Export of MPLS Segment Routing Label Type Information in IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX)
draft-tgraf-ipfix-mpls-sr-label-type-01

Abstract

This document introduces two additional values in the Information Element mplsTopLabelType for IS-IS and OSPF MPLS Segment Routing (SR) extensions to enable Segment Routing label type information in IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX).

Requirements Language

The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 RFC 2119 RFC 8174 when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.

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 September 19, 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. IANA Considerations
• 3. Security Considerations
• 4. Acknowledgements
• 5. Normative References
• Author's Address

1. Introduction

Besides existing MPLS control plane protocols such as BGP-4, LDP and BGP VPN, IS-IS Extensions and OSPF Extensions had been added to propagate Segment Routing labels for the MPLS dataplane.

Traffic Accounting in Segment Routing Networks describes how IPFIX can be laveraged to account traffic to MPLS Segment Routing label dimensions within a Segment Routing domain.

In the Information Model for IP Flow Information Export IPFIX, the information element #46 mplsTopLabelType describes which MPLS control plane protocol allocated the top-of-stack label in the MPLS label stack. RFC 7012 section 7.2 describes the IANA Information Element #46 SubRegistry where new values should be added.

By introducing two new values to information element #46 mplsTopLabelType for IS-IS and OSPF, when Segment Routing with one of these two routing protocols is deployed, we get insight which traffic is being forwarded based on which MPLS control plane protocol. A typical use case scenario is to monitor MPLS control plane migrations from LDP to IS-IS or OSPF.

2. IANA Considerations

This document specifies two additional values for IS-IS and OSPF Segment Routing extension in the sub-registry "IPFIX MPLS label type (Value 46)" of the "IPFIX Information Elements" registry in the "IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) Entities" name space.

  ------------------------------------------------------------------
  |ElementID|Value|      Description      | Abstract  | Data Type  |
  |         |     |                       | Data Type | Semantics  |
  |----------------------------------------------------------------|
  |    46   |  x  | IS-IS Segment Routing | unsigned8 | identifier |
  |----------------------------------------------------------------|
  |    46   |  x  | OSPF Segment Routing  | unsigned8 | identifier |
  ------------------------------------------------------------------

   Figure 1: Updates to "IPFIX Information Element #46" SubRegistry 

3. Security Considerations

It is not believed that this document adds any additional security considerations.

4. Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Zafar Ali for his valuable comments.

5. Normative References

Author's Address