IPv6 Source Routing for ultralow Latency
draft-foglar-ipv6-ull-routing-01

Versions: 00 01                                                         
Routing Area Working Group                         A. Foglar, InnoRoute
INTERNET-DRAFT                                     M. Parker, Uni Essex
Intended status: EXPERIMENTAL                        T. Rokkas, Incites
Expires: March 11, 2018                              September 12, 2017


          IPv6 Source Routing for ultralow Latency
              draft-foglar-ipv6-ull-routing-00

Abstract

  This Internet-Draft describes a hierarchical addressing scheme
  for IPv6, intentionally very much simplified to allow for very
  fast source routing experimentation using simple forwarding
  nodes. Research groups evaluate achievable latency reduction
  for special applications such as radio access networks,
  industrial networks or other networks requiring very low
  latency.

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."

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.


1. Introduction

  To achieve minimum latency the forwarding nodes must support
  cut-through technology as opposed to the commonly used store-
  and-forward technology. Cut-through means, that the packet
  header already leaves a node at the egress port while the tail
  of the packet is still received at the ingress port. This
  short time does not allow complex routing decisions.
  Therefore, a very simple routing address field structure is
  specified below. It should limit the complexity of the
  forwarding node used in the experiments. Therefore, in this
  text the term "forwarding node" is used instead of "router",
  although the device is operating in OSI Layer 3 and accordingly
  executes router functions such as decrementing the hop limit field.
  Redundancy issues are not considered.

2. IPv6 address prefix structure

  One of the goals of IPv6 was to have a sufficiently long address
  to allow grouping in fields to simplify routing decisions. In
  this proposal, this goal is exploited to allow for very low
  complexity in the forwarding nodes.

  Each forwarding node has up to 16 ports and hence needs 4 bits
  of the address field to decide to which port a packet should
  be forwarded. The 64-bit prefix is divided into 16 sub-fields
  of 4 bit, defining up to 16 hierarchy levels. A forwarding
  node is configured manually to which of the sub-fields it should
  evaluate for the forwarding decision.

  A number n of leading 4-bit fields cannot be used for forwarding
  decisions, but must have a special value to indicate the
  'escape prefix' of the experimental forwarding mode.

  The 64-bit prefix of the IPv6 address has this structure:

  | n x 4-bit escape prefix |(16-n) x 4-bit address fields |

  The first 4-bit field following the escape prefix has the
  highest hierarchy level, the last 4-bit field has the lowest
  hierarchy level.

3. Forwarding node behavior

  The forwarding node has up to 16 downlink ports and at least
  one uplink port. Typically, the forwarding nodes are arranged
  in a regular tree structure with one top node, up to 16 nodes
  in the second hierarchy, up to 256 nodes in the third hierarchy
  and so on for up to 16-n hierarchies.

  A forwarding node must be configured to operate at a certain
  position in the hierarchical network. For example, at third
  hierarchy level, branch 4 of the first hierarchy and branch 12
  of the second hierarchy.

  The behavior of each forwarding node is depending on the
  position of a node in a hierarchical network. For all
  positions, the first step is to check the escape prefix. Only
  packets with matching escape prefix are forwarded.

  The top forwarding node with the highest hierarchy level
  evaluates the first 4-bit field following the n x 4-bit escape
  prefix. The value of the evaluation field determines the
  output port of the packet. The remaining fields are don't
  care:

  | escape prefix | 4-bit | (16-n-1) x 4-bit |
  <  mandatory   > <eval.> <   don't care   >

  A forwarding node in a lower hierarchy first checks if the 4-
  bit fields preceding the evaluation field match the configured
  value. In case of match the value of the configured evaluation
  field of the packet is used as downlink port number where the
  packet is forwarded. The remaining 4-bit fields are ignored.
  In case of mismatch the packet is forwarded to the uplink
  port(s).

  | escape prefix | m x 4-bit | 4-bit | (16-n-m-1) x 4-bit |
  <  mandatory   > <  match  > <eval.> <   don't care     >

  The parameter m indicates the hierarchy level with m=0
  denoting the highest hierarchy.

  Hence, when a packet enters a hierarchical network at the
  lowest layer node it is forwarded in uplink direction until it
  reaches a node where the m x 4-bit prefix matches the
  configured value of the node. At latest, the highest-level
  node will always match and forward the packet in the desired
  downlink direction.

4. Numerical values

  As mentioned, one pre-requisite of the simple forwarding
  concept is to keep the complexity of the forwarding nodes low.
  Also, the configuration of the nodes should be kept simple. In
  particular industrial networks are operated by persons who are
  not experts in communication. Configurations should be
  intuitively understandable by all without long explication.
  Therefore, for the first experimental forwarding node the
  number of downlink ports is limited to 10 with numbers 0...9. 16
  digits at the front panel of the forwarding device show the
  configuration. Use of classical 7-segment digits make the
  limits of the configuration obvious.

  As escape code, the first two digits are fixed to the value
  "AF" (binary '10101111'). These two characters contrast with
  the following numerical digits, so that the escape code can be
  clearly differentiated from the following configuration. The
  display uses the 'H' character instead of the 'X' the usual
  term for the variable.

  The H specifies the digit of the packet prefix which is
  evaluated for forwarding. When the H is selected all lower
  digits are automatically set to '-' to indicate the don't care
  nature.

  To make the configuration still more obvious it is recommended
  to configure the local telephone number. With that measure,
  every local experimentation has unique numbers and can
  potentially be interconnected via tunnels (IP, MPLS, VPN etc.)
  with other experimental setups.

  The length of 14 digits allows sufficient in-house
  hierarchies, even for industrial applications where forwarding
  nodes interconnect large numbers of sensor controllers.
  Inhouse installations would be structured for example in
  building, floor, fabrication unit, machine - with one sensor
  controller per machine. For the sake of simplicity numbers are
  deliberately wasted, for example if the building has only 3
  stories the digits 4...9 are unused.

5. Example configuration

  A small office in Munich with the telephone number +49-89-
  45241990 configures its local top-level forwarding node to:

      AF49.8945.2419.90H-

  Note that for the sake of simplicity this simplified notation
  is introduced here as alternative to the usual notation
  AF49:8945:2419:9000/56. With the new notation, the cabling
  staff people can immediately check the hierarchy location of
  the forwarding node and connect the cables to the floors at
  ports 0...3.

  The next hierarchy level is related to the floor. In case of a
  3-story building only three next level forwarding node are
  used with these configured values:

      AF49.8945.2419.900H at the ground level
      AF49.8945.2419.901H at the first floor
      AF49.8945.2419.902H at the second floor
      AF49.8945.2419.903H at the third floor.

  In each floor, up to 10 sensor nodes can be connected.
  Each of the sensor nodes can address several sensors/
  actuators addressed via the interface identifier contained in
  the second part of the 128-bit IPv6 address.

6. Acknowledgements

  The authors would like to thank the consortium of the European
  research project CHARISMA for the possibility to experiment.

7. Authors' Addresses

   Andreas Foglar
   InnoRoute GmbH
   Marsstr. 14a
   80335 Munich
   Germany
   Email: foglar@innoroute.de


   Mike Parker
   Wivenhoe Park, Colchester
   Essex, CO3 4HG
   United Kingdom
   Email: mcpark@essex.ac.uk


   Theodoros Rokkas
   Incites S.A.R.L.
   130, Route d' Arlon
   Strassen L-8008
   Luxembourg
   Email: trokkas@incites.eu


Foglar, Parker, Rokkas             Expires March 11, 2018