Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping/Trace for Segment Routing Networks Using MPLS Dataplane
draft-ietf-mpls-spring-lsp-ping-02

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (mpls WG)
Last updated 2016-12-01
Replaces draft-kumarkini-mpls-spring-lsp-ping
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text pdf html bibtex
Stream WG state WG Document
Document shepherd No shepherd assigned
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
Network Work group                                              N. Kumar
Internet-Draft                                                G. Swallow
Intended status: Standards Track                            C. Pignataro
Expires: June 4, 2017                                Cisco Systems, Inc.
                                                                N. Akiya
                                                     Big Switch Networks
                                                                 S. Kini
                                                              Individual
                                                              H. Gredler
                                                        Juniper Networks
                                                                 M. Chen
                                                                  Huawei
                                                        December 1, 2016

Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping/Trace for Segment Routing Networks Using
                             MPLS Dataplane
                   draft-ietf-mpls-spring-lsp-ping-02

Abstract

   Segment Routing architecture leverages the source routing and
   tunneling paradigms and can be directly applied to MPLS data plane.
   A node steers a packet through a controlled set of instructions
   called segments, by prepending the packet with a Segment Routing
   header.

   The segment assignment and forwarding semantic nature of Segment
   Routing raises additional consideration for connectivity verification
   and fault isolation in LSP with Segment Routing architecture.  This
   document illustrates the problem and describe a mechanism to perform
   LSP Ping and Traceroute on Segment Routing network over MPLS data
   plane.

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."

Kumar, et al.             Expires June 4, 2017                  [Page 1]
Internet-Draft        LSP Ping/Trace for SR on MPLS        December 2016

   This Internet-Draft will expire on June 4, 2017.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2016 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
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   2.  Requirements notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  Challenges with Existing mechanism  . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     4.1.  Path validation in Segment Routing networks . . . . . . .   4
     4.2.  Service Label . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   5.  Segment ID sub-TLV  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     5.1.  IPv4 IGP-Prefix Segment ID  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     5.2.  IPv6 IGP-Prefix Segment ID  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     5.3.  IGP-Adjacency Segment ID  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   6.  Extension to Downstream Detailed Mapping TLV  . . . . . . . .   9
   7.  Procedures  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     7.1.  FECs in Target FEC Stack TLV  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     7.2.  FEC Stack Change sub-TLV  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     7.3.  Segment ID POP Operation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     7.4.  Segment ID Check  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     7.5.  TTL Consideration for traceroute  . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   8.  Issues with non-forwarding labels . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   9.  Backward Compatibility with non Segment Routing devices . . .  14
   10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
     10.1.  New Target FEC Stack Sub-TLVs  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
Show full document text