SFC OAM for path consistency
draft-ao-sfc-oam-path-consistency-03

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2018-10-19
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text pdf html bibtex
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
SFC WG                                                             T. Ao
Internet-Draft                                           ZTE Corporation
Intended status: Standards Track                               G. Mirsky
Expires: April 19, 2019                                        ZTE Corp.
                                                                 Z. Chen
                                                           China Telecom
                                                            Oct 16, 2018

                      SFC OAM for path consistency
                  draft-ao-sfc-oam-path-consistency-03

Abstract

   Service Function Chain (SFC) defines an ordered set of service
   functions (SFs) to be applied to packets and/or frames and/or flows
   selected as a result of classification.  SFC Operation,
   Administration and Maintenance can monitor the continuity of the SFC,
   i.e., that all elements of the SFC are reachable to each other in the
   downstream direction.  But SFC OAM must support verification that the
   order of traversing these SFs corresponds to the state defined by the
   SFC control plane or orchestrator, the metric referred in this
   document as the path consistency of the SFC.  This document defines a
   new SFC OAM method to support SFC consistency, i.e. verification that
   all elements of the given SFC are being traversed in the expected
   order.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on April 19, 2019.

Ao, et al.               Expires April 19, 2019                 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft        SFC OAM for path consistency              Oct 2018

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Conventions used in this document . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.1.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.2.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Consistency OAM: Theory of Operation  . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.1.  COAM packet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     3.2.  SF information Sub-TLV  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     3.3.  SF information Sub-TLV construction . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   4.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   5.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     5.1.  COAM Message Types  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     5.2.  SFF Information Record TLV Type . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     5.3.  SF Information Sub-TLV Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     5.4.  SF Identifier Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   6.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   7.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     7.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     7.2.  Informational References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9

1.  Introduction

   Service Function Chain (SFC) is a chain with a series of ordered
   Service Functions (SFs).  Service Function Path (SFP) is a path of a
   SFC.  SFC is described in detail in the SFC architecture document
   [RFC7665].  The SFs in the SFC are ordered and only when traffic is
   processed by one SF then it should be processed by the next SF,
   otherwise errors may occur.  Sometimes, a SF needs to use the
   metadata from its upstream SF process.  That's why it's very
   important for the operator to make sure that the order of traversing
   the SFs is exactly as defined by the control plane or the
Show full document text