--- 1/draft-ietf-detnet-mpls-06.txt 2020-06-08 08:13:17.955434995 -0700 +++ 2/draft-ietf-detnet-mpls-07.txt 2020-06-08 08:13:18.019436624 -0700 @@ -1,25 +1,25 @@ DetNet B. Varga, Ed. Internet-Draft J. Farkas Intended status: Standards Track Ericsson -Expires: October 25, 2020 L. Berger +Expires: December 10, 2020 L. Berger LabN Consulting, L.L.C. A. Malis Malis Consulting S. Bryant Futurewei Technologies J. Korhonen - April 23, 2020 + June 8, 2020 DetNet Data Plane: MPLS - draft-ietf-detnet-mpls-06 + draft-ietf-detnet-mpls-07 Abstract This document specifies the Deterministic Networking data plane when operating over an MPLS Packet Switched Networks. Status of This Memo This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. @@ -27,21 +27,21 @@ 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 October 25, 2020. + This Internet-Draft will expire on December 10, 2020. Copyright Notice 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 @@ -66,21 +66,21 @@ 4.2. MPLS Data Plane Encapsulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 4.2.1. DetNet Control Word and the DetNet Sequence Number . 10 4.2.2. S-Labels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 4.2.3. F-Labels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 4.3. OAM Indication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 4.4. Flow Aggregation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 4.4.1. Aggregation Via LSP Hierarchy . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 4.4.2. Aggregating DetNet Flows as a new DetNet flow . . . . 18 4.5. Service Sub-Layer Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 4.5.1. Edge Node Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 - 4.5.2. Relay Node Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 + 4.5.2. Relay Node Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 4.6. Forwarding Sub-Layer Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . 20 4.6.1. Class of Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 4.6.2. Quality of Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 5. Management and Control Information Summary . . . . . . . . . 21 5.1. Service Sub-Layer Information Summary . . . . . . . . . . 22 5.1.1. Service Aggregation Information Summary . . . . . . . 23 5.2. Forwarding Sub-Layer Information Summary . . . . . . . . 23 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 @@ -231,27 +231,27 @@ Figure 1: DetNet Adaptation to MPLS Data Plane The DetNet MPLS data plane representation is illustrated in Figure 1. The service sub-layer includes a DetNet control word (d-CW) and a identifying service label (S-Label). The DetNet control word (d-CW) conforms to the Generic PW MPLS Control Word (PWMCW) defined in [RFC4385]. An aggregation label (A-Label) is a special case of S-Label used for aggregation. - A node operating on a DetNet flow in the Detnet service sub- - layer,uses the local context associated with that S-Label, provided - by a received F-Label, to determine what local DetNet operation(s) - are applied to that packet. An S-Label may be taken from the - platform label space [RFC3031], making it unique, enabling DetNet - flow identification regardless of which input interface or LSP the - packet arrives on. + A node operating on a DetNet flow in the Detnet service sub-layer, + uses the local context associated with that S-Label, provided by a + received F-Label, to determine what local DetNet operation(s) are + applied to that packet. An S-Label may be taken from the platform + label space [RFC3031], making it unique, enabling DetNet flow + identification regardless of which input interface or LSP the packet + arrives on. The DetNet forwarding sub-layer is supported by zero or more forwarding labels (F-Labels). MPLS Traffic Engineering encapsulations and mechanisms can be utilized to provide a forwarding sub-layer that is responsible for providing resource allocation and explicit routes. 3.2. DetNet MPLS Data Plane Scenarios DetNet MPLS Relay Transit Relay DetNet MPLS @@ -860,47 +860,51 @@ service they require and encapsulating them accordingly. An edge node may participate in the packet replication and duplicate packet elimination. The DetNet-aware forwarder selects the egress DetNet member flow segment based on the flow identification. The mapping of ingress DetNet member flow segment to egress DetNet member flow segment may be statically or dynamically configured. Additionally the DetNet- aware forwarder does duplicate frame elimination based on the flow identification and the sequence number combination. The packet - replication is also done within the DetNet-aware forwarder. During - elimination and the replication process the sequence number of the - DetNet member flow MUST be preserved and copied to the egress DetNet - member flow. + replication is also done within the DetNet-aware forwarder. + +4.5.2. Relay Node Processing + + A DetNet Relay node operates in the DetNet forwarding sub-layer and + service sub-layer. For DetNet using MPLS forwarding related + processing is performed on the F-Label. This processing is done + within an extended forwarder function. Whether an ingress DetNet + member flow receives DetNet specific processing depends on how the + forwarding is programmed. Some relay nodes may be DetNet service + aware for certain DetNet services, while for other DetNet services + these nodes may perform as unmodified LSRs that only understand how + to switch MPLS-TE LSPs, i.e., as a transit nodes, see Section 4.4. + Again, this is entirely up to how the forwarding has been programmed. + + During the elimination and replication process the sequence number of + the ingress DetNet member flow MUST be preserved and copied to the + corresponding egress DetNet member flow. Specifically, a relay node + sends the same sequence number in an outgoing packet of a DetNet + member flow that is received in the corresponding incoming packet of + a DetNet compound flow. This is true whether or not PREOF is + performed at the relay node. The internal design of a relay node is out of scope of this document. However the reader's attention is drawn to the need to make any PREOF state available to the packet processor(s) dealing with packets to which the PREOF functions must be applied, and to maintain that state - is such as way that it is available to the packet processor operation + is such away that it is available to the packet processor operation on the next packet in the DetNet flow (which may be a duplicate, a late packet, or the next packet in sequence. -4.5.2. Relay Node Processing - - A DetNet Relay node operates in the DetNet forwarding sub-layer . - For DetNet using MPLS this processing is performed on the F-Label. - This processing is done within an extended forwarder function. - Whether an ingress DetNet member flow receives DetNet specific - processing depends on how the forwarding is programmed. Some relay - nodes may be DetNet service aware, while others may be unmodified - LSRs that only understand how to switch MPLS-TE LSPs. - - It is also possible to treat the relay node as a transit node, see - Section 4.4. Again, this is entirely up to how the forwarding has - been programmed. - 4.6. Forwarding Sub-Layer Considerations 4.6.1. Class of Service Class and quality of service, i.e., CoS and QoS, are terms that are often used interchangeably and confused with each other. In the context of DetNet, CoS is used to refer to mechanisms that provide traffic forwarding treatment based on aggregate group basis and QoS is used to refer to mechanisms that provide traffic forwarding treatment based on a specific DetNet flow basis. Examples of @@ -1228,43 +1232,42 @@ [RFC8655] Finn, N., Thubert, P., Varga, B., and J. Farkas, "Deterministic Networking Architecture", RFC 8655, DOI 10.17487/RFC8655, October 2019, . 10.2. Informative References [I-D.ietf-detnet-data-plane-framework] Varga, B., Farkas, J., Berger, L., Malis, A., and S. Bryant, "DetNet Data Plane Framework", draft-ietf-detnet- - data-plane-framework-04 (work in progress), February 2020. + data-plane-framework-06 (work in progress), May 2020. [I-D.ietf-detnet-ip] - Varga, B., Farkas, J., Berger, L., Fedyk, D., Malis, A., - and S. Bryant, "DetNet Data Plane: IP", draft-ietf-detnet- - ip-05 (work in progress), February 2020. + Varga, B., Farkas, J., Berger, L., Fedyk, D., and S. + Bryant, "DetNet Data Plane: IP", draft-ietf-detnet-ip-06 + (work in progress), April 2020. [I-D.ietf-detnet-ip-over-mpls] - Varga, B., Berger, L., Fedyk, D., Malis, A., Bryant, S., - and J. Korhonen, "DetNet Data Plane: IP over MPLS", draft- - ietf-detnet-ip-over-mpls-05 (work in progress), February - 2020. + Varga, B., Berger, L., Fedyk, D., Bryant, S., and J. + Korhonen, "DetNet Data Plane: IP over MPLS", draft-ietf- + detnet-ip-over-mpls-06 (work in progress), May 2020. [I-D.ietf-detnet-mpls-over-tsn] Varga, B., Farkas, J., Malis, A., and S. Bryant, "DetNet Data Plane: MPLS over IEEE 802.1 Time Sensitive Networking (TSN)", draft-ietf-detnet-mpls-over-tsn-02 (work in progress), March 2020. [I-D.ietf-detnet-security] Mizrahi, T. and E. Grossman, "Deterministic Networking (DetNet) Security Considerations", draft-ietf-detnet- - security-09 (work in progress), March 2020. + security-10 (work in progress), May 2020. [IEEE802.1AE-2018] IEEE Standards Association, "IEEE Std 802.1AE-2018 MAC Security (MACsec)", 2018, . [RFC2205] Braden, R., Ed., Zhang, L., Berson, S., Herzog, S., and S. Jamin, "Resource ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP) -- Version 1 Functional Specification", RFC 2205, DOI 10.17487/RFC2205, September 1997, .