Use Case for a Scalable and Topology-Aware Segment Routing MPLS Data Plane Monitoring System
draft-ietf-spring-oam-usecase-01

The information below is for an old version of the document
Document Type Active Internet-Draft (spring WG)
Last updated 2015-10-16
Replaces draft-geib-spring-oam-usecase, draft-geib-segment-routing-oam-usecase
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status Informational
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)
SPRING                                                           R. Geib
Internet-Draft                                          Deutsche Telekom
Intended status: Informational                               C. Filsfils
Expires: April 17, 2016                                     C. Pignataro
                                                                N. Kumar
                                                     Cisco Systems, Inc.
                                                        October 15, 2015

  Use Case for a Scalable and Topology-Aware Segment Routing MPLS Data
                        Plane Monitoring System
                    draft-ietf-spring-oam-usecase-01

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 and prior
   hard to realise 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 17, 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 17, 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.  Acronyms  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  An MPLS Topology-Aware Path Monitoring System . . . . . . . .   5
   4.  SR-Based Path Monitoring Use Case Illustration  . . . . . . .   6
     4.1.  Use Case 1 - LSP Data Plane Monitoring  . . . . . . . . .   6
     4.2.  Use Case 2 - Monitoring a Remote Bundle . . . . . . . . .   8
     4.3.  Use Case 3 - Fault Localization . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   5.  Failure Notification from PMS to LERi . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   6.  Applying SR to Monitor LDP Paths  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   7.  PMS Monitoring of Different Segment ID Types  . . . . . . . .  10
   8.  Connectivity Verification Using PMS . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   9.  Extensions of Related Specifications  . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   11. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   12. Acknowledgement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   13. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     13.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     13.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12

1.  Acronyms

   ECMP  Equal-Cost Multi-Path

   IGP   Interionr Gateway Protocol

   LER   Label Edge Router

   LSP   Label Switched Path

   LSR   Label Switching Router

   OAM   Operations, Administration, and Maintenance

   PMS   Path Monitoring System

   SID   Segment Identifier

   SR    Segment Routing

Geib, et al.             Expires April 17, 2016                 [Page 2]

Internet-Draft         SR MPLS Monitoring Use Case          October 2015

2.  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 data plane in a similar way as user
   packets.  Segment Routing enables forwarding of packets along pre-
Show full document text