sfc F. Brockners
Internet-Draft S. Bhandari
Intended status: Standards Track V. Govindan
Expires: May 3, 2018 C. Pignataro
Cisco
H. Gredler
RtBrick Inc.
J. Leddy
Comcast
S. Youell
JMPC
T. Mizrahi
Marvell
D. Mozes
Mellanox Technologies Ltd.
P. Lapukhov
Facebook
R. Chang
Barefoot Networks
October 30, 2017
NSH Encapsulation for In-situ OAM Data
draft-brockners-sfc-ioam-nsh-00
Abstract
In-situ Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) records
operational and telemetry information in the packet while the packet
traverses a path between two points in the network. This document
outlines how IOAM data fields are encapsulated in the Network Service
Header (NSH).
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."
Brockners, et al. Expires May 3, 2018 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft In-situ OAM NSH encapsulation October 2017
This Internet-Draft will expire on May 3, 2018.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2017 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Conventions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. IOAM data fields encapsulation in NSH . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1. IOAM Trace Data in NSH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.2. IOAM POT Data in NSH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.3. IOAM Edge-to-Edge Data in NSH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4. Discussion of the encapsulation approach . . . . . . . . . . 9
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
1. Introduction
In-situ OAM (IOAM) records OAM information within the packet while
the packet traverses a particular network domain. The term "in-situ"
refers to the fact that the OAM data is added to the data packets
rather than is being sent within packets specifically dedicated to
OAM. This document defines how IOAM data fields are transported as
part of the Network Service Header (NSH) [I-D.ietf-sfc-nsh])
encapsulation. The IOAM data fields are defined in
[I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data]. An implementation of IOAM which leverages
NSH to carry the IOAM data is available from the FD.io open source
software project [FD.io].
Brockners, et al. Expires May 3, 2018 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft In-situ OAM NSH encapsulation October 2017
2. Conventions
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].
Abbreviations used in this document:
IOAM: In-situ Operations, Administration, and Maintenance
MTU: Maximum Transmit Unit
NSH: Network Service Header
OAM: Operations, Administration, and Maintenance
POT: Proof of Transit
SFC: Service Function Chain
TLV: Type, Length, Value
3. IOAM data fields encapsulation in NSH
IOAM data fields are carried within the NSH header following NSH MDx
metadata TLVs.
3.1. IOAM Trace Data in NSH
IOAM tracing data represents data that is inserted at nodes that a
packet traverses. To allow for optimal implementations in both
software as well as hardware forwarders, two different ways to
encapsulate IOAM data are defined: "Pre-allocated" and "incremental".
See [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data] for details on IOAM tracing and the
pre-allocated and incremental IOAM trace options.
The packet formats of the pre-allocated IOAM trace and incremental
IOAM trace when transported in NSH are defined as below.
Note that in Service Function Chaining (SFC) [RFC7665], the Network
Service Header (NSH) [I-D.ietf-sfc-nsh] already includes path tracing
capabilities [I-D.penno-sfc-trace]. IOAM data fields for tracing
complement the capabilities in NSH, in that IOAM data fields carry
information complementary to information in NSH and benefit from the
fact, that IOAM data fields use their own namespace. This allows
intermediate nodes, which are not NSH hops to also process and update
the IOAM data fields if configured to do so.
Brockners, et al. Expires May 3, 2018 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft In-situ OAM NSH encapsulation October 2017
IOAM Trace header following NSH MDx header
(Pre-allocated IOAM trace):
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+<-+
|Ver|O|C|R|R|R|R|R|R| Length | MD Type | NP=IOAM_Trace | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ N
| Service Path Identifer | Service Index | S
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ H
| ... | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+<-+
| Type | IOAM HDR len| Reserved | Next Protocol | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ IOAM
| IOAM-Trace-Type |NodeLen| Flags | Octets-left | Trace
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+<-+
| | |
| node data list [0] | IOAM
| | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ D
| | a
| node data list [1] | t
| | a
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
~ ... ~ S
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ p
| | a
| node data list [n-1] | c
| | e
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |
| | |
| node data list [n] | |
| | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-<--+
| |
| |
| Payload + Padding (L2/L3/ESP/...) |
| |
| |
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
IOAM Pre-allocated Trace Option Data MUST be 4-octet aligned:
Brockners, et al. Expires May 3, 2018 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft In-situ OAM NSH encapsulation October 2017
IOAM Trace header following NSH MDx header
(Incremental IOAM trace):
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+<-+
|Ver|O|C|R|R|R|R|R|R| Length | MD Type | NP=IOAM_Trace | N
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ S
| Service Path Identifer | Service Index | H
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |
| ... | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+<-+
| Type | IOAM HDR len | Reserved | Next Protocol | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ IOAM
| IOAM-Trace-Type |NodeLen| Flags | Max Length | Trace
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+<-+
| | |
| node data list [0] | IOAM
| | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ D
| | a
| node data list [1] | t
| | a
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
~ ... ~ S
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ p
| | a
| node data list [n-1] | c
| | e
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |
| | |
| node data list [n] | |
| | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-<--+
| |
| |
| Payload + Padding (L2/L3/ESP/...) |
| |
| |
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
IOAM Incremental Trace Option Data MUST be 4-octet aligned:
Next Protocol of NSH: TBD value for IOAM_Trace.
Brockners, et al. Expires May 3, 2018 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft In-situ OAM NSH encapsulation October 2017
Type: 8-bit unsigned integer defining IOAM header type
IOAM_TRACE_Preallocated or IOAM_Trace_Incremental are defined
here.
IOAM HDR len: 8-bit unsigned integer. Length of the IOAM HDR in
4-octet units.
Reserved bits and R bits: Reserved bits are present for future use.
The reserved bits MUST be set to 0x0.
Next Protocol: 8-bit unsigned integer that determines the type of
header following IOAM protocol.
IOAM-Trace-Type: 16-bit identifier of IOAM Trace Type as defined in
[I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data] IOAM-Trace-Types.
Node Data Length: 4-bit unsigned integer as defined in
[I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data].
Flags: 5-bit field as defined in [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data].
Octets-left: 7-bit unsigned integer as defined in
[I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data].
Maximum-length: 7-bit unsigned integer as defined in
[I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data].
Node data List [n]: Variable-length field as defined in
[I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data].
3.2. IOAM POT Data in NSH
IOAM proof of transit (POT, see [I-D.brockners-proof-of-transit])
offers a means to verify that a packet has traversed a defined set of
nodes. In an administrative domain where IOAM is used, insertion of
the IOAM data into the NSH header is enabled at the required nodes
(i.e. at the IOAM encapsulating/decapsulating nodes) by means of
configuration.
IOAM POT data fields are added as a TLV following NSH MDx metadata:
Brockners, et al. Expires May 3, 2018 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft In-situ OAM NSH encapsulation October 2017
IOAM POT header following NSH MDx header:
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+<-+
|Ver|O|C|R|R|R|R|R|R| Length | MD Type | NP = IOAM_POT | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ N
| Service Path Identifer | Service Index | S
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ H
| ... | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+<-+
|IOAM_POT Type|P| IOAM HDR len| Reserved | Next Protocol | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |
| Random | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ P
| Random(contd.) | O
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ T
| Cumulative | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |
| Cumulative (contd.) | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+<-+
Next Protocol of NSH: TBD value for IOAM_POT.
IOAM POT Type: 7-bit identifier of a particular POT variant that
specifies the POT data that is to be included as defined in
[I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data].
Profile to use (P): 1-bit as defined in [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data]
IOAM POT Option.
IOAM HDR len: 8-bit unsigned integer. Length of the IOAM HDR in
4-octet units.
Reserved bits and R bits: Reserved bits are present for future use.
The reserved bits MUST be set to 0x0.
Next Protocol: 8-bit unsigned integer that determines the type of
header following IOAM protocol.
Random: 64-bit Per-packet random number.
Cumulative: 64-bit Cumulative value that is updated by the Service
Functions.
Brockners, et al. Expires May 3, 2018 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft In-situ OAM NSH encapsulation October 2017
3.3. IOAM Edge-to-Edge Data in NSH
The IOAM edge-to-edge option is to carry data that is added by the
IOAM encapsulating node and interpreted by the IOAM decapsulating
node. The "Edge-to-Edge" capabilities (see
[I-D.brockners-inband-oam-requirements]) of IOAM can be leveraged
within NSH. In an administrative domain where IOAM is used,
insertion of the IOAM data into the NSH header is enabled at the
required nodes (i.e. at the IOAM encapsulating/decapsulating nodes)
by means of configuration.
IOAM Edge-to-Edge data fields are added as a TLV following NSH MDx
metadata:
IOAM E2E header following NSH MDx header:
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+<-+
|Ver|O|C|R|R|R|R|R|R| Length | MD Type | NP = IOAM_E2E | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ N
| Service Path Identifer | Service Index | S
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ H
| ... | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+<-+
|IOAM_E2E_Type | IOAM HDR len| Reserved | Next Protocol | IOAM
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ E2E
| E2E Option data field determined by IOAM-E2E-Type | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+<-+
Next Protocol of NSH: TBD value for IOAM_E2E.
IOAM E2E Type: 8-bit identifier of a particular E2E variant that
specifies the IOAM E2E data that is to be included as defined in
[I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data].
IOAM HDR len: 8-bit unsigned integer. Length of the IOAM HDR in
4-octet units.
Reserved bits and R bits: Reserved bits are present for future use.
The reserved bits MUST be set to 0x0.
Next Protocol: 8-bit unsigned integer that determines the type of
header following IOAM protocol.
E2E Option data field: Variable length field as defined in
[I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data] IOAM E2E Option.
Brockners, et al. Expires May 3, 2018 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft In-situ OAM NSH encapsulation October 2017
4. Discussion of the encapsulation approach
This section is to support the working group discussion in selecting
the most appropriate approach for encapsulating IOAM data fields in
NSH.
An encapsulation of IOAM data fields in NSH should be friendly to an
implementation in both hardware as well as software forwarders and
support a wide range of deployment cases, including large networks
that desire to leverage multiple IOAM data fields at the same time.
Hardware and software friendly implementation: Hardware forwarders
benefit from an encapsulation that minimizes iterative look-ups of
fields within the packet: Any operation which looks up the value
of a field within the packet, based on which another lookup is
performed, consumes additional gates and time in an implementation
- both of which are desired to be kept to a minimum. This means
that flat TLV structures are to be preferred over nested TLV
structures. IOAM data fields are grouped into three option
categories: Trace, proof-of-transit, and edge-to-edge. Each of
these three options defines a TLV structure. A hardware-friendly
encapsulation approach avoids grouping these three option
categories into yet another TLV structure, but would rather carry
the options as a serial sequence.
Total length of the IOAM data fields: The total length of IOAM
data can grow quite large in case multiple different IOAM data
fields are used and large path-lengths need to be considered. If
for example an operator would consider using the IOAM trace option
and capture node-id, app_data, egress/ingress interface-id,
timestamp seconds, timestamps nanoseconds at every hop, then a
total of 20 octets would be added to the packet at every hop. In
case this particular deployment would have a maximum path length
of 15 hops in the IOAM domain, then a maximum of 300 octets of
IOAM data were to be encapsulated in the packet.
Two approaches for encapsulating IOAM data fields in NSH could be
considered:
1. Encapsulation of IOAM data fields as "NSH MD Type 2" (see
[I-D.ietf-sfc-nsh], section 2.5). Each IOAM data field option
(trace, proof-of-transit, and edge-to-edge) would be specified by
a type, with the different IOAM data fields being TLVs within
this the particular option type. NSH MD Type 2 offers support
for variable length meta-data. The length field is 6-bits,
resulting in a maximum of 256 (2^6 x 4) octets.
Brockners, et al. Expires May 3, 2018 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft In-situ OAM NSH encapsulation October 2017
2. Encapsulation of IOAM data fields using the "Next Protocol"
field. Each IOAM data field option (trace, proof-of-transit, and
edge-to-edge) would be specified by its own "next protocol".
The second option has been chosen here, because it avoids the
additional layer of TLV nesting that the use of NSH MD Type 2 would
result in. In addition, the second option does not constrain IOAM
data to a maximum of 256 octets, thus allowing support for very large
deployments.
5. IANA Considerations
IANA is requested to allocate protocol numbers for the following NSH
"Next Protocols" related to IOAM:
+---------------+-------------+---------------+
| Next Protocol | Description | Reference |
+---------------+-------------+---------------+
| x | IOAM_Trace | This document |
| y | IOAM_POT | This document |
| z | IOAM_E2E | This document |
+---------------+-------------+---------------+
6. Security Considerations
IOAM is considered a "per domain" feature, where one or several
operators decide on leveraging and configuring IOAM according to
their needs. Still, operators need to properly secure the IOAM
domain to avoid malicious configuration and use, which could include
injecting malicious IOAM packets into a domain.
7. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Eric Vyncke, Nalini Elkins, Srihari
Raghavan, Ranganathan T S, Karthik Babu Harichandra Babu, Akshaya
Nadahalli, Stefano Previdi, Hemant Singh, Erik Nordmark, LJ Wobker,
and Andrew Yourtchenko for the comments and advice.
8. References
8.1. Normative References
[ETYPES] "IANA Ethernet Numbers",
<https://www.iana.org/assignments/ethernet-numbers/
ethernet-numbers.xhtml>.
Brockners, et al. Expires May 3, 2018 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft In-situ OAM NSH encapsulation October 2017
[I-D.brockners-inband-oam-requirements]
Brockners, F., Bhandari, S., Dara, S., Pignataro, C.,
Gredler, H., Leddy, J., Youell, S., Mozes, D., Mizrahi,
T., <>, P., and r. remy@barefootnetworks.com,
"Requirements for In-situ OAM", draft-brockners-inband-
oam-requirements-03 (work in progress), March 2017.
[I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-data]
Brockners, F., Bhandari, S., Pignataro, C., Gredler, H.,
Leddy, J., Youell, S., Mizrahi, T., Mozes, D., Lapukhov,
P., Chang, R., and d. daniel.bernier@bell.ca, "Data Fields
for In-situ OAM", draft-ietf-ippm-ioam-data-00 (work in
progress), September 2017.
[I-D.ietf-nvo3-vxlan-gpe]
Maino, F., Kreeger, L., and U. Elzur, "Generic Protocol
Extension for VXLAN", draft-ietf-nvo3-vxlan-gpe-04 (work
in progress), April 2017.
[I-D.ietf-sfc-nsh]
Quinn, P., Elzur, U., and C. Pignataro, "Network Service
Header (NSH)", draft-ietf-sfc-nsh-27 (work in progress),
October 2017.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, <https://www.rfc-
editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC2784] Farinacci, D., Li, T., Hanks, S., Meyer, D., and P.
Traina, "Generic Routing Encapsulation (GRE)", RFC 2784,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2784, March 2000, <https://www.rfc-
editor.org/info/rfc2784>.
[RFC3232] Reynolds, J., Ed., "Assigned Numbers: RFC 1700 is Replaced
by an On-line Database", RFC 3232, DOI 10.17487/RFC3232,
January 2002, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3232>.
8.2. Informative References
[FD.io] "Fast Data Project: FD.io", <https://fd.io/>.
[I-D.brockners-proof-of-transit]
Brockners, F., Bhandari, S., Dara, S., Pignataro, C.,
Leddy, J., Youell, S., Mozes, D., and T. Mizrahi, "Proof
of Transit", draft-brockners-proof-of-transit-03 (work in
progress), March 2017.
Brockners, et al. Expires May 3, 2018 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft In-situ OAM NSH encapsulation October 2017
[I-D.ietf-ippm-6man-pdm-option]
Elkins, N., Hamilton, R., and m. mackermann@bcbsm.com,
"IPv6 Performance and Diagnostic Metrics (PDM) Destination
Option", draft-ietf-ippm-6man-pdm-option-13 (work in
progress), June 2017.
[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing]
Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Decraene, B., Litkowski, S.,
and R. Shakir, "Segment Routing Architecture", draft-ietf-
spring-segment-routing-12 (work in progress), June 2017.
[I-D.kitamura-ipv6-record-route]
Kitamura, H., "Record Route for IPv6 (PR6) Hop-by-Hop
Option Extension", draft-kitamura-ipv6-record-route-00
(work in progress), November 2000.
[I-D.penno-sfc-trace]
Penno, R., Quinn, P., Pignataro, C., and D. Zhou,
"Services Function Chaining Traceroute", draft-penno-sfc-
trace-03 (work in progress), September 2015.
[RFC7665] Halpern, J., Ed. and C. Pignataro, Ed., "Service Function
Chaining (SFC) Architecture", RFC 7665,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7665, October 2015, <https://www.rfc-
editor.org/info/rfc7665>.
Authors' Addresses
Frank Brockners
Cisco Systems, Inc.
Hansaallee 249, 3rd Floor
DUESSELDORF, NORDRHEIN-WESTFALEN 40549
Germany
Email: fbrockne@cisco.com
Shwetha Bhandari
Cisco Systems, Inc.
Cessna Business Park, Sarjapura Marathalli Outer Ring Road
Bangalore, KARNATAKA 560 087
India
Email: shwethab@cisco.com
Brockners, et al. Expires May 3, 2018 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft In-situ OAM NSH encapsulation October 2017
Vengada Prasad Govindan
Cisco Systems, Inc.
Email: venggovi@cisco.com
Carlos Pignataro
Cisco Systems, Inc.
7200-11 Kit Creek Road
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709
United States
Email: cpignata@cisco.com
Hannes Gredler
RtBrick Inc.
Email: hannes@rtbrick.com
John Leddy
Comcast
Email: John_Leddy@cable.comcast.com
Stephen Youell
JP Morgan Chase
25 Bank Street
London E14 5JP
United Kingdom
Email: stephen.youell@jpmorgan.com
Tal Mizrahi
Marvell
6 Hamada St.
Yokneam 20692
Israel
Email: talmi@marvell.com
Brockners, et al. Expires May 3, 2018 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft In-situ OAM NSH encapsulation October 2017
David Mozes
Mellanox Technologies Ltd.
Email: davidm@mellanox.com
Petr Lapukhov
Facebook
1 Hacker Way
Menlo Park, CA 94025
US
Email: petr@fb.com
Remy Chang
Barefoot Networks
2185 Park Boulevard
Palo Alto, CA 94306
US
Brockners, et al. Expires May 3, 2018 [Page 14]