Internet DRAFT - draft-so-vpn4dc
draft-so-vpn4dc
Network N. So
Internet Draft D. McDysan
Intended status: Informational Verizon, Inc
Expires: April 2012 H.Yu
TW Telecom
J. Heinz
CenturyLink
Maria Napierala
James Uttaro
AT&T
October 24, 2011
Requirements of Layer 3 Virtual Private Network for Data Centers
draft-so-vpn4dc-00.txt
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. This document may not be modified,
and derivative works of it may not be created, and it may not
be published except as an Internet-Draft.
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. This document may not be modified,
and derivative works of it may not be created, except to publish
it as an RFC and to translate it into languages other than English.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts.
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."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2011 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.
Abstract
This contribution addresses service provider requirements to
provide host-to-host connectivity through Layer 3 Virtual
Private Networks (L3VPNs). It describes the use cases and
the characteristics of hosts in data centers automatically
joining the L3VPN. It specifies the requirements on how to
maintain and manage such host-to-host connectivity through
L3VPN, so that automated provisioning, monitoring, and
reporting of the cloud services can be achieved.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction.................................................3
2. Conventions used in this document............................3
3. Definitions..................................................3
4. Use case utlizing L3VPN for DC ............................4
5. Connectivity requirments for hosts in DCs joining L3VPN......5
6. Authors' addresses...........................................7
7. Acknowledgement..............................................7
So Expires April 24,2011 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft VPN-oriented Data Center Services October 2011
1. Introduction
L3VPN services offer secure and logically dedicated connectivity
among multiple sites for enterprises. Capabilities allowing hosts
in data centers to join L3VPN via inband signaling and/or protocol
interworking is suited for those VPN customers who want to temporarily
offload or augment some dedicated user data center
operations such as software, compute, and storage, to the shared
carrier data centers. These customers often view the public
Internet as less secure than a L3VPN. Therefore, L3VPN is the
primary network accessing and handling the traffic between the
customer (user and user data centers) and the carrier multi-tenant
data centers. Furthermore, if technology were developed to make the
carrier data center a natural extension of the VPN they are already
using, the benefits of a multi-tenant data center could be achieved
while retaining as much control, security and isolation as currently
delivered by the L3VPN service.
The seamless host-to-host connectivity through L3VPN is the
foundation for controlled communication interworking between the
Virtual Machines (VM) hosts and Virtual Network Attached Storage
(vNAS) in a Virtual Data Center (VDC) logically dedicated to an
enterprise spanning provider DCs and enterprise DCs. For example,
the L3VPN network can be used as a common control point for
host-to-host communications as well as access to other virtualized
data center resources, such as firewalls, security functions and
load balancers. Extensions to L3VPN could automate at least the
following aspects of a VDC: service ordering/provisioning,
monitoring/troubleshooting, logging and auditing, security
assurance, and location control of VMs.
2. Conventions used in this document
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 RFC-2119 [RFC2119].
In this document, these words will appear with that interpretation
only when in ALL CAPS. Lower case uses of these words are not to be
interpreted as carrying RFC-2119 significance.
3. Definitions
DC: Data Center
VM: Virtual Machine
So Expires April 24,2011 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft VPN-oriented Data Center Services October 2011
Host: VM or dedicated server in data center
VPN Gateway (VPN GW): a VPN CE router (Data Center gateway
switch/router) function that allows the VPN4DC connectivity to be
established through the CE router.
Virtual Data Center (VDC): a resource pool on top of the virtualized
data center infrastructures, including hypervisors, VM/servers,
intra-DC networks, and storage. A VDC may provide control of
reachability within the VDC as well as access to the VDC within
one enterprise or between enterprises.
4. Use Cases Utilizing L3VPN for DCs
4.1. Automated M-to-M Service Ordering/Provisioning:
Today's cloud service ordering/provisioning and management are
often a manual process even for standard services and with physical
infrastructure already in place. The ability to automatically
integrate with the L3VPN and control other aspects are missing,
such as bandwidth and QoS on access and between VDC sites.
Many functions performed manually can be automated via
common/standard protocol exchanges and APIs, thus reducing the
provisioning time as well as providing additionally features, such
as dynamically allocated bandwidth and QoS. Standard protocol
exchange is the preferred method of controlling VPN reachability
and service parameters versus the alternative of management systems
(DCs and L3VPN) interworking because of the following reasons:
. Management systems' interworking is often not practical
from the operational perspective. Data Center management
systems and L3VPN network management system often have
different owners and operators, and of course the
enterprise data center and the service provider owner and
operators differ. Additionally, non-standard legacy
mechanisms make backward compatibility and interworking
difficult.
. In-band signaling of data plane between DC gateway
switch/router (VPN CE) and L3VPN Provider Edge (PE) router
can be much faster, making just-in-time access to data
center resource capacity expansion/contraction possible.
4.2. End-to-end Service Monitoring/Trouble Shooting:
When carrier DC is used as overflow or augmentation for the
enterprise DCs, the service provider has the responsibility of
So Expires April 24,2011 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft VPN-oriented Data Center Services October 2011
operating the L3VPN network and the provider DCs. The customer has
the responsibility of operating the customer DCs. A particular set
of services can be running on both the customer DCs and provider DCs
simultaneously. It is important to the customer as well as the
provider, in real-time or near real-time, to know when, where, and
how the services are being hosted. This real-time visibility can be
particularly important during failure recovery and troubleshooting
situations where mission critical services are interrupted.
Today all segments of the host-to-host connection supporting the
services are managed independently, with no direct visibility beyond
each segment's management domain. If standard protocols are used for
hosts in DCs to join L3VPN, the entire path of the connection can be
known to L3VPN. A standard OAM (e.g. Y.1731 and BFD)can be set up
between PE router and the CE router (DC gateway switch/router)
associated with hosts in DCs to monitor that portion of the
host-to-host connection's condition. The trouble shooting/congestion
detection on any segment of the host-to-host connection can happen
quickly (even automatically) from both ends, so the customer's
service (hosts) can be moved to the secondary DCs/paths quickly
with minimal impact to the services. Furthermore, if a standard
agent were running on the enterprise hosts (VMs), this monitoring
and troubleshooting could be extended host-host.
5. Connectivity Requirements for Hosts in DCs Joining L3VPN
o Once the hypervisor or Top Of Rack switch is configured to
connect the host to a DC gateway, the hosts in DC SHALL be
able to signal to DC gateway switch/router (L3VPN CE) to
join a specific VPN. The join request CAN include the
basic service requirements such as bandwidth and QoS.
o The DC gateway switch/router (CE) SHALL be able to signal
to L3VPN PE to join a specific VPN for establishing
connectivity between the hosts in DC and the PE router.
o The DC gateway switch/router (CE) SHALL be able to signal
to L3VPN the basic service requirements such as bandwidth
and QoS, as aggregated from the host requests.
o The DC gateway switch/router SHALL be able to signal to
L3VPN PE the host IDs (IP/MAC/VDC addresses) that are
joining and/or leaving the VPN. VDC address space/scheme
SHOULD be defined to allow addressing hierarchy and support
aggregation and access control within and between the DCs
which comprise the VDC.
So Expires April 24,2011 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft VPN-oriented Data Center Services October 2011
o The DC gateway switch/router SHALL be able to signal to L3VPN
PE how the connectivity is provisioned within the DC network between
PE and the hosts. For example, provider multi-tenant DC gateway router
SHALL be able to indicate to PE the required reachability between
sets of hosts in the VPN is achieved within its VDC. PE router SHALL
then be able to signal the required reachability to the other DC
gateway routers in the same VDC. This information CAN be used for
connectivity security verification and auditing/reporting purposes.
o DC GW switch/router SHALL be able to signal to PE router whether
the reachability control capability is supported.
o The DC gateway switch/router SHOULD signal to L3VPN PE any host
and/or connectivity changes within its own VDC. The changes
SHALL be signaled to all the DC gateway switch/routers associated
with this VDC.
o DC gateway switch/router (VPN CE) and VPN PE router SHOULD be
able to record all the hosts and connectivity information associated
with the VDC and VPN.
o The PE router SHALL be able to signal to the DC GW switch/router
(e.g. provider DC) how a new logical connectivity should be established
based the customer DCs' service requirements, such as bandwidth and QoS.
o Once host-to-host agent connection has been established through
L3VPN, additional configuration messages SHALL be allowed to use this
connection. For example, additional security configurations can be
performed from one host to a remote host via the connection.
o Once host-to-host agent connection has been established through
L3VPN, it SHOULD be strictly maintained. Hosts on both customer and
provider sides SHOULD be notified and agreed to any
configuration changes prior to the change taking place
o The host-to-host agent connection SHOULD support OAM interworking
mechanisms per DC pair per VPN to allow end-to-end management of the
service. For example, upon detection of a segment of the
infrastructure failure and/or congestion, the user CAN move the host
to an alternative DC instead of waiting for the repair/relieve.
The solution SHOULD use existing protocols(e.g., IEEE 802.1ag, ITU-T
Y.1731, BFD) wherever possible to facilitate interoperability with
existing OAM deployments.
So Expires April 24,2011 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft VPN-oriented Data Center Services October 2011
6. Authors' Addresses
Ning So
Verizon Inc.
2400 N. Glenville Ave.,
Richardson, TX75082
ning.so@verizonbusiness.com
Dave McDysan
Verizon Inc.
22001 Loudoun County PKWY.
Ashburn, VA 20147
Dave.mcdysan@verizon.com
Henry Yu
TW Telecom
10475 Park Meadows Dr.
Littleton, CO 80124
Henry.yu@twtelecom.com
John M. Heinz
CenturyLink
600 New Century PKWY
KSNCAA0420-4B116
New Century, KS 66031
john.m.heinz@centurylink.com
7. Acknowledgments
This document was prepared using 2-Word-v2.0.template.dot.
So Expires April 24,2011 [Page 7]
