idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-detnet-mpls-over-udp-ip-08.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 (December 14, 2020) is 1229 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(See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) == Outdated reference: A later version (-16) exists of draft-ietf-detnet-security-12 Summary: 0 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 2 warnings (==), 1 comment (--).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: June 17, 2021 L. Berger 6 LabN Consulting, L.L.C. 7 A. Malis 8 Malis Consulting 9 S. Bryant 10 Futurewei Technologies 11 December 14, 2020 13 DetNet Data Plane: MPLS over UDP/IP 14 draft-ietf-detnet-mpls-over-udp-ip-08 16 Abstract 18 This document specifies the MPLS Deterministic Networking data plane 19 operation and encapsulation over an IP network. The approach is 20 based on the operation of MPLS-in-UDP technology. 22 Status of This Memo 24 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 25 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 27 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 28 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 29 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 30 Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 32 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 33 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 34 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 35 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 37 This Internet-Draft will expire on June 17, 2021. 39 Copyright Notice 41 Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 42 document authors. All rights reserved. 44 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 45 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 46 (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 47 publication of this document. Please review these documents 48 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 49 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 50 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 51 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 52 described in the Simplified BSD License. 54 Table of Contents 56 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 57 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 58 2.1. Terms Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 59 2.2. Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 60 2.3. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 61 3. DetNet MPLS Operation over DetNet 62 IP PSNs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 63 4. DetNet Data Plane Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 64 5. Management and Control Information Summary . . . . . . . . . 6 65 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 66 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 67 8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 68 9. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 69 10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 70 10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 71 10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 72 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 74 1. Introduction 76 Deterministic Networking (DetNet) is a service that can be offered by 77 a network to DetNet flows. DetNet provides these flows extremely low 78 packet loss rates and assured maximum end-to-end delivery latency. 79 General background and concepts of DetNet can be found in [RFC8655]. 81 To carry DetNet MPLS flows with full functionality at the DetNet 82 layer over an IP network, the following components are required 83 (these are a subset of the requirements for MPLS encapsulation listed 84 in [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls]): 86 1. A method for identifying DetNet flows to the processing element. 88 2. A method for carrying the DetNet sequence number. 90 3. A method for distinguishing DetNet OAM packets from DetNet data 91 packets. 93 4. A method for carrying queueing and forwarding indication. 95 These requirements are satisfied by the DetNet over MPLS 96 Encapsulation described in [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls] and they are partly 97 satisfied (i.e., IP flows can be identified however no DetNet 98 sequence number is carried) by the DetNet IP data plane defined in 99 [I-D.ietf-detnet-ip] 101 This document specifies use of the MPLS DetNet encapsulation over an 102 IP network. The approach is modeled on the operation of MPLS over an 103 IP Packet Switched Network (PSN) [RFC7510]. It maps the MPLS data 104 plane encapsulation described in [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls] to the DetNet 105 IP data plane defined in [I-D.ietf-detnet-ip]. 107 As specified in [RFC7510]: "MPLS-in-UDP MUST NOT be used over the 108 general Internet, or over non-cooperating network operators, to carry 109 traffic that is not congestion controlled." This does apply to 110 DetNet networks as this document focuses on solutions for networks 111 that are under a single administrative control or within a closed 112 group of administrative control. 114 2. Terminology 116 2.1. Terms Used in This Document 118 This document uses the terminology established in the DetNet 119 architecture [RFC8655], and the reader is assumed to be familiar with 120 that document and its terminology. 122 2.2. Abbreviations 124 The following abbreviations are used in this document: 126 d-CW A DetNet Control Word (d-CW) is used for sequencing and 127 identifying duplicate packets of a DetNet flow at the 128 DetNet service sub-layer. 130 DetNet Deterministic Networking. 132 A-Label A special case of an S-Label, whose properties are 133 known only at the aggregation and deaggregation end- 134 points. 136 F-Label A Detnet "forwarding" label that identifies the LSP 137 used to forward a DetNet flow across an MPLS PSN, e.g., 138 a hop-by-hop label used between label switching 139 routers. 141 MPLS Multiprotocol Label Switching. 143 OAM Operations, Administration, and Maintenance. 145 PEF Packet Elimination Function. 147 POF Packet Ordering Function. 149 PREOF Packet Replication, Elimination and Ordering Functions. 151 PRF Packet Replication Function. 153 PSN Packet Switched Network. 155 S-Label A DetNet "service" label that is used between DetNet 156 nodes that also implement the DetNet service sub-layer 157 functions. An S-Label is also used to identify a 158 DetNet flow at DetNet service sub-layer. 160 2.3. Requirements Language 162 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 163 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and 164 "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 165 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all 166 capitals, as shown here. 168 3. DetNet MPLS Operation over DetNet IP PSNs 170 This document builds on the specification of MPLS over UDP defined in 171 [RFC7510]. It may replace partly or entirely the F-Label(s) used in 172 [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls] with UDP and IP headers. The UDP and IP 173 header information is used to identify DetNet flows, including member 174 flows, per [I-D.ietf-detnet-ip]. The resulting encapsulation is 175 shown in Figure 1. There may be zero or more F-label(s) between the 176 S-label and the UDP header. 178 Note that this encapsulation works equally well with IPv4, IPv6, and 179 IPv6-based Segment Routing [RFC8754]. 181 +---------------------------------+ 182 | | 183 | DetNet App-Flow | 184 | Payload Packet | 185 | | 186 +---------------------------------+ <--\ 187 | DetNet Control Word | | 188 +---------------------------------+ +--> DetNet data plane 189 | S-Label | | MPLS encapsulation 190 +---------------------------------+ | 191 | [ F-label(s) ] | | 192 +---------------------------------+ <--+ 193 | UDP Header | | 194 +---------------------------------+ +--> DetNet data plane 195 | IP Header | | IP encapsulation 196 +---------------------------------+ <--/ 197 | Data-Link | 198 +---------------------------------+ 199 | Physical | 200 +---------------------------------+ 202 Figure 1: UDP/IP Encapsulation of DetNet MPLS 204 S-Labels, A-Labels (when present), d-CW and zero or more F-Labels are 205 used as defined in [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls] and are not modified by 206 this document. 208 4. DetNet Data Plane Procedures 210 To support outgoing DetNet MPLS over UDP encapsulation, an 211 implementation MUST support the provisioning of UDP and IP header 212 information in addition to or in place of F-Label(s). Note, when PRF 213 is performed at the MPLS service sub-layer, there will be multiple 214 member flows, and each member flow will require the provisioning of 215 their own UDP and IP header information. The headers for each 216 outgoing packet MUST be formatted according to the configuration 217 information and as defined in [RFC7510], and the UDP Source Port 218 value MUST be set to uniquely identify the DetNet flow. The packet 219 MUST then be handled as a DetNet IP packet, per [I-D.ietf-detnet-ip]. 220 This includes QoS related traffic treatment. 222 To support the receive processing defined in this document, an 223 implementation MUST also support the provisioning of received UDP and 224 IP header information. The provisioned information MUST be used to 225 identify incoming app-flows based on the combination of S-Label and 226 incoming encapsulation header information. Normal receive processing 227 as defined in [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls], including PEF and POF, can then 228 take place. 230 5. Management and Control Information Summary 232 The following summarizes the minimum set of information that is 233 needed to configure DetNet MPLS over UDP/IP: 235 o Label information (A-labels, S-labels and F-labels) to be mapped 236 to UDP/IP flows. Note that for example, a single S-Label can map 237 to multiple sets of UDP/IP information when PREOF is used. 239 o IPv4 or IPv6 source address field. 241 o IPv4 or IPv6 destination address field. 243 o DSCP Field in either IPv4 Type of Service or IPv6 Traffic Class 244 Fields. 246 o UDP Source Port. 248 o UDP Destination Port. 250 o Use/non-use of UDP checksum. 252 This information MUST be provisioned per DetNet flow via 253 configuration, e.g., via the controller [RFC8655] or management 254 plane. Not using the UDP checksum has to be evaluated on a case-by- 255 case basis for a given network scenario based on the exception 256 criteria's defined in [RFC7510], particularly when IPv6 is used. 258 It is the responsibility of the DetNet controller plane to properly 259 provision both flow identification information and the flow specific 260 resources needed to provide the traffic treatment needed to meet each 261 flow's service requirements. This applies for aggregated and 262 individual flows. 264 Note: In the presence of network (and port) address translation 265 devices/functions it would be up to the controller plane to determine 266 the appropriate information to ensure proper mapping at the sender/ 267 receiver. 269 6. Security Considerations 271 The solution defined in this document reuses mechanisms specified in 272 other documents, and the security considerations in those documents 273 apply equally to this document. Of particular note is [RFC7510], as 274 this document is primarily an application of MPLS-in-UDP. 276 Additionally, the security considerations of DetNet in general are 277 discussed in [RFC8655] and [I-D.ietf-detnet-security]. Finally, MPLS 278 and IP specific security considerations are described in 279 [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls] and [I-D.ietf-detnet-ip]. This draft does not 280 have additional security considerations. 282 7. IANA Considerations 284 This document makes no IANA requests. 286 8. Acknowledgements 288 The authors wish to thank Pat Thaler, Norman Finn, Loa Anderson, 289 David Black, Rodney Cummings, Ethan Grossman, Tal Mizrahi, David 290 Mozes, Craig Gunther, George Swallow, Yuanlong Jiang and Carlos J. 291 Bernardos for their various contributions to this work. 293 9. Contributors 295 This document is derived from an earlier draft that was edited by 296 Jouni Korhonen (jouni.nospam@gmail.com) and as such, he contributed 297 to and authored text in this document. 299 10. References 301 10.1. Normative References 303 [I-D.ietf-detnet-ip] 304 Varga, B., Farkas, J., Berger, L., Fedyk, D., and S. 305 Bryant, "DetNet Data Plane: IP", draft-ietf-detnet-ip-07 306 (work in progress), July 2020. 308 [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls] 309 Varga, B., Farkas, J., Berger, L., Malis, A., Bryant, S., 310 and J. Korhonen, "DetNet Data Plane: MPLS", draft-ietf- 311 detnet-mpls-13 (work in progress), October 2020. 313 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 314 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, 315 DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, 316 . 318 [RFC7510] Xu, X., Sheth, N., Yong, L., Callon, R., and D. Black, 319 "Encapsulating MPLS in UDP", RFC 7510, 320 DOI 10.17487/RFC7510, April 2015, 321 . 323 [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 324 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, 325 May 2017, . 327 10.2. Informative References 329 [I-D.ietf-detnet-security] 330 Grossman, E., Mizrahi, T., and A. Hacker, "Deterministic 331 Networking (DetNet) Security Considerations", draft-ietf- 332 detnet-security-12 (work in progress), October 2020. 334 [RFC8655] Finn, N., Thubert, P., Varga, B., and J. Farkas, 335 "Deterministic Networking Architecture", RFC 8655, 336 DOI 10.17487/RFC8655, October 2019, 337 . 339 [RFC8754] Filsfils, C., Ed., Dukes, D., Ed., Previdi, S., Leddy, J., 340 Matsushima, S., and D. Voyer, "IPv6 Segment Routing Header 341 (SRH)", RFC 8754, DOI 10.17487/RFC8754, March 2020, 342 . 344 Authors' Addresses 346 Balazs Varga (editor) 347 Ericsson 348 Magyar Tudosok krt. 11. 349 Budapest 1117 350 Hungary 352 Email: balazs.a.varga@ericsson.com 354 Janos Farkas 355 Ericsson 356 Magyar Tudosok krt. 11. 357 Budapest 1117 358 Hungary 360 Email: janos.farkas@ericsson.com 362 Lou Berger 363 LabN Consulting, L.L.C. 365 Email: lberger@labn.net 366 Andrew G. Malis 367 Malis Consulting 369 Email: agmalis@gmail.com 371 Stewart Bryant 372 Futurewei Technologies 374 Email: stewart.bryant@gmail.com