[Docs] [txt|pdf] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: (draft-vandevelde-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-rld) 00 01 02

IDR Working Group                                   G. Van de Velde, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                             W. Henderickx
Intended status: Standards Track                                M. Bocci
Expires: December 14, 2018                                         Nokia
                                                                K. Patel
                                                                  Arrcus
                                                           June 12, 2018


                      Signalling ERLD using BGP-LS
              draft-ietf-idr-bgp-ls-segment-routing-rld-02

Abstract

   This document defines the attribute encoding to use for BGP-LS to
   expose ERLD "Entropy capable Readable Label Depth" from a node to a
   centralised controller (PCE/SDN).

Requirements Language

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [1].

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   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 December 14, 2018.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2018 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



Van de Velde, et al.    Expires December 14, 2018               [Page 1]


Internet-Draft        Signalling ERLD using BGP-LS             June 2018


   (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
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Conventions used in this document . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.1.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Problem Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   4.  Origination of ERLD in BGP-LS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   5.  ERLD support by a node  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   7.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   8.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   9.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     9.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     9.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5

1.  Introduction

   When Segment Routing tunnels are computed by a centralised
   controller, it is beneficial that the controller knows the ERLD
   (Entropy capable Readable Label Depth) of each node or link a tunnel
   traverses.  A network node signalling an ERLD MUST support the
   ability to read the signalled number of labels before any action is
   done upon the packet and SHOULD support entropy awareness found
   within the signalled ERLD depth.

   ERLD awareness of each node will allow a network SDN controller to
   influence the path used for each tunnel.  The SDN controller may for
   example only create tunnels with a label stack smaller or equal as
   the ERLD of each node on the path.  This will allow the network to
   behave accordingly (e.g.  make use of Entropy Labels to improve ECMP)
   upon the imposed Segment Routing label stack on each packet.

   This document describes how to use BGP-LS to expose the ERLD of a
   node.








Van de Velde, et al.    Expires December 14, 2018               [Page 2]


Internet-Draft        Signalling ERLD using BGP-LS             June 2018


2.  Conventions used in this document

2.1.  Terminology

   BGP-LS: Distribution of Link-State and TE Information using Border
   Gateway Protocol

   ERLD: Entropy capable Readable Label Depth

   PCC: Path Computation Client

   PCE: Path Computation Element

   PCEP: Path Computation Element Protocol

   SID: Segment Identifier

   SR: Segment routing

3.  Problem Statement

   In existing technology both ISIS [4] and OSPF [3] have proposed
   extensions to signal the RLD (Readable Label Depth) and ELC (Entropy
   Label Capability) of a node.  However, if a network SDN controller is
   connected to the network through a BGP-LS session and not through
   ISIS or OSPF technology, then both RLD and ELC needs to be signalled
   using BGP-LS encoding.  This document describes the extension BGP-LS
   requires to transport the combined RLD and ELC into an ERLD (Entropy
   capable Readable Label Depth) attribute.

   A network SDN controller having awareness of the ERLD can for example
   use it as a constraint on path computation to make sure that high
   bandwidth LSPs are not placed on LAG (Link Aggregation Group),
   containing links with smaller member bandwidth, if they know the
   Entropy Label cannot be processed by the node at the ingress to the
   link.

4.  Origination of ERLD in BGP-LS

   Both ISIS [4] and OSPF [3] have proposed extensions to signal the RLD
   (Readable Label Depth) and ELC (Entropy Label Capability) for a node.
   A BGP-LS router exporting the IGP LSDB, MUST NOT encode the IGP RLD
   value in an BGP-LS ERLD attribute, if the associated node ELC is not
   signalled.







Van de Velde, et al.    Expires December 14, 2018               [Page 3]


Internet-Draft        Signalling ERLD using BGP-LS             June 2018


5.  ERLD support by a node

   Node ERLD is encoded in a new Node Attribute TLV, as defined in
   RFC7752 [2].


      0                   1                   2                   3
      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
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |              Type             |             Length            |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |     ERLD      |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


                                 Figure 1

      Type : A 2-octet field specifying code-point of the new TLV type.
      Code-point: TBA from BGP-LS Node Descriptor, Link Descriptor,
      Prefix Descriptor, and Attribute TLVs registry

      Length: A 2-octet field that indicates the length of the value
      portion

      ERLD: Node ERLD is a number in the range of 0-254.  The value of 0
      represents lack of ability to read a label stack of any depth, any
      other value represents the readable label depth of the node.

6.  Security Considerations

   This document does not introduce security issues beyond those
   discussed in RFC7752 [2]

7.  Acknowledgements

   Thanks to discussions with Acee Lindem, Jeff Tantsura, Stephane
   Litkowski, Bruno Decraene, Kireeti Kompella, John E.  Drake and
   Carlos Pignataro to bring the concept of combining ELC and RLD into a
   single ERLD signalled parameter more suitable for SDN controller
   based networks.

8.  IANA Considerations

   This document requests assigning a new code-points from the BGP-LS
   Node Descriptor, Link Descriptor, Prefix Descriptor, and Attribute
   TLVs registry as specified in section 5.

   Note: placeholder IANA request



Van de Velde, et al.    Expires December 14, 2018               [Page 4]


Internet-Draft        Signalling ERLD using BGP-LS             June 2018


   Request Node ERLD codepoint

   BGP-LS TLV Code Point: TBD1

   ISIS TLV 242/TBD2

   Note: There is nothing in IANA from draft draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc

   Note: Draft talks only about ELC/RLD and that is mismatch with ERLD

   OSPF RI TLV TBD5

   OSPF ELC in Non-OSPF functionality Capability Bits (TBD6)

9.  References

9.1.  Normative References

   [1]        Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997,
              <http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/html/rfc2119.html>.

   [2]        Gredler, H., Ed., Medved, J., Previdi, S., Farrel, A., and
              S. Ray, "North-Bound Distribution of Link-State and
              Traffic Engineering (TE) Information Using BGP", RFC 7752,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC7752, March 2016,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7752>.

9.2.  Informative References

   [3]        Xu, X., Kini, S., Sivabalan, S., Filsfils, C., and S.
              Litkowski, "draft-ietf-ospf-mpls-elc", January 2018.

   [4]        Xu, X., Kini, S., Sivabalan, S., Filsfils, C., and S.
              Litkowski, "draft-ietf-isis-mpls-elc", January 2018.

Authors' Addresses

   Gunter Van de Velde (editor)
   Nokia
   Antwerp
   BE

   Email: gunter.van_de_velde@nokia.com







Van de Velde, et al.    Expires December 14, 2018               [Page 5]


Internet-Draft        Signalling ERLD using BGP-LS             June 2018


   Wim Henderickx
   Nokia
   Belgium

   Email: wim.henderickx@nokia.com


   Matthew Bocci
   Nokia
   Shoppenhangers Road
   Maidenhead, Berks
   UK

   Email: matthew.bocci@nokia.com


   Keyur Patel
   Arrcus
   USA

   Email: keyur@arrcus.com






























Van de Velde, et al.    Expires December 14, 2018               [Page 6]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.127, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/