Skip to main content

MNA for Performance Measurement with Alternate Marking Method
draft-cx-mpls-mna-inband-pm-00

The information below is for an old version of the document.
Document Type
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft whose latest revision state is "Active".
Authors Weiqiang Cheng , Xiao Min
Last updated 2023-03-12
RFC stream (None)
Formats
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date (None)
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
draft-cx-mpls-mna-inband-pm-00
MPLS Working Group                                              W. Cheng
Internet-Draft                                              China Mobile
Intended status: Standards Track                                  X. Min
Expires: 13 September 2023                                     ZTE Corp.
                                                           12 March 2023

     MNA for Performance Measurement with Alternate Marking Method
                     draft-cx-mpls-mna-inband-pm-00

Abstract

   MPLS Network Action (MNA) is used to indicate action for Label
   Switched Paths (LSPs) and/or MPLS packets and to transfer data needed
   for the action.

   This document defines MNA encoding for MPLS performance measurement
   with alternate marking method, which performs flow-based packet loss,
   delay, and jitter measurements on MPLS live traffic.

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 13 September 2023.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2023 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

Cheng & Min             Expires 13 September 2023               [Page 1]
Internet-Draft             MNA for PM with AMM                March 2023

   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 Revised BSD License text as
   described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
   provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
     1.1.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   2.  MPLS Network Action for Flow-based PM . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   5.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   6.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     6.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     6.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5

1.  Introduction

   MPLS Network Action (MNA) is used to indicate action for Label
   Switched Paths (LSPs) and/or MPLS packets and to transfer data needed
   for the action.

   To addressing the MNA requirements [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-requirements]
   and by following the MNA framework [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-fwk],
   [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-hdr] defines the MNA sub-stack solution for
   carrying Network Actions and Ancillary Data in the label stack.

   As specified in [I-D.ietf-mpls-inband-pm-encapsulation], Flow-ID
   Label, L bit and D bit are used for MPLS flow identification and
   flow-based performance measurement with alternate marking method,
   which can be an applicable MNA usecase [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-usecases].

   This document defines MNA encoding for MPLS performance measurement
   with alternate marking method, which performs flow-based packet loss,
   delay, and jitter measurements on MPLS live traffic.  The proposed
   MNA encoding is compliant with the MNA sub-stack solution specified
   in [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-hdr] and reuses the data fields specified in
   [I-D.ietf-mpls-inband-pm-encapsulation].

Cheng & Min             Expires 13 September 2023               [Page 2]
Internet-Draft             MNA for PM with AMM                March 2023

1.1.  Terminology

   This document makes use of the terms defined in
   [I-D.ietf-mpls-inband-pm-encapsulation] and [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-hdr].

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
   "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
   14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
   capitals, as shown here.

2.  MPLS Network Action for Flow-based PM

   The MNA format for performance measurement with alternate marking
   method is illustrated as below:

      0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |   Opcode=3  |    Bit-Position=TBA1    |R|IHS|S| Res |U| NASL=1|
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |1|                Flow-ID                |L|D|S|    Reserved   |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

                    Figure 1: MNA for Alternate Marking

   The description of MNA for Alternate Marking is as follows:

   *  Name: Performance Measurement with Alternate Marking Method
      (PMAMM) Action.

   *  Network Action Indication: The PMAMM Action indication is bit
      position TBA1.

   *  Scope: The PMAMM Action is valid in all scopes.

   *  In-Stack Data: The PMAMM Action carries 30 bits of ancillary data.
      The most significant 20 bits of ancillary data is the Flow-ID
      Value, immediately followed by L bit and D bit.  The least
      significant 8 bits of ancillary data is reserved.  The three
      fields Flow-ID Value, L bit and D bit have semantics consistent
      with the Flow-ID Label, L bit and D bit defined in
      [I-D.ietf-mpls-inband-pm-encapsulation].  While the Flow-ID Label
      has some restrictions to avoid collisions with the reserved label
      space (0-15) [RFC3032], those restrictions are not necessary for
      the Flow-ID Value and do not apply.  The forwarding node in the
      scope of PMAMM Action SHOULD execute flow-based performance
      measurement by using the Flow-ID Value, L bit and D bit.

Cheng & Min             Expires 13 September 2023               [Page 3]
Internet-Draft             MNA for PM with AMM                March 2023

   *  Post-Stack Data: None.

   Ed.note: There is ongoing discussion in MPLS mailing list on whether
   to omit "Flag-based NAI with AD" from [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-hdr], if the
   WG decision is to omit "Flag-based NAI with AD", then the MNA format
   described above would be changed from "Flag-based NAI with AD" to
   "New Opcode with AD".

3.  Security Considerations

   Security issues discussed in [I-D.ietf-mpls-inband-pm-encapsulation]
   and [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-hdr] apply to this document.

4.  IANA Considerations

   This document requests that IANA allocate a bit position (TBA1) from
   the MPLS "In-Stack MPLS Network Action Indicator Flags" registry for
   the Performance Measurement with Alternate Marking Method Action.
   Specifically, this document requests the following allocation from
   IANA.

   MNA Flag    Bit-Position    Description
   --------    ------------    -----------
      P            TBA1        PM with Alternate Marking Method

5.  Acknowledgements

   To be added.

6.  References

6.1.  Normative References

   [I-D.ietf-mpls-inband-pm-encapsulation]
              Cheng, W., Min, X., Zhou, T., Dong, X., and Y. Peleg,
              "Encapsulation For MPLS Performance Measurement with
              Alternate Marking Method", Work in Progress, Internet-
              Draft, draft-ietf-mpls-inband-pm-encapsulation-05, 12
              March 2023,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/api/v1/doc/document/draft-
              ietf-mpls-inband-pm-encapsulation/>.

   [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-hdr]
              Rajamanickam, J., Gandhi, R., Zigler, R., Song, H., and K.
              Kompella, "MPLS Network Action (MNA) Sub-Stack Solution",
              Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-mpls-mna-hdr-
              01, 8 March 2023, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/
              draft-ietf-mpls-mna-hdr-01>.

Cheng & Min             Expires 13 September 2023               [Page 4]
Internet-Draft             MNA for PM with AMM                March 2023

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

   [RFC3032]  Rosen, E., Tappan, D., Fedorkow, G., Rekhter, Y.,
              Farinacci, D., Li, T., and A. Conta, "MPLS Label Stack
              Encoding", RFC 3032, DOI 10.17487/RFC3032, January 2001,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3032>.

   [RFC8174]  Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
              2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
              May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.

6.2.  Informative References

   [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-fwk]
              Andersson, L., Bryant, S., Bocci, M., and T. Li, "MPLS
              Network Actions Framework", Work in Progress, Internet-
              Draft, draft-ietf-mpls-mna-fwk-03, 11 March 2023,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-mpls-
              mna-fwk-03>.

   [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-requirements]
              Bocci, M., Bryant, S., and J. Drake, "Requirements for
              MPLS Network Actions", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft,
              draft-ietf-mpls-mna-requirements-04, 13 October 2022,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-mpls-
              mna-requirements-04>.

   [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-usecases]
              Saad, T., Makhijani, K., Song, H., and G. Mirsky, "Use
              Cases for MPLS Network Action Indicators and MPLS
              Ancillary Data", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-
              ietf-mpls-mna-usecases-01, 24 October 2022,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-mpls-
              mna-usecases-01>.

Authors' Addresses

   Weiqiang Cheng
   China Mobile
   Beijing
   China
   Email: chengweiqiang@chinamobile.com

Cheng & Min             Expires 13 September 2023               [Page 5]
Internet-Draft             MNA for PM with AMM                March 2023

   Xiao Min
   ZTE Corp.
   Nanjing
   China
   Email: xiao.min2@zte.com.cn

Cheng & Min             Expires 13 September 2023               [Page 6]