RFC6374 Synonymous Flow Labels
draft-bryant-mpls-synonymous-flow-labels-00

The information below is for an old version of the document
Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2015-03-02
Replaced by draft-bryant-mpls-sfl-framework
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)
MPLS                                                           S. Bryant
Internet-Draft                                                G. Swallow
Intended status: Standards Track                            S. Sivabalan
Expires: September 3, 2015                                 Cisco Systems
                                                           March 2, 2015

                     RFC6374 Synonymous Flow Labels
              draft-bryant-mpls-synonymous-flow-labels-00

Abstract

   This document describes a method of providing flow identification
   information when making RFC6374 performance measurements.  This
   allows RFC6374 measurements to be made on multi-point to point LSPs
   and allows the measurement of flows within an MPLS construct using
   RFC6374.

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 http://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 September 3, 2015.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2015 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
   (http://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

Bryant, et al.          Expires September 3, 2015               [Page 1]
Internet-Draft              Synonymous Labels                 March 2015

   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Synonymous Flow Labels  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   4.  User Service Traffic in the Data Plane  . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     4.1.  Applications Label Present  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     4.2.  Single Label Stack  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   5.  RFC6374 Packet Loss Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     5.1.  SFL TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   6.  Manageability Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   7.  Privacy Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   8.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   9.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   10. Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   11. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     11.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     11.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10

1.  Introduction

   [I-D.bryant-mpls-flow-ident] describes the requirement for
   introducing flow identities when using RFC6374 [RFC6374] packet loss
   measurements.  In summary RFC6374 uses the RFC6374 packet as the
   packet accounting demarcation point.  Unfortunately this gives rise
   to a number of problems that may lead to significant packet
   accounting errors:

   1.  Where a flow is subjected to Equal Cost Multi-Path (ECMP)
       treatment packets may arrive out of order with respect to the
       RFC6374 packet.

   2.  Where a flow is subjected to ECMP treatment packets may arrive at
       different hardware interfaces, thus requiring reception of an
       RFC6374 packet on one interface to trigger a packet accounting
       action on another interface which may not be co-located with it.
       This is a difficult technical problem to address with the
       required degree of accuracy.

   3.  Even where there is no ECMP (for example on RSVP-TE, MPLS-TP LSPs
       and PWs) local processing may be distributed over a number of
       cores, leading to synchronization problems.

Bryant, et al.          Expires September 3, 2015               [Page 2]
Internet-Draft              Synonymous Labels                 March 2015

   4.  Some forwarder implementations have a long pipeline between
       processing a packet and incrementing the associated counter.
Show full document text