Internet DRAFT - draft-ashwood-nvo3-oam-requirements
draft-ashwood-nvo3-oam-requirements
NVO3 Working Group H. Chen, Ed.
INTERNET-DRAFT P. Ashwood-Smith
Intended Status: Informational L. Xia
Huawei Technologies
R. Iyengar
T. Tsou
Huawei Technologies USA
A. Sajassi
Cisco Technologies
M. Boucadair
C. Jacquenet
France Telecom
M. Daikoku
KDDI corporation
A. Ghanwani
Dell
R. Krishnan
Brocade
Expires: April 21, 2016 October 19, 2015
NVO3 Operations, Administration, and Maintenance Requirements
draft-ashwood-nvo3-oam-requirements-04
Abstract
This document provides framework and requirements for Network
Virtualization Overlay (NVO3) Operations, Administration, and
Maintenance (OAM).
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as
Internet-Drafts.
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."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html
Chen & Ashwood-Smith, et al [Page 1]
INTERNET DRAFT NVO3 OAM Requirements July 2015
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
Copyright and License Notice
Copyright (c) 2015 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
(http://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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.1. OSI Definitions of OAM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.2. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.3. Relationship with Other OAM Work . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3. NVO3 Reference Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4. OAM Framework for NVO3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.1. OAM Layering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.2. OAM Domains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5. NVO3 OAM Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.1. Discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.2. Connectivity Fault Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.2.1. Connectivity Fault Detection . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.2.2. Connectivity Fault Verification . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.2.3. Connectivity Fault localization . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.2.4. Connectivity Fault Notification and Alarm
Suppression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.3. Connectivity Performance Management . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.3.1. Frame Loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.3.2. Frame Delay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.3.3. Frame Delay Variation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
5.3.4. Frame Throughput . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.3.5. Frame Discard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.4. Continuity Check . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.5. Availability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Chen & Ashwood-Smith, et al [Page 2]
INTERNET DRAFT NVO3 OAM Requirements July 2015
5.6. Data Path Forwarding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.7. Scalability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
5.8. Extensibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
5.9. Security . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
5.10. Transport Independence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
5.11. Application Independence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
5.12. Prioritization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
5.13. Logging and Traceability Requirements . . . . . . . . . . 14
5.14. Live Traffic Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
6. Items for Further Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
9. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
10.1 Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
10.2 Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Chen & Ashwood-Smith, et al [Page 3]
INTERNET DRAFT NVO3 OAM Requirements July 2015
1. Introduction
This document provides framework and requirements for Network
Virtualization Overlay (NVO3) Operations, Administration, and
Maintenance (OAM). Given that this OAM subject is far from new and
has been under extensive investigation by various IETF working groups
(and several other standards bodies) for many years, this document
draws from existing work, starting with [RFC6136]. As a result,
sections of [RFC6136] have been reused with minor changes with the
permission of the authors.
NVO3 OAM requirements are expected to be a subset of IETF/IEEE etc.
work done so far; however, we begin with a full set of requirements
and expect to prune them through several iterations of this document.
1.1. OSI Definitions of OAM
The scope of OAM for any service and/or transport/network
infrastructure technologies can be very broad in nature. OSI has
defined the following five generic functional areas commonly
abbreviated as "FCAPS" [NM-Standards]:
o Fault Management,
o Configuration Management,
o Accounting Management,
o Performance Management, and
o Security Management.
This document focuses on the Fault, Performance and to a limited
extent the Configuration Management aspects. Other functional
aspects of FCAPS and their relevance (or not) to NVO3 are for further
study.
Fault Management can typically be viewed in terms of the following
categories:
o Fault Detection;
o Fault Verification;
o Fault Isolation;
o Fault Notification and Alarm Suppression;
Chen & Ashwood-Smith, et al [Page 4]
INTERNET DRAFT NVO3 OAM Requirements July 2015
o Fault Recovery.
Fault detection deals with mechanism(s) that can detect both hard
failures such as link and device failures, and soft failures, such as
software failure, memory corruption, misconfiguration, etc. Fault
detection relies upon a set of mechanisms that first allow the
observation of an event, then the use of a protocol to dynamically
notify a network/system operator (or management system) about the
event occurrence, then the use of diagnostic tools to assess the
nature and severity of the fault.
After verifying that a fault has occurred along the data path, it is
important to be able to isolate the fault to the level of a given
device or link. Therefore, a fault isolation mechanism is needed in
Fault Management. A fault notification mechanism should be used in
conjunction with a fault detection mechanism to notify the devices
upstream and downstream to the fault detection point. The fault
notification mechanism should also notify NMS systems.
The terms "upstream" and "backward" are used here to denote the
direction(s) from which data traffic is flowing. The terms
"downstream" and "forward" denote the direction(s) to which data
traffic is forwarded.
For example, when there is a client/server relationship between two
layered networks (e.g., the NVO3 layer is a client of the outer IP
server layer, while the inner IP layer is a client of the NVO3 server
layer 2), fault detection at the server layer may result in the
following fault notifications:
o Sending a forward fault notification from the server layer to the
client layer network(s) using the fault notification format
appropriate to the client layer.
o Sending a backward fault notification to the server layer, if
applicable, in the reverse direction.
o Sending a backward fault notification to the client layer, if
applicable, in the reverse direction.
Finally, fault recovery deals with recovering from the detected
failure by switching to an alternate available data path (depending
on the nature of the fault) using alternate devices or links. In
fact, the controller can provision another virtual network, thus
automatically resolving the reported problem.
The controller may also directly monitor the status of virtual
network components such as Network Virtualization Edge elements
Chen & Ashwood-Smith, et al [Page 5]
INTERNET DRAFT NVO3 OAM Requirements July 2015
(NVEs) [RFC7365] in order to respond to their failures. In addition
to forward and backward fault notifications, the controller may
deliver notifications to a higher level orchestration component,
e.g., one responsible for Virtual Machine (VM) provisioning and
management.
Note, given that the IP network on which NVO3 resides is usually self
healing, it is expected that recovery by the NVO3 layer would not
normally be required, although there may be a requirement for that
layer to log that the problem has been detected and resolved. The
special cases of a static IP overlay network, or possibly of a
centrally controlled IP overlay network, may, however, require NVO3
involvement in fault recovery.
Performance Management deals with mechanism(s) that allow determining
and measuring the performance of the network/services under
consideration. Performance Management can be used to verify the
compliance to both the service-level and network-level metric
objectives/specifications. Performance Management typically consists
of measuring performance metrics, e.g., Frame Loss, Frame Delay,
Frame Delay Variation (aka Jitter), Frame Throughput, Frame Discard,
etc., across managed entities when the managed entities are in
available state. Performance Management is suspended across
unavailable managed entities.
1.2. 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 [RFC2119].
1.3. Relationship with Other OAM Work
This document leverages requirements that originate with other OAM
work, specifically the following:
o [RFC6136] provides a template and some of the high level
requirements and introductory wording.
o [IEEE802.1Q-2011] is expected to provide a subset of the
requirements for NVO3 both at the Tenant level and also within the
L3 Overlay network.
o [Y.1731] is expected to provide a subset of the requirements for
NVO3 at the Tenant level.
o Section 3.3.2.1 of [NVO3-DP-Reqs] lists several requirements
specifically concerning ECMP/LAG.
Chen & Ashwood-Smith, et al [Page 6]
INTERNET DRAFT NVO3 OAM Requirements July 2015
2. Terminology
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
[RFC2119].
The terminology defined in [RFC7365] and [NVO3-DP-Reqs] is used
throughout this document. We introduce no new terminology.
3. NVO3 Reference Model
Figure 1 below reproduces the generic NVO3 reference model as per
[RFC7365].
+--------+ +--------+
| Tenant | | Tenant |
| End +--+ +---| End |
| System | | | | System |
+--------+ | ............... .... | +--------+
| +-+--+ +--+-+ |
| | NV | | NV | |
+--|Edge| L3 Overlay |Edge|--+
+-+--+ Network +--+-+
/ . . \
+--------+ / . +----------+ . \ +--------+
| Tenant +--+ . |Controller| . +----| Tenant |
| End | . |(optional)| . | End |
| System | . +-------+--+ . | System |
+--------+ . . . +--------+
. +----+ . .
.....| NV |.........
|Edge|
+----+
|
|
+--+-----+
| Tenant |
| End |
| System |
+--------+
Figure 1: Generic NVO3 Reference Model
Figure 2 below, reproduces the Generic reference model for the NV
Edge (NVE) as per [NVO3-DP-Reqs].
Chen & Ashwood-Smith, et al [Page 7]
INTERNET DRAFT NVO3 OAM Requirements July 2015
+-----------------+
| Controller |(optional)
+--------+--------+
|
|
+------- L3 Network ------+
| |
| Tunnel Overlay |
+------------+---------^-+ +--------+-------------^-+
| +----------+------+ | | | +------+----------+ | |
| | Overlay Module | | | | | Overlay Module | | |
| +--------+--------+ | | | +--------+--------+ | |
| | VNID | | | | VNID | |
| | OAM | | | OAM |
| +-------+-------+ | | | +-------+-------+ | |
| | VNI | | | | | VNI | | |
NVE1 | +-+-----------+-+ | | NVE2 | +-+-----------+-+ | |
| | VAPs | | | | | VAPs | | |
+----+-----------+-----V-+ +----+-----------+-----V-+
| | | |
-------+-----------+--------------------+-----------+--------
| | Tenant | |
| | Service IF | |
Tenant End Systems Tenant End Systems
Figure 2: Generic reference model for the NV Edge (NVE)
4. OAM Framework for NVO3
Figure 1 shows the generic reference model for a DC network
virtualization over an L3 (or L3VPN) infrastructure while Figure 2
showed the generic reference model for the Network Virtualization
(NV) Edge. As shown in both figure 1 and figure 2, the Controller
is an optional element that can participate to the support and the
operation of OAM functions.
L3 network(s) or L3 VPN networks (either IPv6 or IPv4, or a
combination thereof), provide transport for an emulated layer 2
created by NV Edge devices. Unicast and multicast tunneling
methods (de-multiplexed by Virtual Network Identifier (VNID)) are
used to provide connectivity between the NV Edge devices. The NV
Edge devices then present an emulated layer 2 network to the
Tenant End Systems at a Virtual Network Interface (VNI) through
Virtual Access Points (VAPs). The NV Edge devices map layer 2
unicast to layer 3 unicast point-to-point tunnels and may either
map layer 2 multicast to layer 3 multicast tunnels or may
replicate packets onto multiple layer 3 unicast tunnels.
Chen & Ashwood-Smith, et al [Page 8]
INTERNET DRAFT NVO3 OAM Requirements July 2015
4.1. OAM Layering
The emulated layer 2 network is provided by the NV Edge devices to
which the Tenant End Systems are connected. This network of NV
Edges can be operated by a single service provider or can span
across multiple administrative domains. Likewise, the L3 Overlay
Network can be operated by a single service provider or span
across multiple administrative domains.
While each of the layers is responsible for its own OAM, each
layer may consist of several different administrative domains.
Figure 3 shows an example.
TENANT |----------------------------| TENANT
NV Edge |----------------------| NV Edge
IP(VPN) |---| IP (VPN) |---| IP(VPN)
Figure 3: Example NVO3 OAM Layering
For example, at the bottom, at the L3 IP overlay network layer
IP(VPN) and/or Ethernet OAM mechanisms are used to probe link by
link, node to node etc. OAM addressing here means physical node
loopback or interface addresses.
Further up, at the NV Edge layer, NVO3 OAM messages are used to
probe the NV Edge to NV Edge tunnels and NV Edge entity status.
OAM addressing here likely means the physical node loopback
together with the VNI (to de-multiplex the tunnels).
Finally, at the Tenant layer, the IP and/or Ethernet OAM
mechanisms are again used but here they are operating over the
logical L2/L3 provided by the NV-Edge through the VAP. OAM
addressing at this layer deals with the logical interfaces on
Vswitches and Virtual Machines.
4.2. OAM Domains
Complex OAM relationships exist as a result of the hierarchical
layering of responsibility and of breaking up of end-to-end
responsibility.
The OAM domain above NVO3, is expected to be supported by existing
IP and L2 OAM methods and tools.
The OAM domain below NVO3, is expected to be supported by existing
IP/L2 and MPLS OAM methods and tools. Where this layer is actually
Chen & Ashwood-Smith, et al [Page 9]
INTERNET DRAFT NVO3 OAM Requirements July 2015
multiple domains spliced together, the existing methods to deal
with these boundaries are unchanged. Note however that exposing
LAG/ECMP detailed behavior may result in additional requirements
to this domain, the details of which will be specified in the
future versions of this draft.
When we refer to an OAM domain in this document, or just 'domain',
we therefore refer to a closed set of NV Edges or MEPs and the
tunnels which interconnect them.
Note, whether for the scenario of inter-domain or multi-layer,
each domain (or layer) is responsible for its own OAM, no
correlation of OAM function exists between each domain (or layer).
When an E2E connection in Tenant layer spans across multiple
domains and has multiple underlay layers of NV Edge layer and L3
IP (VPN) layer, current OAM implementation for the E2E connection
of Tenant layer such as Fault or Performance Management can only
be performed per domain and layer manually and more manual labor
is needed. An automatic coordination process among OAM functions
of each domain or layer may be useful here for improving
efficiency and intelligence.
In the case where a gateway device is use to connect two different
domains (whether for changing the encapsulation or other reasons),
it is necessary to provide mechanisms to monitor the path through
the gateway which involves the removal of one overlay header and
the creation of a new one.
5. NVO3 OAM Requirements
5.1. Discovery
R1) NVO3 OAM MUST allow an NV Edge device to dynamically discover
other NV Edge devices that share the same VNI within a given NVO3
domain. This may be based on a discovery mechanism used to set up
data path forwarding between NVEs.
5.2. Connectivity Fault Management
5.2.1. Connectivity Fault Detection
R2) NVO3 OAM MUST allow proactive connectivity monitoring between
two or more NV Edge devices that support the same VNIs within a
given NVO3 domain. NVO3 OAM MAY act as a protection trigger.
That is, automatic recovery from transmission facility failure by
switchover to a redundant replacement facility may be triggered by
notifications from NVO3 OAM.
Chen & Ashwood-Smith, et al [Page 10]
INTERNET DRAFT NVO3 OAM Requirements July 2015
R3) NVO3 OAM MAY allow monitoring/tracing of all possible paths in
the underlay network between a specified set of two or more NV
Edge devices. Using this feature, equal cost paths that traverse
LAG and/or ECMP may be differentiated.
5.2.2. Connectivity Fault Verification
R4) NVO3 OAM MUST allow connectivity fault verification between
two or more NV Edge devices that support the same VNI within a
given NVO3 domain.
5.2.3. Connectivity Fault localization
R5) NVO3 OAM MUST allow connectivity fault localization between
two or more NV Edge devices that support the same VNI within a
given NVO3 domain.
5.2.4. Connectivity Fault Notification and Alarm Suppression
R6) NVO3 OAM MUST support fault notification to be triggered as a
result of the faults occurring in the underneath network
infrastructure. This fault notification SHOULD be used for the
suppression of redundant service-level alarms.
5.3. Connectivity Performance Management
5.3.1. Frame Loss
R7) NVO3 OAM MUST support measurement of per VNI frame loss
between two NV Edge devices that support the same VNI within a
given NVO3 domain.
5.3.2. Frame Delay
R8) NVO3 OAM MUST support measurement of per VNI two-way frame
delay between two NV edge devices that support the same VNI within
a given NVO3 domain.
R9) NVO3 OAM MUST support measurement of per VNI one-way frame
delay between two NV Edge devices that support the same VNI within
a given NVO3 domain.
5.3.3. Frame Delay Variation
R10) NVO3 OAM MUST support measurement of per VNI frame delay
variation between two NV Edge devices that support the same VNI
Chen & Ashwood-Smith, et al [Page 11]
INTERNET DRAFT NVO3 OAM Requirements July 2015
within a given NVO3 domain.
5.3.4. Frame Throughput
R11) NVO3 OAM MAY support measurement of per VNI frame throughput
(in frames and bytes) between two NV Edge devices that support the
same VNI within a given NVO3 domain. This feature could be an
effective way to confirm whether or not assigned path bandwidth
conforms to service level agreement before providing the path
between two NV Edge devices.
5.3.5. Frame Discard
R12) NVO3 OAM MAY support measurement of per VNI frame discard
between two NV Edge devices that support the same VNI within a
given NVO3 domain. This feature MAY be effective to monitor bursty
traffic between two NV Edge devices.
5.4. Continuity Check
NVO3 OAM MUST provide functions that allow any arbitrary NV edge
device to perform a Continuity Check to any other NV edge device.
NVO3 OAM MUST provide functions that allow any arbitrary NV edge
device to perform a Continuity Check to any other NV edge device
using a path associated with a specified flow.
NVO3 OAM SHOULD provide functions that allow any arbitrary NV edge
device to perform a Continuity Check to any other NV edge device
over any section of any selectable least-cost path.
NVO3 OAM SHOULD provide the ability to perform a Continuity Check
on sections of any selectable path within the network.
5.5. Availability
A service may be considered unavailable if the service
frames/packets do not reach their intended destination (e.g.,
connectivity is down) or the service is degraded (e.g., frame loss
and/or frame delay and/or delay variation threshold is exceeded).
Entry and exit conditions may be defined for the unavailable
state. Availability itself may be defined in the context of a
service type. Since availability measurement may be associated
with connectivity, frame loss, frame delay, and frame delay
variation measurements, no additional requirements are specified
currently.
5.6. Data Path Forwarding
Chen & Ashwood-Smith, et al [Page 12]
INTERNET DRAFT NVO3 OAM Requirements July 2015
R13) NVO3 OAM frames MUST be forwarded along the same path (i.e.,
links (including LAG members) and nodes) as the NVO3 data frames.
R14) NVO3 OAM frames MAY provide a mechanism to exercise/trace all
data paths that result due to ECMP/LAG hops in the underlay
network, if these paths have been known.
NVO3 OAM frame MUST be possible arranged to follow the path taken
by a specific flow.
NVE MUST have the ability to identify frames that require OAM
processing.
The Controller element MAY be involved in the out-of-band OAM
design and deployment. Indeed, the Controller is expected to
maintain an up-to-date global, systemic view of all the network
paths and their associated status (e.g., available, idle,
unavailable, faulty, in maintenance, etc.)
5.7. Scalability
R15) NVO3 OAM MUST be scalable such that an NV edge device can
support proactive OAM for each VNI that is supported by the
device.
5.8. Extensibility
R16) NVO3 OAM should be extensible such that new functionality and
information elements related to this functionality can be
introduced in the future.
R17) NVO3 OAM MUST be defined such that devices not supporting the
OAM are able to forward the OAM frames in a similar fashion as the
regular NVO3 data frames/packets.
5.9. Security
R18) NVO3 OAM frames MUST be prevented from leaking outside their
NVO3 domain.
R19) NVO3 OAM frames from outside an NVO3 domain MUST be prevented
from entering the said NVO3 domain when such OAM frames belong to
the same level or to a lower-level OAM. (Trivially met because
hierarchical domains are independent technologies.)
R20) NVO3 OAM frames from outside an NVO3 domain MUST be
transported transparently inside the NVO3 domain when such OAM
frames belong to a higher-level NVO3 domain. (Trivially met
Chen & Ashwood-Smith, et al [Page 13]
INTERNET DRAFT NVO3 OAM Requirements July 2015
because hierarchical domains are independent technologies).
5.10. Transport Independence
Similar to transport requirement from [RFC6136], we expect NVO3
OAM will leverage the OAM capabilities of the transport layer
(e.g., IP underlay).
R21) NVO3 OAM MAY allow adaptation/interworking with its IP
underlay OAM functions. For example, this would be useful to
allow fault notifications from the IP layer to be sent to the NVO3
layer. Likewise, LAG/ECMP-originated notifications may affect the
NVO3 OAM decision process.
5.11. Application Independence
R22) NVO3 OAM MAY be independent of the application technologies
and specific application OAM capabilities.
5.12. Prioritization
R23) NVO3 OAM messages MUST be preferentially treated in NVE and
between NVEs, since NVO3 OAM MAY be used to trigger protection
switching. As noted above (R2), protection switching is the
automatic replacement of a failed transmission facility with a
working one providing equal or greater capacity, typically within
a few tens of milliseconds from fault detection.
5.13. Logging and Traceability Requirements
Logging is required at the Network Virtualization Authority (NVA)
and the Network Virtualization Edge (NVE) [and the NVO3 Gateway,
but the framework does not mention such a beast] in support of
fault management and configuration management.
R24) All logs MUST contain a (sufficiently accurate) timestamp to
allow the reporting functional instance (i.e., NVA, NVE) to
precisely determine the sequence of events. Clocks on different
functional instances SHOULD be synchronized to allow similar
accuracy when comparing logs from different devices.
R25) All logs MUST contain information that unambiguously
identifies the reporting functional instance
R26) Implementations MUST be capable of reporting the following
fault-related events:
Chen & Ashwood-Smith, et al [Page 14]
INTERNET DRAFT NVO3 OAM Requirements July 2015
1. Loss and resumption of connectivity
These reports SHOULD identify the affected VNI(s), but when the
loss affects a large number of VNIs simultaneously the report
SHOULD identify the underlying entity (e.g., route) if available.
2. Loss and resumption of NVE responsiveness
These reports will be generated by adjacent NVAs or NVEs. They
MUST identify the NVE concerned.
3. NVA or NVE change of operational state
These reports will be generated by the NVA or NVE concerned. They
MUST indicate the old and new operational states and the cause.
4. Loss and resumption of a VAP
These reports will be generated by adjacent NVAs or NVEs. They
MUST identify the VAP concerned.
R27) Implementations MUST be capable of reporting the following
events in support of configuration management and auditing. It
MUST be possible to generate the reports at both the originating
and executing entities. The report generated at the originating
entity MUST identify the executing entity and the report at the
executing entity MUST identify the originating entity. Both
reports MUST indicate the result of the transaction.
1. Virtual Access Point (VAP) creation or deletion
These reports MUST identify the VAP, the Tenant System, and the
port supporting the VAP.
2. VNI creation or deletion
These reports MUST identify the VNI and the VAP.
3. VNI renumbering
These reports MUST identify the VAP and the old and new VNI
numbers.
4. Reachability and forwarding information update
These reports MUST identify the previous and new file identifiers.
(Assumption: reachability and forwarding information is passed as
files, which are retained at the originating and executing
Chen & Ashwood-Smith, et al [Page 15]
INTERNET DRAFT NVO3 OAM Requirements July 2015
entities for a fixed period for auditing purposes.)
R28) As a general requirement, implementations MUST provide a
means whereby the operator can impose rate limits on the
generation of specific reports. Implementations MUST further
permit the operator to totally suppress reporting of specific
events. However, if any report types have been suppressed, non-
suppressible reports MUST be generated at regular intervals (e.g.,
once an hour) indicating what report types have been suppressed.
5.14. Live Traffic Monitoring
NVO3 OAM implementations MAY provide methods to utilize live
traffic for troubleshooting and performance monitoring.
6. Items for Further Discussion
This section identifies a set of operational items which may be
elaborated further if these items fall within the scope of the
NVO3.
o VNID renumbering support
* Means to change the VNID assigned to a given instance MUST
be supported.
* System convergence subsequent to VNID renumbering MUST NOT
take longer than a few seconds, to minimize impact on the
tenant systems.
* A NVE MUST be able to map a VNID with a virtual network
context.
o VNI migration and management operations
* Means to delete an existing VNI MUST be supported.
* Means to add a new VNI MUST be supported.
* Means to merge several VNIs MAY be supported.
* Means to retrieve reporting data per VNI MUST be supported.
* Means to monitor the network resources per VNI MUST be
supported.
o Support of planned maintenance operations on the NVO3
infrastructure
Chen & Ashwood-Smith, et al [Page 16]
INTERNET DRAFT NVO3 OAM Requirements July 2015
* Graceful procedure to allow for planned maintenance
operation on NVE MUST be supported. This includes undoing
any configuration changes made for maintenance purposes
after completion of the maintenance.
o Support for communication among virtual networks
* For global reachability purposes, communication among
virtual networks MUST be supported. This can be enforced
using a NAT function.
o Activation of new network-related services to the NVO3
* Means to assist in activating new network services (e.g.,
multicast) without impacting running service SHOULD be
supported.
o Inter-operator NVO3 considerations
* As NVO3 may be deployed over inter-operator infrastructure,
coordinating OAM actions in each individual domain are
required to ensure an end-to-end OAM. In particular, this
assumes existence of agreements on the measurement and
monitoring methods, fault detection and repair actions,
extending QoS classes (e.g., DSCP mapping policies), etc.
o An automatic coordination process among OAM functions of
different domains or layers which an E2E connection in Tenant
layer is tunneled on
* NVO3 OAM MAY support the automatic coordination of OAM
functions among different domains or layers which belong to
one Tenant layer E2E connection. The automatic coordination
means OAM function in client layer or one domain triggers
associated OAM functions in server layer or neighbouring
domain. This triggered action performs at the domain
boundaries, which is also the MEPs of the domain. Which OAM
function in client layer or one domain can trigger which OAM
functions in server layer or neighbouring domain depends on
specific condition, and can be very flexible. But the basic
rule is that the OAM functions performed simultaneously in
different domains or layers can be synthesized together to
get the final result.
* The OAM MEPs of domains MUST have the capability to know if
it they need to perform the above automatic coordination
process. This can be achieved by many ways, i.e., by
configuration, by checking the flag field in OAM frames.
Chen & Ashwood-Smith, et al [Page 17]
INTERNET DRAFT NVO3 OAM Requirements July 2015
* When the OAM MEPs perform the automatic coordination, a
specific global characteristic information MUST be carried
and mapped between OAM frames used in different domains or
layers, and be kept the same alone the whole tenant layer
E2E connection. The global characteristic information can
be the tenant network identifier (e.g., VNID), ICMP sequence
number, etc. It is used for identifying a set of correlated
OAM results obtained from these domains or layers. This set
of OAM results is then synthesized together to get the final
diagnose result.
* NVO3 OAM MUST support a Collection Point for collecting all
the OAM results and synthesizing them. It can be the SDN
controller, NVA, or NMS. An E2E OAM function in tenant
network can trigger several OAM functions in different
underlay networks, a Collection Point is needed to collect
all the OAM results from different OAM MEPs of different
domains or layers and synthesizes them.
7. IANA Considerations
This memo includes no request to IANA.
8. Security Considerations
Security requirements are specified in Section 5.9. For general NVO3
security considerations, please refer to [NVO3-Security].
9. Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful for the contributions of David Black, Dennis
Qin, Erik Smith, Deepark Kumar, Dapeng Liu, and Ziye Yang to this
latest version.
10. References
10.1 Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI
10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, <http://www.rfc-
editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
10.2 Informative References
[IEEE802.1Q-2011] "IEEE Standard for Local and metropolitan area
Chen & Ashwood-Smith, et al [Page 18]
INTERNET DRAFT NVO3 OAM Requirements July 2015
networks - Media Access Control (MAC) Bridges and Virtual
Bridged Local Area Networks", 2011.
[NM-Standards] "ITU-T Recommendation M.3400 (02/2000) - TMN
Management Functions", February 2000.
[NVO3-DP-Reqs] Bitar, N., Lasserre, M., Balus, F., Morin, T., Jin, L.
and Khasnabish, B., "NVO3 Data Plane Requirements", draft-
ietf-nvo3-dataplane-requirements-03(work in progress),
April 2014.
[NVO3-Security] Hartman, S., Zhang, D., Wasserman, M., Qiang, Z. and
Zhang, M., "Security Requirements of NVO3", draft-ietf-
nvo3-security-requirements-05(work in progress), June
2015.
[RFC6136] Sajassi, A. and D. Mohan, "Layer 2 Virtual Private
Network(L2VPN) Operations, Administration, and
Maintenance(OAM) Requirements and Framework", March 2011.
[RFC7365] Lasserre, M., Balus, F., Morin, T., Bitar, N., and Y.
Rekhter, "Framework for DC Network Virtualization",
October 2014.
[Y.1731] "ITU-T Recommendation Y.1731 (02/08) - OAM functions and
mechanisms for Ethernet based networks", February 2008.
Authors' Addresses
Hao Chen
Huawei Technologies
101 Software Avenue,
Nanjing 210012
China
Phone: +86-25-56624440
EMail: philips.chenhao@huawei.com
Peter Ashwood-Smith
Huawei Technologies
303 Terry Fox Drive, Suite 400
Kanata, Ontario K2K 3J1
Canada
Phone: +1 613 595-1900
Email: Peter.AshwoodSmith@huawei.com
Chen & Ashwood-Smith, et al [Page 19]
INTERNET DRAFT NVO3 OAM Requirements July 2015
Liang Xia (Frank)
Huawei Technologies
Email: Frank.xialiang@huawei.com
Ranga Iyengar
Huawei Technologies USA
2330 Central Expy
Santa Clara, CA 95050
USA
Email: ranga.Iyengar@huawei.com
Tina Tsou
Huawei Technologies USA
2330 Central Expy
Santa Clara, CA 95050
USA
Email: Tina.Tsou.Zouting@huawei.com
Ali Sajassi
Cisco Technologies
170 West Tasman Drive
San Jose, CA 95134
USA
Email: sajassi@cisco.com
Mohamed Boucadair
France Telecom
Rennes, 35000
France
Email: mohamed.boucadair@orange.com
Christian Jacquenet
France Telecom
Rennes, 35000
France
Email: christian.jacquenet@orange.com
Masahiro Daikoku
KDDI corporation
3-10-10, Iidabashi, Chiyoda-ku
Chen & Ashwood-Smith, et al [Page 20]
INTERNET DRAFT NVO3 OAM Requirements July 2015
Tokyo 1028460
Japan
Email: ms-daikoku@kddi.com
Anoop Ghanwani
Dell
5450 Great America Pkwy
Santa Clara, CA
USA
Email: anoop@alumni.duke.edu
Ram Krishnan
Brocade
130 Holger Way
San Jose, CA 95134
USA
Email: ramk@brocade.com
Chen & Ashwood-Smith, et al [Page 21]