SPRING Working Group R. Gandhi, Ed.
Internet-Draft C. Filsfils
Intended Status: Standards Track S. Soni
P. Khordoc
Z. Ali
Cisco Systems, Inc.
D. Voyer
D. Bernier
Bell Canada
S. Salsano
Universita di Roma "Tor Vergata"
P. L. Ventre
CNIT
D. Steinberg
Steinberg Consulting
March 19, 2018
UDP Path for In-band Performance Measurement for
Segment Routing Networks
draft-gandhi-spring-udp-pm-00.txt
Abstract
Segment Routing (SR) is applicable to both MPLS (SR-MPLS) and IPv6
(SRv6) data planes. This document specifies a procedure for using
UDP path for sending and processing in-band Performance Measurement
(PM) Probe query and response messages. The procedure uses RFC 6374
defined mechanisms for Delay and Loss performance measurement. The
procedure defined is applicable to IPv4, IPv6, SR-MPLS and SRv6 data
planes. This document also defines Return Path Segment List TLV for
bidirectional performance measurement.
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."
Gandhi, et al. Expires September 20, 2018 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft UDP Path for PM for Segment Routing March 19, 2018
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.2. Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Probe Messages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1. Probe Query Message . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1.1. Delay Measurement Query Message . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1.2. Loss Measurement Query Message . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1.3. Probe Query Message for SR Links . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.1.4. In-band Probe Query Message for SR Policy . . . . . . 6
3.1.4.1. In-band Probe Query Message for SR-MPLS Policy . . 6
3.1.4.2. In-band Probe Query Message for SRv6 Policy . . . 7
3.1.4.3. In-band Probe Query Message for Segment of SRv6
Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.2. Probe Response Message . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.2.1. Probe Response Message for SR Links . . . . . . . . . 8
3.2.2. One-way Performance Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.2.2.1. Probe Response Message to Controller . . . . . . . 9
3.3. Two-way Performance Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.3.1. Return Path Segment List TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.3.2. In-band Probe Response Message for SR-MPLS Policy . . 10
3.3.3. In-band Probe Response Message for SRv6 Policy . . . . 10
3.4. ECMP Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Gandhi, et al. Expires September 20, 2018 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft UDP Path for PM for Segment Routing March 19, 2018
1. Introduction
Segment Routing (SR) technology greatly simplifies network operations
for Software Defined Networks (SDNs). SR is applicable to both
Multiprotocol Label Switching (SR-MPLS) and IPv6 (SRv6) data planes.
SR takes advantage of the Equal-Cost Multipath (ECMP) between source
and destination nodes. SR Traffic Engineering (TE) Policies as
defined in [I-D.spring-segment-routing-policy] are used to steer
traffic through a specific, user-defined path using a stack of
Segments. Built-in SR Performance Measurement (PM) is one of the
essential requirements to provide Service Level Agreements (SLAs).
[RFC6374] specifies protocol mechanisms to enable the efficient and
accurate measurement of performance metrics in SR networks with MPLS
data plane [I-D.spring-sr-mpls-pm]. However, [RFC6374] requires data
plane to support Generic Associated Channel Label (GAL) and Generic
Associated Channel (G-Ach), which may be not be supported on all
nodes in the network.
The One-Way Active Measurement Protocol (OWAMP) defined in [RFC4656]
and Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (TWAMP) defined in [RFC5357]
provide capabilities for the measurement of various performance
metrics in IP networks. These protocols rely on control channel
signaling to establish a connection over an UDP path to bootstrap PM
sessions, and they are not compatible with the mechanisms defined in
[RFC6374]. Furthermore, these protocols do not define handling for
ECMP forwarding paths in SR networks (e.g. using 128/7 addresses
defined in [RFC8029]).
[RFC7876] specifies the procedures to be used when sending and
processing out-of-band performance measurement Responses over an UDP
return path and when receiving performance measurement queries using
RFC 6374. [RFC7876] can be used to send out-of-band PM Responses in
both SR-MPLS and SRv6 networks.
For SR Policies, there is a need to specify a return path in the form
of a Segment List in PM query messages for bidirectional
measurements. Exiting protocols (e.g. TWAMP, RFC 6374, etc.) do not
have such mechanisms to specify return path in the PM query messages.
This document specifies a procedure for using UDP path for sending
and processing in-band PM Probe query and response messages. The
procedure uses RFC 6374 defined mechanisms for Delay and Loss PM and
unless otherwise specified, the procedures from RFC 6374 are not
modified. The procedure defined is applicable to IPv4, IPv6, SR-MPLS
and SRv6 data planes. The procedure does not require to bootstrap PM
sessions and can be used for both SR links and SR Policies. This
document also defines Return Path Segment List TLV for bidirectional
Gandhi, et al. Expires September 20, 2018 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft UDP Path for PM for Segment Routing March 19, 2018
performance measurement.
2. Conventions Used in This Document
2.1. Requirements Language
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] [RFC8174].
2.2. Abbreviations
ACH: Associated Channel Header.
DFLag: Data Format Flag.
DM: Delay Measurement.
G-ACh: Generic Associated Channel (G-ACh).
GAL: Generic Associated Channel (G-ACh) Label.
LM: Loss Measurement.
MPLS: Multiprotocol Label Switching.
PM: Performance Measurement.
PTP: Precision Time Protocol.
RPSL: Return Path Segment List.
SID: Segment ID.
SR: Segment Routing.
SRv6: Segment Routing with IPv6 data plane.
URO: UDP Return Object.
3. Probe Messages
In the reference topology shown in the following Figure, node R1
initiates a query for performance measurement and node R5 sends a
response for the query message received. The response may be sent to
the querier node R1 or to a controller node R100. The nodes R1 and
Gandhi, et al. Expires September 20, 2018 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft UDP Path for PM for Segment Routing March 19, 2018
R5 may be directly connected via a link enabled with segment routing
or there exists an SR Policy [I-D.spring-segment-routing-policy] on
node R1 with destination to node R5. Both delay and loss performance
measurement is performed for the traffic traversing between node R1
and node R5.
------
|R100|
------
^
| Response (optional)
|
+-------+ Query +-------+
| | - - - - - - - - - ->| |
| R1 |---------------------| R5 |
| |<- - - - - - - - - - | |
+-------+ Response +-------+
Reference Topology
3.1. Probe Query Message
3.1.1. Delay Measurement Query Message
The message content for Delay Measurement probe query message using
UDP header [RFC768] is shown in Figure 1.
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
| IP Header |
. Source IP Address = Sender IP4 or IPv6 Address .
. Destination IP Address = Responder IPv4 or IPv6 Address .
. Protocol = UDP .
. IP TTL = 1 .
. Router Alert Option Not Set .
. .
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
| UDP Header |
. Source Port = As chosen by Sender .
. Destination Port = TBA1 by IANA .
. .
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
| Message as specified in RFC 6374 Section 3.2 |
. .
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
Figure 1: DM Probe Query Message
3.1.2. Loss Measurement Query Message
Gandhi, et al. Expires September 20, 2018 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft UDP Path for PM for Segment Routing March 19, 2018
The message content for loss measurement probe query message using
UDP header is shown in Figure 2.
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
| IP Header |
. Source IP Address = Sender IPv4 or IPv6 Address .
. Destination IP Address = Responder IPv4 or IPv6 Address .
. Protocol = UDP .
. IP TTL = 1 .
. Router Alert Option Not Set .
. .
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
| UDP Header |
. Source Port = As chosen by Sender .
. Destination Port = TBA2 by IANA .
. .
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
| Message as specified in RFC 6374 Section 3.1 |
. .
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
Figure 2: LM Probe Query Message
An LM message carries Data Format Flags (DFlags) as defined in
[RFC6374]. New Flag is defined in this document for Color (C) in the
DFlags field as follows.
+-+-+-+-+
|X|B|C|0|
+-+-+-+-+
Data Format Flags
The Flag C indicates the Color of the counters in the LM message
[RFC8321].
3.1.3. Probe Query Message for SR Links
The query message defined in Figure 1 can be used for delay
measurement and Figure 2 for loss measurement for SR links.
3.1.4. In-band Probe Query Message for SR Policy
3.1.4.1. In-band Probe Query Message for SR-MPLS Policy
The message content for in-band probe query message using UDP header
for an SR-MPLS Policy is shown in Figure 3.
Gandhi, et al. Expires September 20, 2018 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft UDP Path for PM for Segment Routing March 19, 2018
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Segment List[0] | EXP |S| TTL |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
. .
. .
. .
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Segment List[n] | EXP |S| TTL |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Message as shown in Figure 1 for DM or Figure 2 for LM |
. .
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
Figure 3: In-band Probe Query Message for SR-MPLS Policy
The Segment List can be empty to indicate Implicit NULL case.
3.1.4.2. In-band Probe Query Message for SRv6 Policy
The in-band probe query messages using UDP message for an SRv6 Policy
is sent using SRH and Segment List as defined in
[I-D.6man-segment-routing-header] as shown in Figure 4.
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| SRH |
. .
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Message as shown in Figure 1 for DM or Figure 2 for LM |
. .
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
Figure 4: In-band Probe Query Message for SRv6 Policy
3.1.4.3. In-band Probe Query Message for Segment of SRv6 Policy
In order to measure performance of a segment of an SRv6 Policy, i.e.
from the ingress node of the SRv6 Policy to one of the transit nodes
of the SRv6 Policy, SID function END.OTP, as described in the pseudo
code in [I-D.spring-srv6-network-programming] can be used.
Specifically, SID function END.OTP is inserted just before the target
SID in the SRH to punt probe messages on the target node, as shown in
Figure 5.
0 1 2 3
Gandhi, et al. Expires September 20, 2018 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft UDP Path for PM for Segment Routing March 19, 2018
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| SRH |
. END.OTP Before Target SID .
. .
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Message as shown in Figure 1 for DM or Figure 2 for LM |
. .
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
Figure 5: In-band Probe Query Message for Segment of SRv6 Policy
3.2. Probe Response Message
The message format for probe response message using UDP header is
shown in Figure 6.
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
| IP Header |
. Source IP Address = Responder IPv4 or IPv6 Address .
. Destination IP Address = Source IP Address from Query .
. Protocol = UDP .
. Router Alert Option Not Set .
. .
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
| UDP Header |
. Source Port = As chosen by Responder .
. Destination Port = Source Port from Query .
. .
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
| Message as specified in RFC 6374 Section 3.2 for DM, or |
. Message as specified in RFC 6374 Section 3.1 for LM .
. .
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
Figure 6: Probe Response Message
3.2.1. Probe Response Message for SR Links
The response message defined in Figure 6 can be used for SR links.
3.2.2. One-way Performance Measurement
The PM response message defined in Section 3.2 can be used for one-
way delay and loss measurement.
Note that for one-way delay measurement, Clock synchronization
between the querier and responder nodes using methods detailed in
Gandhi, et al. Expires September 20, 2018 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft UDP Path for PM for Segment Routing March 19, 2018
[RFC6374] such as IEEE 1588 Precision Time Protocol (PTP) [IEEE1588],
is required. Two-way delay measurement does not require clock to be
synchronized between the querier and responder nodes.
3.2.2.1. Probe Response Message to Controller
The PM querier node can receive out-of-band probe responses by
properly setting the UDP Return Object (URO) TLV in the probe
message. The URO TLV (Type 131) is defined in [RFC7876] and includes
the UDP-Destination-Port and IP Address. If the querier node
requires the probe response to be sent to the controller, it sets the
IP address of the controller in the Address field of the URO TLV of
the PM probe query message.
3.3. Two-way Performance Measurement
For two-way performance measurement [RFC6374], when using a
bidirectional channel, the probe response message is sent back to the
querier node using a message similar to the probe query message. In
this case, the "control code" in the probe message is set to "in-band
response requested".
3.3.1. Return Path Segment List TLV
For bidirectional measurement, the responder node needs to send the
response message on a specific reverse SR path. The querier node can
request in the probe query message to the responder node to send a
response back on a given reverse path (e.g. co-routed path).
[RFC6374] defines DM and LM Probe query messages that include one or
more optional TLVs. New TLV Types are defined in this document for
Return Path Segment List (RPSL). The format of the RPSL is shown in
Figure 9:
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| RPSL Type | Length | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Segment List[0] |
. .
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
. .
. .
. .
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Segment List[n] |
. .
Gandhi, et al. Expires September 20, 2018 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft UDP Path for PM for Segment Routing March 19, 2018
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 9: Return Path Segment List TLV
The Segment in Segment List may be SR-MPLS Label (Type TBA3), SRv6
Segment (Type TBA4), SR-MPLS Binding SID of the Reverse SR Policy
(Type TBA5) or SRv6 Binding SID of the Reverse SR Policy (Type TBA6).
The Segment List[0] may be used by the responder node to compute the
next-hop address and outgoing interface for the probe response
message.
The PM querier MUST only insert one RPSL TLV in the probe query
message and the responder node MUST only process the first RPSL TLV
in the probe query message and ignore the other RPSL TLVs if present.
3.3.2. In-band Probe Response Message for SR-MPLS Policy
The message format for in-band probe response message using UDP
header for an SR-MPLS Policy is shown in Figure 7. The SR-MPLS label
stack in the packet header is built using the segments received in
the RPSL TLV in the probe query message.
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Segment List[0] | EXP |S| TTL |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
. .
. .
. .
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Segment List[n] | EXP |S| TTL |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Message as shown in Figure 6 |
. IP TTL = 1 .
. .
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
Figure 7: In-band Probe Response Message for SR-MPLS Policy
3.3.3. In-band Probe Response Message for SRv6 Policy
For SRv6 Policy, the SRv6 segment list in the message SRH is built
using the SRv6 segments received in the RPSL TLV in the probe query
message as shown in Figure 8.
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
Gandhi, et al. Expires September 20, 2018 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft UDP Path for PM for Segment Routing March 19, 2018
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| SRH |
. .
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Message as shown in Figure 6 |
. IP TTL = 1 .
. .
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
Figure 8: In-band Probe Response Message for SRv6 Policy
3.4. ECMP Support
Equal-Cost Multipath (ECMP) mechanisms described in [RFC8029] are
equally applicable to the performance measurement procedure defined
in this document.
Responder IPv4 addresses in the range of 127/8 [RFC8029] can be used
in PM probe query messages to take advantage of the hashing function
in the forwarding plane. This allows the PM query messages to
traverse different ECMP forwarding paths of an SR-MPLS Policy. This
is used by the querier node to measure the performance of an
individual ECMP forwarding path of the SR Policy. Optionally, the
querier node may use different source-address and source-port to
influence the ECMP forwarding path taken by the PM query message.
Entropy label can also be used to take advantage of the hashing
function in the forwarding plane to measure performance of various
ECMP forwarding paths of an SR-MPLS Policy.
ECMP for SRv6 Policies to be added in a future revision of this
document.
4. Security Considerations
TBA.
5. IANA Considerations
IANA is requested to allocate an UDP port (TBA1) for Performance
Delay Measurement and an UDP port (TBA2) for Performance Loss
Measurement.
IANA is also requested to allocate values for the following Return
Path Segment List TLVs for RFC 6374 PM Query messages:
o TYPE TBA3: SR-MPLS Segment List
Gandhi, et al. Expires September 20, 2018 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft UDP Path for PM for Segment Routing March 19, 2018
o TYPE TBA4: SRv6 Segment List
o TYPE TBA5: SR-MPLS Binding SID of the Reverse SR Policy
o TYPE TBA6: SRv6 Binding SID of the Reverse SR Policy
6. References
6.1. Normative References
[IEEE1588] IEEE, "1588-2008 IEEE Standard for a Precision Clock
Synchronization Protocol for Networked Measurement and
Control Systems", March 2008.
[RFC768] Postel, J., "User Datagram Protocol", STD 6, RFC 768,
August 1980.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC6374] Frost, D. and S. Bryant, "Packet Loss and Delay
Measurement for MPLS networks', RFC 6374, September 2011.
[RFC7876] Bryant, S., Sivabalan, S., and Soni, S., "UDP Return Path
for Packet Loss and Delay Measurement for MPLS Networks",
RFC 7876, July 2016.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", RFC 8174, May 2017.
6.2. Informative References
[RFC4656] Shalunov, S., Teitelbaum, B., Karp, A., Boote, J., and M.
Zekauskas, "A One-way Active Measurement Protoco (OWAMP)",
RFC 4656, September 2006.
[RFC5357] Hedayat, K., Krzanowski, R., Morton, A., Yum, K., and J.
Babiarz, "A Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (TWAMP)",
RFC 5357, October 2008.
[RFC8029] Kompella, K., Swallow, G., Pignataro, C., Kumar, N.,
Aldrin, S. and M. Chen, "Detecting Multiprotocol Label
Switched (MPLS) Data-Plane Failures", RFC 8029, March
2017.
[RFC8321] Fioccola, G. Ed., "Alternate-Marking Method for Passive
and Hybrid Performance Monitoring", RFC 8321, January
Gandhi, et al. Expires September 20, 2018 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft UDP Path for PM for Segment Routing March 19, 2018
2018.
[I-D.spring-segment-routing-policy] Filsfils, C., et al., "Segment
Routing Policy for Traffic Engineering",
draft-filsfils-spring-segment-routing-policy, work in
progress.
[] Previdi, S., Filsfils, et al.,
"IPv6 Segment Routing Header (SRH)",
draft-ietf-6man-segment-routing-header, work in progress.
[I-D.spring-srv6-network-programming] C. Filsfils, et al., "SRv6
Network Programming",
draft-filsfils-spring-srv6-network-programming, work in
progress.
[I-D.spring-sr-mpls-pm] Filsfils, C., et al. "Performance
Measurement in Segment Routing Networks with MPLS Data
Plane", draft-gandhi-spring-sr-mpls-pm, work in progress.
Gandhi, et al. Expires September 20, 2018 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft UDP Path for PM for Segment Routing March 19, 2018
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Faisal Iqbal, Nagendra Kumar and
Carlos Pignataro for the earlier discussions on SRv6 Performance
Measurement using TLVs in SRH.
Contributors
To be added.
Authors' Addresses
Rakesh Gandhi (editor)
Cisco Systems, Inc.
Canada
Email: rgandhi@cisco.com
Clarence Filsfils
Cisco Systems, Inc.
Email: cfilsfil@cisco.com
Sagar Soni
Cisco Systems, Inc.
Email: sagsoni@cisco.com
Patrick Khordoc
Cisco Systems, Inc.
Email: pkhordoc@cisco.com
Zafar Ali
Cisco Systems, Inc.
Email: zali@cisco.com
Daniel Voyer
Bell Canada
Email: daniel.voyer@bell.ca
Daniel Bernier
Bell Canada
Email: daniel.bernier@bell.ca
Gandhi, et al. Expires September 20, 2018 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft UDP Path for PM for Segment Routing March 19, 2018
Stefano Salsano
Universita di Roma "Tor Vergata"
Italy
Email: stefano.salsano@uniroma2.it
Pier Luigi Ventre
CNIT
Italy
Email: pierluigi.ventre@cnit.it
Dirk Steinberg
Steinberg Consulting
Germany
Email: dws@dirksteinberg.de
Gandhi, et al. Expires September 20, 2018 [Page 15]