Signaling Maximum SID Depth using Border Gateway Protocol Link-State
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-msd-01
The information below is for an old version of the document.
| Document | Type |
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft that was ultimately published as RFC 8814.
Expired & archived
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Jeff Tantsura , Uma Chunduri , Greg Mirsky , Siva Sivabalan | ||
| Last updated | 2018-04-19 (Latest revision 2017-10-16) | ||
| Replaces | draft-tantsura-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-msd | ||
| RFC stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Reviews |
RTGDIR Early review
(of
-05)
by Mach Chen
Has issues
|
||
| Additional resources | Mailing list discussion | ||
| Stream | WG state | WG Document | |
| Document shepherd | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Became RFC 8814 (Proposed Standard) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Yes | ||
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-msd-01
IDR Working Group J. Tantsura
Internet-Draft Individual
Intended status: Standards Track U. Chunduri
Expires: April 18, 2018 Huawei Technologies
G. Mirsky
ZTE Corp.
S. Sivabalan
Cisco
October 15, 2017
Signaling Maximum SID Depth using Border Gateway Protocol Link-State
draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-msd-01
Abstract
This document proposes a way to signal Maximum SID Depth (MSD)
supported by a node at node and/or link granularity by a BGP-LS
speaker. In a Segment Routing (SR) enabled network a centralized
controller that programs SR tunnels needs to know the MSD supported
by the head-end at node and/or link granularity to push the SID stack
of an appropriate depth. MSD is relevant to the head-end of a SR
tunnel or Binding-SID anchor node where Binding-SID expansions might
result in creation of a new SID stack.
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 18, 2018.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
Tantsura, et al. Expires April 18, 2018 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Signaling MSD Using BGP-LS October 2017
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
1.1. Conventions used in this document . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1.1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1.2. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Problem Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. MSD supported by a node . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. MSD supported on a link . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1. Introduction
When Segment Routing tunnels are computed by a centralized
controller, it is critical that the controller learns the MSD
"Maximum SID Depth" of the node or link SR tunnel exits over, so the
SID stack depth of a path computed doesn't exceed the number of SIDs
the node is capable of imposing. This document describes how to use
BGP-LS to signal the MSD of a node or link to a centralized
controller.
PCEP SR extensions draft [I-D.ietf-pce-segment-routing] signals MSD
in SR PCE Capability TLV and METRIC Object. However, if PCEP is not
supported/configured on the head-end of a SR tunnel or a Binding-SID
anchor node and controller does not participate in IGP routing, it
has no way to learn the MSD of nodes and links which has been
configured. BGP-LS [RFC7752] defines a way to expose topology and
associated attributes and capabilities of the nodes in that topology
to a centralized controller.
MSD of sub-type 1, called Base MSD as defined in Section 3 is used to
signal the number of SID's a node is capable of imposing, to be used
Tantsura, et al. Expires April 18, 2018 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Signaling MSD Using BGP-LS October 2017
by a path computation element/controller. In case, there are
additional labels (e.g. service) that are to be pushed to the stack -
this would be signaled with an another MSD type (TBD), no adjustment
to the Base MSD should be made. In the future, new MSD types could
be defined to signal additional capabilities: entropy labels, labels
that can be pushed thru recirculation, or another dataplane e.g IPv6.
1.1. Conventions used in this document
1.1.1. Terminology
BGP-LS: Distribution of Link-State and TE Information using Border
Gateway Protocol
MSD: Maximum SID Depth
PCC: Path Computation Client
PCE: Path Computation Element
PCEP: Path Computation Element Protocol
SID: Segment Identifier
SR: Segment routing
1.1.2. Requirements Language
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
[RFC2119].
2. Problem Statement
In existing technology only PCEP has extension to signal the MSD (SR
PCE Capability TLV/ METRIC Object as defined in
[I-D.ietf-pce-segment-routing],If PCEP is not supported by the node
(head-end of the SR tunnel) controller has no way to learn the MSD of
the node/link configured. OSPF and IS-IS extensions are defined in:
[I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-msd]
[I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd]
Tantsura, et al. Expires April 18, 2018 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Signaling MSD Using BGP-LS October 2017
3. MSD supported by a node
Node MSD is encoded in a new Node Attribute TLV, as defined in
[RFC7752]
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Sub-Type and Value ...
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ...
Figure 1: Node attribute format
Type : A 2-octet field specifiying code-point of the new TLV type.
Code-point:(TBD1) from BGP-LS Node Descriptor, Link Descriptor,
Prefix Descriptor, and Attribute TLVs registry
Length: A 2-octet field that indicates the length of the value
portion
Sub-Type and value fields are as defined in corresponding OSPF
[I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-msd] and IS-IS
[I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd] extensions.
4. MSD supported on a link
Link MSD is encoded in a New Link Attribute TLV, as defined in
[RFC7752]
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Sub-Type and Value ...
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ...
Figure 2: Link attribute format
Type : A 2-octet field specifiying code-point of the new TLV type.
Code-point:(TBD2) from BGP-LS Node Descriptor, Link Descriptor,
Prefix Descriptor, and Attribute TLVs registry
Length: A 2-octet field that indicates the length of the value
portion
Tantsura, et al. Expires April 18, 2018 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Signaling MSD Using BGP-LS October 2017
Sub-Type and value fields are as defined in corresponding OSPF
[I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-msd] and IS-IS
[I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd] extensions.
5. IANA Considerations
We request IANA assign code points from the registry BGP-LS Node
Descriptor, Link Descriptor, Prefix Descriptor, and Attribute TLVs,
as follows: TLV Code Point Description IS-IS TLV/Sub-TLV Reference
TBD1 Node MSD 242/23 (this document) TBD2 Link MSD
(22,23,25,141,222,223)/15 (this document)
6. Security Considerations
This document does not introduce security issues beyond those
discussed in [RFC7752]
7. Acknowledgements
We like to thank Nikos Triantafillis, Stephane Litkowski and Bruno
Decraene for their reviews and valuable comments.
8. References
8.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd]
Tantsura, J., Chunduri, U., Aldrin, S., and L. Ginsberg,
"Signaling MSD (Maximum SID Depth) using IS-IS", draft-
ietf-isis-segment-routing-msd-04 (work in progress), June
2017.
[I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-msd]
Tantsura, J., Chunduri, U., Aldrin, S., and P. Psenak,
"Signaling MSD (Maximum SID Depth) using OSPF", draft-
ietf-ospf-segment-routing-msd-05 (work in progress), June
2017.
[I-D.ietf-pce-segment-routing]
Sivabalan, S., Filsfils, C., Tantsura, J., Henderickx, W.,
and J. Hardwick, "PCEP Extensions for Segment Routing",
draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-10 (work in progress),
October 2017.
Tantsura, et al. Expires April 18, 2018 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Signaling MSD Using BGP-LS October 2017
[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing-mpls]
Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Bashandy, A., Decraene, B.,
Litkowski, S., and R. Shakir, "Segment Routing with MPLS
data plane", draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-mpls-10
(work in progress), June 2017.
[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>.
[RFC7752] Gredler, H., Ed., Medved, J., Previdi, S., Farrel, A., and
S. Ray, "North-Bound Distribution of Link-State and
Traffic Engineering (TE) Information Using BGP", RFC 7752,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7752, March 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7752>.
8.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-isis-segment-routing-extensions]
Previdi, S., Filsfils, C., Bashandy, A., Gredler, H.,
Litkowski, S., Decraene, B., and j. jefftant@gmail.com,
"IS-IS Extensions for Segment Routing", draft-ietf-isis-
segment-routing-extensions-13 (work in progress), June
2017.
[I-D.ietf-ospf-segment-routing-extensions]
Psenak, P., Previdi, S., Filsfils, C., Gredler, H.,
Shakir, R., Henderickx, W., and J. Tantsura, "OSPF
Extensions for Segment Routing", draft-ietf-ospf-segment-
routing-extensions-19 (work in progress), August 2017.
Authors' Addresses
Jeff Tantsura
Individual
Email: jefftant.ietf@gmail.com
Uma Chunduri
Huawei Technologies
Email: uma.chunduri@huawei.com
Tantsura, et al. Expires April 18, 2018 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Signaling MSD Using BGP-LS October 2017
Greg Mirsky
ZTE Corp.
Email: gregimirsky@gmail.com
Siva Sivabalan
Cisco
Email: msiva@cisco.com
Tantsura, et al. Expires April 18, 2018 [Page 7]