spring | N. Kumar |
Internet-Draft | C. Pignataro |
Intended status: Informational | N. Akiya |
Expires: July 4, 2015 | Cisco Systems, Inc. |
R. Geib | |
Deutsche Telekom | |
G. Mirsky | |
Ericsson | |
December 31, 2014 |
OAM Requirements for Segment Routing Network
draft-kumar-spring-sr-oam-requirement-02
This document describes a list of functional requirement for OAM in Segment Routing (SR) based network.
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 http://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 July 4, 2015.
Copyright (c) 2014 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 (http://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.
[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing] introduces and explains Segment Routing architecture that leverages source routing and tunneling standards which can be applied directly to MPLS dataplane with no changes on forwarding plane and on IPv6 dataplane with new Routing Extension Header.
This document list the OAM requirements for Segment Routing based network which can further be used to produce OAM tools, either through enhancing existing OAM tools or constructing new OAM tools, for path liveliness and service validation.
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
SR OAM Packet: OAM probe originated and processed within SR domain(s)
ECMP: Equal Cost Multipath
SR: Segment Routing
UCMP: Unequal Cost Multipath
Initiator: Centralized OAM initiator or PMS as referred in [I-D.geib-spring-oam-usecase]
This section list the OAM requirement for Segment Routing based network. The below listed requirement MUST be supported with both MPLS and IPv6 dataplane:
This document does not propose any IANA consideration.
This document list the OAM requirement for Segment Routing network and does not raise any security considerations.
The authors would like to thank Stefano Previdi for his review.
Sriganesh Kini
Ericsson
Email: sriganesh.kini@ericsson.com
[I-D.geib-spring-oam-usecase] | Geib, R., Filsfils, C., Pignataro, C. and N. Kumar, "Use case for a scalable and topology aware MPLS data plane monitoring system", Internet-Draft draft-geib-spring-oam-usecase-03, October 2014. |
[I-D.ietf-spring-segment-routing] | Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Bashandy, A., Decraene, B., Litkowski, S., Horneffer, M., Shakir, R., Tantsura, J. and E. Crabbe, "Segment Routing Architecture", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-spring-segment-routing-00, December 2014. |
[RFC2119] | Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. |
[RFC4379] | Kompella, K. and G. Swallow, "Detecting Multi-Protocol Label Switched (MPLS) Data Plane Failures", RFC 4379, February 2006. |
[RFC6291] | Andersson, L., van Helvoort, H., Bonica, R., Romascanu, D. and S. Mansfield, "Guidelines for the Use of the "OAM" Acronym in the IETF", BCP 161, RFC 6291, June 2011. |
[RFC6424] | Bahadur, N., Kompella, K. and G. Swallow, "Mechanism for Performing Label Switched Path Ping (LSP Ping) over MPLS Tunnels", RFC 6424, November 2011. |
[RFC6425] | Saxena, S., Swallow, G., Ali, Z., Farrel, A., Yasukawa, S. and T. Nadeau, "Detecting Data-Plane Failures in Point-to-Multipoint MPLS - Extensions to LSP Ping", RFC 6425, November 2011. |