Name-Based Service Function Forwarder (nSFF) component within SFC framework
draft-trossen-sfc-name-based-sff-04

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2019-04-17
Stream ISE
Intended RFC status Informational
Formats plain text xml pdf html bibtex
Stream ISE state Response to Review Needed
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
Document shepherd No shepherd assigned
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
Network Working Group                                         D. Trossen
Internet-Draft                                  InterDigital Europe, Ltd
Intended status: Informational                            D. Purkayastha
Expires: October 19, 2019                                      A. Rahman
                                        InterDigital Communications, LLC
                                                          April 17, 2019

   Name-Based Service Function Forwarder (nSFF) component within SFC
                               framework
                  draft-trossen-sfc-name-based-sff-04

Abstract

   Many stringent requirements are imposed on today's network, such as
   low latency, high availability and reliability in order to support
   several use cases such as IoT, Gaming, Content distribution, Robotics
   etc.  Adoption of cloud and fog technology at the edge of the network
   allows operator to deploy a single "Service Function" to multiple
   "Execution locations".  The decision to steer traffic to a specific
   location may change frequently based on load, proximity etc.  Under
   the current SFC framework, steering traffic dynamically to the
   different execution end points require a specific 're-chaining',
   i.e., a change in the service function path reflecting the different
   IP endpoints to be used for the new execution points.  This procedure
   may be complex and take time.  In order to simplify re-chaining and
   reduce the time to complete the procedure, we discuss separating the
   logical Service Function Path from the specific execution end points.
   This can be done by identifying the Service Functions using a name
   rather than a routable IP endpoint (or Layer 2 address).  This draft
   describes the necessary extensions, additional functions and protocol
   details in SFF (Service Function Forwarder) to handle name based
   relationships.

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."

Trossen, et al.         Expires October 19, 2019                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft               Name Based SFF                   April 2019

   This Internet-Draft will expire on October 19, 2019.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2019 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
   (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 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.  Example use case: 5G control plane services . . . . . . . . .   4
   3.  Background  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     3.1.  Relevant part of SFC architecture . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     3.2.  Challenges with current framework . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   4.  Name based operation in SFF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     4.1.  General Idea  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     4.2.  Name-Based Service Function Path (nSFP) . . . . . . . . .   8
     4.3.  Name Based Network Locator Map (nNLM) . . . . . . . . . .  10
     4.4.  Name-based Service Function Forwarder (nSFF)  . . . . . .  11
     4.5.  High Level Architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
     4.6.  Operational Steps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   5.  nSFF Forwarding Operations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
     5.1.  nSFF Protocol Layers  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
     5.2.  nSFF Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
       5.2.1.  Forwarding between nSFFs and nSFF-NR  . . . . . . . .  17
       5.2.2.  SF Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
       5.2.3.  Local SF Forwarding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20
       5.2.4.  Handling of HTTP responses  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20
       5.2.5.  Remote SF Forwarding  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  21
   6.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  24
Show full document text