[Search] [txt|pdfized|bibtex] [Tracker] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]
Versions: 00 01 02 03                                                   
Network Working Group                                          Z. Qiang
Internet Draft                                                 Ericsson
Intended status: Informational                         January 22, 2015
Expires: July 2015



                        Data Plane Handling in NVO3
                draft-zu-nvo3-user-plane-signalling-01.txt


Status of this Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF
   Contributions published or made publicly available before November
   10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this
   material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow
   modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process.
   Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling
   the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified
   outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may
   not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format
   it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other
   than English.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that
   other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
   Drafts.

   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."

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html

   This Internet-Draft will expire on July 23, 2015.






Z. Qiang                Expires July 22, 2015                  [Page 1]


Internet-Draft       Data Plane Handling in NVO3           January 2015


Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2015 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.

Abstract

   This draft discusses the considerations on user plane signaling and
   data handling in NVO3 architecture and several related issues which
   need to be considered when designing a NVO3 based virtualized data
   center network for multiple tenants.



Table of Contents


   1. Introduction...................................................3
   2. Conventions used in this document..............................3
   3. Terminology....................................................3
   4. Data Forwarding................................................3
   5. STP/RSTP/MSTP..................................................4
   6. LACP...........................................................5
   7. ARP and Neighbor Discovery.....................................5
   8. Routing protocol...............................................6
   9. Security Considerations........................................8
   10. IANA Considerations...........................................8
   11. References....................................................8
      11.1. Normative References.....................................8
      11.2. Informative References...................................9
   12. Acknowledgments..............................................10








Z. Qiang                Expires July 23, 2015                  [Page 2]


Internet-Draft       Data Plane Handling in NVO3           January 2015


1. Introduction

   A high-level overview of a possible architecture for building NVO3
   overlay networks has been present in [nvo3-arch]. The corresponding
   control plane requirements has documented in [hypervisor-nve-cp] and
   [nve-nva-cp-req].

   User plane signaling is referring to the Layer 2 Control Protocol
   (L2CP) specified in IEEE802.1 and Layer 3 Control Protocol (L3CP)
   specified in IETF.

   This document is providing some considerations on how the user plane
   signaling shall be handled by NVE. And several related issues due to
   the user plane signaling handling are discussed.

2. Conventions used in this document

   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 RFC-2119 [RFC2119].

   In this document, these words will appear with that interpretation
   only when in ALL CAPS. Lower case uses of these words are not to be
   interpreted as carrying RFC-2119 significance.

3. Terminology

   This document uses the same terminology as found in the NVO3
   Framework document [framework] and [hypervisor-nve-cp].

4. Data Forwarding

   In NVO3, a L2 NVE implements Ethernet LAN emulation, an Ethernet
   based multipoint service similar to an IETF VPLS [RFC4761] [RFC4762]
   or EVPN [EVPN] service. It forwards the multicast and unicast L2
   traffic between the TSs. From the Tenant Systems aspect, the NVE is
   just like a L2 bridge as specified in IEEE 802.1Q [IEEE 802.1Q].

   A L3 NVE provides Virtualized IP forwarding service, similar to IETF
   IP VPN, e.g. BGP/MPLS IPVPN [RFC4364]. An L3 NVE provides inter-
   subnet layer 3 switching/routing for the TS. The NVE is the first hop
   or next hop router to the attached TS.

   In NVO3, it is very common to provide both L2 and L3 service to a TS.
   In logic view, the TS is attached to a NVE which provides both L2 and
   L3 function. In implementation, the L2 NVE function and L3 NVE
   function may be collocated. The L2 NVE function provides intra-subnet


Z. Qiang                Expires July 23, 2015                  [Page 3]


Internet-Draft       Data Plane Handling in NVO3           January 2015


   traffic forwarding. The L3 NVE function provides inter-subnet traffic
   forwarding.

   In NVO3, to avoid flooding issues, the inner-outer address mapping
   table is built using the NVA-NVE control signaling [nve-nva-cp-req].
   Both L2 and L3 data forwarding are based on the inner-outer address
   mapping table lookup (and forwarding policies).

   The data forwarding procedure is similar for both L2 NVE and L3 NVE.
   Upon receiving a unicast packet from the TS, the NVE performs a
   lookup in the inner-outer address mapping table using the received
   destination IP/MAC address. If a mapping is found, the received
   packet will be encapsulated and forwarded to the destination NVE. If
   no mapping is found, the received unknown unicast packet should be
   dropped. As an alternative, the inner-outer address mapping table
   updating procedure may be triggered using the NVA-NVE control
   signaling [nve-nva-cp-req]. However, an attacker may generate large
   amount of unknown unicast packets from a compromised VM, which may
   result a denial of service (DOS) attacks. Therefore for security
   reason, the inner-outer address mapping table updating procedure
   shall not be triggered too often. One easy way to avoid this kind
   security issue is to implement user plane filtering function.

   Discussions: As specified in [nvo3-sec-req], some kind user plane
   filtering functions need to be supported in the NVE for security
   reason, i.e. the NVE MUST have a frequency limitation on the NVA
   query procedure triggered by any received unknown data packets.

5. STP/RSTP/MSTP

   For a L2 NVE, the VAP is an emulation of a physical Ethernet port. It
   shall have the capability to handle any L2CP.

   The Spanning Tree Protocol (STP) is a L2 protocol that ensures a
   loop-free topology for any bridged Ethernet local area network. STP
   is originally standardized as IEEE 802.1D. It is deprecated as of
   802.1d-2004 in favor of Rapid Spanning Tree Protocol (RSTP). The
   Multiple Spanning Tree Protocol (MSTP) defines an extension to RSTP
   to further develop the usefulness of VLANs.

   In NVO3 network, the L2 forwarding / switching function provided by
   the NVE is based on the destination MAC address and the inner-outer
   address mapping table. There won't be any looping of the L2
   connections among the TSes by the NVEs if the NVE inner-outer address
   mapping table is configured correctly. Therefor there is no need to
   use any L2CP for that purpose among the participated NVEs of a TS.



Z. Qiang                Expires July 23, 2015                  [Page 4]


Internet-Draft       Data Plane Handling in NVO3           January 2015


   However, STP/RSTP/MSTP may be used by the TS, including multi-homing
   case.

   In NVO3 network, the NVE does not need to propagate any STP messages
   to the remote NVEs. But, the NVE may need to learn the Root Bridge
   MAC address and Bridge Priority of the root of the Internal Spanning
   Tree (IST) of the attached layer 2 segment by listening to the BPDUs.

   Discussions: The NVE does not need to forward the L2CP message. But
   it may need to participate.

6. LACP

   Link Aggregation [IEEE 802.1AXbk-2012] is a mechanism for making
   multiple point-to-point links between a pair of devices appear to be
   a single logical link between those devices.

   A L2 NVE does not have to be involved in the Link Aggregation
   procedure. It only needs to encapsulate and forward any Link
   Aggregation Control Protocol Data and data packets between the
   participated TSs.

   Discussions: The NVE does not need to be involved. But it may need to
   forward the messages.

7. ARP and Neighbor Discovery

   For an L2 service, it is not a must for NVE to support any special
   processing of ARP [RFC0826] and IPv6 Neighbor Discovery (ND)
   [RFC4861] in NVO3 architecture. The NVE may forward the ARP or ND
   messages using the mcast capability. However, as a performance
   optimization, an NVE does not need to propagate the ARP or ND
   messages. It can intercept ARP or ND requests received from its
   attached TSs and respond based on the information configured in the
   inner-outer address mapping table.

   Discussions: The NVE does not have to forward the ARP or ND messages.
   But it may need to response to the received messages based on the
   inner-outer address mapping table for performance optimization.

   Upon receiving ARP or ND request from a TS, the NVE sends the ARP or
   ND response with the requested MAC address back. The NVE may perform
   ARP or ND proxy when responding the ARP or ND request. If the NVE
   does not have the interested MAC information in the receiving ARP or
   ND request, it may query the NVA using the NVA-NVE control signaling
   [nve-nva-cp-req]. However, an attacker may generate large amount of
   ARP / ND request packets from a compromised VM, which may result a


Z. Qiang                Expires July 23, 2015                  [Page 5]


Internet-Draft       Data Plane Handling in NVO3           January 2015


   denial of service (DOS) attacks. Therefore for security reason, the
   inner-outer address mapping table updating procedure shall not be
   triggered too often. One easy way to avoid this kind security issue
   is to implement user plane signaling filtering function.

   Discussions: As specified in [nvo3-sec-req], the NVE shall have some
   kind ARP and/or ND filtering functions installed for security reason,
   i.e. the NVE MUST have a frequency limitation at sending NVA query
   message triggered by the received ARP/ND request messages with
   unknown MAC addresses.

   In Multi-Homing NVE scenarios, a TS may be reachable via more than
   one NVEs. In this case, if ARP / ND proxy is supported at the
   participated NVEs of the same network segment where a TS is attached,
   all participated NVEs may be aware of the same location of the
   traffic's destination. Therefore, all participated NVEs may offer its
   own MAC address for the same destination IP address in the ARP / ND
   reply message, which could be a racing issue. One NVE may need to be
   selected by the NVA at each network segment to avoid racing issue.
   Only the selected NVE can response to the ARP / ND request at the
   attached network segment.

   Discussions: The NVA may need a property way to select one NVE per
   network segment of a TS for ARP / ND proxy of given destination IP
   addresses to avoid the racing issue.

   At VM mobility, a VM may be moved from one layer-2 segment to another
   layer-2 segment, assuming IP address preservation is supported. To
   optimize the ARP or ND updating procedure, both the source NVE and
   the target NVE can have the same MAC address configured at the VAP
   where the TS attached.

   Discussions: The NVA may need a property way to configure the
   participated NVEs with same MAC address on the VAP of the same VN at
   each network segment. However, at Multi-Homing NVE scenarios, the NVA
   may need a property way to configure the participated NVEs on the VAP
   of the same VN at each network segment to avoid duplicated MAC
   address issue.

8. Routing protocol

   IP routing protocol may be used by the TS for user plane dynamic IP
   routing. A routing protocol specifies how routers communicate with
   each other, disseminating information that enables them to select
   routes between any two nodes on a computer network.




Z. Qiang                Expires July 23, 2015                  [Page 6]


Internet-Draft       Data Plane Handling in NVO3           January 2015


   In NVO3, there are different developments to support layer 3
   services: centralized GW function, distributed GW function, or both.

   If the layer 3 service is provided by a NVO3 Centralized Gateway
   function, the user plane routing function and the NVO3 Centralized
   Gateway functions appears as router adjacencies to each other. A
   routing protocol may be used between the routers for overlay data
   plane. Any user plane routing messages (e.g. routing updates message
   from a vR function installed in a VM of the TS) will be handled by
   the NVO3 Centralized Gateway function. Once there is a routing rules
   installation or updating, the NVO3 Centralized Gateway function may
   update its routing distribution polices and forward data packets
   accordingly. The user data packet will be forwarded by the attached
   NVE to the NVO3 Centralized Gateway function. Then the NVO3
   Centralized Gateway function will make the layer 3 routing decision
   that either discarding the packet or tunneling it to the destination
   NVE where the destination VM attached. In this case, the NVE
   functions, both source and destination, only need to support layer 2
   functionalities.

   If the layer 3 service is provided by the Distributed GW function
   embedded in the L3 NVE, this can be an issue for dynamic routing
   updates. In tenant view, the Distributed GW function appears as next
   hop router to the user plane routing functions, e.g. vR functions
   installed in a VM of the TS. The Distributed GW function embedded in
   the L3 NVE may need to support one or more routing protocols (e.g.
   BGP/OSPF/RIP) to learn any user plane routing rules installation or
   updating. This allows a L3 NVE and the attached TS router to learn
   the IP routes updates from each other. However, as the user plane
   packet forwarding in the L3 NVE is based on the inner-outer address
   mapping table configured by NVA using the NVA-NVE control protocol,
   any user plane routing updates may trigger the inner-outer address
   mapping table updates accordingly, not only in the attached L3 NVE,
   but also in the remote participated L3 NVEs. With the NVO3
   architecture specified in [nvo3-arch], it is an issue on how this
   dynamic updates can be done.

   Discussion: Alternatives are:

   -  Alt A: Disallow the support of dynamic routing function. This is
     an easy implementation with missing functionalities.

   -  Alt B: Using NVE-NVE interaction messages to update the peer L3
     NVEs. For instance, the L3NVE may inform the peer NVEs with the
     received routing updates information. However, in this case,
     should the peer NVE update its inner-outer address mapping table
     without NVA's involvements? This may be challenging the NVA's


Z. Qiang                Expires July 23, 2015                  [Page 7]


Internet-Draft       Data Plane Handling in NVO3           January 2015


     centralized control role. And it may also cause some security
     violation concerns.

   -  Alt C: Using the NVA-NVE signaling to update the peer L3 NVEs. In
     this case, the L3 NVE shall not forward any routing updates
     information to any peer NVEs to avoid flooding. Instead, it shall
     always inform the NVA about any routing changes. Then the NVA will
     use the NVA-NVE signaling for the inner-outer address mapping
     table updating at the peer NVE.

   -  Alt D: Collocated NVA and GW function. With this alternative, the
     TS routing policies (i.e. RIB) is managed by the collocated GW
     function. It is assumed that the NVA is synced with the collocated
     GW function. The Distributed GW function embedded in the NVE is
     installed with the TS IP forwarding policies (i.e. FIB or inner-
     outer address mapping table). The TS user plane routing messages
     will be terminated at the collocated GW function which is the next
     hop router of the user plane routing function. If there is any
     user plane routing installing and updating, the collocated GW
     function may update the routing policies (i.e. RIB), and the NVA
     will notify the distributed GW functions with the updated inner-
     outer address mapping table using the NVA-NVE control signaling.

9. Security Considerations

   This is a discussion paper which provides inputs for the NVO3
   requirement documents and in itself does not introduce any new
   security concerns.
10. IANA Considerations

   No actions are required from IANA for this informational document.
11. References

11.1. Normative References

   [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
             Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

   [RFC2234] Crocker, D. and Overell, P.(Editors), "Augmented BNF for
             Syntax Specifications: ABNF", RFC 2234, Internet Mail
             Consortium and Demon Internet Ltd., November 1997.







Z. Qiang                Expires July 23, 2015                  [Page 8]


Internet-Draft       Data Plane Handling in NVO3           January 2015


11.2. Informative References

   [overlay-problem-statement] Narten, T., Gray, E., Black, D., Fang,
             L., Kreeger, L., and M. Napierala, "Problem Statement:
             Overlays for Network Virtualization", draft-ietf-nvo3-
             overlay-problem-statement-04 (work in progress), July 31,
             2013.

   [hypervisor-nve-cp] Li, Y., Yong L., Kreeger, L., Narten, T., and D.
             Black, "Hypervisor to NVE Control Plane Requirements",
             draft-ietf-nvo3-hpvr2nve-cp-req-00(work in progress), July
             1, 2014.

   [nvo3-framework] Lasserre, M., Balus, F., Morin, T., Bitar, N., and
             Y. Rekhter, "Framework for DC Network Virtualization",
             draft-ietf-nvo3-framework-09 (work in progress), July 4,
             2014.

   [nve-nva-cp-req] Kreeger, L., D. Dutt, T. Narten, D. Black, "Network
             Virtualization NVE to NVA Control Protocol Requirements",
             draft-ietf-nvo3-nve-nva-cp-req-02 (work in progress), April
             24, 2014

   [nvo3-arch] D. Black, J. Hudson, L. Kreeger, M. Lasserre, T. Narten,
             "An Architecture for Overlay Networks (NVO3)", draft-ietf-
             nvo3-arch-01(work in progress), February 14, 2014

   [nvo3-sec-req] S.Hartman, D.Zhang, M.Wasserman, Z.Qiang, "Security
             Requirements of NVO3", draft-ietf-nvo3-security-
             requirements-04 (work in progress), January 12, 2015

   [IEEE 802.1Q] "Virtual Bridged Local Area Networks", 2005

   [EVPN]    Sajassi, A. et al, "BGP MPLS Based Ethernet VPN", draft-
             ietf-l2vpn-evpn (work in progress)

   [RFC4761] Kompella, K. et al, "Virtual Private LAN Service (VPLS)
             Using BGP for auto-discovery and Signaling", RFC4761,
             January 2007

   [RFC4762] Lasserre, M. et al, "Virtual Private LAN Service (VPLS)
             Using Label Distribution Protocol (LDP) Signaling",
             RFC4762, January 2007






Z. Qiang                Expires July 23, 2015                  [Page 9]


Internet-Draft       Data Plane Handling in NVO3           January 2015


   [RFC0826]  Plummer, D., "Ethernet Address Resolution Protocol: Or
             converting network protocol addresses to 48.bit Ethernet
             address for transmission on Ethernet hardware", STD 37, RFC
             826, November 1982.

   [RFC4364]  Rosen, E. and Y. Rekhter, "BGP/MPLS IP Virtual Private
             Networks (VPNs)", RFC 4364, February 2006.

   [RFC4861]  Narten, T., Nordmark, E., Simpson, W., and H. Soliman,
             "Neighbor Discovery for IP version 6 (IPv6)", RFC 4861,
             September 2007.

12. Acknowledgments

   Many people have contributed to the development of this document and
   many more will probably do so before we are done with it.  While we
   cannot thank all contributors, some have played an especially
   prominent role. The following have provided essential input: Suresh
   Krishnan.



Authors' Addresses
   Zu Qiang
   Ericsson
   8400, boul. Decarie
   Ville Mont-Royal, QC,
   Canada

   Email: Zu.Qiang@Ericsson.com


















Z. Qiang                Expires July 23, 2015                 [Page 10]