Enhanced Performance and Liveness Monitoring in Segment Routing Networks
draft-gandhi-spring-sr-enhanced-plm-04

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Authors Rakesh Gandhi  , Clarence Filsfils  , Navin Vaghamshi  , Moses Nagarajah  , Richard Foote 
Last updated 2021-02-09
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text xml pdf htmlized (tools) htmlized 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)
SPRING Working Group                                      R. Gandhi, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                               C. Filsfils
Intended status: Standards Track                     Cisco Systems, Inc.
Expires: August 13, 2021                                    N. Vaghamshi
                                                                Reliance
                                                            M. Nagarajah
                                                                 Telstra
                                                                R. Foote
                                                                   Nokia
                                                       February 09, 2021

Enhanced Performance and Liveness Monitoring in Segment Routing Networks
                 draft-gandhi-spring-sr-enhanced-plm-04

Abstract

   Segment Routing (SR) leverages the source routing paradigm.  SR is
   applicable to both Multiprotocol Label Switching (SR-MPLS) and IPv6
   (SRv6) data planes.  This document defines procedures for Enhanced
   Performance and Liveness Monitoring (PLM) for end-to-end SR paths
   including SR Policies for both SR-MPLS and SRv6 data planes, those
   reduce the deployment and operational complexities in a network.

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 August 13, 2021.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2021 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

Gandhi, et al.           Expires August 13, 2021                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft  Performance and Liveness Monitoring in SR  February 2021

   (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.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.2.  Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     2.3.  Reference Topology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   3.  Overview  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     3.1.  Loopback Mode . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     3.2.  Loopback Mode Enabled with Network Programming Function .   6
     3.3.  Example Provisioning Model  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   4.  PLM Test Packet Formats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   5.  PLM Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     5.1.  PLM for SR-MPLS Policies  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     5.2.  PLM for SRv6 Policies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   6.  Enhanced PLM Procedure  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     6.1.  Enhanced PLM with Timestamp Label for SR-MPLS Policies  .  11
       6.1.1.  Timestamp Label Allocation  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
       6.1.2.  Node Capability for Timestamp Label . . . . . . . . .  13
     6.2.  Enhanced PLM with Timestamp Endpoint Function for SRv6
           Policies  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
       6.2.1.  Timestamp Endpoint Function Assignment  . . . . . . .  14
       6.2.2.  Node Capability for Timestamp Endpoint Function . . .  15
   7.  ECMP Handling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
   8.  Example PLM Failure Notifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
   9.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
   10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
   11. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
     11.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
     11.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
   Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
Show full document text