< draft-bernardos-sfc-nsh-distributed-control-03.txt   draft-bernardos-sfc-nsh-distributed-control-04.txt >
SFC WG CJ. Bernardos SFC WG CJ. Bernardos
Internet-Draft UC3M Internet-Draft UC3M
Intended status: Experimental A. Mourad Intended status: Experimental A. Mourad
Expires: March 14, 2022 InterDigital Expires: 22 September 2022 InterDigital
September 10, 2021 21 March 2022
NSH extensions for local distributed SFC control NSH extensions for local distributed SFC control
draft-bernardos-sfc-nsh-distributed-control-03 draft-bernardos-sfc-nsh-distributed-control-04
Abstract Abstract
Service function chaining (SFC) allows the instantiation of an Service function chaining (SFC) allows the instantiation of an
ordered set of service functions and subsequent "steering" of traffic ordered set of service functions and subsequent "steering" of traffic
through them. In order to set up and maintain SFC instances, a through them. In order to set up and maintain SFC instances, a
control plane is required, which typically is centralized. In control plane is required, which typically is centralized. In
certain environments, such as fog computing ones, such centralized certain environments, such as fog computing ones, such centralized
control might not be feasible, calling for distributed SFC control control might not be feasible, calling for distributed SFC control
solutions. This document specifies several NSH extensions to provide solutions. This document specifies several NSH extensions to provide
skipping to change at page 1, line 38 skipping to change at page 1, line 38
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on March 14, 2022. This Internet-Draft will expire on 22 September 2022.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2022 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
publication of this document. Please review these documents Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Local SFC control signaling extending NSH . . . . . . . . . . 5 3. Local SFC control signaling extending NSH . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 6. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
skipping to change at page 5, line 6 skipping to change at page 5, line 4
Compared to existing SFC controllers/orchestrators, which manage Compared to existing SFC controllers/orchestrators, which manage
multiple SFCs instantiated over a common infrastructure, pseudo multiple SFCs instantiated over a common infrastructure, pseudo
controllers are constrained to service specific lifecycle controllers are constrained to service specific lifecycle
management. management.
SFC Central Controller (C-CTRL): central control plane logical SFC Central Controller (C-CTRL): central control plane logical
entity in charge of configuring and managing the SFC components entity in charge of configuring and managing the SFC components
[RFC7665]. [RFC7665].
3. Local SFC control signaling extending NSH 3. Local SFC control signaling extending NSH
o o
node B | node B |
+--------|-+ F1+-.-.-+F2+-.-.-+F3 SFC +--------|-+ F1+-·-·-+F2+-·-·-+F3 SFC
| ........ | | ········ |
| |P-CTRL| | | |P-CTRL| |
| ........ | | ········ |
+-.-.-+F2 | +-·-·-+F2 |
o / +---+------+ ________ o / +---+------+ ________
| . . _( )_ | · · _( )_
+--------|-+ / / _( +--------+ )_ +--------|-+ / / _( +--------+ )_
| | . . (_ | C-CTRL | _) | | · · (_ | C-CTRL | _)
| | / / (_+--------+_) | | / / (_+--------+_)
| |. | (________) | | (________)
| +-.-./ . | +-·-·/ ·
| F1 | | ( (oo) ) | F1 | | ( (oo) )
+----------+ . o /\ ........ +----------+ · o /\ ········
node A | | /\/\ |P-CTRL| node A | | /\/\ |P-CTRL|
+-----.--|-+ /\/\/\........ +-----·--|-+ /\/\/\········
| | | /\/ \/\ F3 | | | /\/ \/\ F3
| . | node D | · | node D
| | | | | |
| + | | + |
| | | |
+----------+ +----------+
node C node C
Figure 1: Example SFC scenario Figure 1: Example SFC scenario
Figure 1 shows an exemplary scenario to show the use of the new NSH Figure 1 shows an exemplary scenario to show the use of the new NSH
extensions. In this scenario, there is no mobility, so nodes are not extensions. In this scenario, there is no mobility, so nodes are not
moving out of radio coverage. In this scenario, at a given point in moving out of radio coverage. In this scenario, at a given point in
time the service demands increase, which requires F2 (running at node time the service demands increase, which requires F2 (running at node
B) and F3 (running at node D) to have more resources allocated, as B) and F3 (running at node D) to have more resources allocated, as
otherwise the service would not meet the required SLA. This is otherwise the service would not meet the required SLA. This is
detected by the P-CTRL through service-specific local OAM monitoring. detected by the P-CTRL through service-specific local OAM monitoring.
Once detected the need of scaling up the resources at nodes B and D, Once detected the need of scaling up the resources at nodes B and D,
P-CTRL notifies this through in-band signaling in the actual data P-CTRL notifies this through in-band signaling in the actual data
skipping to change at page 7, line 4 skipping to change at page 7, line 4
The format of the new variable-length field for NS lifecycle The format of the new variable-length field for NS lifecycle
management commands is shown next: management commands is shown next:
0 1 2 3 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 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| NS lifecycle cmd | Type |U| Length | | NS lifecycle cmd | Type |U| Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Variable-Length Metadata | | Variable-Length Metadata |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
o NS lifecycle cmd: the NS lifecycle management command. This is a * NS lifecycle cmd: the NS lifecycle management command. This is a
non-limiting list of the commands: non-limiting list of the commands:
* Scale in. - Scale in.
* Scale out. - Scale out.
* Scale up. - Scale up.
* Scale down. - Scale down.
* Instantiate function. - Instantiate function.
* Terminate function. - Terminate function.
* Configure function. - Configure function.
* Upgrade function. - Upgrade function.
* Update function. - Update function.
* Update function. - Update function.
* Onboard VNFD. - Onboard VNFD.
* Onboard OAMD. - Onboard OAMD.
* Sync state. - Sync state.
* Request to overcome CTRL. - Request to overcome CTRL.
* CTRL activation. - CTRL activation.
o Type: indicates the explicit type of command carried out. This * Type: indicates the explicit type of command carried out. This
depends on the orchestration framework implementation. depends on the orchestration framework implementation.
o Unassigned bit: one unassigned bit is available for future use. * Unassigned bit: one unassigned bit is available for future use.
This bit MUST NOT be set, and it MUST be ignored on receipt. This bit MUST NOT be set, and it MUST be ignored on receipt.
o Unassigned bit: one unassigned bit is available for future use. * Unassigned bit: one unassigned bit is available for future use.
This bit MUST NOT be set, and it MUST be ignored on receipt. This bit MUST NOT be set, and it MUST be ignored on receipt.
4. IANA Considerations 4. IANA Considerations
N/A. N/A.
5. Security Considerations 5. Security Considerations
TBD. TBD.
skipping to change at page 8, line 20 skipping to change at page 8, line 20
The work in this draft has been partially supported by the H2020 The work in this draft has been partially supported by the H2020
5Growth (Grant 856709) and 5G-DIVE projects (Grant 859881). 5Growth (Grant 856709) and 5G-DIVE projects (Grant 859881).
7. References 7. References
7.1. Normative References 7.1. Normative References
[I-D.bernardos-sfc-distributed-control] [I-D.bernardos-sfc-distributed-control]
Bernardos, C. J. and A. Mourad, "Distributed SFC control Bernardos, C. J. and A. Mourad, "Distributed SFC control
for fog environments", draft-bernardos-sfc-distributed- for fog environments", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft,
control-04 (work in progress), July 2021. draft-bernardos-sfc-distributed-control-05, 27 January
2022, <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-bernardos-
sfc-distributed-control-05.txt>.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
7.2. Informative References 7.2. Informative References
[I-D.bernardos-sfc-fog-ran] [I-D.bernardos-sfc-fog-ran]
Bernardos, C. J., Rahman, A., and A. Mourad, "Service Bernardos, C. J. and A. Mourad, "Service Function Chaining
Function Chaining Use Cases in Fog RAN", draft-bernardos- Use Cases in Fog RAN", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft,
sfc-fog-ran-09 (work in progress), March 2021. draft-bernardos-sfc-fog-ran-10, 22 October 2021,
<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-bernardos-sfc-fog-
ran-10.txt>.
[RFC7665] Halpern, J., Ed. and C. Pignataro, Ed., "Service Function [RFC7665] Halpern, J., Ed. and C. Pignataro, Ed., "Service Function
Chaining (SFC) Architecture", RFC 7665, Chaining (SFC) Architecture", RFC 7665,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7665, October 2015, DOI 10.17487/RFC7665, October 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7665>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7665>.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Carlos J. Bernardos Carlos J. Bernardos
Universidad Carlos III de Madrid Universidad Carlos III de Madrid
Av. Universidad, 30 Av. Universidad, 30
Leganes, Madrid 28911 28911 Leganes, Madrid
Spain Spain
Phone: +34 91624 6236 Phone: +34 91624 6236
Email: cjbc@it.uc3m.es Email: cjbc@it.uc3m.es
URI: http://www.it.uc3m.es/cjbc/ URI: http://www.it.uc3m.es/cjbc/
Alain Mourad Alain Mourad
InterDigital Europe InterDigital Europe
Email: Alain.Mourad@InterDigital.com Email: Alain.Mourad@InterDigital.com
URI: http://www.InterDigital.com/ URI: http://www.InterDigital.com/
 End of changes. 41 change blocks. 
54 lines changed or deleted 55 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/