| < draft-boutros-l2vpn-evpn-vpws-00.txt | draft-boutros-l2vpn-evpn-vpws-01.txt > | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| INTERNET-DRAFT Sami Boutros | INTERNET-DRAFT Sami Boutros | |||
| Intended Status: Informational Ali Sajassi | Intended Status: Standard Track Ali Sajassi | |||
| Samer Salam | Samer Salam | |||
| Expires: January 1, 2013 June 30, 2012 | Cisco Systems | |||
| John Drake | ||||
| Juniper Networks | ||||
| Jeff Tantsura | ||||
| Ericsson | ||||
| Expires: August 28, 2013 February 24, 2013 | ||||
| VPWS support in E-VPN | VPWS support in E-VPN | |||
| draft-boutros-l2vpn-evpn-vpws-00.txt | draft-boutros-l2vpn-evpn-vpws-01.txt | |||
| Abstract | Abstract | |||
| This document describes how E-VPN can be used to support virtual | This document describes how E-VPN can be used to support virtual | |||
| private wire service (VPWS) in MPLS/IP networks. E-VPN enables the | private wire service (VPWS) in MPLS/IP networks. E-VPN enables the | |||
| following characteristics for VPWS: 1) active/standby redundancy, 2) | following characteristics for VPWS: active/standby as well as | |||
| active/active multi-homing with flow-based load-balancing, 3) | active/active multi-homing with flow-based load-balancing, eliminates | |||
| eliminates the need for single-segment and multi-segment PW | the need for single-segment and multi-segment PW signaling, and | |||
| signaling, and 4) provides faster convergence using data-plane prefix | provides fast protection using data-plane prefix independent | |||
| independent convergence upon node or link failure in comparison to | convergence upon node or link failure. | |||
| control-plane convergence with PW redundancy. | ||||
| Status of this Memo | Status of this Memo | |||
| This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the | This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the | |||
| provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. | provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. | |||
| Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering | |||
| Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that | Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that | |||
| other groups may also distribute working documents as | other groups may also distribute working documents as | |||
| Internet-Drafts. | Internet-Drafts. | |||
| skipping to change at page 1, line 45 ¶ | skipping to change at page 2, line 7 ¶ | |||
| material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." | material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." | |||
| The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at | The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at | |||
| http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html | http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html | |||
| The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at | The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at | |||
| http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html | http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html | |||
| Copyright and License Notice | Copyright and License Notice | |||
| Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | Copyright (c) 2013 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 | |||
| (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | |||
| publication of this document. Please review these documents | publication of this document. Please review these documents | |||
| carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect | carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect | |||
| to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must | to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must | |||
| include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of | include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of | |||
| the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as | the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as | |||
| described in the Simplified BSD License. | described in the Simplified BSD License. | |||
| Table of Contents | Table of Contents | |||
| 1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | 1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | |||
| 1.1 Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | 1.1 Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 | |||
| 2. BGP Extensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | 2. BGP Extensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | |||
| 3 Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | 3 Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 | |||
| 4 E-VPN Comparison to PW Signaling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | 4 E-VPN Comparison to PW Signaling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | |||
| 5 VPWS with multiple sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | 5 ESI Bandwidth Attribute . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 | |||
| 6 Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | 6 VPWS with multiple sites . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | |||
| 7 IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | 7 Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | |||
| 8 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | 8 IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | |||
| 8.1 Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | 9 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | |||
| 8.2 Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | 9.1 Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | |||
| Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 | 9.2 Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | |||
| Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 | ||||
| 1 Introduction | 1 Introduction | |||
| This document describes how E-VPN can be used to support virtual | This document describes how E-VPN can be used to support virtual | |||
| private wire service (VPWS) in MPLS/IP networks. The use of E-VPN | private wire service (VPWS) in MPLS/IP networks. The use of E-VPN | |||
| mechanisms for VPWS introduces all the benefits of E-VPN to p2p | mechanisms for VPWS applies the benefits of E-VPN to p2p services. | |||
| services. These benefits include active/standby AC redundancy, | These benefits include active/standby AC redundancy as well as | |||
| active/active multi-homing with flow-based load-balancing. | active/active multi-homing with flow-based load-balancing. | |||
| Furthermore, the use of E-VPN for VPWS eliminates the need for | Furthermore, the use of E-VPN for VPWS eliminates the need for | |||
| signaling single-segment and multi-segment PWs for p2p Ethernet | signaling single-segment and multi-segment PWs for p2p Ethernet | |||
| services. | services. | |||
| [E-VPN] has the ability to forward customer traffic to/from a given | [E-VPN] has the ability to forward customer traffic to/from a given | |||
| customer Attachment Circuit (aka Ethernet AD route) without any MAC | customer Attachment Circuit (AC), aka Ethernet Segment in E-VPN | |||
| lookup. This capability is ideal in providing P2P services (aka VPWS | terminology, without any MAC lookup. This capability is ideal in | |||
| services). [MEF] defines EVPL service as P2P service between a pair | providing p2p services (aka VPWS services). [MEF] defines EVPL | |||
| of ACs (designated by VLANs). EVPL can be considered as a VPWS with | service as p2p service between a pair of ACs (designated by VLANs). | |||
| only two ACs. In delivering an EVPL service, traffic forwarding | EVPL can be considered as a VPWS with only two ACs. In delivering an | |||
| capability of E-VPN between a pair of Ethernet AD routes is used; | EVPL service, the traffic forwarding capability of E-VPN using only a | |||
| whereas, for more general VPWS, traffic forwarding capability of E- | pair of Ethernet AD routes is used; whereas, for more general VPWS, | |||
| VPN among a group of Ethernet AD routes (one Ether AD route per | traffic forwarding capability of E-VPN using a group of Ethernet AD | |||
| AC/site) is used. Since in VPWS services, the traffic from an | routes (one Ethernet AD route per AC/segment) is used. Since in VPWS | |||
| originating Ether AD route can go only to a single destination Ether | services, the traffic from an originating Ethernet Segment can go | |||
| AD route, no MAC lookup is needed and MPLS label associated with the | only to a single destination Ethernet Segment, no MAC lookup is | |||
| destination Ether AD route can be used in forwarding user traffic to | needed and the MPLS label associated with the per-EVI Ethernet AD | |||
| the destination AC. | route can be used in forwarding user traffic to the destination AC. | |||
| In current PW redundancy mechanisms, convergence time is a function | In current PW redundancy mechanisms, convergence time is a function | |||
| of control plane convergence characteristics. However, with E-VPN it | of control plane convergence characteristics. However, with E-VPN it | |||
| is possible to attain faster convergence through the use of data- | is possible to attain faster convergence through the use of data- | |||
| plane prefix independent convergence upon node or link failure. | plane prefix independent convergence upon node or link failure. | |||
| This document proposes the use of the Ethernet AD route to signal | This document proposes the use of the Ethernet AD route to signal | |||
| labels for P2P Ethernet services. As with E-VPN, the Ethernet Segment | labels for P2P Ethernet services. As with E-VPN, the Ethernet Segment | |||
| route can be used to synchronize LACP and other state between the PEs | route can be used to synchronize state between the PEs attached to | |||
| attached to the same multi-homed device. | the same multi-homed Segment. | |||
| 1.1 Terminology | 1.1 Terminology | |||
| The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", | The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", | |||
| "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this | "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this | |||
| document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. | document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. | |||
| MAC: Media Access Control | MAC: Media Access Control | |||
| MPLS: Multi Protocol Label Switching. | MPLS: Multi Protocol Label Switching. | |||
| skipping to change at page 4, line 17 ¶ | skipping to change at page 4, line 17 ¶ | |||
| PE: Provide Edge Node. | PE: Provide Edge Node. | |||
| CE: Customer Edge device e.g., host or router or switch. | CE: Customer Edge device e.g., host or router or switch. | |||
| EVI: E-VPN Instance. | EVI: E-VPN Instance. | |||
| 2. BGP Extensions | 2. BGP Extensions | |||
| [E-VPN] defines a new BGP NLRI for advertising different route types | [E-VPN] defines a new BGP NLRI for advertising different route types | |||
| for E-VPN operation. This document does not define any new BGP | for E-VPN operation. This document does not define any new BGP | |||
| messages, but rather repurposes one of the routes as described next. | messages, but rather re-purposes one of the routes as described next. | |||
| This document proposes the use of the Ethernet AD route to signal P2P | This document proposes the use of the per EVI Ethernet AD route to | |||
| services. The Ethernet Segment Identifier field is set to the ESI of | signal P2P services. The Ethernet Segment Identifier field is set to | |||
| the attachment circuit of the VPWS service instance. The Ethernet Tag | the ESI of the attachment circuit of the VPWS service instance. The | |||
| field is set to 0 in the case of an Ethernet Private Wire service, | Ethernet Tag field is set to 0 in the case of an Ethernet Private | |||
| and to the VLAN identifier associated with the service for Ethernet | Wire service, and to the VLAN identifier associated with the service | |||
| Virtual Private Wire service. The route is associated with a Route- | for Ethernet Virtual Private Wire service. The route is associated | |||
| Target (RT) extended community attribute that identifies the service | with a Route-Target (RT) extended community attribute that identifies | |||
| instance (together with the Ethernet Tag field when non-zero | the service instance (together with the Ethernet Tag field when non- | |||
| zero). | ||||
| 3 Operation | 3 Operation | |||
| The following figure shows an example of a P2P service deployed with | The following figure shows an example of a P2P service deployed with | |||
| E-VPN. | E-VPN. | |||
| Ethernet Ethernet | Ethernet Ethernet | |||
| Native |<---------E-VPN Instance------------>| Native | Native |<---------E-VPN Instance------------>| Native | |||
| Service | | Service | Service | | Service | |||
| (AC) | |<-PSN1->| |<-PSN2->| | (AC) | (AC) | |<-PSN1->| |<-PSN2->| | (AC) | |||
| | V V V V V V | | | V V V V V V | | |||
| skipping to change at page 5, line 13 ¶ | skipping to change at page 5, line 13 ¶ | |||
| |<---------------- Emulated Service -------------------->| | |<---------------- Emulated Service -------------------->| | |||
| iBGP sessions will be established between PE1, PE2, ASBR1 and ASBR3, | iBGP sessions will be established between PE1, PE2, ASBR1 and ASBR3, | |||
| possibly via a BGP route-reflector. Similarly, iBGP sessions will be | possibly via a BGP route-reflector. Similarly, iBGP sessions will be | |||
| established between PE3, PE4, ASBR2 and ASBR4. eBGP sessions will be | established between PE3, PE4, ASBR2 and ASBR4. eBGP sessions will be | |||
| established among ASBR1, ASBR2, ASBR3, and ASBR4. | established among ASBR1, ASBR2, ASBR3, and ASBR4. | |||
| All PEs and ASBRs are enabled for the E-VPN SAFI, and exchange E-VPN | All PEs and ASBRs are enabled for the E-VPN SAFI, and exchange E-VPN | |||
| Ethernet A-D routes - one route per AC. The ASBRs re-advertise the | Ethernet A-D routes - one route per AC. The ASBRs re-advertise the | |||
| Ethernet A-D routes with Next Hop attribute set to their IP | Ethernet A-D routes with Next Hop attribute set to their IP | |||
| addresses. The link between the CE and the PE is an C-TAG or S-TAG | addresses. The link between the CE and the PE is either a C-tagged or | |||
| interface as described in [802.1Q] that can carry a single vlan tag | S-tagged interface, as described in [802.1Q], that can carry a single | |||
| or two vlan tags nested in each other. This interface is setup as a | VLAN tag or two nested VLAN tags. This interface is set up as a trunk | |||
| trunk with multiple VLANs. | with multiple VLANs. | |||
| A VPWS with multiple sites or multiple EVPL services on the same CE | A VPWS with multiple sites or multiple EVPL services on the same CE | |||
| port can be included in one EVI between 2 or more PEs. An Ethernet | port can be included in one EVI between 2 or more PEs. An Ethernet | |||
| Tag corresponding to each P2P connection and known to both PEs is | Tag corresponding to each P2P connection and known to both PEs is | |||
| used to identify the services multiplexed in the same EVI. For CE | used to identify the services multiplexed in the same EVI. | |||
| multi-homing, the Ethernet AD Route encodes the ESI associated with | ||||
| the CE. This allows flow-based load-balancing of traffic between PEs | For CE multi-homing, the Ethernet AD Route encodes the ESI associated | |||
| connected to the same multi-homed CE. The VPN ID MUST be the same on | with the CE. This allows flow-based load-balancing of traffic between | |||
| both PEs attached to the site. The Ethernet Segment route may be used | PEs connected to the same multi-homed CE. The VPN ID MUST be the same | |||
| too, for discovery of multi-homed CEs. In all cases traffic follows | on both PEs attached to the site. The Ethernet Segment route may be | |||
| the transport paths, which may be asymmetric. | used too, for discovery of multi-homed CEs. In all cases traffic | |||
| follows the transport paths, which may be asymmetric. | ||||
| 4 E-VPN Comparison to PW Signaling | 4 E-VPN Comparison to PW Signaling | |||
| In E-VPN, service endpoint discovery and label signaling are done | In E-VPN, service endpoint discovery and label signaling are done | |||
| concurrently using BGP. Whereas, with VPWS based on [RFC4448], label | concurrently using BGP. Whereas, with VPWS based on [RFC4448], label | |||
| signaling is done via LDP and service endpoint discovery is either | signaling is done via LDP and service endpoint discovery is either | |||
| through manual provisioning or through BGP. In VPWS, redundancy is | through manual provisioning or through BGP. In VPWS, redundancy is | |||
| limited to Active/Standby mode, while with E-VPN both Active/Active | limited to Active/Standby mode, while with E-VPN both Active/Active | |||
| and Active/Standby redundancy modes can be supported. In VPWS, backup | and Active/Standby redundancy modes can be supported. In VPWS, backup | |||
| PWs are not used to carry traffic, while E-VPN traffic can be load- | PWs are not used to carry traffic, while E-VPN traffic can be load- | |||
| balanced among primary and secondary PEs. On link or node failure, E- | balanced among primary and secondary PEs. On link or node failure, E- | |||
| VPN can trigger failover with the withdrawal of a single BGP route | VPN can trigger failover with the withdrawal of a single BGP route | |||
| per service, whereas with VPWS PW redundancy, the failover sequence | per service, whereas with VPWS PW redundancy, the failover sequence | |||
| requires exchange of two control plane messages: one message to | requires exchange of two control plane messages: one message to | |||
| deactivate the group of primary PWs and a second message to activate | deactivate the group of primary PWs and a second message to activate | |||
| the group of backup PWs associated with the access link. Finally, E- | the group of backup PWs associated with the access link. Finally, E- | |||
| VPN may employ data plane local repair mechanisms not available in | VPN may employ data plane local repair mechanisms not available in | |||
| VPWS. | VPWS. | |||
| 5 VPWS with multiple sites | 5 ESI Bandwidth Attribute | |||
| The ESI Bandwidth Attribute is a new optional BGP attribute that will | ||||
| be associated with the Ethernet AD route used to realize the EVPL | ||||
| services. | ||||
| +---------------------------------------+ | ||||
| | Type (2 octets) | | ||||
| +---------------------------------------+ | ||||
| | Length (2 octets) | | ||||
| +---------------------------------------+ | ||||
| | Flags (1 Octet) | | ||||
| +---------------------------------------+ | ||||
| | Reserved=0(1 Octet) | | ||||
| +---------------------------------------+ | ||||
| | Reverse SENDER_TSPEC | | ||||
| +---------------------------------------+ | ||||
| The content of the SENDER_TSPEC are as defined in [RFC 2210] section | ||||
| 3.1. | ||||
| When a PE receives this attribute for a given EVPL it MUST request | ||||
| the appropriate resources described in the SENDER_TSPEC from the PSN | ||||
| towards the other EVPL service destination PE originating the | ||||
| message. When resources are allocated from the PSN for a given EVPL | ||||
| service, then the PSN SHOULD account for the Bandwidth requested by | ||||
| this EVPL service. | ||||
| In the case where PSN resources are not available, the PE receiving | ||||
| this attribute MUST re-send its local Ethernet AD routes for this | ||||
| EVPL service with the ESI Bandwidth attribute and with the Flags set | ||||
| to 1 "PSN Resources Unavailable". | ||||
| 6 VPWS with multiple sites | ||||
| The future revision of this draft will describe how a VPWS among | The future revision of this draft will describe how a VPWS among | |||
| multiple sites (full mesh of P2P connections - one per pair of sites) | multiple sites (full mesh of P2P connections - one per pair of sites) | |||
| can be setup automatically without any explicit provisioning of P2P | can be setup automatically without any explicit provisioning of P2P | |||
| connections among the sites. | connections among the sites. | |||
| 6 Security Considerations | 7 Security Considerations | |||
| This document does not introduce any additional security constraints. | This document does not introduce any additional security constraints. | |||
| 7 IANA Considerations | 8 IANA Considerations | |||
| TBD | TBD | |||
| 8 References | 9 References | |||
| 8.1 Normative References | 9.1 Normative References | |||
| [KEYWORDS] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate | [KEYWORDS] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate | |||
| Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. | Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. | |||
| 8.2 Informative References | [RFC 2210] Wroclawski, J. "The Use of RSVP with IETF Integrated | |||
| Services", RFC 2210, September 1997 | ||||
| 9.2 Informative References | ||||
| [EVPN-REQ] A. Sajassi, R. Aggarwal et. al., "Requirements for | [EVPN-REQ] A. Sajassi, R. Aggarwal et. al., "Requirements for | |||
| Ethernet VPN", draft-ietf-l2vpn-evpn-req-00.txt. | Ethernet VPN", draft-ietf-l2vpn-evpn-req-00.txt. | |||
| [EVPN] A. Sajassi, R. Aggarwal et. al., "BGP MPLS Based Ethernet | [EVPN] A. Sajassi, R. Aggarwal et. al., "BGP MPLS Based Ethernet | |||
| VPN", draft-ietf-l2vpn-evpn-00.txt. | VPN", draft-ietf-l2vpn-evpn-00.txt. | |||
| Authors' Addresses | Authors' Addresses | |||
| Sami Boutros | Sami Boutros | |||
| skipping to change at line 254 ¶ | skipping to change at page 7, line 35 ¶ | |||
| Cisco | Cisco | |||
| 170 West Tasman Drive | 170 West Tasman Drive | |||
| San Jose, CA 95134, US | San Jose, CA 95134, US | |||
| Email: sajassi@cisco.com | Email: sajassi@cisco.com | |||
| Samer Salam | Samer Salam | |||
| Cisco | Cisco | |||
| 595 Burrard Street, Suite 2123 | 595 Burrard Street, Suite 2123 | |||
| Vancouver, BC V7X 1J1, Canada | Vancouver, BC V7X 1J1, Canada | |||
| Email: ssalam@cisco.com | Email: ssalam@cisco.com | |||
| John Drake | ||||
| Juniper Networks | ||||
| Email: jdrake@juniper.net | ||||
| Jeff Tantsura | ||||
| Ericsson | ||||
| Email: jeff.tantsura@ericsson.com | ||||
| End of changes. 20 change blocks. | ||||
| 60 lines changed or deleted | 102 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/ | ||||