Supporting In-Situ OAM Direct Export Using MPLS Network Actions
draft-mb-mpls-ioam-dex-01
The information below is for an old version of the document.
| Document | Type |
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft whose latest revision state is "Active".
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Greg Mirsky , Mohamed Boucadair | ||
| Last updated | 2022-09-27 | ||
| RFC stream | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | I-D Exists | |
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
draft-mb-mpls-ioam-dex-01
MPLS Working Group G. Mirsky
Internet-Draft Ericsson
Intended status: Standards Track M. Boucadair
Expires: 31 March 2023 Orange
27 September 2022
Supporting In-Situ OAM Direct Export Using MPLS Network Actions
draft-mb-mpls-ioam-dex-01
Abstract
In-Situ Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (IOAM), defined
in RFC 9197, is an on-path telemetry method to collect and transport
the operational state and telemetry information that can be used in
calculating various performance metrics. IOAM Direct Export (IOAM-
DEX) is one of the IOAM Option types, in which the operational state
and telemetry information are collected according to the specified
profile and exported in a manner and format defined by a local
policy. MPLS Network Actions (MNA) techniques are meant to indicate
actions to be performed on any combination of Label Switched Paths
(LSPs), MPLS packets, and the node itself, and also to transfer data
needed for these actions. This document explores how MNA can be used
for collecting on-path operational state and telemetry information
using IOAM-DEX Option.
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."
This Internet-Draft will expire on 31 March 2023.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2022 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
Mirsky & Boucadair Expires 31 March 2023 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft IOAM-DEX Over MNA September 2022
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 Revised BSD License text as
described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Conventions Used in this Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. Acronyms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Applicability of IOAM Option Types in an MPLS Network . . . . 3
3.1. Realization of IOAM-DEX as an MPLS Network Action . . . . 5
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7.2. Informational References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1. Introduction
In-Situ OAM (IOAM) [RFC9197] is an on-path telemetry method to
collect and transport the operational state and telemetry information
that can be used in calculating various performance metrics. Several
IOAM Option types (e.g., Pre-allocated and Incremental) use the user
packet themselves to collect the operational state and telemetry
information. Such a mechanism transports the collected information
to an IOAM decapsulating node (typically, located at the edge of the
IOAM domain within the data packet). IOAM Direct Export (IOAM-DEX)
[I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-direct-export] is an IOAM Option type. In IOAM-
DEX, the operational state and telemetry information are collected
according to the specified profile and exported in a manner and
format defined by a local policy. MPLS Network Actions (MNA)
techniques [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-fwk] indicate actions to be performed
on any combination of Label Switched Paths (LSPs), MPLS packets, the
node itself, and also allow for the transfer of data needed for these
actions.
This document describes how MNA can be used for collecting on-path
operational state and telemetry information using IOAM-DEX Option.
Specifying the mechanism of exporting collected information is
outside the scope of this document.
Mirsky & Boucadair Expires 31 March 2023 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft IOAM-DEX Over MNA September 2022
2. Conventions Used in this Document
2.1. Acronyms
IOAM: In-Situ OAM
IOAM-DEX: IOAM Direct Export
ISD: In-Stack Data
LSP: Label Switched Path
MPLS: Multiprotocol Label Switching
MNA: MPLS Network Actions
PSD: Post-Stack Data
2.2. Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here.
3. Applicability of IOAM Option Types in an MPLS Network
Pre-allocated, Incremental, and Edge-to-Edge IOAM Option types
[RFC9197] use user packets to collect and transport the operational
state and telemetry information. In some environments, for example,
data center networks, this technique is useful as the available
bandwidth, and the use of jumbo frames can accommodate the increase
of the packet payload. But for other use cases in which network
resources are closely controlled, the use of in-band channels for
collecting and transporting the telemetry information may noticeably
decrease the cost-efficiency of network operations. Although the
operational state and telemetry information are essential for network
automation (Section 4 of [RFC8969]), its delivery is not as critical
as user packets. As such, collecting and transporting the
operational state and telemetry information out-of-band using the
management plane is a viable option for some environments. IOAM-DEX
[I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-direct-export] is used to collect IOAM data
defined in [RFC9197]. The processing and transport of the collected
information are controlled by a local policy which is outside the
scope of this specification.
Mirsky & Boucadair Expires 31 March 2023 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft IOAM-DEX Over MNA September 2022
[I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-direct-export] defines the IOAM-DEX Option-Type
format as shown in Figure 1.
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Namespace-ID | Flags |Extension-Flags|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| IOAM-Trace-Type | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Flow ID (Optional) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Sequence Number (Optional) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 1: IOAM Direct Export Option Type Format
Figure 2 displays the detailed format of the Extension-Flags field
that indicates presence of the optional Flow ID and/or Sequence
Number fields in the IOAM-DEX header.
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|F|S|U|U|U|U|U|U|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 2: Extension-Flags Field Format
Where elements are defined as follows:
* F - one-bit flag. When the flag is set to 1, it indicates the
presence of the Flow ID field in the IOAM-DEX header.
* S - one-bit flag. When the flag is set to 1, it indicates the
presence of the Sequence Number field in the IOAM-DEX header.
* U - unassigned one-bit flag. It MUST be zeroed on transmission
and the value MUST be ignored upon receipt.
Mirsky & Boucadair Expires 31 March 2023 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft IOAM-DEX Over MNA September 2022
3.1. Realization of IOAM-DEX as an MPLS Network Action
[I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-usecases] recognizes the importance of IOAM in
MPLS networks and lists it as one of the use cases that might be
supported using MNA techniques. [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-fwk] defines the
architectural elements that compose MNA. Figure 3 displays an
example of MNA elements encapsulated in an MPLS packet. The exact
format will be defined in future MNA solution document(s).
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ---
| Network Action Sub-Stack Indicator | U |S| U |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ NAS
~ MNA Indicators |S| ~
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ---
~ In-Stack Data Block |S| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ---
| |1| | BoS
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ---
~ Post-Stack Data Block ~
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
~ Packet Payload ~
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 3: An Example of MPLS Network Action
Where the enclosed elements are defined as follows:
* Network Action Sub-Stack Indicator (NSI) is a Base Special Purpose
Label assigned by IANA.
* U - unassigned fields in a Label Stack Element.
* S - Bottom-of-Stack field.
* MNA Indicators is a field listing requested MNAs.
* In-Stack Data (ISD) Block includes ancillary data elements in
support of MNAs as defined in [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-fwk].
* Post-Stack Data (PSD) Block includes data elements in support of
MNAs as defined in [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-fwk].
In order to support direct export of the operational state and
telemetry information, the IOAM-DEX blob (binary large object)
Figure 1 can be placed as part of the ISD block in an MPLS label
Mirsky & Boucadair Expires 31 March 2023 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft IOAM-DEX Over MNA September 2022
stack. In doing so, the IOAM-DEX can be used for hop-by-hop and
edge-to-edge collection of the operational state and telemetry
information. The length of the enclosed IOAM-DEX is determined as a
function of the flag setting (Figure 2). Policies controlling the
processing of the collected information and its transport are outside
the scope of this document.
The performance considerations discussed in Section of 5 of
[I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-direct-export] are applicable here.
4. IANA Considerations
IANA is requested to assign an IOAM-DEX Network Action Indicator from
its X registry.
5. Security Considerations
Security considerations discussed in [RFC9197],
[I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-direct-export], and [I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-fwk] apply
to this document.
6. Acknowledgments
TBD
7. References
7.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-direct-export]
Song, H., Gafni, B., Brockners, F., Bhandari, S., and T.
Mizrahi, "In-situ OAM Direct Exporting", Work in Progress,
Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-direct-export-11, 23
September 2022, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/
draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-direct-export-11>.
[I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-fwk]
Andersson, L., Bryant, S., Bocci, M., and T. Li, "MPLS
Network Actions Framework", Work in Progress, Internet-
Draft, draft-ietf-mpls-mna-fwk-01, 8 September 2022,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-mpls-
mna-fwk-01>.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
Mirsky & Boucadair Expires 31 March 2023 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft IOAM-DEX Over MNA September 2022
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
[RFC9197] Brockners, F., Ed., Bhandari, S., Ed., and T. Mizrahi,
Ed., "Data Fields for In Situ Operations, Administration,
and Maintenance (IOAM)", RFC 9197, DOI 10.17487/RFC9197,
May 2022, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9197>.
7.2. Informational References
[I-D.ietf-mpls-mna-usecases]
Saad, T., Makhijani, K., Song, H., and G. Mirsky, "Use
Cases for MPLS Network Action Indicators and MPLS
Ancillary Data", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-
ietf-mpls-mna-usecases-00, 19 May 2022,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-mpls-
mna-usecases-00>.
[RFC8969] Wu, Q., Ed., Boucadair, M., Ed., Lopez, D., Xie, C., and
L. Geng, "A Framework for Automating Service and Network
Management with YANG", RFC 8969, DOI 10.17487/RFC8969,
January 2021, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8969>.
Authors' Addresses
Greg Mirsky
Ericsson
Email: gregimirsky@gmail.com
Mohamed Boucadair
Orange
35000 Rennes
France
Email: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
Mirsky & Boucadair Expires 31 March 2023 [Page 7]