--- 1/draft-ietf-detnet-mpls-over-udp-ip-04.txt 2020-02-03 09:18:26.032802594 -0800 +++ 2/draft-ietf-detnet-mpls-over-udp-ip-05.txt 2020-02-03 09:18:26.224807441 -0800 @@ -1,25 +1,24 @@ DetNet B. Varga, Ed. Internet-Draft J. Farkas Intended status: Standards Track Ericsson -Expires: May 24, 2020 L. Berger +Expires: August 6, 2020 L. Berger LabN Consulting, L.L.C. A. Malis Independent S. Bryant Futurewei Technologies - J. Korhonen - November 21, 2019 + February 3, 2020 DetNet Data Plane: MPLS over UDP/IP - draft-ietf-detnet-mpls-over-udp-ip-04 + draft-ietf-detnet-mpls-over-udp-ip-05 Abstract This document specifies the MPLS Deterministic Networking data plane operation and encapsulation over an IP network. The approach is modeled on the operation of MPLS and over UDP/IP packet switched networks. Status of This Memo @@ -29,25 +28,25 @@ Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." - This Internet-Draft will expire on May 24, 2020. + This Internet-Draft will expire on August 6, 2020. Copyright Notice - Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the + Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as @@ -59,24 +58,25 @@ 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.1. Terms Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.2. Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.3. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. DetNet MPLS Operation over DetNet IP PSNs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4. DetNet Data Plane Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5. Management and Control Information Summary . . . . . . . . . 6 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 - 8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 - 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 - 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 - 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 + 8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 + 9. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 + 10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 + 10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 + 10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 1. Introduction Deterministic Networking (DetNet) is a service that can be offered by a network to DetNet flows. DetNet provides these flows extremely low packet loss rates and assured maximum end-to-end delivery latency. General background and concepts of DetNet can be found in [RFC8655]. This document specifies use of the MPLS DetNet encapsulation over an @@ -94,21 +94,23 @@ 2. A method for carrying the DetNet sequence number. 3. A method for distinguishing DetNet OAM packets from DetNet data packets. 4. A method for carrying queuing and forwarding indication. These requirements are satisfied by the DetNet over MPLS Encapsulation described in [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls] and they are partly - satisfied by the DetNet IP data plane defined in [I-D.ietf-detnet-ip] + satisfied (i.e., IP flows can be identified however no DetNet + sequence number is carried) by the DetNet IP data plane defined in + [I-D.ietf-detnet-ip] 2. Terminology 2.1. Terms Used in This Document This document uses the terminology established in the DetNet architecture [RFC8655], and the reader is assumed to be familiar with that document and its terminology. 2.2. Abbreviations @@ -186,73 +188,74 @@ +---------------------------------+ +--> DetNet data plane | IP Header | | IP encapsulation +---------------------------------+ <--/ | Data-Link | +---------------------------------+ | Physical | +---------------------------------+ Figure 1: UDP/IP Encapsulation of DetNet MPLS - S-Labels, d-CW and zero or more F-Labels are used as defined in - [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls] and are not modified by this document. In - case of aggregates the A-Label is treated as an S-Label and it too is - not modified. + S-Labels, A-Labels (when present), d-CW and zero or more F-Labels are + used as defined in [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls] and are not modified by + this document. 4. DetNet Data Plane Procedures To support outgoing DetNet MPLS over UDP/IP encapsulation, an implementation MUST support the provisioning of UDP and IP header information in addition or in place of F-Label(s). Note, when PRF is performed at the MPLS service sub-layer, there will be multiple member flows, and each member flow will require the provisioning of their own UDP and IP header information. The headers for each outgoing packet MUST be formatted according to the configuration - information and as defined in [RFC7510], with one exception. Note - that the UDP Source Port value MUST be set to uniquely identify the - DetNet flow. The packet MUST then be handed as a DetNet IP packet, - per [I-D.ietf-detnet-ip]. This includes QoS related traffic - treatment. + information and as defined in [RFC7510], and the UDP Source Port + value MUST be set to uniquely identify the DetNet flow. The packet + MUST then be handled as a DetNet IP packet, per [I-D.ietf-detnet-ip]. + This includes QoS related traffic treatment. - To support receive processing an implementation MUST also support the - provisioning of received UDP and IP header information. The - provisioned information MUST be used to identify incoming app-flows - based on the combination of S-Label and incoming encapsulation header - information. Normal receive processing as defined in - [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls], including PEF and POF, can then take place. + To support the receive processing defined in this document, an + implementation MUST also support the provisioning of received UDP and + IP header information. The provisioned information MUST be used to + identify incoming app-flows based on the combination of S-Label and + incoming encapsulation header information. Normal receive processing + as defined in [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls], including PEF and POF, can then + take place. 5. Management and Control Information Summary The following summarizes the set of information that is needed to configure DetNet MPLS over UDP/IP: - o Label information (S-label or F-label) to be mapped to UDP/IP - flow. Note that a single S-Label can map to multiple sets of UPD/ - IP information when PREOF is used. + o Label information (A-labels, S-labels and F-labels) to be mapped + to UDP/IP flow. Note that for example, a single S-Label can map + to multiple sets of UDP/IP information when PREOF is used. o IPv4 or IPv6 source address field. o IPv4 or IPv6 destination address field. - o IPv4 Type of Service or IPv6 Traffic Class Fields. + o DSCP Field in either IPv4 Type of Service or IPv6 Traffic Class + Fields. o UDP Source Port. o UDP Destination Port. This information MUST be provisioned per DetNet flow via - configuration, e.g., via the controller or management plane. + configuration, e.g., via the controller [RFC8655] or management + plane. It is the responsibility of the DetNet controller plane to properly provision both flow identification information and the flow specific - resources needed to provided the traffic treatment needed to meet - each flow's service requirements. This applies for aggregated and + resources needed to provide the traffic treatment needed to meet each + flow's service requirements. This applies for aggregated and individual flows. 6. Security Considerations The security considerations of DetNet in general are discussed in [RFC8655] and [I-D.ietf-detnet-security]. MPLS and IP specific security considerations are described in [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls] and [I-D.ietf-detnet-ip]. This draft does not have additional security considerations. @@ -260,62 +263,68 @@ This document makes no IANA requests. 8. Acknowledgements The authors wish to thank Pat Thaler, Norman Finn, Loa Anderson, David Black, Rodney Cummings, Ethan Grossman, Tal Mizrahi, David Mozes, Craig Gunther, George Swallow, Yuanlong Jiang and Carlos J. Bernardos for their various contributions to this work. -9. References +9. Contributors -9.1. Normative References + This document is derived from an earlier draft that was edited by + Jouni Korhonen (jouni.nospam@gmail.com) and as such, he contributed + to and authored text in this document. + +10. References + +10.1. Normative References [I-D.ietf-detnet-ip] Varga, B., Farkas, J., Berger, L., Fedyk, D., Malis, A., Bryant, S., and J. Korhonen, "DetNet Data Plane: IP", - draft-ietf-detnet-ip-03 (work in progress), October 2019. + draft-ietf-detnet-ip-04 (work in progress), November 2019. [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls] Varga, B., Farkas, J., Berger, L., Fedyk, D., Malis, A., Bryant, S., and J. Korhonen, "DetNet Data Plane: MPLS", - draft-ietf-detnet-mpls-03 (work in progress), October + draft-ietf-detnet-mpls-04 (work in progress), November 2019. [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, . [RFC7510] Xu, X., Sheth, N., Yong, L., Callon, R., and D. Black, "Encapsulating MPLS in UDP", RFC 7510, DOI 10.17487/RFC7510, April 2015, . [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, May 2017, . -9.2. Informative References +10.2. Informative References [I-D.ietf-6man-segment-routing-header] Filsfils, C., Dukes, D., Previdi, S., Leddy, J., Matsushima, S., and D. Voyer, "IPv6 Segment Routing Header (SRH)", draft-ietf-6man-segment-routing-header-26 (work in progress), October 2019. [I-D.ietf-detnet-security] Mizrahi, T., Grossman, E., Hacker, A., Das, S., Dowdell, J., Austad, H., and N. Finn, "Deterministic Networking (DetNet) Security Considerations", draft-ietf-detnet- - security-06 (work in progress), November 2019. + security-07 (work in progress), January 2020. [RFC8655] Finn, N., Thubert, P., Varga, B., and J. Farkas, "Deterministic Networking Architecture", RFC 8655, DOI 10.17487/RFC8655, October 2019, . Authors' Addresses Balazs Varga (editor) Ericsson @@ -335,19 +344,14 @@ Lou Berger LabN Consulting, L.L.C. Email: lberger@labn.net Andrew G. Malis Independent Email: agmalis@gmail.com - Stewart Bryant Futurewei Technologies Email: stewart.bryant@gmail.com - - Jouni Korhonen - - Email: jouni.nospam@gmail.com