Segment Routing Generic TLV for MPLS Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping/ Traceroute
draft-nainar-mpls-spring-lsp-ping-sr-generic-sid-03
|
| Document |
Type |
|
Active Internet-Draft (individual)
|
|
Last updated |
|
2020-04-28
|
|
Stream |
|
(None)
|
|
Intended RFC status |
|
(None)
|
|
Formats |
|
plain text
pdf
htmlized (tools)
htmlized
bibtex
|
| Stream |
Stream state |
|
(No stream defined) |
|
Consensus Boilerplate |
|
Unknown
|
|
RFC Editor Note |
|
(None)
|
| IESG |
IESG state |
|
I-D Exists
|
|
Telechat date |
|
|
|
Responsible AD |
|
(None)
|
|
Send notices to |
|
(None)
|
Network Work group N. Nainar, Ed.
Internet-Draft C. Pignataro, Ed.
Intended status: Standards Track Z. Ali
Expires: October 30, 2020 C. Filsfils
Cisco
T. Saad
Juniper
April 28, 2020
Segment Routing Generic TLV for MPLS Label Switched Path (LSP) Ping/
Traceroute
draft-nainar-mpls-spring-lsp-ping-sr-generic-sid-03
Abstract
RFC8402 introduces Segment Routing architecture that leverages source
routing and tunneling paradigms and can be directly applied to the
Multi Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) data plane. A node steers a
packet through a controlled set of instructions called segments, by
prepending the packet with Segment Routing header. SR architecture
defines different types of segments with different forwarding
semantics associated. SR can be applied to the MPLS directly and to
IPv6 dataplane using a new routing header.
RFC8287 defines the extensions to MPLS LSP Ping and Traceroute for
Segment Routing IGP-Prefix and IGP-Adjacency Segment Identifier
(SIDs) with an MPLS data plane. Various SIDs are proposed as part of
SR architecture with different associated instructions that raises a
need to come up with new Target FEC Stack Sub-TLV for each such SIDs.
This document defines a new Target FEC Stack Sub-TLV that is used to
validate the instruction associated with any SID.
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."
Nainar, et al. Expires October 30, 2020 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft SR Generic TLV for MPLS LSP Ping/Trace April 2020
This Internet-Draft will expire on October 30, 2020.
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
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
1.1. Challenges with Existing Mechanism . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Requirements notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Target FEC Stack sub-TLV for Segment Routing SID . . . . . . 4
4.1. Segment Routing Generic Label . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.2. FEC for Path validation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5.1. SID to Interface Mapping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5.2. Initiator behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5.2.1. SRGL in Target FEC Stack TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5.3. Responder behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5.4. PHP flag behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6.1. New Target FEC Stack Sub-TLVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6.2. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7. Acknowledgement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
8. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
1. Introduction
Show full document text