OAM Header for use in Overlay Networks
draft-ooamdt-rtgwg-ooam-header-02
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 "Expired".
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Greg Mirsky , Nagendra Kumar Nainar , Deepak Kumar , Mach Chen , Yizhou Li , David Mozes , David Dolson | ||
| Last updated | 2017-02-27 (Latest revision 2016-10-14) | ||
| 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-ooamdt-rtgwg-ooam-header-02
NVO3 Working Group G. Mirsky
Internet-Draft ZTE Corp.
Intended status: Standards Track N. Kumar
Expires: August 31, 2017 D. Kumar
Cisco Systems, Inc.
M. Chen
Y. Li
Huawei Technologies
D. Mozes
Mellanox Technologies Ltd.
D. Dolson
Sandvine
February 27, 2017
OAM Header for use in Overlay Networks
draft-ooamdt-rtgwg-ooam-header-02
Abstract
This document introduces Overlay Operations, Administration, and
Maintenance (OOAM) Header to be used in overlay networks to create
Overlay Associated Channel (OAC) to ensure that OOAM control packets
are in-band with user traffic and de-multiplex OOAM protocols.
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 August 31, 2017.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
Mirsky, et al. Expires August 31, 2017 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft OAM Header for use in Overlay Networks February 2017
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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1. Conventions used in this document . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1.1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1.2. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Associated Channel in Overlay Networks . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Overlay OAM Header . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.1. OOAM Message Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.2. OOAM Header Flags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
7. Acknowledgement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1. Introduction
New protocols that support overlay networks like VxLAN-GPE
[I-D.ietf-nvo3-vxlan-gpe], GUE [I-D.ietf-nvo3-gue], Geneve
[I-D.ietf-nvo3-geneve], BIER [I-D.ietf-bier-mpls-encapsulation], and
NSH [I-D.ietf-sfc-nsh] support multi-protocol payload, e.g.
Ethernet, IPv4/IPv6, and recognize Operations, Administration, and
Maintenance (OAM) as one of distinct types. That ensures that
Overlay OAM (OOAM)packets are sharing fate with Overlay data packet
traversing the underlay.
This document introduces OOAM Header to be used in overlay networks
to de-multiplex OOAM protocols.
1.1. Conventions used in this document
Mirsky, et al. Expires August 31, 2017 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft OAM Header for use in Overlay Networks February 2017
1.1.1. Terminology
Term "Overlay OAM" used in this document interchangeably with longer
version "set of OAM protocols, methods and tools for Overlay
networks".
NTP Network Time Protocol
OAC Overlay Associated Channel
OAM Operations, Administration, and Maintenance
OOAM Overlay OAM
PTP Precision Time Protocol
1.1.2. 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
[RFC2119].
2. Associated Channel in Overlay Networks
Associated channel in the overlay network is the channel that, by
using the same encapsulation as user traffic, follows the same path
through the underlay network as user traffic. In other words, the
associated channel is in-band with user traffic. Creating notion of
the overlay associated channel (OAC) in the overlay network ensures
that control packets of active OAM protocols carried in the OAC are
in-band with user traffic. Additionally, OAC allows depelopment of
OAM tools that, from operational point of view, function in
essentially the same manner in any type of overlay.
3. Overlay OAM Header
OOAM Header immediately follows the header of the overlay and
identifies OAC. The format of the OOAM Header is:
Mirsky, et al. Expires August 31, 2017 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft OAM Header for use in Overlay Networks February 2017
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| V | Msg Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Flags | Reserved | Next Prot |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
~ OOAM Control Packet ~
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 1: Overlay OAM Header format
The OAM Header consists of the following fields:
o V - two bits long field indicates the current version of the
Overlay OAM Header. The current value is 0;
o Msg Type - 14 bits long field identifies OAM protocol, e.g. Echo
Request/Reply, BFD, Performance Measurement;
o Length - two octets long field that is length of the OOAM control
packet in octets;
o Flags -two octets long field carries bit flags that define
optional capability and thus processing of the OOAM control
packet;
o Reserved - one octet field that MUST be zeroed on transmit and
ignored on receipt;
o Next Prot - one octet long field that defines optional payload
that is present after the OOAM Control Packet.
The format of the Flags field is:
0 1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|T| Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 2: Flags field format
where:
o T - Timestap block flag.
Mirsky, et al. Expires August 31, 2017 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft OAM Header for use in Overlay Networks February 2017
o Reserved - must be set to all zeroes on transmission and ignored
on receipt.
The OOAM header may be followed by the Timestamp control block
Figure 3 and then by OOAM Control Packet identified by the Msg Type
field.
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| QTF | RTF | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Timestamp 1 |
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
~ ~
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Timestamp 4 |
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 3: Timestamp block format
where:
QTF - Querier timestamp format
RTF - Responder timestamp format
Timestamp 1-4 - 64-bit timestamp values
Network Time Protocol (NTP), described in [RFC5905], is widely used
and has long history of deployment. But it is the IEEE 1588
Precision Time Protocol (PTP) [IEEE.1588.2008] that is being broadly
used to achieve high-quality clock synchronization. Converging
between NTP and PTP time formats is possible but is not trivial and
does come with cost, particularly when it is required to be performed
in real time without loss of accuracy. And recently protocols that
supported only NTP time format, like One-Way Active Measurement
Protocol [RFC4656] and Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol [RFC5357],
have been enchanced to support the PTP time format as well
[I-D.ietf-ippm-twamp-time-format]. This document proposes to select
PTP time format as default time format for Overlay OAM performance
measurement. Hence QTF, RTF fields MUST be set to 0 if querer or
responder use PTP time format respectively. If the querer or
responder use the NTP time format, then QTF and/or RTF MUST be set to
1. Use of other values MUST be considered as error and MAY be
reported.
Mirsky, et al. Expires August 31, 2017 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft OAM Header for use in Overlay Networks February 2017
4. IANA Considerations
IANA is requested to create new registry called "Overlay OAM".
4.1. OOAM Message Types
IANA is requested to create new sub-registry called "Overlay OAM
Protocol Types" in the "Overlay OAM" registry. All code points in
the range 1 through 15615 in this registry shall be allocated
according to the "IETF Review" procedure as specified in [RFC5226] .
Remaining code points are allocated according to the Table 1:
+---------------+--------------+-------------------------+
| Value | Description | Reference |
+---------------+--------------+-------------------------+
| 0 | Reserved | |
| 1 - 15615 | Unassigned | IETF Review |
| 15616 - 16127 | Unassigned | First Come First Served |
| 16128 - 16143 | Experimental | This document |
| 16144 - 16382 | Private Use | This document |
| 16383 | Reserved | This document |
+---------------+--------------+-------------------------+
Table 1: Overlay OAM Protocol type
4.2. OOAM Header Flags
IANA is requested to create sub-registry "Overlay OAM Header Flags"
in "Overlay OAM" registry. Two flags are defined in this document.
New values are assigned via Standards Action [RFC5226].
+-----------+-----------------+---------------+
| Flags bit | Description | Reference |
+-----------+-----------------+---------------+
| Bit 0 | Timestamp field | This document |
| Bit 1-15 | Unassigned | |
+-----------+-----------------+---------------+
Table 2: Overlay OAM Flags
5. Security Considerations
TBD
Mirsky, et al. Expires August 31, 2017 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft OAM Header for use in Overlay Networks February 2017
6. Contributors
Work on this documented started by Overlay OAM Design Team with
contributions from:
Carlos Pignataro
Cisco Systems, Inc.
cpignata@cisco.com
Erik Nordmark
Arista Networks
nordmark@acm.org
Ignas Bagdonas
ibagdona@gmail.com
7. Acknowledgement
TBD
8. References
8.1. Normative References
[IEEE.1588.2008]
"Standard for a Precision Clock Synchronization Protocol
for Networked Measurement and Control Systems",
IEEE Standard 1588, July 2008.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC5905] Mills, D., Martin, J., Ed., Burbank, J., and W. Kasch,
"Network Time Protocol Version 4: Protocol and Algorithms
Specification", RFC 5905, DOI 10.17487/RFC5905, June 2010,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5905>.
Mirsky, et al. Expires August 31, 2017 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft OAM Header for use in Overlay Networks February 2017
8.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-bier-mpls-encapsulation]
Wijnands, I., Rosen, E., Dolganow, A., Tantsura, J.,
Aldrin, S., and I. Meilik, "Encapsulation for Bit Index
Explicit Replication in MPLS and non-MPLS Networks",
draft-ietf-bier-mpls-encapsulation-06 (work in progress),
December 2016.
[I-D.ietf-ippm-twamp-time-format]
Mirsky, G. and I. Meilik, "Support of IEEE-1588 time stamp
format in Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (TWAMP)",
draft-ietf-ippm-twamp-time-format-02 (work in progress),
February 2017.
[I-D.ietf-nvo3-geneve]
Gross, J., Ganga, I., and T. Sridhar, "Geneve: Generic
Network Virtualization Encapsulation", draft-ietf-
nvo3-geneve-03 (work in progress), September 2016.
[I-D.ietf-nvo3-gue]
Herbert, T., Yong, L., and O. Zia, "Generic UDP
Encapsulation", draft-ietf-nvo3-gue-05 (work in progress),
October 2016.
[I-D.ietf-nvo3-vxlan-gpe]
Maino, F., Kreeger, L., and U. Elzur, "Generic Protocol
Extension for VXLAN", draft-ietf-nvo3-vxlan-gpe-03 (work
in progress), October 2016.
[I-D.ietf-sfc-nsh]
Quinn, P. and U. Elzur, "Network Service Header", draft-
ietf-sfc-nsh-12 (work in progress), February 2017.
[RFC4656] Shalunov, S., Teitelbaum, B., Karp, A., Boote, J., and M.
Zekauskas, "A One-way Active Measurement Protocol
(OWAMP)", RFC 4656, DOI 10.17487/RFC4656, September 2006,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4656>.
[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5226, May 2008,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5226>.
[RFC5357] Hedayat, K., Krzanowski, R., Morton, A., Yum, K., and J.
Babiarz, "A Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (TWAMP)",
RFC 5357, DOI 10.17487/RFC5357, October 2008,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5357>.
Mirsky, et al. Expires August 31, 2017 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft OAM Header for use in Overlay Networks February 2017
Authors' Addresses
Greg Mirsky
ZTE Corp.
Email: gregimirsky@gmail.com
Nagendra Kumar
Cisco Systems, Inc.
Email: naikumar@cisco.com
Deepak Kumar
Cisco Systems, Inc.
Email: dekumar@cisco.com
Mach Chen
Huawei Technologies
Email: mach.chen@huawei.com
Yizhou Li
Huawei Technologies
Email: liyizhou@huawei.com
David Mozes
Mellanox Technologies Ltd.
Email: davidm@mellanox.com
David Dolson
Sandvine
Email: ddolson@sandvine.com
Mirsky, et al. Expires August 31, 2017 [Page 9]