idnits 2.17.1 draft-meng-nsh-broadband-allocation-00.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 : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The document seems to lack a Security Considerations section. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year == The document doesn't use any RFC 2119 keywords, yet seems to have RFC 2119 boilerplate text. -- The document date (September 25, 2015) is 3128 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) == Unused Reference: 'I-D.ietf-sfc-nsh' is defined on line 144, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC2865' is defined on line 158, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC7498' is defined on line 163, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Outdated reference: A later version (-28) exists of draft-ietf-sfc-nsh-01 ** Downref: Normative reference to an Informational draft: draft-ietf-sfc-problem-statement (ref. 'I-D.ietf-sfc-problem-statement') ** Downref: Normative reference to an Informational RFC: RFC 7498 Summary: 3 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 6 warnings (==), 1 comment (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Service Function Chaining W. Meng 3 Internet-Draft C. Wang 4 Intended status: Standards Track ZTE Corporation 5 Expires: March 28, 2016 September 25, 2015 7 NSH Context Header - Broadband 8 draft-meng-nsh-broadband-allocation-00 10 Abstract 12 This document provides a recommended allocation of the mandatory 13 fixed context headers for a Network Service Header (NSH) within the 14 broadband service provider network context. 16 Status of this Memo 18 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 19 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 21 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 22 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 23 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 24 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 26 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 27 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 28 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 29 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 31 This Internet-Draft will expire on March 28, 2016. 33 Copyright Notice 35 Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 36 document authors. All rights reserved. 38 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 39 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 40 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 41 publication of this document. Please review these documents 42 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 43 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 44 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 45 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 46 described in the Simplified BSD License. 48 Table of Contents 50 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 51 2. Convention and Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 52 3. Network Service Header (NSH) Context Headers . . . . . . . . . 5 53 4. Recommended Broadband Context Allocation . . . . . . . . . . . 6 54 5. Broadband Allocation Specifics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 55 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 56 7. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 57 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 59 1. Introduction 61 The objective of SFC is trying to unload services from nodes in 62 traditional network and deal with such services through service 63 function chains. 65 As increasingly large number of customers, The possibility of 66 deployment SFC in broadband network seems emergency. And this 67 document is aimed to provides a recommended allocation of the 68 mandatory fixed context headers for a Network Service Header (NSH) in 69 broadband network. 71 2. Convention and Terminology 73 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 74 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 75 document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. 77 The terms about SFC are defined in [I-D.ietf-sfc-problem-statement]. 79 3. Network Service Header (NSH) Context Headers 81 In Service Function Chaining, the Network Service Header is composed 82 of a 4-byte base header (BH1), a 4-byte service path header (SH1) and 83 four mandatory 4-byte context headers (CH1-CH4). 85 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 86 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 87 |Ver|O|C|R|R|R|R|R|R| Length | MD Type = 0x01| Next Protocol | BH1 88 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 89 | Service Path ID | Service Index | SH1 90 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 91 | Mandatory Context Header 1 | CH1 92 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 93 | Mandatory Context Header 2 | CH2 94 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 95 | Mandatory Context Header 3 | CH3 96 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 97 | Mandatory Context Header 4 | CH4 98 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 100 Figure 1: Network Service Header - MD Type 0x01 102 4. Recommended Broadband Context Allocation 104 The following context header allocation provides information to 105 support service function chaining in a broadband service provider 106 network. 108 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 1 109 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 110 | Source Node ID | Source Interface ID |CH1 111 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 112 | User ID/Accouting ID | CH2 113 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 114 | vlan ID | reserved | CH3 115 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 116 | reserved | CH4 117 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 119 Figure 2: NSH Broadband Context Allocation 121 5. Broadband Allocation Specifics 123 Source Node ID: An identifier indicating the source device where the 124 original traffic initially entered the Service Function Chain. This 125 identifier is unique within an SFC-enabled domain. 127 Source Interface ID: An identifier indicating the source interface 128 where the original traffic initially entered the Service Function 129 Chain. This identifier is scoped within the context of the Source 130 Node ID. 132 User ID: The user ID indicates the user who access to the broadband 133 network. It is unique in administrative domain. 135 Vlan ID : Together with Source Node ID and Source Interface ID, they 136 indicate the access point of the user accessing. 138 6. IANA Considerations 140 This memo includes no request to IANA. 142 7. Normative References 144 [I-D.ietf-sfc-nsh] 145 Quinn, P. and U. Elzur, "Network Service Header", 146 draft-ietf-sfc-nsh-01 (work in progress), July 2015. 148 [I-D.ietf-sfc-problem-statement] 149 Quinn, P. and T. Nadeau, "Service Function Chaining 150 Problem Statement", draft-ietf-sfc-problem-statement-13 151 (work in progress), February 2015. 153 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 154 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/ 155 RFC2119, March 1997, 156 . 158 [RFC2865] Rigney, C., Willens, S., Rubens, A., and W. Simpson, 159 "Remote Authentication Dial In User Service (RADIUS)", 160 RFC 2865, DOI 10.17487/RFC2865, June 2000, 161 . 163 [RFC7498] Quinn, P., Ed. and T. Nadeau, Ed., "Problem Statement for 164 Service Function Chaining", RFC 7498, DOI 10.17487/ 165 RFC7498, April 2015, 166 . 168 Authors' Addresses 170 Wei Meng 171 ZTE Corporation 172 No.50 Software Avenue, Yuhuatai District 173 Nanjing 174 China 176 Email: meng.wei2@zte.com.cn,vally.meng@gmail.com 178 Cui Wang 179 ZTE Corporation 180 No.50 Software Avenue, Yuhuatai District 181 Nanjing 182 China 184 Email: wang.cui1@zte.com.cn