Center architecture is
to provide scalable, isolated tenant networks. The transition to
IPv6 and the introduction of Segment Routing IPv6 open up the
possibility to achieve tenant's isolation without additional headers.
2.4. SPRING in the Content Delivery Networks 2.4. SPRING in the Content Delivery Networks
The rise of online video applications and new, video-capable IP The rise of online video applications and new, video-capable IP
devices has led to an explosion of video traffic traversing network devices has led to an explosion of video traffic traversing network
operator infrastructures. In the drive to reduce the capital and operator infrastructures. In the drive to reduce the capital and
operational impact of the massive influx of online video traffic, as operational impact of the massive influx of online video traffic, as
well as to extend traditional TV services to new devices and screens, well as to extend traditional TV services to new devices and screens,
network operators are increasingly turning to Content Delivery network operators are increasingly turning to Content Delivery
Networks (CDNs). Networks (CDNs).
skipping to change at page 10, line 18 skipping to change at page 10, line 28
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.ietf-6man-segment-routing-header] [I-D.ietf-6man-segment-routing-header]
7. Informative References 7. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-6man-segment-routing-header] [I-D.ietf-6man-segment-routing-header]
Previdi, S., Filsfils, C., Field, B., Leung, I., Linkova, Previdi, S., Filsfils, C., Field, B., Leung, I., Linkova,
J., Aries, E., Kosugi, T., Vyncke, E., and D. Lebrun, J., Aries, E., Kosugi, T., Vyncke, E., and D. Lebrun,
"IPv6 Segment Routing Header (SRH)", draft-ietf-6man- "IPv6 Segment Routing Header (SRH)", draft-ietf-6man-
segment-routing-header-04 (work in progress), January segment-routing-header-05 (work in progress), February
2017. 2017.
[I-D.ietf-rtgwg-dst-src-routing] [I-D.ietf-rtgwg-dst-src-routing]
Lamparter, D. and A. Smirnov, "Destination/Source Lamparter, D. and A. Smirnov, "Destination/Source
Routing", draft-ietf-rtgwg-dst-src-routing-03 (work in Routing", draft-ietf-rtgwg-dst-src-routing-03 (work in
progress), November 2016. progress), November 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-10 (work in progress), November spring-segment-routing-10 (work in progress), November
2016. 2016.
[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., Litkowski, S., Horneffer, M., Shakir, R.,
jefftant@gmail.com, j., and E. Crabbe, "Segment Routing jefftant@gmail.com, j., and E. Crabbe, "Segment Routing
with MPLS data plane", draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing- with MPLS data plane", draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-
mpls-06 (work in progress), January 2017. mpls-07 (work in progress), February 2017.
[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,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4798, February 2007, DOI 10.17487/RFC4798, February 2007,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4798>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4798>.
[RFC5095] Abley, J., Savola, P., and G. Neville-Neil, "Deprecation [RFC5095] Abley, J., Savola, P., and G. Neville-Neil, "Deprecation
of Type 0 Routing Headers in IPv6", RFC 5095, of Type 0 Routing Headers in IPv6", RFC 5095,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5095, December 2007, DOI 10.17487/RFC5095, December 2007,
skipping to change at page 11, line 28 skipping to change at page 11, line 39
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
Mark Townsley
Cisco Systems
Email: townsley@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
Vimercate 20871 Vimercate 20871
Italy Italy
Email: robmgl@cisco.com Email: robmgl@cisco.com
Mark Townsley
Cisco Systems
Email: townsley@cisco.com
 End of changes. 17 change blocks. 
26 lines changed or deleted 35 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/