[Search] [txt|html|xml|pdf|bibtex] [Tracker] [Email] [Nits]

Versions: 00 01                                                         
Network Working Group                                             K. Sun
Internet-Draft                                                    Y. Kim
Intended status: Informational                       Soongsil University
Expires: 10 February 2022                                  9 August 2021


                LISP Support for Dynamic Anycast Routing
                      draft-kjsun-lisp-dyncast-00

Abstract

   This draft describes the LISP-based architecture and solutions for
   supporting dynamic anycast (Dyncast) routing.

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 10 February 2022.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2021 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 the Trust Legal Provisions and are
   provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.







Sun & Kim               Expires 10 February 2022                [Page 1]


Internet-Draft                LISP Anycast                   August 2021


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   3.  Architecture Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   4.  Addressing Dyncast Requirements with LISP . . . . . . . . . .   6
     4.1.  Anycast-based Service Addressing  . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     4.2.  Instance Affinity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     4.3.  Encoding and Signaling of Metric  . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     4.4.  Dynamic Routing Decisions based using Metrics . . . . . .   7
     4.5.  Supporting Service Dynamism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   5.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   6.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     6.1.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9

1.  Introduction

   In an environment where equivalent services are distributed in
   multiple geographic locations, Dynamic-Anycast (Dyncast) enables to
   perform resource-efficient anycast routing.  To support Dyncast,
   according to [draft-liu-dyncast-ps-usecases], a unique service
   identifier that can be assigned to multiple instances in multiple
   edge environments should be able to be mapped as an actual routable
   unicast address.  Since this concept is similar to the Location/ID
   separation method already used in the LISP design basis, the LISP
   protocol can be considered as one of the candidate protocols that can
   implement Dyncast.  This draft is proposed to design the LISP-based
   architecture for Dyncast and analyze the extension method of LISP to
   meet the requirements defined in [draft-liu-dyncast-reqs] for
   realizing dynamic anycasting between different LISP sites.

2.  Terminology

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document is to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].  This
   document uses the terminology described in [RFC6830],
   [draft-liu-dyncast-ps-usecases], [draft-liu-dyncast-reqs].

3.  Architecture Overview

   Figure 1 describes the Dyncast architecture based on LISP.  In the
   LISP architecture [draft-ietf-lisp-introduction-13], each edge
   network has one or more LISP routers deployed.  For anycast address,
   [RFC6830] defines that anycast address can be assigned for both
   Endpoint ID (EID) and Routing Locator (RLOC) within each of their
   address spaces.  In this draft, we called EID for dynamic anycasting



Sun & Kim               Expires 10 February 2022                [Page 2]


Internet-Draft                LISP Anycast                   August 2021


   as Dyncast Service ID (DSID), which is assigned to equivalent
   services across the multiple LISP sites.  Similar to the common EID
   definition, the DSID cannot be routed globally by itself, and the
   same DSID cannot be assigned to different services.  In order to
   forward a packet destined for a DSID between LISP edges, the
   addresses of the LISP Egress Tunnel Router (ETR) are used as RLOC,
   which operates as a Dyncast Binding ID (DBID) from a Dyncast
   perspective.  Map-server/resolver of the LISP control plane can
   manage mapping information for DSID-RLOC mappings together with
   existing EID-RLOC mappings.  Differences of DSID-RLOC from existing
   EID-RLOC mapping table, it that a single DSID can be mapped with
   multiple RLOCs from different edge sites together.

   For resource-efficient forwarding decisions across multiple service
   instances, [draft-li-dyncast-architecture] defines Dyncast Metric
   Agent (D-MA) which collects metrics related network and service
   instances.  Actual packet forwarding is handled in the Dyncast Router
   (D-Router) based upon collected metrics with maintaining instance
   affinity.  In the LISP architecture, the D-Router function can be
   implemented on the LISP xTR, and the D-MA can be deployed as a
   separate component within the edge for managing service instances, or
   it can be deployed in combination with the LISP xTR.  The LISP,
   control plane is logically centralized and it provides an interface
   with each LISP router to exchange mapping information.  However, it
   does not mean that the LISP control plane is located in a single
   physical location, several mechanisms for distributing the mapping
   system already have been defined.
























Sun & Kim               Expires 10 February 2022                [Page 3]


Internet-Draft                LISP Anycast                   August 2021


     LISP Edge                                    LISP Edge

   +----------+                                  +----------+
   |  Service |                                  |  Service |
   | Instance |                                  | Instance |
   |  (DBID)  |                                  |  (DBID)  |
   +----------+                                  +----------+
        |           +---------------------+           |
        |           |  LISP Control Plane |           |
   +----------+"""""+---------------------+"          |
   |   D-MA   |    "  "                     "         |
   +----------+   "  "                       "        |
        |        "  "                         "  +----------+
        |       "  "                           " |   D-MA   |
   +----------+"   " +--------------------+     "+----------+
   | LISP-xTR |DBID" |    Core Network    |DBID  | LISP-xTR |
   |(D-Router)|----"-|    (RLOC-Space)    |------|(D-Router)|
   +----------+    " +--------------------+      +----------+
        |          "           |DBID                  |
        |           "+--------------------+           |
        |            | LISP-xTR (D-Router)|           |
        |            +--------------------+           |
   +----------+                |                 +----------+
   |  Client  |           +----------+           |  Client  |
   |  (EID)   |           |  Client  |           |  (EID)   |
   +----------+           |  (EID)   |           +----------+
                          +----------+

                            LISP Edge

                 Figure 1: LISP-based Dyncast Architecture

   Figure 2 shows an example of LISP-based Dyncast deployment where two
   services each deployed two instances at different edges.  In this
   scenario, two services are assigned an RLOC according to the ETR
   address of the LISP site.  Both Service_A and Service_B instances
   connected to ETR_2 are assigned RLOC2, which is the RLOC of ETR_2, as
   a binding ID.  In the case of the edge where ETR_2 is located, as an
   edge composed only of service instances, the LISP Router function can
   be operated by being strongly coupled to the edge computing server.
   In this case, the D-MA function can be implemented on the ETR to
   insert service-instance-related metrics directly into the LISP
   protocol packet.  In case that a service instance and a client co-
   exist like an edge where ETR_3 is located, the D-MA entity can be
   independently deployed proximity of the service instance is running,
   transparent from the LISP operation for clients.  Mapping information
   update for DSID is performed through the LISP protocol Map-Register
   message, and service-instance-related metric can be delivered through



Sun & Kim               Expires 10 February 2022                [Page 4]


Internet-Draft                LISP Anycast                   August 2021


   in the LISP protocol header or other methods.  A method of inserting
   service-instance-related metric information into the LISP protocol
   will be discussed later.  When the ITR_1 receives a packet destined
   for the DSID of the service by service request from the Host_1, the
   ITR can acquire the RLOC mapped to the requested DSID from the LISP
   control-plane through the Map-Request message.  At the control plane,
   it may select an proper DBID address on the collected metric
   information and return it to the ITR or return the DBID list of
   multiple service instances with metric information to the ITR so the
   ITR selects the proper DBID in the list.  A method for determining an
   appropriate DBID will be discussed later.

                                                               Service_A
                                                                +------+
                    Map-Register              D-Router        +-|DSID_A|
                   (DSID_A, DBID2, <metric>) +-------+------+ | +------+
                   (DSID_B, DBID2, ,metric>) | ETR_2 | D-MA |-|
                                             +-------+------+ | +------+
                                                 |            +-|DSID_B|
                           +------------------+  | RLOC2        +------+
    Host_1     D-Router    | +--------------+ |--+(DBID2)      Service_B
  +--------+  +-------+    | |     LISP     | |
  | EID_H1 |--| ITR_1 |----| | Control Plane| |
  +--------+  +-------+    | +--------------+ |
                      RLOC1|    RLOC-Space    |--+ RLOC3
                           +------------------+  |(DBID3)
                                             D-Router      Host_2
                    Map-Register             +-------+   +--------+
                   (DSID_A, DBID3, <metric>) | ETR_3 |---| EID_H2 |
                   (DSID_B, DBID3, <metric>) +-------+   +--------+
                                                 |
                                              +------+
                                              | D-MA |
                                              +------+
                                                 |
                                           +-----+-----+
                                           |           |
                                       +------+     +------+
                                       |DSID_A|     |DSID_B|
                                       +------+     +------+
                                       Service_A    Service_B


              Figure 2: LISP-based Dyncast Example Scenario







Sun & Kim               Expires 10 February 2022                [Page 5]


Internet-Draft                LISP Anycast                   August 2021


4.  Addressing Dyncast Requirements with LISP

4.1.  Anycast-based Service Addressing

   To support Dyncast routing, the system must provide a method for
   searching a service identifier allocated as an anycast address and
   mapping it to a specific unicast address.  From this point of view,
   the LISP is a suitable protocol for separating ID/Location of service
   and managing mapping information.  When the system allocates the same
   D-SID to each service instance for service equivalency, the LISP can
   define an anycast address space for the DSID and assign it to service
   instances created across multiple sites.  Also, the DBID can be used
   as an RLOC address of LISP xTR that can be routed between edges as
   unicast.  That is, it is necessary to define a separate space for
   anycast address within the existing EID space and to allocate it in
   advance so that it can be used in all edge networks where the service
   instances are located.  In the LISP definition, the EID assigned to
   each service has a globally unique value and, in particular,
   [RFC6830] defines that anycast address can be assigned within an EID
   or RLOC block spaces.  In each LISP site, same as the EID which is
   defined to enable internal routing, the DSID can be able to be routed
   without the DBID encapsulation process to the EID within a single
   site.

4.2.  Instance Affinity

   For Dyncast routing, it is required that the system must set
   "Instance Affinity" for one or several service requests to provide
   routing to the same service instance for the same flow.  In LISP, the
   RLOC mapping information for the destination EID is stored in a local
   cache called Map-cache in the ITR for a certain period of time, and
   it is maintained for a set time-to-live (TTL) time.  Therefore,
   mapping information for a specific service once requested from a
   client is generally maintained in the ITR until the corresponding
   session expires and can be delivered to the RLOC stored in the map-
   cache entry.  However, in order to have a flexible selection of
   service instances between different flows at the same point, it is
   additionally required to assign different RLOCs for different flows
   depending on metrics dynamically changed.  For that, it is necessary
   to enhance ITR Map-cache to maintain destination RLOC for each flow.
   In addition, although the general TTL value in LISP ITR is defined as
   24 hours, in Dyncast the system requires a shorter TTL time for
   changing network path depending on dynamically updated network-
   related and service-instance-related metrics.







Sun & Kim               Expires 10 February 2022                [Page 6]


Internet-Draft                LISP Anycast                   August 2021


4.3.  Encoding and Signaling of Metric

   In Dyncast routing, the one of most important requirements is that it
   should be able to collect various metrics of service-instances-
   related as well as network-related, and include them in-network
   routing decisions.  For that, it is necessary to define how to
   collect these metrics and forward them, and also where to make a
   decision.  In the LISP environment, since that the entire EID-RLOC
   mapping information is managed in the control plane, one possible
   scenario is that the D-MA function which collects service-instance-
   related metrics updates them to the DSID mapping entry in the LISP
   control plane.  For that, it can be used an encoding method proposed
   in [draft-farinacci-lisp-name-encoding] that defines to insert
   specific information such as parameters for a specific EID or RLOC
   using an ASCII string.  Using that, it is possible to encode a string
   that is pre-defined of a specific metric to interpret in the control
   plane and send a Map-Request message so that the control plane can
   select an appropriate RLOC based on it.  In order to insert service-
   instance-related metrics, the D-MA must forward the DSID of the
   requested service to the LISP ITR so that the metric can be inserted
   into the header of the Map-Register message.  This metric information
   encoded into the Map-Register message can help the LISP control plane
   to uses a mechanism to make a routing decision based on the metric
   information of the requested or updated BSID.

4.4.  Dynamic Routing Decisions based using Metrics

   The Dyncast system is required that in must make routing decisions
   for all service requests, and this must be done under an
   understanding of all metrics.  Routing decisions in the LISP can be
   done in the control plane or ITR by specifying priority and weight
   values for each RLOC.  In case that routing decisions are made in the
   control plane, the Map-Resolver dynamically sets the priority and
   weight values of each mapped DBIDs collected from D-MAs, selects a
   proper DBID based on them, and forward it to the requested ITR using
   the Map-Reply message.  However, since this centralized approach may
   not be calculated based on point of requested ITR, the actual routing
   path may not be optimal.  In case that routing decision is determined
   at the ITR, the LISP control plane may return one or more DBID values
   for the requested DSID to the ITR, including priority and weight
   values based on the collected metrics.  After receiving multiple
   DBIDs, the ITR stores them in map-cache entry and selects an
   appropriate one to forward the data packet.  For that, a mechanism
   for estimating appropriate priority and weight values based on both
   network-related and service-instance-related metrics is required for
   the control plane or ITR.





Sun & Kim               Expires 10 February 2022                [Page 7]


Internet-Draft                LISP Anycast                   August 2021


   In the Dyncast architecture described in
   [draft-li-dyncast-architecture], the D-Router collects metrics by
   exchanging metric information of the service identifier between
   another edge D-Routers and make a decision itself.  This approach can
   minimize the signaling for routing decisions by decentralizing the
   authority for the anycast routing decision to an entity in the actual
   packet path, but the signaling for collecting metrics between each
   D-Router is bound to increase.  In contrast, when the LISP is used,
   it can reduce effectively signaling of collecting metrics from the
   ITR since that the mapping information for D-SID and D-BID can be
   managed in a centralized control plane.

4.5.  Supporting Service Dynamism

   For service dynamism, the Dyncast system should support different
   selections for each flow according to a dynamically changing metric
   while considering various requirements in the selection of a service
   instance.  As mentioned in Section 4.2, if the map-cache can be
   maintained for each flow, the forwarding path can be dynamically
   changed to the different service instances by allocating target DBID
   to the map-cache entry per-flow according to dynamic changes of
   metrics.  In order to refresh the DSID-DBID mapping upon changing
   metric, the Solicit Map-Request message can be used to update so that
   the ITR can update the weight and priority for the DBID which is
   already received from the Map-server.  Additionally, as proposed in
   [draft-farinacci-lisp-telemetry], telemetry data can be collected
   between Encapsulating/Decapsulating xTRs of the current flow, which
   is expected to be used for dynamic service path reselection.

5.  Security Considerations

   TBD

6.  References

6.1.  Informative References

   [draft-farinacci-lisp-name-encoding]
              Farinacci, D., "LISP Distinguished Name Encoding", May
              2021, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-farinacci-
              lisp-name-encoding/>.

   [draft-farinacci-lisp-telemetry]
              Farinacci, D., Ouissal, S., and E. Nordmark, "LISP Data-
              Plane Telemetry", May 2021,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-farinacci-lisp-
              telemetry/>.




Sun & Kim               Expires 10 February 2022                [Page 8]


Internet-Draft                LISP Anycast                   August 2021


   [draft-ietf-lisp-introduction-13]
              Cabellos, A. and D. Saucez, "An Architectural Introduction
              to the Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP)", April 2015,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-lisp-
              introduction/>.

   [draft-li-dyncast-architecture]
              Li, Y., Iannone, L., Trossen, D., and P. Liu, "Dynamic-
              Anycast Architecture", February 2021,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-dyncast-
              architecture/>.

   [draft-liu-dyncast-ps-usecases]
              Liu, P., Willis, P., and D. Trossen, "Dynamic-Anycast
              (Dyncast) Use Cases & Problem Statement", February 2021,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-liu-dyncast-ps-
              usecases/>.

   [draft-liu-dyncast-reqs]
              Liu, P., Willis, P., and D. Trossen, "Dynamic-Anycast
              (Dyncast) Requirements", February 2021,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-liu-dyncast-
              reqs/>.

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", RFC 2119, March 1997,
              <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc2119/>.

   [RFC6830]  Farinacci, D., Fuller, V., Meyer, D., and D. Lewis, "The
              Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP)", RFC 6830, January
              2013, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc6830/>.

Authors' Addresses

   Kyoungjae Sun
   Soongsil University
   369, Sangdo-ro, Dongjak-gu
   Seoul
   06978
   Republic of Korea

   Phone: +82 10 3643 5627
   Email: gomjae@dcn.ssu.ac.kr


   Younghan Kim
   Soongsil University
   369, Sangdo-ro, Dongjak-gu



Sun & Kim               Expires 10 February 2022                [Page 9]


Internet-Draft                LISP Anycast                   August 2021


   Seoul
   06978
   Republic of Korea

   Phone: +82 10 2691 0904
   Email: younghak@ssu.ac.kr













































Sun & Kim               Expires 10 February 2022               [Page 10]