Multi-Layer OAM for Service function Chaining
draft-wang-sfc-multi-layer-oam-00

The information below is for an old version of the document
Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2014-10-27
Replaced by draft-ietf-sfc-multi-layer-oam
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats pdf htmlized bibtex
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
SFC WG                                                           C. Wang
Internet-Draft                                                   W. Meng
Intended status: Standards Track                         ZTE Corporation
Expires: April 30, 2015                                    B. Khasnabish
                                                            ZTE TX, Inc.
                                                        October 27, 2014

             Multi-Layer OAM for Service function Chaining
                   draft-wang-sfc-multi-layer-oam-00

Abstract

   Since there are different notions of service chain, such as fully
   abstract notion named SFC, half-fully abstraction notion named SFP
   and fully specific notion named RSP, and there are different
   components defined in SFC architecture, it seems reasonable to define
   differentiated OAM for these different service chains.  This document
   tries to discuss the multi-layer OAM requirements in SFC domain and
   provides a multi-layer OAM solution for different service chains.

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 30, 2015.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2014 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

Wang, et al.             Expires April 30, 2015                 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft           Multi-Layer OAM for SFC            October 2014

   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.  Convention and Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   3.  Requirement  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
   4.  Multi-layer SFC OAM architecture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   5.  Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
   6.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
   7.  IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
   8.  References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
     8.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
     8.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
   Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Wang, et al.             Expires April 30, 2015                 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft           Multi-Layer OAM for SFC            October 2014

1.  Introduction

   Since there are different notions of service chain, such as fully
   abstract notion named SFC, half-fully abstraction notion named SFP
   and fully specific notion named RSP, and there are different
   components defined in SFC architecture, it seems reasonable to define
   differentiated OAM for these different service chains.  This document
   tries to discuss the multi-layer OAM requirements in SFC domain and
   provides a multi-layer OAM solution for different service chains.

Wang, et al.             Expires April 30, 2015                 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft           Multi-Layer OAM for SFC            October 2014

2.  Convention and Terminology

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].

   The terms are all defined in [I-D.ietf-sfc-architecture].

Wang, et al.             Expires April 30, 2015                 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft           Multi-Layer OAM for SFC            October 2014

3.  Requirement

   In fact, besides the link layer OAM, network layer OAM, SFC service
   layer OAM is requisite in SFC Domain, which may be typically
   illustrated in Figure 1.

Show full document text