Use case for a scalable and topology aware MPLS data plane monitoring system
draft-ietf-spring-oam-usecase-00

The information below is for an old version of the document
Document Type Active Internet-Draft (spring WG)
Last updated 2015-10-15
Replaces draft-geib-segment-routing-oam-usecase, draft-geib-spring-oam-usecase
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status Informational
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)
spring                                                      R. Geib, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                          Deutsche Telekom
Intended status: Informational                               C. Filsfils
Expires: April 16, 2016                                     C. Pignataro
                                                                N. Kumar
                                                     Cisco Systems, Inc.
                                                        October 14, 2015

 Use case for a scalable and topology aware MPLS data plane monitoring
                                 system
                    draft-ietf-spring-oam-usecase-00

Abstract

   This document describes features and a use case of a path monitoring
   system.  Segment based routing enables a scalable and simple method
   to monitor data plane liveliness of the complete set of paths
   belonging to a single domain.  Compared with legacy MPLS ping and
   path trace, MPLS topology awareness reduces management and control
   plane involvement of OAM measurements while enabling new OAM
   features.

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."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on April 16, 2016.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2015 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

Geib, et al.             Expires April 16, 2016                 [Page 1]

Internet-Draft         SR MPLS monitoring use case          October 2015

   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.  An MPLS topology aware path monitoring system . . . . . . . .   4
   3.  SR based path monitoring use case illustration  . . . . . . .   5
     3.1.  Use-case 1 - LSP dataplane monitoring . . . . . . . . . .   5
     3.2.  Use-case 2 - Monitoring a remote bundle . . . . . . . . .   7
     3.3.  Use-Case 3 - Fault localization . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   4.  Failure Notification from PMS to LERi . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   5.  Applying SR to monitor LDP paths  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   6.  PMS monitoring of different Segment ID types  . . . . . . . .   9
   7.  Connectivity Verification using PMS . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   8.  Extensions of related standards helpful for this use case . .  10
   9.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   11. Acknowledgement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   12. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     12.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     12.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11

1.  Introduction

   It is essential for a network operator to monitor all the forwarding
   paths observed by the transported user packets.  The monitoring flow
   is expected to be forwarded in dataplane in a similar way as user
   packets.  Segment Routing enables forwarding of packets along pre-
   defined paths and segments and thus a Segment Routed monitoring
   packet can stay in dataplane while passing along one or more segments
   to be monitored.

   This document describes illustrates use-cases based on data plane
   path monitoring capabilities.  The use case is limited to a single
   IGP MPLS domain.

   The use case applies to monitoring of LDP LSP's as well as to
   monitoring of Segment Routed LSP's.  As compared to LDP, Segment
   Routing is expected to simplify the use case by enabling MPLS
   topology detection based on IGP signaled segments as specified by
Show full document text