<?xml version="1.0" encoding="US-ASCII"?>
<!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd" [
]>
<?xml-stylesheet type='text/xsl' href='rfc2629.xslt' ?>
<?rfc toc="yes"?>
<?rfc symrefs="yes"?>
<?rfc sortrefs="yes"?>
<?rfc iprnotified="no"?>
<?rfc strict="yes"?>
<?rfc compact="yes"?>
<?rfc subcompact="no"?>
<rfc category="std"
     docName="draft-varhal-6man-icmp-srv6-vpn-00"
         ipr="trust200902"
         submissionType="IETF">
  <front>
    <title abbrev="ICMP VPN SRv6">
    ICMP Error Handling for VPNs in SRv6 Networks</title>

  <author fullname="Balazs Varga" initials="B." surname="Varga">
        <organization>Ericsson</organization>
        <address>
         <email>balazs.a.varga@ericsson.com</email>
        </address>
        </author>

    <author fullname="Joel Halpern" initials="J." surname="Halpern">
      <organization>Ericsson</organization>
      <address>
        <email>joel.halpern@ericsson.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>

<!--
    <author fullname="James Bond" initials="J." surname="Bond">
      <organization>MI6</organization>
      <address>
        <email>james@bond.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>
-->

  <date />
  <workgroup>6man</workgroup>
     <keyword>SRv6</keyword>
     <keyword>Segment Routing</keyword>
     <keyword>ICMP</keyword>
     <keyword>VPN</keyword>

     <!-- Keywords will be incorporated into HTML output
        files in a meta tag but they have no effect on text or nroff
        output. If you submit your draft to the RFC Editor, the
        keywords will be used for the search engine. -->

  <abstract>
   <t>
     This document specifies ICMP error handling in SRv6-based Virtual Private 
	 Networks.
   </t>
  </abstract>
  </front>

 <middle>
 <section title="Introduction" anchor="sec_intro">
  <t>
    Troubleshooting is an essential part of all IP networks. IP VPN service of 
	transport networks always represented a special challenge to provide ICMP 
	error handling, as the hosts in a VPN are not part of the transport network. 
  </t>
  <t>
    For VPNs the main challenge to use ICMP for connectivity check and fault 
    localization is that network internal nodes (a.k.a. P routers) are not service 
    (i.e., VPN) aware. Therefore, P routers cannot route VPN specific ICMP error 
    messages back to the original source of the packet, that triggered the 
    generation of the ICMP error message. Furthermore, in SRv6 networks the 
    P routers may be IPv6-only (i.e., may not support the protocol (e.g. IPv4) 
	or address space used by the VPN clients).   
  </t>
  <t>
    The Uniform Model defined in <xref target="RFC3443"/> allows visibility of 
	traversed nodes outside the provider network.
  </t>
  <t>
    This document proposes a solution that is capable to allow (1) ping or trace 
    for VPN endpoints with transport network visibility; and (2) find broken 
    link or node within the transport network (e.g., SRv6 domain).
  </t>
 </section> <!-- end of introduction -->

<section title="Terminology">
 <section title="Terms Used in This Document">
  <t>
   This document uses the Segment Routing terminology established in 
   <xref target="RFC8402"/> and in <xref target="RFC9252"/>. The reader is 
   assumed to be familiar with those documents and their terminology.
  </t>
 </section>

 <section title="Abbreviations">
  <t>
   The following abbreviations are used in this document:
   <list style="hanging" hangIndent="14">
    <t hangText="SID">Segment Identifier.</t>
    <t hangText="SRH">SRv6 header.</t>
    <t hangText="SRv6">Segment Routing over IPv6.</t>   </list>
  </t>
 </section>

 <section title="Requirements Language">
  <t>
    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 <xref target="RFC2119"/> <xref target="RFC8174"/> when, and
    only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.
  </t>
 </section>
 
</section>  <!-- end of terminology -->

<!-- ===================================================================== -->

 <section title="ICMP Error Handling for SRv6-VPNs" anchor="sec_icmp_srv6">
  <section title="Overview" anchor="sec_overv">
  <t>
    While a solution for diagnostics in MPLS VPNs has been created, the solution 
	created for MPLS based VPN ping or traceroute has many inherited 
	drawbacks. MPLS technology has its special encapsulation, i.e., the MPLS 
	header is a label stack. In case of MPLS, P routers have no options to 
	identify the ingress of the MPLS tunnel, as labels in the header point 
	towards the network egress point. This characteristic restricts the 
	possible solutions to provide VPN specific ICMP handling in MPLS networks. 
  </t>
  <t>
	IPv6 encapsulation used by SRv6 has a srcIP field referring to the 
	originator of the IP packet, i.e., the ingress endpoint of the SRv6 tunnel. 
	Therefore the MPLS restriction does not have to apply for SRv6 networks. 
	The solution described here takes advantages from this presence of the 
	ingress endpoint information to provide an optimal method and to be fully 
	inline with <xref target="RFC4443"/>.
  </t>
  <t>
    Node functions in the described method are as follows:

  <list style="numbers">
   <t>Ingress PE (ingress node of the SRv6 tunnel): VPN packet encapsulation 
   follows <xref target="RFC3443"/> Uniform model. The node adds VPN specific 
   information to the encapsulated packet (i.e., srcIP=VPN-specific-SID of the 
   Ingress PE) and forwards it over the SRv6 network.</t>
   <t>P node = Originator of the ICMP error (within the SRv6 domain): it does 
   standard <xref target="RFC4443"/> operation, so an ICMP error message is sent 
   to the originator (i.e., the ingress PE) of the SRv6 encapsulated packet, 
   that caused the ICMP message generation (e.g., as the Hop Limit of the packet 
   expired).</t>
   <t>Ingress PE: it processes the ICMP error message and forwards it to the 
   original source of the (passenger) packet (located within the VPN 
   context). This function is called as VPN-associated-ICMP-leak-function and 
   is described in detail in <xref target="sec_icmp_detail"/>.</t>
  </list>
  </t>
  </section> <!-- Overview -->

  <section title="Details of ICMP Error Handling for VPNs in SRv6 Networks"
           anchor="sec_icmp_detail">
  <t>
    
	<xref target="fig_icmp_srv6_vpn"/> shows the reference topology used to 
	describe the ICMP error handling. Packet processing works as follows: 

  <list style="numbers">
   <t>HostA sends packet to HostB.</t>
   <t>PE1 encapsulates the packet in an SRv6 tunnel (Uniform model used). The 
   srcIP of the encapsulation is a VPN specific SID of PE1.</t>
   <t>Encapsulated packet reaches P2 where Hop Limit expires.</t>
   <t>P2 generates an ICMP Error Message and sends it to PE1, using the 
   VPN specific SID as a dstIP.</t>
   <t>PE1 process the ICMP Error Message according to its 
   VPN-associated-ICMP-leak-function and identifies the related VPN instance.</t>
   <t>PE1 send the processed ICMP Error Message to HostA.</t>
   <t>HostA is informed about the Hop Limit expire event and its network 
   location (i.e., P2).</t>
  </list>
  </t>

      <figure align="center" anchor="fig_icmp_srv6_vpn"
              title="ICMP Error Handling for VPNs in SRv6 Networks: Reference Topology">
        <artwork><![CDATA[

               |<--------- SRv6 Domain -------->|
               |                                |
          +-----+      +----+      +----+      +-----+
 HostA----+ PE1 +------+ P1 |------| P2 +------+ PE2 +------HostB
          +-----+      +----+      +----+      +-----+
             |                                    |
             |<--------------- VPN -------------->|

        ]]></artwork>
      </figure>

  <t>
    The VPN-associated-ICMP-leak-function operation contains the followig 
	steps: 

  <list style="numbers">
   <t>It processes the received ICMP error message (originated e.g., from a P 
   node within the SRv6 domain).</t>
   <t>It identifies the related VPN, based on the VPN specific srcIP value in 
   the SRv6 encapsulation of the received ICMP error message.</t>
   <t>It modifies the ICMP error message:
    <list style="symbols">
      <t>It removes the SRv6 domain specific encapsulation/header(s) of the 
	  received ICMP error message.</t>
      <t>It identifies the VPN specific source of the original packet that 
	  caused the ICMP error message, based on the invoking packet header part 
	  of the ICMP error message payload.</t>
      <t>It removes the SRv6 domain specific header(s) from the invoking packet 
	  header part of the ICMP error message payload.</t>
      <t>It creates a new header for the ICMP error message, where 
	  srcIP=SRv6Originator-of-the-ICMP-error-message and 
	  dstIP=SourceIP-of-the-invoking-packet.</t>
    </list>
   </t>
   <t>Forwards the modified ICMP error message according to the local VPN 
   routing table (vrf).</t>
  </list>
  </t>

  <t>
	In case of an IPv4-VPN service, a translation of involved IP addresses 
	is needed (between the related IPv6 and IPv4 addresses).
  </t>

  <t>
	The VPN-associated-ICMP-leak-function may translate the IP 
	address of the SRv6Originator-of-the-ICMP-error-message (e.g., a P node) to 
	limit the VPN specific visibility characteristics. For example, if the SRv6 
	domain operator does not want to export the real SID values of the domain 
	nodes. 
  </t>

    </section> <!-- Details -->

  <section title="Characteristics of the solution"
           anchor="sec_char">

  <t>
    ICMP Error Handling for VPNs in SRv6 Networks has the following 
	characteristics: 

  <list style="symbols">
   <t>It is compliant to existing standards, like <xref target="RFC4443"/>.</t>
   <t>It eliminates the shortcomings of the MPLS based solutions, as (1) it 
   works in case of failures between ingress-PE and egress-PE and (2) it 
   supports direct localization of failures. </t>
   <t>It does not result in additional complexity on P nodes.</t>
   <t>It makes P nodes service agnostic and allows building IPv6-only core networks.</t>
   <t>It uses a SID as a source address.</t>
   <t>It can hide the SIDs used inside the SRv6 domain and can provide 
   different visibility for served VPNs if needed.</t>
  </list>
  </t>
    </section> <!-- Advantages -->

  </section>  <!-- end of ICMP Error Handling for SRv6-VPNs -->


<!-- ===================================================================== -->

<section title="Security Considerations">
  <t>
    This document does not impose any additional security challenges to
	be considered beyond the security threats described in <xref target="RFC9252"/>.
  </t>
</section>


<section anchor="iana" title="IANA Considerations">
  <t>
   This document makes no IANA requests.
  </t>
</section>

<section anchor="acks" title="Acknowledgements">
 <t>
   Authors extend their appreciation to Janos Farkas and Ferenc Fejes
   for their insightful comments and productive discussion that 
   helped to improve the document.
  </t>
</section>


</middle>

<back>
  <references title="Normative References">
   <?rfc include="reference.RFC.2119"?>
   <?rfc include="reference.RFC.3443"?> 
   <?rfc include="reference.RFC.4443"?>
   <?rfc include="reference.RFC.8174"?>
   <?rfc include="reference.RFC.8402"?>
   <?rfc include="reference.RFC.9252"?>
  </references>
 </back>
</rfc>
