idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-detnet-mpls-over-udp-ip-07.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (October 11, 2020) is 1290 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) == Outdated reference: A later version (-13) exists of draft-ietf-detnet-mpls-12 == Outdated reference: A later version (-16) exists of draft-ietf-detnet-security-12 Summary: 0 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 3 warnings (==), 1 comment (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 DetNet B. Varga, Ed. 3 Internet-Draft J. Farkas 4 Intended status: Standards Track Ericsson 5 Expires: April 14, 2021 L. Berger 6 LabN Consulting, L.L.C. 7 A. Malis 8 Malis Consulting 9 S. Bryant 10 Futurewei Technologies 11 October 11, 2020 13 DetNet Data Plane: MPLS over UDP/IP 14 draft-ietf-detnet-mpls-over-udp-ip-07 16 Abstract 18 This document specifies the MPLS Deterministic Networking data plane 19 operation and encapsulation over an IP network. The approach is 20 modeled on the operation of MPLS and over UDP/IP packet switched 21 networks. 23 Status of This Memo 25 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 26 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 28 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 29 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 30 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 31 Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 33 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 34 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 35 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 36 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 38 This Internet-Draft will expire on April 14, 2021. 40 Copyright Notice 42 Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 43 document authors. All rights reserved. 45 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 46 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 47 (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 48 publication of this document. Please review these documents 49 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 50 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 51 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 52 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 53 described in the Simplified BSD License. 55 Table of Contents 57 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 58 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 59 2.1. Terms Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 60 2.2. Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 61 2.3. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 62 3. DetNet MPLS Operation over DetNet 63 IP PSNs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 64 4. DetNet Data Plane Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 65 5. Management and Control Information Summary . . . . . . . . . 6 66 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 67 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 68 8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 69 9. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 70 10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 71 10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 72 10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 73 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 75 1. Introduction 77 Deterministic Networking (DetNet) is a service that can be offered by 78 a network to DetNet flows. DetNet provides these flows extremely low 79 packet loss rates and assured maximum end-to-end delivery latency. 80 General background and concepts of DetNet can be found in [RFC8655]. 82 To carry DetNet MPLS flows with full functionality at the DetNet 83 layer over an IP network, the following components are required 84 (these are a subset of the requirements for MPLS encapsulation listed 85 in [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls]): 87 1. A method for identifying DetNet flows to the processing element. 89 2. A method for carrying the DetNet sequence number. 91 3. A method for distinguishing DetNet OAM packets from DetNet data 92 packets. 94 4. A method for carrying queuing and forwarding indication. 96 These requirements are satisfied by the DetNet over MPLS 97 Encapsulation described in [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls] and they are partly 98 satisfied (i.e., IP flows can be identified however no DetNet 99 sequence number is carried) by the DetNet IP data plane defined in 100 [I-D.ietf-detnet-ip] 102 This document specifies use of the MPLS DetNet encapsulation over an 103 IP network. The approach is modeled on the operation of MPLS over an 104 IP Packet Switched Network (PSN) [RFC7510]. It maps the MPLS data 105 plane encapsulation described in [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls] to the DetNet 106 IP data plane defined in [I-D.ietf-detnet-ip]. 108 As specified in [RFC7510]: "MPLS-in-UDP MUST NOT be used over the 109 general Internet, or over non-cooperating network operators, to carry 110 traffic that is not congestion controlled." This does apply to 111 DetNet networks as this document focuses on solutions for networks 112 that are under a single administrative control or within a closed 113 group of administrative control. 115 2. Terminology 117 2.1. Terms Used in This Document 119 This document uses the terminology established in the DetNet 120 architecture [RFC8655], and the reader is assumed to be familiar with 121 that document and its terminology. 123 2.2. Abbreviations 125 The following abbreviations are used in this document: 127 d-CW A DetNet Control Word (d-CW) is used for sequencing and 128 identifying duplicate packets of a DetNet flow at the 129 DetNet service sub-layer. 131 DetNet Deterministic Networking. 133 A-Label A special case of an S-Label, whose properties are 134 known only at the aggregation and deaggregation end- 135 points. 137 F-Label A Detnet "forwarding" label that identifies the LSP 138 used to forward a DetNet flow across an MPLS PSN, e.g., 139 a hop-by-hop label used between label switching 140 routers. 142 MPLS Multiprotocol Label Switching. 144 OAM Operations, Administration, and Maintenance. 146 PEF Packet Elimination Function. 148 POF Packet Ordering Function. 150 PREOF Packet Replication, Elimination and Ordering Functions. 152 PRF Packet Replication Function. 154 PSN Packet Switched Network. 156 S-Label A DetNet "service" label that is used between DetNet 157 nodes that also implement the DetNet service sub-layer 158 functions. An S-Label is also used to identify a 159 DetNet flow at DetNet service sub-layer. 161 2.3. Requirements Language 163 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 164 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and 165 "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 166 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all 167 capitals, as shown here. 169 3. DetNet MPLS Operation over DetNet IP PSNs 171 This document builds on the specification of MPLS over UDP defined in 172 [RFC7510]. It may replace partly or entirely the F-Label(s) used in 173 [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls] with UDP and IP headers. The UDP and IP 174 header information is used to identify DetNet flows, including member 175 flows, per [I-D.ietf-detnet-ip]. The resulting encapsulation is 176 shown in Figure 1. There may be zero or more F-label(s) between the 177 S-label and the UDP header. 179 Note that this encapsulation works equally well with IPv4, IPv6, and 180 IPv6-based Segment Routing [I-D.ietf-6man-segment-routing-header]. 182 +---------------------------------+ 183 | | 184 | DetNet App-Flow | 185 | Payload Packet | 186 | | 187 +---------------------------------+ <--\ 188 | DetNet Control Word | | 189 +---------------------------------+ +--> DetNet data plane 190 | S-Label | | MPLS encapsulation 191 +---------------------------------+ | 192 | [ F-label(s) ] | | 193 +---------------------------------+ <--+ 194 | UDP Header | | 195 +---------------------------------+ +--> DetNet data plane 196 | IP Header | | IP encapsulation 197 +---------------------------------+ <--/ 198 | Data-Link | 199 +---------------------------------+ 200 | Physical | 201 +---------------------------------+ 203 Figure 1: UDP/IP Encapsulation of DetNet MPLS 205 S-Labels, A-Labels (when present), d-CW and zero or more F-Labels are 206 used as defined in [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls] and are not modified by 207 this document. 209 4. DetNet Data Plane Procedures 211 To support outgoing DetNet MPLS over UDP encapsulation, an 212 implementation MUST support the provisioning of UDP and IP header 213 information in addition or in place of F-Label(s). Note, when PRF is 214 performed at the MPLS service sub-layer, there will be multiple 215 member flows, and each member flow will require the provisioning of 216 their own UDP and IP header information. The headers for each 217 outgoing packet MUST be formatted according to the configuration 218 information and as defined in [RFC7510], and the UDP Source Port 219 value MUST be set to uniquely identify the DetNet flow. The packet 220 MUST then be handled as a DetNet IP packet, per [I-D.ietf-detnet-ip]. 221 This includes QoS related traffic treatment. 223 To support the receive processing defined in this document, an 224 implementation MUST also support the provisioning of received UDP and 225 IP header information. The provisioned information MUST be used to 226 identify incoming app-flows based on the combination of S-Label and 227 incoming encapsulation header information. Normal receive processing 228 as defined in [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls], including PEF and POF, can then 229 take place. 231 5. Management and Control Information Summary 233 The following summarizes the set of information that is needed to 234 configure DetNet MPLS over UDP/IP: 236 o Label information (A-labels, S-labels and F-labels) to be mapped 237 to UDP/IP flow. Note that for example, a single S-Label can map 238 to multiple sets of UDP/IP information when PREOF is used. 240 o IPv4 or IPv6 source address field. 242 o IPv4 or IPv6 destination address field. 244 o DSCP Field in either IPv4 Type of Service or IPv6 Traffic Class 245 Fields. 247 o UDP Source Port. 249 o UDP Destination Port. 251 This information MUST be provisioned per DetNet flow via 252 configuration, e.g., via the controller [RFC8655] or management 253 plane. 255 It is the responsibility of the DetNet controller plane to properly 256 provision both flow identification information and the flow specific 257 resources needed to provide the traffic treatment needed to meet each 258 flow's service requirements. This applies for aggregated and 259 individual flows. 261 Note: In the presence of network (and port) address translation 262 devices/functions it would be up to the controller plane to determine 263 the appropriate information to ensure proper mapping at the sender/ 264 receiver. 266 6. Security Considerations 268 The solution defined in this document reuses mechanisms specified in 269 other documents, and the security considerations in those documents 270 apply equally to this document. Notably [RFC7510], as this document 271 is primarily an application of MPLS-in-UDP. Additionally, the 272 security considerations of DetNet in general are discussed in 273 [RFC8655] and [I-D.ietf-detnet-security]. Finally,MPLS and IP 274 specific security considerations are described in 276 [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls] and [I-D.ietf-detnet-ip]. This draft does not 277 have additional security considerations. 279 7. IANA Considerations 281 This document makes no IANA requests. 283 8. Acknowledgements 285 The authors wish to thank Pat Thaler, Norman Finn, Loa Anderson, 286 David Black, Rodney Cummings, Ethan Grossman, Tal Mizrahi, David 287 Mozes, Craig Gunther, George Swallow, Yuanlong Jiang and Carlos J. 288 Bernardos for their various contributions to this work. 290 9. Contributors 292 This document is derived from an earlier draft that was edited by 293 Jouni Korhonen (jouni.nospam@gmail.com) and as such, he contributed 294 to and authored text in this document. 296 10. References 298 10.1. Normative References 300 [I-D.ietf-detnet-ip] 301 Varga, B., Farkas, J., Berger, L., Fedyk, D., and S. 302 Bryant, "DetNet Data Plane: IP", draft-ietf-detnet-ip-07 303 (work in progress), July 2020. 305 [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls] 306 Varga, B., Farkas, J., Berger, L., Malis, A., Bryant, S., 307 and J. Korhonen, "DetNet Data Plane: MPLS", draft-ietf- 308 detnet-mpls-12 (work in progress), September 2020. 310 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 311 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, 312 DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, 313 . 315 [RFC7510] Xu, X., Sheth, N., Yong, L., Callon, R., and D. Black, 316 "Encapsulating MPLS in UDP", RFC 7510, 317 DOI 10.17487/RFC7510, April 2015, 318 . 320 [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 321 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, 322 May 2017, . 324 10.2. Informative References 326 [I-D.ietf-6man-segment-routing-header] 327 Filsfils, C., Dukes, D., Previdi, S., Leddy, J., 328 Matsushima, S., and D. Voyer, "IPv6 Segment Routing Header 329 (SRH)", draft-ietf-6man-segment-routing-header-26 (work in 330 progress), October 2019. 332 [I-D.ietf-detnet-security] 333 Grossman, E., Mizrahi, T., and A. Hacker, "Deterministic 334 Networking (DetNet) Security Considerations", draft-ietf- 335 detnet-security-12 (work in progress), October 2020. 337 [RFC8655] Finn, N., Thubert, P., Varga, B., and J. Farkas, 338 "Deterministic Networking Architecture", RFC 8655, 339 DOI 10.17487/RFC8655, October 2019, 340 . 342 Authors' Addresses 344 Balazs Varga (editor) 345 Ericsson 346 Magyar Tudosok krt. 11. 347 Budapest 1117 348 Hungary 350 Email: balazs.a.varga@ericsson.com 352 Janos Farkas 353 Ericsson 354 Magyar Tudosok krt. 11. 355 Budapest 1117 356 Hungary 358 Email: janos.farkas@ericsson.com 360 Lou Berger 361 LabN Consulting, L.L.C. 363 Email: lberger@labn.net 365 Andrew G. Malis 366 Malis Consulting 368 Email: agmalis@gmail.com 369 Stewart Bryant 370 Futurewei Technologies 372 Email: stewart.bryant@gmail.com