Network Working Group A. Mishra Internet-Draft SES Intended status: Standards Track M. Jethanandani Expires: October 14, 2021 Kloud Services A. Saxena Ciena Corporation S. Pallagatti VMware M. Chen Huawei P. Fan China Mobile April 12, 2021 BFD Stability draft-ietf-bfd-stability-10 Abstract This document describes extensions to the Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) protocol to measure BFD stability. Specifically, it describes a mechanism for detection of BFD packet loss. 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 October 14, 2021. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2021 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 Mishra, et al. Expires October 14, 2021 [Page 1] Internet-Draft BFD Stability April 2021 (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 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4. BFD NULL-Authentication Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 5. Theory of Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 5.1. Loss Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 6. ietf-bfd-stability YANG Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 6.1. Data Model Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 6.2. YANG Module . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 7.1. The "IETF XML" Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 7.2. The "YANG Module Names" Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 8. Security Consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 9. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 10. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 1. Introduction The Bidirectional Forwarding Detection ( BFD) [RFC5880] protocol operates by transmitting and receiving BFD control packets, generally at high frequency, over the datapath being monitored. In order to prevent significant data loss due to a datapath failure, BFD session detection time as defined in BFD [RFC5880] is set to the smallest feasible value. This document proposes a mechanism to detect lost packets in a BFD session in addition to the datapath fault detection mechanisms of BFD. Such a mechanism presents significant value to measure the stability of BFD sessions and provides data to the operators for the cause of a BFD failure. This document does not propose any BFD extension to measure data traffic loss or delay on a link or tunnel and the scope is limited to BFD packets. Mishra, et al. Expires October 14, 2021 [Page 2] Internet-Draft BFD Stability April 2021 2. Terminology 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 RFC 2119 [RFC2119] and RFC 8174 [RFC8174]. The reader is expected to be familiar with the BFD [RFC5880], Optimizing BFD Authentication [I-D.ietf-bfd-optimizing-authentication] and BFD Secure Sequence Numbers [I-D.ietf-bfd-secure-sequence-numbers]. 3. Use Cases Bidirectional Forwarding Detection as defined in BFD [RFC5880] cannot detect any BFD packet loss if the loss does not last for detection time. This document proposes a method to detect a dropped packet on the receiver. For example, if the receiver receives BFD control packet k at time t but receives packet k+3 at time t+10ms, and never receives packet k+1 and/or k+2, then it has experienced a drop. This proposal enables BFD implementations to generate diagnostic information on the health of each BFD session that could be used to preempt a failure on a datapath that BFD was monitoring by allowing time for a corrective action to be taken. In a faulty datapath scenario, an operator can use BFD health information to trigger delay and loss measurement OAM protocol, Connectivity Fault Management (CFM) [IEEE802.1ag] or Loss Measurement (LM)-Delay Measurement (DM)) as defined by A One-way Active Measurement Protocol (OWAMP) [RFC4656] to further isolate the issue. 4. BFD NULL-Authentication Type The functionality proposed for BFD stability measurement is achieved by appending an authentication section with the NULL Authentication type (as defined in Optimizing BFD Authentication [I-D.ietf-bfd-optimizing-authentication] ) to the BFD control packets that do not have authentication enabled. 5. Theory of Operation This mechanism allows operators to measure the loss of BFD control packets. When using MD5 or SHA authentication, BFD uses an authentication section that carries the Sequence Number. However, if non-meticulous authentication is being used, or no authentication is in use, then Mishra, et al. Expires October 14, 2021 [Page 3] Internet-Draft BFD Stability April 2021 the non-authenticated BFD control packets MUST include an authentication section with the NULL Authentication type. 5.1. Loss Measurement Loss measurement counts the number of BFD control packets missed at the receiver during any Detection Time period. The loss is detected by comparing the Sequence Number field in the Auth TLV (NULL or otherwise) in successive BFD control packets. The Sequence Number in each successive control packet generated on a BFD session by the transmitter is incremented by one. This loss count can then be exposed using the YANG module defined in the subsequent section. The first BFD authentication section with a non-zero sequence number, in a valid BFD control packet, processed by the receiver is used for bootstrapping the logic. When using secure sequence numbers, if the expected values are pre-calculated, the value must be matched to detect lost packets as defined in BFD secure sequence numbers [I-D.ietf-bfd-secure-sequence-numbers]. 6. ietf-bfd-stability YANG Module 6.1. Data Model Overview This YANG module augments the "ietf-bfd" module to add to the per- session set of counters a 'loss-packet-count' for BFD packets that are lost but do not necessarily result in the BFD session going down. Mishra, et al. Expires October 14, 2021 [Page 4] Internet-Draft BFD Stability April 2021 module: ietf-bfd-stability augment /rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols /rt:control-plane-protocol/bfd:bfd/bfd-ip-sh:ip-sh /bfd-ip-sh:sessions/bfd-ip-sh:session /bfd-ip-sh:session-statistics: +--ro lost-packet-count? yang:counter32 augment /rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols /rt:control-plane-protocol/bfd:bfd/bfd-ip-mh:ip-mh /bfd-ip-mh:session-groups/bfd-ip-mh:session-group /bfd-ip-mh:sessions/bfd-ip-mh:session-statistics: +--ro lost-packet-count? yang:counter32 augment /rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols /rt:control-plane-protocol/bfd:bfd/bfd-lag:lag /bfd-lag:sessions/bfd-lag:session/bfd-lag:member-links /bfd-lag:micro-bfd-ipv4/bfd-lag:session-statistics: +--ro lost-packet-count? yang:counter32 augment /rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols /rt:control-plane-protocol/bfd:bfd/bfd-lag:lag /bfd-lag:sessions/bfd-lag:session/bfd-lag:member-links /bfd-lag:micro-bfd-ipv6/bfd-lag:session-statistics: +--ro lost-packet-count? yang:counter32 augment /rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols /rt:control-plane-protocol/bfd:bfd/bfd-mpls:mpls /bfd-mpls:session-groups/bfd-mpls:session-group /bfd-mpls:sessions/bfd-mpls:session-statistics: +--ro lost-packet-count? yang:counter32 6.2. YANG Module This YANG module imports Common YANG Types [RFC6991], A YANG Data Model for Routing [RFC8349], and YANG Data Model for Bidirectional Forwading Detection (BFD) [I-D.ietf-bfd-yang]. file "ietf-bfd-stability@2021-04-11.yang" module ietf-bfd-stability { yang-version 1.1; namespace "urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-bfd-stability"; prefix "bfds"; import ietf-yang-types { prefix "yang"; reference "RFC 6991: Common YANG Data Types"; } import ietf-routing { prefix "rt"; reference Mishra, et al. Expires October 14, 2021 [Page 5] Internet-Draft BFD Stability April 2021 "RFC 8349: A YANG Data Model for Routing Management (NMDA version)"; } import ietf-bfd { prefix bfd; reference "I-D.ietf-bfd-yang: YANG Data Model for Bidirectional Forwarding Detection."; } import ietf-bfd-ip-sh { prefix bfd-ip-sh; reference "I-D.ietf-bfd-yang: YANG Data Model for Bidirectional Forwarding Detection."; } import ietf-bfd-ip-mh { prefix bfd-ip-mh; reference "I-D.ietf-bfd-yang: YANG Data Model for Bidirectional Forwarding Detection."; } import ietf-bfd-lag { prefix bfd-lag; reference "I-D.ietf-bfd-yang: YANG Data Model for Bidirectional Forwarding Detection."; } import ietf-bfd-mpls { prefix bfd-mpls; reference "I-D.ietf-bfd-yang: YANG Data Model for Bidirectional Forwarding Detection."; } organization "IETF BFD Working Group"; contact "WG Web: WG List: Authors: Mahesh Jethanandani (mjethanandani@gmail.com) Ashesh Mishra (mishra.ashesh@gmail.com) Mishra, et al. Expires October 14, 2021 [Page 6] Internet-Draft BFD Stability April 2021 Ankur Saxena (ankurpsaxena@gmail.com) Santosh Pallagatti (santosh.pallagati@gmail.com) Mach Chen (mach.chen@huawei.com) Peng Fan (fanp08@gmail.com)."; description "This YANG module augments the base BFD YANG model to add attributes related to BFD Stability. In particular it adds a a per session count for BFD packets that are lost. Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as authors of the code. All rights reserved. Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, is permitted pursuant to, and subject to the license terms contained in, the Simplified BSD License set forth in Section 4.c of the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info). This version of this YANG module is part of RFC XXXX (https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfcXXXX); see the RFC itself for full legal notices. 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."; revision "2021-04-11" { description "Initial Version."; reference "RFC XXXX, BFD Stability."; } augment "/rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols/" + "rt:control-plane-protocol/bfd:bfd/bfd-ip-sh:ip-sh/" + "bfd-ip-sh:sessions/bfd-ip-sh:session/" + "bfd-ip-sh:session-statistics" { leaf lost-packet-count { type yang:counter32; description "Number of BFD packets that were lost without bringing the session down."; } Mishra, et al. Expires October 14, 2021 [Page 7] Internet-Draft BFD Stability April 2021 description "Augment the 'bfd' container to add attributes related to BFD stability."; } augment "/rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols/" + "rt:control-plane-protocol/bfd:bfd/bfd-ip-mh:ip-mh/" + "bfd-ip-mh:session-groups/bfd-ip-mh:session-group/" + "bfd-ip-mh:sessions/bfd-ip-mh:session-statistics" { leaf lost-packet-count { type yang:counter32; description "Number of BFD packets that were lost without bringing the session down."; } description "Augment the 'bfd' container to add attributes related to BFD stability."; } augment "/rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols/" + "rt:control-plane-protocol/bfd:bfd/bfd-lag:lag/" + "bfd-lag:sessions/bfd-lag:session/bfd-lag:member-links/" + "bfd-lag:micro-bfd-ipv4/bfd-lag:session-statistics" { leaf lost-packet-count { type yang:counter32; description "Number of BFD packets that were lost without bringing the session down."; } description "Augment the 'bfd' container to add attributes related to BFD stability."; } augment "/rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols/" + "rt:control-plane-protocol/bfd:bfd/bfd-lag:lag/" + "bfd-lag:sessions/bfd-lag:session/bfd-lag:member-links/" + "bfd-lag:micro-bfd-ipv6/bfd-lag:session-statistics" { leaf lost-packet-count { type yang:counter32; description "Number of BFD packets that were lost without bringing the session down."; } description "Augment the 'bfd' container to add attributes related to BFD stability."; Mishra, et al. Expires October 14, 2021 [Page 8] Internet-Draft BFD Stability April 2021 } augment "/rt:routing/rt:control-plane-protocols/" + "rt:control-plane-protocol/bfd:bfd/bfd-mpls:mpls/" + "bfd-mpls:session-groups/bfd-mpls:session-group/" + "bfd-mpls:sessions/bfd-mpls:session-statistics" { leaf lost-packet-count { type yang:counter32; description "Number of BFD packets that were lost without bringing the session down."; } description "Augment the 'bfd' container to add attributes related to BFD stability."; } } 7. IANA Considerations 7.1. The "IETF XML" Registry This document registers one URIs in the "ns" subregistry of the "IETF XML" registry [RFC3688]. Following the format in [RFC3688], the following registration is requested: URI: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-bfd-stability Registrant Contact: The IESG XML: N/A, the requested URI is an XML namespace. 7.2. The "YANG Module Names" Registry This document registers one YANG module in the "YANG Module Names" registry YANG [RFC6020]. Following the format in YANG [RFC6020], the following registrations are requested: name: ietf-bfd-stability namespace: urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:yang:ietf-bfd-stability prefix: bfds reference: RFC XXXX 8. Security Consideration The YANG module specified in this document defines a schema for data that is designed to be accessed via network management protocols such as NETCONF [RFC6241] or RESTCONF [RFC8040]. The lowest NETCONF layer is the secure transport layer, and the mandatory-to-implement secure Mishra, et al. Expires October 14, 2021 [Page 9] Internet-Draft BFD Stability April 2021 transport is Secure Shell (SSH) [RFC6242]. The lowest RESTCONF layer is HTTPS, and the mandatory-to-implement secure transport is TLS [RFC8446]. The NETCONF Access Control Model (NACM) [RFC8341] provides the means to restrict access for particular NETCONF or RESTCONF users to a preconfigured subset of all available NETCONF or RESTCONF protocol operations and content. The YANG module does not define any writeable/creatable/deletable data nodes. The only readable data nodes in YANG module may be considered sensitive or vulnerable in some network environments. It is thus important to control read access (e.g., via get, get-config, or notification) to these data nodes. The model does not define any readable subtrees and data nodes. The YANG module does not define any RPC operations. 9. Contributors Manav Bhatia 10. Acknowledgements Authors would like to thank Nobo Akiya, Jeffery Haas, Dileep Singh, Basil Saji, Sagar Soni, Albert Fu and Mallik Mudigonda who also contributed to this document. 11. References 11.1. Normative References [I-D.ietf-bfd-optimizing-authentication] Jethanandani, M., Mishra, A., Saxena, A., and M. Bhatia, "Optimizing BFD Authentication", draft-ietf-bfd- optimizing-authentication-11 (work in progress), July 2020. [I-D.ietf-bfd-secure-sequence-numbers] Jethanandani, M., Agarwal, S., Mishra, A., Saxena, A., and A. DeKok, "Secure BFD Sequence Numbers", draft-ietf-bfd- secure-sequence-numbers-07 (work in progress), December 2020. Mishra, et al. Expires October 14, 2021 [Page 10] Internet-Draft BFD Stability April 2021 [I-D.ietf-bfd-yang] Rahman, R., Zheng, L., Jethanandani, M., Pallagatti, S., and G. Mirsky, "YANG Data Model for Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD)", draft-ietf-bfd-yang-17 (work in progress), August 2018. [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, . [RFC3688] Mealling, M., "The IETF XML Registry", BCP 81, RFC 3688, DOI 10.17487/RFC3688, January 2004, . [RFC5880] Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD)", RFC 5880, DOI 10.17487/RFC5880, June 2010, . [RFC6020] Bjorklund, M., Ed., "YANG - A Data Modeling Language for the Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)", RFC 6020, DOI 10.17487/RFC6020, October 2010, . [RFC6241] Enns, R., Ed., Bjorklund, M., Ed., Schoenwaelder, J., Ed., and A. Bierman, Ed., "Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)", RFC 6241, DOI 10.17487/RFC6241, June 2011, . [RFC6242] Wasserman, M., "Using the NETCONF Protocol over Secure Shell (SSH)", RFC 6242, DOI 10.17487/RFC6242, June 2011, . [RFC6991] Schoenwaelder, J., Ed., "Common YANG Data Types", RFC 6991, DOI 10.17487/RFC6991, July 2013, . [RFC8040] Bierman, A., Bjorklund, M., and K. Watsen, "RESTCONF Protocol", RFC 8040, DOI 10.17487/RFC8040, January 2017, . [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, May 2017, . Mishra, et al. Expires October 14, 2021 [Page 11] Internet-Draft BFD Stability April 2021 [RFC8341] Bierman, A. and M. Bjorklund, "Network Configuration Access Control Model", STD 91, RFC 8341, DOI 10.17487/RFC8341, March 2018, . [RFC8349] Lhotka, L., Lindem, A., and Y. Qu, "A YANG Data Model for Routing Management (NMDA Version)", RFC 8349, DOI 10.17487/RFC8349, March 2018, . [RFC8446] Rescorla, E., "The Transport Layer Security (TLS) Protocol Version 1.3", RFC 8446, DOI 10.17487/RFC8446, August 2018, . 11.2. Informative References [IEEE802.1ag] Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc., "802.1ag - Connectivity Fault Management", September 2007, . [RFC4656] Shalunov, S., Teitelbaum, B., Karp, A., Boote, J., and M. Zekauskas, "A One-way Active Measurement Protocol (OWAMP)", RFC 4656, DOI 10.17487/RFC4656, September 2006, . Authors' Addresses Ashesh Mishra SES Email: mishra.ashesh@gmail.com Mahesh Jethanandani Kloud Services CA USA Email: mjethanandani@gmail.com Mishra, et al. Expires October 14, 2021 [Page 12] Internet-Draft BFD Stability April 2021 Ankur Saxena Ciena Corporation 3939 North 1st Street San Jose, CA 95134 USA Email: ankurpsaxena@gmail.com URI: www.ciena.com Santosh Pallagatti VMware Bangalore, Karnataka 560103 India Email: santosh.pallagatti@gmail.com Mach Chen Huawei Email: mach.chen@huawei.com Peng Fan China Mobile 32 Xuanwumen West Street Beijing, Beijing China Email: fanp08@gmail.com Mishra, et al. Expires October 14, 2021 [Page 13]