Postcard-based On-Path Flow Data Telemetry using Packet Marking
draft-song-ippm-postcard-based-telemetry-08

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Authors Haoyu Song  , Tianran Zhou  , Zhenbin Li  , Greg Mirsky  , Jongyoon Shin  , Kyungtae Lee 
Last updated 2020-10-30
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text xml 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)
IPPM                                                             H. Song
Internet-Draft                                                 Futurewei
Intended status: Informational                                   T. Zhou
Expires: May 3, 2021                                               Z. Li
                                                                  Huawei
                                                               G. Mirsky
                                                               ZTE Corp.
                                                                 J. Shin
                                                              SK Telecom
                                                                  K. Lee
                                                                   LG U+
                                                        October 30, 2020

    Postcard-based On-Path Flow Data Telemetry using Packet Marking
              draft-song-ippm-postcard-based-telemetry-08

Abstract

   The document describes a packet-marking variation of the Postcard-
   Based Telemetry (PBT), referred to as PBT-M.  Unlike the instruction-
   based PBT, as embodied in [I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-direct-export], PBT-M
   does not require the encapsulation of a telemetry instruction header,
   so it avoids some of the implementation challenges of the
   instruction-based PBT.  However, PBT-M has unique issues that need to
   be considered.  This document serves as a scheme overview and
   provides design guidelines applicable to implementations in different
   network protocols.

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 May 3, 2021.

Song, et al.               Expires May 3, 2021                  [Page 1]
Internet-Draft          PBT using Packet Marking            October 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.  Motivation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  PBT-M: Marking-based PBT  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   3.  New Challenges  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   4.  PBT-M Design Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     4.1.  Packet Marking  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     4.2.  Flow Path Discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     4.3.  Packet Identity for Export Data Correlation . . . . . . .   8
     4.4.  Control the Load  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   5.  Implementation Recommendation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     5.1.  Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     5.2.  Postcard Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     5.3.  Data Correlation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   7.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   8.  Contributors  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   9.  Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   10. Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12

1.  Motivation

   To gain detailed data plane visibility to support effective network
   OAM, it is essential to be able to examine the trace of user packets
   along their forwarding paths.  Such on-path flow data reflect the
   state and status of each user packet's real-time experience and
   provide valuable information for network monitoring, measurement, and
   diagnosis.

   The telemetry data include but not limited to the detailed forwarding
   path, the timestamp/latency at each network node, and, in case of
Show full document text