draft-akiya-mpls-entropy-lsp-ping-02.txt   draft-akiya-mpls-entropy-lsp-ping-03.txt 
Internet Engineering Task Force N. Akiya Internet Engineering Task Force N. Akiya
Internet-Draft G. Swallow Internet-Draft G. Swallow
Updates: 4379,6424,6790 (if approved) C. Pignataro Updates: 4379,6424,6790 (if approved) C. Pignataro
Intended status: Standards Track Cisco Systems Intended status: Standards Track Cisco Systems
Expires: January 5, 2015 A. Malis Expires: April 25, 2015 A. Malis
S. Aldrin S. Aldrin
Huawei Technologies Huawei Technologies
July 4, 2014 October 22, 2014
Label Switched Path (LSP) and Pseudowire (PW) Ping/Trace over Label Switched Path (LSP) and Pseudowire (PW) Ping/Trace over
MPLS Network using Entropy Labels (EL) MPLS Network using Entropy Labels (EL)
draft-akiya-mpls-entropy-lsp-ping-02 draft-akiya-mpls-entropy-lsp-ping-03
Abstract Abstract
The Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Path (LSP) The Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Path (LSP)
Ping and Traceroute are used to exercise specific paths of Equal-Cost Ping and Traceroute are used to exercise specific paths of Equal-Cost
Multipath (ECMP). When LSP is signaled to use Entropy Label (EL) Multipath (ECMP). When LSP is signaled to use Entropy Label (EL)
described in RFC6790, the ability for LSP Ping and Traceroute described in RFC6790, the ability for LSP Ping and Traceroute
operation to discover and exercise ECMP paths has been lost in operation to discover and exercise ECMP paths has been lost in
scenarios which LSRs apply deviating load balance techniques. One scenarios which LSRs apply deviating load balance techniques. One
such scenario is when some LSRs apply EL based load balancing while such scenario is when some LSRs apply EL based load balancing while
skipping to change at page 2, line 10 skipping to change at page 2, line 10
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on January 5, 2015. This Internet-Draft will expire on April 25, 2015.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 2, line 49 skipping to change at page 2, line 49
6.2. IP Based Load Balancer & Pushes ELI/EL . . . . . . . . . 10 6.2. IP Based Load Balancer & Pushes ELI/EL . . . . . . . . . 10
6.3. Label Based Load Balancer & Not Pushing ELI/EL . . . . . 11 6.3. Label Based Load Balancer & Not Pushing ELI/EL . . . . . 11
6.4. Label Based Load Balancer & Pushes ELI/EL . . . . . . . . 11 6.4. Label Based Load Balancer & Pushes ELI/EL . . . . . . . . 11
6.5. Flow Aware MS-PW Stitching LSR . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 6.5. Flow Aware MS-PW Stitching LSR . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
7. Entropy Label FEC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 7. Entropy Label FEC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
8. DS Flags: L and E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 8. DS Flags: L and E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
9. New Multipath Information Type: 10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 9. New Multipath Information Type: 10 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
10. Supported and Unsupported Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 10. Supported and Unsupported Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
11. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 11. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
12. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 12. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
12.1. New Sub-Registries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 12.1. DS Flags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
12.1.1. DS Flags . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 12.2. Multpath Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
12.1.2. Multipath Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 12.3. Entropy Label FEC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
12.2. Entropy Label FEC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 13. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
14. Contributing Authors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
13. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 15. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
14. Contributing Authors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 15.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
15. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
15.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
15.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 15.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
1.1. Terminology 1.1. Terminology
The following acronyms/terminologies are used in this document: The following acronyms/terminologies are used in this document:
o MPLS - Multiprotocol Label Switching. o MPLS - Multiprotocol Label Switching.
o LSP - Label Switched Path. o LSP - Label Switched Path.
skipping to change at page 18, line 30 skipping to change at page 18, line 30
Responder node that pushes ELI/EL will need to compute and return Responder node that pushes ELI/EL will need to compute and return
multipath data including associated EL. Initiator node will need to multipath data including associated EL. Initiator node will need to
store and handle both IP multipath and label multipath information, store and handle both IP multipath and label multipath information,
and include destination IP addresses and/or ELs in MPLS echo request and include destination IP addresses and/or ELs in MPLS echo request
packet as well as in carried multipath information to downstream packet as well as in carried multipath information to downstream
nodes. Due to additional processing, it is critical that proper nodes. Due to additional processing, it is critical that proper
security measures described in [RFC4379] and [RFC6424] are followed. security measures described in [RFC4379] and [RFC6424] are followed.
12. IANA Considerations 12. IANA Considerations
12.1. New Sub-Registries 12.1. DS Flags
[RFC4379] defines the Downstream Mapping TLV, which has the Type 2 The IANA is requested to assign new bit numbers from the "DS flags"
assigned from the "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label sub-registry from the "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label
Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters - TLVs" registry. [RFC6424] Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters - TLVs" registry
defines the Downstream Detailed Mapping TLV, which has the Type 20 ([IANA-MPLS-LSP-PING]).
assigned from the "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label
Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters - TLVs" registry. Both TLVs Note: the "DS flags" sub-registry is created by
shares two fields: "DS Flags" and "Multipath Type". This document [I-D.decraene-mpls-lsp-ping-registry].
requires allocation of new values in both the "DS Flags" and
"Multipath Type" fields, which are not maintained by IANA today.
Therefore, this document requests IANA to create new registries
within [IANA-MPLS-LSP-PING] protocol to maintain "DS Flags" and
"Multipath Type" fields. Name of registries and initial values are
described in immediate sub-sections to follow.
12.1.1. DS Flags
Bit number Name Reference Bit number Name Reference
---------- ---------------------------------------- --------- ---------- ---------------------------------------- ---------
7 N: Treat as a Non-IP Packet RFC4379 TBD2(5) E: ELI/EL push indicator this document
6 I: Interface and Label Stack Object Request RFC4379 TBD3(4) L: Label based load balance indicator this document
5 E: ELI/EL push indicator this document
4 L: Label based load balance indicator this document
3-0 Unassigned
Assignments of DS Flags are via Standards Action [RFC5226] or IESG This document requests the bit number 5 as TBD2, and the bit number 4
Approval [RFC5226]. as TBD3.
Note that "DS Flags" is a field included in two TLVs defined in 12.2. Multpath Type
"Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs)
Ping Parameters - TLVs" registry: Downstream Mapping TLV (value 2)
and Downstream Detailed Mapping TLV (value 20). Modification to "DS
Flags" registry will affect both TLVs.
12.1.2. Multipath Type The IANA is requested to assign a new value from the "Multipath Type"
sub-registry from the "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label
Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters - TLVs" registry
([IANA-MPLS-LSP-PING]).
Note: the "Multipath Type" sub-registry is created by
[I-D.decraene-mpls-lsp-ping-registry].
Value Meaning Reference Value Meaning Reference
---------- ---------------------------------------- --------- ---------- ---------------------------------------- ---------
0 no multipath RFC4379 TBD4(10) IP and label set this document
1 Unassigned
2 IP address RFC4379
3 Unassigned
4 IP address range RFC4379
5-7 Unassigned
8 Bit-masked IP address set RFC4379
9 Bit-masked label set RFC4379
10 IP and label set this document
11-255 Unassigned
Assignments of Multipath Type are via IETF Review [RFC5226] or IESG
Approval [RFC5226].
Note that "Multipath Type" is a field included in two TLVs defined in This document requests the value 10 as TBD4.
"Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs)
Ping Parameters - TLVs" registry: Downstream Mapping TLV (value 2)
and Downstream Detailed Mapping TLV (value 20). Modification to
"Multipath Type" registry will affect both TLVs.
12.2. Entropy Label FEC 12.3. Entropy Label FEC
IANA is requested to assign a new sub-TLV from the "Sub-TLVs for TLV The IANA is requested to assign a new sub-TLV from the "Sub-TLVs for
Types 1 and 16" section from "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) TLV Types 1 and 16" section from the "Multi-Protocol Label Switching
Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters - TLVs" registry. (MPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters - TLVs" registry
([IANA-MPLS-LSP-PING]).
Sub-Type Sub-TLV Name Reference Sub-Type Sub-TLV Name Reference
-------- ------------ --------- -------- ------------ ---------
TBD1 Entropy Label FEC this document TBD1 Entropy Label FEC this document
13. Acknowledgements 13. Acknowledgements
Authors would like to thank Loa Andersson, Curtis Villamizar, Daniel Authors would like to thank Loa Andersson, Curtis Villamizar, Daniel
King and Sriganesh Kini for performing thorough review and providing King and Sriganesh Kini for performing thorough review and providing
valuable comments. valuable comments.
skipping to change at page 20, line 38 skipping to change at page 20, line 11
[RFC4379] Kompella, K. and G. Swallow, "Detecting Multi-Protocol [RFC4379] Kompella, K. and G. Swallow, "Detecting Multi-Protocol
Label Switched (MPLS) Data Plane Failures", RFC 4379, Label Switched (MPLS) Data Plane Failures", RFC 4379,
February 2006. February 2006.
[RFC6790] Kompella, K., Drake, J., Amante, S., Henderickx, W., and [RFC6790] Kompella, K., Drake, J., Amante, S., Henderickx, W., and
L. Yong, "The Use of Entropy Labels in MPLS Forwarding", L. Yong, "The Use of Entropy Labels in MPLS Forwarding",
RFC 6790, November 2012. RFC 6790, November 2012.
15.2. Informative References 15.2. Informative References
[I-D.decraene-mpls-lsp-ping-registry]
Decraene, B., Akiya, N., Pignataro, C., Andersson, L., and
S. Aldrin, "IANA registries for LSP ping Code Points",
draft-decraene-mpls-lsp-ping-registry-00 (work in
progress), October 2014.
[I-D.ietf-mpls-forwarding] [I-D.ietf-mpls-forwarding]
Villamizar, C., Kompella, K., Amante, S., Malis, A., and Villamizar, C., Kompella, K., Amante, S., Malis, A., and
C. Pignataro, "MPLS Forwarding Compliance and Performance C. Pignataro, "MPLS Forwarding Compliance and Performance
Requirements", draft-ietf-mpls-forwarding-09 (work in Requirements", draft-ietf-mpls-forwarding-09 (work in
progress), March 2014. progress), March 2014.
[I-D.ravisingh-mpls-el-for-seamless-mpls] [I-D.ravisingh-mpls-el-for-seamless-mpls]
Singh, R., Shen, Y., and J. Drake, "Entropy label for Singh, R., Shen, Y., and J. Drake, "Entropy label for
seamless MPLS", draft-ravisingh-mpls-el-for-seamless- seamless MPLS", draft-ravisingh-mpls-el-for-seamless-
mpls-01 (work in progress), October 2013. mpls-02 (work in progress), July 2014.
[IANA-MPLS-LSP-PING] [IANA-MPLS-LSP-PING]
IANA, "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label IANA, "Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label
Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters", Switched Paths (LSPs) Ping Parameters",
<http://www.iana.org/assignments/mpls-lsp-ping-parameters/ <http://www.iana.org/assignments/mpls-lsp-ping-parameters/
mpls-lsp-ping-parameters.xhtml>. mpls-lsp-ping-parameters.xhtml>.
[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
May 2008.
[RFC6391] Bryant, S., Filsfils, C., Drafz, U., Kompella, V., Regan, [RFC6391] Bryant, S., Filsfils, C., Drafz, U., Kompella, V., Regan,
J., and S. Amante, "Flow-Aware Transport of Pseudowires J., and S. Amante, "Flow-Aware Transport of Pseudowires
over an MPLS Packet Switched Network", RFC 6391, November over an MPLS Packet Switched Network", RFC 6391, November
2011. 2011.
[RFC6424] Bahadur, N., Kompella, K., and G. Swallow, "Mechanism for [RFC6424] Bahadur, N., Kompella, K., and G. Swallow, "Mechanism for
Performing Label Switched Path Ping (LSP Ping) over MPLS Performing Label Switched Path Ping (LSP Ping) over MPLS
Tunnels", RFC 6424, November 2011. Tunnels", RFC 6424, November 2011.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
 End of changes. 20 change blocks. 
69 lines changed or deleted 46 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.41. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/