Generic Transport Functions
draft-zzhang-tsvwg-generic-transport-functions-00

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Authors Zhaohui Zhang  , Ron Bonica  , Kireeti Kompella 
Last updated 2020-11-01
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text pdf htmlized (tools) 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)
tsvwg                                                           Z. Zhang
Internet-Draft                                                 R. Bonica
Intended status: Standards Track                             K. Kompella
Expires: May 5, 2021                                    Juniper Networks
                                                       November 01, 2020

                      Generic Transport Functions
           draft-zzhang-tsvwg-generic-transport-functions-00

Abstract

   Some functionalities (e.g. fragmentation/reassembly and Encapsulating
   Security Payload) provided by IPv6 can be viewed as independent of
   IPv6 or even IP entirely.  This document proposes to provide those
   functionalities at different layers (e.g., MPLS, BIER or even
   Ethernet) independent of IP.

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 May 5, 2021.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2020 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

Zhang, et al.              Expires May 5, 2021                  [Page 1]
Internet-Draft         Generic Transport Functions         November 2020

   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Specifications  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     2.1.  Generic Fragmentation Header  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     2.2.  MPLS Signaling  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
       2.2.1.  BGP Signaling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
       2.2.2.  IGP Signaling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     2.3.  Generic ESP/Authentication Header . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   3.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   4.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   5.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   6.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     6.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     6.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8

1.  Introduction

   Consider an operator providing Ethernet services such as pseudowires,
   VPLS or EVPN.  The Ethernet frames that a Provider Edge (PE) device
   receives from a Customer Edge (CE) device may have a larger size than
   the PE-PE path MTU (pMTU) in the provider network.  This could be
   because

   1.  the provider network is built upon virtual connections (e.g.
       pseudowires) provided by another infrastructure provider, or

   2.  the customer network uses jumbo frames while the provider network
       does not, or

   3.  the provider-side overhead for transporting customers packets
       across the network pushes past the pMTU.

   In any case, the provider simply cannot require its customers to
   change their MTU.

   To get those large frames across the provider network, currently the
   only workaround is to encapsulate the frames in IP (with or without
   GRE) and then fragment the IP packets.  Even if MPLS is used for
   service delimiting, IP is used for transporation (MPLS over IP/GRE).
   This may not be desirable in certain deployment scenarios, where MPLS
   is the preferred transport or IP encapsulation overhead is deemed
   excessive.

Zhang, et al.              Expires May 5, 2021                  [Page 2]
Internet-Draft         Generic Transport Functions         November 2020

   IPv6 fragmentation and reassembly are based on the IPv6 Fragmentation
   header below [RFC8200]:

   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |  Next Header  |   Reserved    |      Fragment Offset    |Res|M|
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Show full document text