Usage and Applicability of Link State Vector Routing in Data Centers
draft-ietf-lsvr-applicability-07

• Status
• IESG evaluation record
• IESG writeups
• Email expansions
• History

• Versions
• 00
• 01
• 02
• 03
• 04
• 05
• 06
• 07

LSVR                                                            K. Patel
Internet-Draft                                              Arrcus, Inc.
Intended status: Informational                                 A. Lindem
Expires: March 25, 2021                                    Cisco Systems
                                                                S. Zandi
                                                                G. Dawra
                                                                Linkedin
                                                      September 21, 2020

  Usage and Applicability of Link State Vector Routing in Data Centers
                    draft-ietf-lsvr-applicability-07

Abstract

   This document discusses the usage and applicability of Link State
   Vector Routing (LSVR) extensions in data center networks utilizing
   CLOS or Fat-Tree topologies.  The document is intended to provide a
   simplified guide for the deployment of LSVR extensions.

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 March 25, 2021.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2020 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

Patel, et al.            Expires March 25, 2021                 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft                                            September 2020

   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.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Recommended Reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   4.  Common Deployment Scenario  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   5.  Justification for BGP SPF Extension . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   6.  LSVR Applicability to CLOS Networks . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     6.1.  Usage of BGP-LS SPF SAFI  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
       6.1.1.  Relationship to Other BGP AFI/SAFI Tuples . . . . . .   6
     6.2.  Peering Models  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
       6.2.1.  Sparse Peering Model  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
       6.2.2.  Bi-Connected Graph Heuristic  . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     6.3.  BGP Spine/Leaf Topology Policy  . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     6.4.  BGP Peer Discovery Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     6.5.  BGP Peer Discovery  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
       6.5.1.  BGP Peer Discovery Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . .   9
       6.5.2.  BGP IPv6 Simplified Peering . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
       6.5.3.  BGP-LS SPF Topology Visibility for Management . . . .  10
       6.5.4.  Data Center Interconnect (DCI) Applicability  . . . .  10
   7.  Non-CLOS/FAT Tree Topology Applicability  . . . . . . . . . .  10
   8.  Non-Transit Node Capability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   9.  BGP Policy Applicability  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   11. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   12. Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   13. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     13.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     13.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14

1.  Introduction

   This document complements [I-D.ietf-lsvr-bgp-spf] by discussing the
   applicability of the technology in a simple and fairly common
   deployment scenario, which is described in Section 4.

   After describing the deployment scenario, Section 5 will describe the
   reasons for BGP modifications for such deployments.

   Once the control plane routing protocol requirements are described,