Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping/Trace for Segment Routing Networks Using MPLS Dataplane
draft-ietf-mpls-spring-lsp-ping-01
| The information below is for an old version of the document |
| Document |
Type |
|
Active Internet-Draft (mpls WG)
|
|
Last updated |
|
2016-10-31
|
|
Replaces |
|
draft-kumarkini-mpls-spring-lsp-ping
|
|
Stream |
|
IETF
|
|
Intended RFC status |
|
(None)
|
|
Formats |
|
pdf
htmlized
bibtex
|
|
Reviews |
|
|
| 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: May 4, 2017 Cisco Systems, Inc.
N. Akiya
Big Switch Networks
S. Kini
Individual
H. Gredler
Juniper Networks
M. Chen
Huawei
October 31, 2016
Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping/Trace for Segment Routing Networks Using
MPLS Dataplane
draft-ietf-mpls-spring-lsp-ping-01
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 May 4, 2017 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft LSP Ping/Trace for SR on MPLS October 2016
This Internet-Draft will expire on May 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5.2. IPv6 IGP-Prefix Segment ID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5.3. IGP-Adjacency Segment ID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6. Extension to Downstream Mapping TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7. Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
7.1. FECs in Target FEC Stack TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
7.2. FEC Stack Change sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
7.3. Segment ID POP Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
7.4. Segment ID Check . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
7.5. TTL Consideration for traceroute . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
8. Issues with non-forwarding labels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
9. Backward Compatibility with non Segment Routing devices . . . 13
10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
10.1. New Target FEC Stack Sub-TLVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
11. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
12. Acknowledgement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Show full document text