Internet DRAFT - draft-chen-idr-bgp-ls-sr-policy-nrp
draft-chen-idr-bgp-ls-sr-policy-nrp
IDR R. Chen
Internet-Draft ZTE Corporation
Intended status: Standards Track J. Dong
Expires: 26 August 2024 Huawei
D. Zhao
ZTE Corporation
L. Gong
China mobile
Y. Zhu
China Telecom
R. Pang
China Unicom
23 February 2024
SR Policies Extensions for NRP in BGP-LS
draft-chen-idr-bgp-ls-sr-policy-nrp-05
Abstract
This document defines a new TLV which enable the headend to report
the configuration and the states of SR policies carrying NRP
information by using BGP-LS.
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 26 August 2024.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2024 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
Chen, et al. Expires 26 August 2024 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft SR policy NRP in BGP-LS February 2024
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 Revised BSD License text as
described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Carrying NRP TLV in BGP-LS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. Scalability Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
8. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1. Introduction
Segment Routing Policy [RFC9256] is an ordered list of segments (i.e.
instructions) that represent a source-routed policy. Packet flows
are steered into a SR Policy on a node where it is instantiated
called a headend node. The packets steered into an SR Policy carry
an ordered list of segments associated with that SR Policy.
[I-D.ietf-teas-ietf-network-slices] provides the definition of IETF
network slice for use within the IETF and discusses the general
framework for requesting and operating IETF Network Slices, their
characteristics, and the necessary system components and
interfaces.It also introduces the concept Network Resource Partition
(NRP), which is a subset of the resources and associated policies in
the underlay network.
[I-D.ietf-teas-ns-ip-mpls] introduces the notion of a Slice-Flow
Aggregate which comprises of one or more IETF network slice traffic
streams. It also describes the Network Resource Partition (NRP) and
the NRP Policy that can be used to instantiate control and data plane
behaviors on select topological elements associated with the NRP that
supports a Slice-Flow Aggregate.
[I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-ls-sr-policy] describes a mechanism to distribute
SR policy information to external components using BGP-LS.
Chen, et al. Expires 26 August 2024 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft SR policy NRP in BGP-LS February 2024
[I-D.ietf-idr-sr-policy-nrp] defines the extensions to BGP SR policy
to specify the NRP which the SR Policy candidate path is associated
with.
This document defines a new TLV which enable the headend to report
the configuration and the states of an SR policy carrying the NRP
information by using BPG-LS.
2. 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 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here.
3. Carrying NRP TLV in BGP-LS
In order to collect configuration and states of the NRP SR policy,
this document defines a new SR Policy state TLV which enable the
headend to report the state at the SR Policy CP level.
This TLV is carried in the optional non-transitive BGP Attribute
"LINK_STATE Attribute" defined in [RFC7752]associated with the SR
Policy CP NLRI type.
This TLV is optional and only one this TLV is advertised for a given
CP. If multiple TLVs are present, then the first one is considered
valid and the rest are ignored as describe in
[I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-ls-sr-policy].
The TLV has the following format:
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length | Flags | RESERVED |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| NRP ID (4 octets) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
where:
Type: TBD1.
Length: 6 octets.
Chen, et al. Expires 26 August 2024 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft SR policy NRP in BGP-LS February 2024
Flags: 1 octet of flags. None are defined at this stage. Flags
SHOULD be set to zero on transmission and MUST be ignored on receipt.
RESERVED: 1 octet of reserved bits. SHOULD be set to zero on
transmission and MUST be ignored on receipt.
NRP ID: 4-octet domain significant identifier of Network Resource
Partition.
4. Scalability Considerations
The mechanism specified in this document defines the headend to
report configuration and states of an SR policy carrying the NRP
information by using BPG-LS. BGP-LS SR Policy is used to report the
SR Policy attributes and status. As a new attribute of the SR
Policy, NRP will not increase the number of the SR Policy reported by
BGP-LS.
5. Acknowledgements
TBD.
6. IANA Considerations
IANA maintains a registry called "Border Gateway Protocol - Link
State (BGP-LS) Parameters" with a sub-registry called "BGP-LS NLRI
and Attribute TLVs". The following TLV codepoints are suggested (for
early allocation by IANA):
Codepoint Description Reference
----------------------------------------------------------
TBD NRP TLV This document
7. Security Considerations
Procedures and protocol extensions defined in this document do not
affect the BGP security model. See the "Security
Considerations"section of [RFC4271] for a discussion of BGP
security.Security considerations for acquiring and distributing BGP-
LS information are discussed in [RFC7752].
8. Informative References
Chen, et al. Expires 26 August 2024 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft SR policy NRP in BGP-LS February 2024
[I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-ls-sr-policy]
Previdi, S., Talaulikar, K., Dong, J., Gredler, H., and J.
Tantsura, "Advertisement of Segment Routing Policies using
BGP Link-State", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-
ietf-idr-bgp-ls-sr-policy-03, 5 November 2023,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-idr-bgp-
ls-sr-policy-03>.
[I-D.ietf-idr-sr-policy-nrp]
Dong, J., Hu, Z., and R. Pang, "BGP SR Policy Extensions
for Network Resource Partition", Work in Progress,
Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-idr-sr-policy-nrp-00, 17
December 2023, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/
draft-ietf-idr-sr-policy-nrp-00>.
[I-D.ietf-teas-ietf-network-slices]
Farrel, A., Drake, J., Rokui, R., Homma, S., Makhijani,
K., Contreras, L. M., and J. Tantsura, "A Framework for
Network Slices in Networks Built from IETF Technologies",
Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-teas-ietf-
network-slices-25, 14 September 2023,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-teas-
ietf-network-slices-25>.
[I-D.ietf-teas-ns-ip-mpls]
Saad, T., Beeram, V. P., Dong, J., Wen, B., Ceccarelli,
D., Halpern, J. M., Peng, S., Chen, R., Liu, X.,
Contreras, L. M., Rokui, R., and L. Jalil, "Realizing
Network Slices in IP/MPLS Networks", Work in Progress,
Internet-Draft, draft-ietf-teas-ns-ip-mpls-03, 26 November
2023, <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-
teas-ns-ip-mpls-03>.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC4271] Rekhter, Y., Ed., Li, T., Ed., and S. Hares, Ed., "A
Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4)", RFC 4271,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4271, January 2006,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4271>.
[RFC7752] Gredler, H., Ed., Medved, J., Previdi, S., Farrel, A., and
S. Ray, "North-Bound Distribution of Link-State and
Traffic Engineering (TE) Information Using BGP", RFC 7752,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7752, March 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7752>.
Chen, et al. Expires 26 August 2024 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft SR policy NRP in BGP-LS February 2024
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
[RFC9256] Filsfils, C., Talaulikar, K., Ed., Voyer, D., Bogdanov,
A., and P. Mattes, "Segment Routing Policy Architecture",
RFC 9256, DOI 10.17487/RFC9256, July 2022,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9256>.
Authors' Addresses
Ran Chen
ZTE Corporation
Nanjing
China
Email: chen.ran@zte.com.cn
Jie Dong
Huawei
Beijing
China
Email: jie.dong@huawei.com
Detao Zhao
ZTE Corporation
Nanjing
China
Email: zhao.detao@zte.com.cn
Liyan Gong
China mobile
Beijing
China
Email: gongliyan@chinamobile.com
Yongqing Zhu
China Telecom
Guangzhou
China
Email: zhuyq8@chinatelecom.cn
Chen, et al. Expires 26 August 2024 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft SR policy NRP in BGP-LS February 2024
Ran Pang
China Unicom
Beijing
China
Email: pangran@chinaunicom.cn
Chen, et al. Expires 26 August 2024 [Page 7]
