Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping/Traceroute for Segment Routing IGP Prefix and Adjacency SIDs with MPLS Data-plane
draft-ietf-mpls-spring-lsp-ping-08
The information below is for an old version of the document |
Document |
Type |
|
Active Internet-Draft (mpls WG)
|
|
Last updated |
|
2017-09-20
|
|
Replaces |
|
draft-kumarkini-mpls-spring-lsp-ping
|
|
Stream |
|
IETF
|
|
Intended RFC status |
|
(None)
|
|
Formats |
|
pdf
htmlized
bibtex
|
|
Reviews |
|
|
Stream |
WG state
|
|
Submitted to IESG for Publication
|
|
Document shepherd |
|
Loa Andersson
|
|
Shepherd write-up |
|
Show
(last changed 2017-08-21)
|
IESG |
IESG state |
|
Publication Requested
|
|
Consensus Boilerplate |
|
Unknown
|
|
Telechat date |
|
|
|
Responsible AD |
|
Deborah Brungard
|
|
Send notices to |
|
Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>, draft-ietf-mpls-spring-lsp-ping@ietf.org
|
Network Work group N. Kumar, Ed.
Internet-Draft C. Pignataro, Ed.
Intended status: Standards Track Cisco
Expires: March 24, 2018 G. Swallow
Southend Technical Center
N. Akiya
Big Switch Networks
S. Kini
Individual
M. Chen
Huawei
September 20, 2017
Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping/Traceroute for Segment Routing IGP Prefix
and Adjacency SIDs with MPLS Data-plane
draft-ietf-mpls-spring-lsp-ping-08
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 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."
Kumar, et al. Expires March 24, 2018 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft LSP Ping/Trace for SR on MPLS September 2017
This Internet-Draft will expire on March 24, 2018.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2017 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
(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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Requirements notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Challenges with Existing mechanism . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.1. Path validation in Segment Routing networks . . . . . . . 4
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 Detailed 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
8. Backward Compatibility with non Segment Routing devices . . . 16
9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
9.1. New Target FEC Stack Sub-TLVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
9.2. Protocol in Label Stack Sub-TLV of Downstream Detailed
Mapping TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
9.3. Return Code . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
11. Acknowledgement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Show full document text