Context Label for MPLS EVPN
draft-wang-bess-evpn-context-label-00

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2020-01-17
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text pdf 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)
BESS WG                                                      Yubao. Wang
Internet-Draft                                           ZTE Corporation
Intended status: Standards Track                        January 17, 2020
Expires: July 20, 2020

                      Context Label for MPLS EVPN
               draft-wang-bess-evpn-context-label-00.txt

Abstract

   EVPN is designed to provide a better VPLS service than [RFC4761] and
   [RFC4762],and EVPN indeed introduced many new features which couldn't
   be achieved in those old VPLS implementions.But EVPN didn't inherit
   all features of old VPLS, and a few issues arises for EVPN only.

   Some of these issues can be imputed to the MP2P nature of EVPN
   labels.The PW label in old VPLS is a label for P2P VC, so it contains
   more context than a identifier in dataplane for it's VSI instance.But
   the EVPN label just identifies it's VSI instnace and it can't stand
   for the ingress PE in dataplane.  So the following issues arises with
   MPLS EVPN service:

   MPLS EVPN statistics can't be done per ingress PE.

   MPLS EVPN can't support hub/spoke use case which the spoke PE can
   only connect to each other by the hub PE.

   MPLS EVPN can't support AR REPLICATOR.

   MPLS EVPN can't support anycast SR-MPLS tunnel on the SPE nodes.

   This document introduces a compound label stack to take advantage of
   both P2P VC and MP2P evpn labels.

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

Wang                      Expires July 20, 2020                 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft             EVPN Context Label               January 2020

   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 July 20, 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.  Problem Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Context VC Infrastructure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.1.  Context VC Signalling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
       2.1.1.  Kompella Signalling for context VC  . . . . . . . . .   4
       2.1.2.  SR-MPLS signalling for context VC . . . . . . . . . .   4
   3.  Solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     3.1.  Solution for spoke PE isolating on hub PE . . . . . . . .   5
     3.2.  Solution for per ingress statistics . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     3.3.  Solution for AR REPLICATOR in MPLS EVPN . . . . . . . . .   6
     3.4.  Solution for anycast tunnel usage on SPE  . . . . . . . .   6
   4.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   5.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   6.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   Author's Address  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8

1.  Problem Statement

   EVPN is designed to provide a better VPLS service than RFC4761/
   RFC4762, and EVPN indeed introduced many new features which couldn't
   be achieved in those old VPLS implemention.But EVPN didn't inherit
   all features of old VPLS, and a few issues arises for EVPN only.

   Some of these issues can be imputed to the MP2P nature of EVPN
   labels.The PW label in old VPLS is a label for P2P VC, so it contains
   more context than a identifier in dataplane for it's VSI instance.But
   the EVPN label just identifies it's VSI instnace and it can't stand

Wang                      Expires July 20, 2020                 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft             EVPN Context Label               January 2020

   for the ingress PE in dataplane.  So the following issues arises with
   MPLS EVPN service:

   MPLS EVPN statistics can't be done per ingress PE.  All flows from
   remote PEs share the same statistics on egress PE, because they share
Show full document text