Layer-Transcending Traceroute for Overlay Networks like VXLAN
draft-nordmark-nvo3-transcending-traceroute-01

• Status
• IESG evaluation record
• IESG writeups
• Email expansions
• History

• Versions
• 00
• 01
• 02
• 03

NVO3 WG                                                      E. Nordmark
Internet-Draft                                                C. Appanna
Intended status: Standards Track                                   A. Lo
Expires: April 3, 2016                                   Arista Networks
                                                                Oct 2015

     Layer-Transcending Traceroute for Overlay Networks like VXLAN
             draft-nordmark-nvo3-transcending-traceroute-01

Abstract

   Tools like traceroute have been very valuable for the operation of
   the Internet.  Part of that value comes from being able to display
   information about routers and paths over which the user of the tool
   has no control, but the traceroute output can be passed along to
   someone else that can further investigate or fix the problem.

   In overlay networks such as VXLAN and NVGRE the prevailing view is
   that since the overlay network has no control of the underlay there
   needs to be special tools and agreements to enable extracting traces
   from the underlay.  We argue that enabling visibility into the
   underlay and using existing tools like traceroute has been overlooked
   and would add value in many deployments of overlay networks.

   This document specifies an approach that can be used to make
   traceroute transcend layers of encapsulation including details for
   how to apply this to VXLAN.  The technique can be applied to other
   encapsulations used for overlay networks.  It can also be implemented
   using current commercial silicon.

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 3, 2016.

Nordmark, et al.          Expires April 3, 2016                 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft                    LTTON                         Oct 2015

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
   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.  Solution Overview  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   3.  Goals and Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
   4.  Definition Of Terms  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
   5.  Example Topologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
   6.  Controlling and selecting ttl behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
   7.  Introducing a ttl copyin flag in the encapsulation header  . . 10
   8.  Encapsulation Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
   9.  Decapsulating Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
   10. Other ICMP errors  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
   11. Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
   12. IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
   13. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
   14. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
     14.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
     14.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
   Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Nordmark, et al.          Expires April 3, 2016                 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft                    LTTON                         Oct 2015

1.  Introduction

   Tools like traceroute have been very valuable for the operation of
   the Internet.  Part of that value comes from being able to display
   information about routers and paths over which the user of the tool
   has no control, but the traceroute output can be passed along to
   someone else that can further investigate or fix the problem.  The
   output of traceroute can be included in an email or a trouble ticket