Internet DRAFT - draft-sajassi-bess-evpn-ac-aware-bundling
draft-sajassi-bess-evpn-ac-aware-bundling
BESS Working Group A. Sajassi
Internet-Draft P. Brissette
Intended status: Standards Track M. Mishra
Expires: 16 March 2023 S. Thoria
Cisco Systems
J. Rabadan
Nokia
J. Drake
Juniper Networks
12 September 2022
AC-Aware Bundling Service Interface in EVPN
draft-sajassi-bess-evpn-ac-aware-bundling-06
Abstract
EVPN provides an extensible and flexible multi-homing VPN solution
over an MPLS/IP network for intra-subnet connectivity among Tenant
Systems and End Devices that can be physical or virtual.
EVPN multihoming with IRB is one of the common deployment scenarios.
There are deployments which requires capability to have multiple
subnets designated with multiple VLAN IDs in single Broadcast Domain.
EVPN technology defines three different types of service interface
which serve different requirements but none of them address the
requirement of supporting multiple subnets within single Broadcast
Domain. In this draft we define new service interface type to
support multiple subnets in single Broadcast Domain. Service
interface proposed in this draft will be applicable to multihoming
case only.
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 [RFC2119] and
RFC 8174 [RFC8174].
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Sajassi, et al. Expires 16 March 2023 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft EVPN AC-Aware Bundling Service Interface September 2022
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 16 March 2023.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2022 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 Revised BSD License text as
described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1. Problem With Unicast MAC Route . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.2. Problem With Multicast Route Synchronization . . . . . . 6
1.3. Potential Security Concern caused By Misconfiguration . . 6
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3. Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4. Solution Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.1. Control Plane Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.1.1. MAC/IP Address Advertisement . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.1.1.1. Local Unicast MAC Learning . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.1.1.2. Remote Unicast MAC Learning . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.1.2. Multicast Route Advertisement . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.1.2.1. Local Multicast State . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.1.2.2. Remote Multicast State . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.2. Data Plane Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.2.1. Unicast Forwarding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.2.2. Multicast Forwarding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5. Mis-configuration Across Multihoming Peers . . . . . . . . . 10
6. BGP Encoding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6.1. Attachment Circuit ID Extended Community . . . . . . . . 10
Sajassi, et al. Expires 16 March 2023 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft EVPN AC-Aware Bundling Service Interface September 2022
6.2. Ethernet-tag Field vs AC ID Extended Community . . . . . 11
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
9. Acknowledgement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
1. Introduction
EVPN based All-Active multi-homing is becoming the basic building
block for providing redundancy in next generation data center
deployments as well as service provider access/aggregation network.
For EVPN IRB mode, there are deployments which expect to be able to
support multiple subnets within single Broadcast Domain. Each subnet
would be differentiated by VLAN. Thus, single IRB interface can
still serve multiple subnet.
Motivation behind such deployments are
1. Manageability: The support to have multiple subnets using single
Broadcast Domain requires only one Broadcast Domain and one IRB
for "N" subnets compare to "N" Broadcast Domain and "N" IRB
interface to manage.
2. Simplicity: It avoids extra configuration by configuring VLAN
Range with single BD and IRB as compare to individual VLAN, BD
and IRB interface per subnet.
[RFC7432] defines three types of service interface. None of them
provide flexibility to achieve multiple subnets within single
Broadcast Domain. The different types of service interface from
[RFC7432] are:
1. VLAN-Based Service Interface: With this service interface, an
EVPN instance consists of only a single broadcast domain (e.g., a
single VLAN). Therefore, there is a one-to-one mapping between a
VID on this interface and a MAC-VRF.
2. VLAN Bundle Service Interface: With this service interface, an
EVPN instance corresponds to multiple broadcast domains (e.g.,
multiple VLANs); however, only a single bridge table is
maintained per MAC-VRF, which means multiple VLANs share the same
bridge table. The MPLS-encapsulated frames MUST remain tagged
with the originating VID. Tag translation is NOT permitted. The
Ethernet Tag ID in all EVPN routes MUST be set to 0.
Sajassi, et al. Expires 16 March 2023 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft EVPN AC-Aware Bundling Service Interface September 2022
3. VLAN-Aware Bundle Service Interface: With this service interface,
an EVPN instance consists of multiple broadcast domains (e.g.,
multiple VLANs) with each VLAN having its own bridge table --
i.e., multiple bridge tables (one per VLAN) are maintained by a
single MAC-VRF corresponding to the EVPN instance.
From definition, it seems like VLAN Bundle Service Interface does
provide flexibility to support multiple subnets within single
Broadcast Domain. However, the requirement is to have multiple
subnets from same ES on multi-homing all active mode; that would not
work. For example, lets take the case from Figure 1 where PE1 learns
MAC of H1 on VLAN 1 (subnet S1). PE1 originates EVPN MAC route, as
per [RFC7432], where the Ethernet Tag would be set to 0. Incoming
packets from IRB interface, at PE2, are untagged packet. PE2 does
not have any associated AC information from EVPN MAC routes
advertised by PE1. PE2 can not forward traffic which is destined to
H1.
This draft proposes an extension to existing service interface types
defined in [RFC7432] and defines AC-aware Bundling service interface.
AC-aware Bundling service interface would provide mechanism to have
multiple subnets in single Broadcast Domain. This extension is
applicable only for multi-homed EVPN peers.
Sajassi, et al. Expires 16 March 2023 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft EVPN AC-Aware Bundling Service Interface September 2022
H3
|
+---+---+
| PE3 | EVI-1
+---+---+
|
+-----------------------+--------------------+
| |
| IP MPLS core |
| |
+------+------------------------------+------+
| |
+--------------+----+ +----+--------------+
| PE1 | | PE2 |
| | | |
| +-----+ | | +-----+ |
| | IRB | | | | IRB | |
| +--+-----+--+ | | +--+-----+--+ |
| | BD & EVI | | | | BD & EVI | |
| +--+--+--+--+ | | +-----------+ |
| |S1|S2|S3|S4| | | |S1|S2|S3|S4| |
+---+--+-X+--+--+---+ +---+--+--+X-+--+---+
X X
X X
X X ESI-100
X X EVI-1
X X BD-1
X X
XX
+------+
| CE |
+-+--+-+
| |
H1 H2
MAC-1 MAC-2
VLAN-1 VLAN-2
(S,G) (S,G)
Figure 1
EVPN topology with multi-homing and non multihoming peer.
Figure 1 shows sample EVPN topology where PE1 and PE2 are multihomed
peers. PE3 is remote peer participating in the same EVPN instance
(EVI-1). It illustrates four subnets S1, S2, S3 and S4 where
numerical value provides associated VLAN information.
Sajassi, et al. Expires 16 March 2023 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft EVPN AC-Aware Bundling Service Interface September 2022
1.1. Problem With Unicast MAC Route
BD-1 has multiple subnets where each subnet is distinguished by VLAN
1, 2 ,3 and 4. PE1 learns MAC address MAC-1 from AC associated with
subnet S1. PE1 uses MAC route to advertise MAC-1 presence to peer
PEs. As per [RFC7432] MAC route advertisement from PE1 does not
carry any context providing information about MAC address association
with AC. When PE2 receives MAC route with MAC-2 it can not determine
which AC this MAC belongs too.
Since PE2 could not bind MAC-1 with correct AC, when it receives data
traffic destined to MAC-1, it does not know the destination AC since
multiple bridge ports have the same ESI assignment.
1.2. Problem With Multicast Route Synchronization
[RFC9251] defines mechanism to synchronize multicast routes between
multihome peers. In above case, if receiver behind S1 send IGMP
membership request, CE could hash it to either of the PEs. When
multicast route is originated, it does not contain any AC
information. Once it reaches to peering PE, it does not have any
information about which subnet this IGMP membership request belong
to. Similarly to unicast traffic problem, the incoming multicast
traffic from IRB cannot be forearded to proper AC.
1.3. Potential Security Concern caused By Misconfiguration
In case of single subnet per Broadcast Domain, there is potential
case of security issue. For example, PE1 has BD1 configured with
VLAN-1 where as multihome peer PE2 has BD1 configured VLAN-2. Each
of the IGMP membership requests on PE1 would be synchronized to PE2
and PE2 would process multicast routes and start forwarding multicast
traffic on VLAN-2, which was not intended. Again, similar issue can
potentially be seen with unicast traffic.
2. Terminology
* AC: Attachment Circuit.
* ARP: Address Resolution Protocol.
* BD: Broadcast Domain. As per [RFC7432], an EVI consists of a
single or multiple BDs. In case of VLAN-bundle and VLAN-based
service models (see [RFC7432]), a BD is equivalent to an EVI. In
case of VLAN-aware bundle service model, an EVI contains multiple
BDs. Also, in this document, BD and subnet are equivalent terms.
Sajassi, et al. Expires 16 March 2023 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft EVPN AC-Aware Bundling Service Interface September 2022
* BD Route Target: refers to the Broadcast Domain assigned Route
Target [RFC4364]. In case of VLAN-aware bundle service model, all
the BD instances in the MAC-VRF share the same Route Target.
* BT: Bridge Table. The instantiation of a BD in a MAC-VRF, as per
[RFC7432].
* Ethernet A-D route: Ethernet Auto-Discovery (A-D) route, as per
[RFC7432].
* EVI: EVPN Instance spanning the NVE/PE devices that are
participating on that EVPN, as per [RFC7432].
* EVPN: Ethernet Virtual Private Networks, as per [RFC7432].
* IRB: Integrated Routing and Bridging interface. It connects an
IP-VRF to a BD (or subnet).
* MAC-VRF: A Virtual Routing and Forwarding table for Media Access
Control (MAC) addresses on an NVE/PE, as per [RFC7432]. A MAC-VRF
is also an instantiation of an EVI in an NVE/PE.
* ND: Neighbor Discovery Protocol.
* RD: BGP Route Distinguisher.
* RT-2: EVPN route type 2, i.e., MAC/IP advertisement route, as
defined in [RFC7432].
* RT-5: EVPN route type 5, i.e., IP Prefix route. As defined in
Section 3 of [RFC9136].
* SN: Subnet.
* TS: Tenant System.
* VLAN: The usage of VLAN refers to 802.1Q or 802.1AD tag.
* (S,G): Multicast membership request
* This document also assumes familiarity with the terminology of
[RFC7432],[RFC8365], [RFC7365].
3. Requirements
1. A service interface represents an attachement-circuit where
multiple VLAN are configured on. Each of these VLANs are
represented by a different AC under a single Broadcast Domain.
Sajassi, et al. Expires 16 March 2023 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft EVPN AC-Aware Bundling Service Interface September 2022
2. Single Broadcast Domain MUST support service interfaces.
3. Service interface MUST be applicable to multihomed peers only.
4. Service interface MUST have an Ethernet-Segment identifier
assignement.
5. New service interface handling procedures MUST be backward
compatible with implementation procedures defined in [RFC7432]
6. New service interface MUST support EVPN multicast routes defined
in [RFC9251] too.
4. Solution Description
4.1. Control Plane Operation
4.1.1. MAC/IP Address Advertisement
4.1.1.1. Local Unicast MAC Learning
[RFC7432] section 9.1 describes different mechanism to learn Unicast
MAC address locally. PEs where AC aware bundling is supported, MAC
address is learnt along with VLAN associated with AC.
MAC/IP route construction follows mechanism defined in [RFC7432]
section 9.2.1. An attach Attachment Circuit ID Extended Community
(Section 6.1) must be attached to EVPN RT-2.
4.1.1.2. Remote Unicast MAC Learning
Presence of Attachment Circuit ID Extended Community (Section 6.1)
MUST be ignored by non multihoming PEs. Remote PE (non-multihome PE)
MUST process MAC route as defined in [RFC7432]
Multihoming peer MUST process Attachment Circuit ID Extended
Community (Section 6.1) to attach remote MAC address to appropriate
AC.
From Figure 1, PE2 receives MAC route for MAC-1. It MUST get
Attachment Circuit ID from Attachment Circuit ID Extended Community
(Section 6.1) in RT-2 and associate MAC address with specific subnet.
4.1.2. Multicast Route Advertisement
Sajassi, et al. Expires 16 March 2023 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft EVPN AC-Aware Bundling Service Interface September 2022
4.1.2.1. Local Multicast State
When a local multihomed AC in given Broadcast Domain receives IGMP
membership request, it MUST synchronize multicast state by
originating multicast route defined in [RFC9251]. When Service
interface is AC aware it MUST attach Attachment Circuit ID Extended
Community (Section 6.1) along with multicast route. For example in
Figure 1 when H2 sends IGMP membership request for (S,G), CE hashed
it to one of the PE. Lets say PE1 received IGMP membership request.
PE1 MUST originate multicast route to synchronize multicast state
with PE2. Multicast route MUST contain Attachment Circuit ID
Extended Community (Section 6.1) along with multicast route.
PE1 must originate multicast route updates for any subsequent IGMP
membership requests under same or different subnet attaching adequate
Attachment Circuit ID Extended Community (Section 6.1).
4.1.2.2. Remote Multicast State
If multihomed PE receives remote multicast route on Broadcast Domain
for given ES, route MUST be programmed to correct subnet. Subnet
information MUST be extracted from Attachment Circuit ID Extended
Community. That value maps to the VLAN of a local AC where the
multicast route is associated to.
4.2. Data Plane Operation
4.2.1. Unicast Forwarding
Packet received from CE must follow same procedure as defined in
[RFC7432] section 13.1
Unknown Unicast packets from a Remote PE MUST follow procedure as per
[RFC7432] section 13.2.1.
Known unicast Received on a remote PE MUST follow procedure as per
[RFC7432] section 13.2.2. In Figure 1, if PE3 receives known unicast
packet for destination MAC MAC-1, it MUST follow procedure defined in
[RFC7432] section 13.2.2.
If destination MAC lookup is performed on known unicast packet,
destination MAC lookup MUST provide VLAN and local AC information.
For example if PE2 receives unicast packet which is destined to MAC-1
(packet might be coming from IRB or remote PE with EVPN tunnel),
destination MAC lookup on PE2 MUST provide outgoing port along with
associated VLAN value.
Sajassi, et al. Expires 16 March 2023 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft EVPN AC-Aware Bundling Service Interface September 2022
4.2.2. Multicast Forwarding
Multicast traffic from CE and remote PE MUST follow procedure defined
in [RFC7432]
Multicast traffic received from IRB interface or EVPN tunnel, route
lookup would be performed based on IGMP snooping state and traffic
would be forwarded to appropriate AC.
5. Mis-configuration Across Multihoming Peers
If there is mis-configuration of VLAN or VLAN range across
multihoming peers, same MAC address would be learnt with different
VLAN per Broadcast Domain. In this case Error message MUST be thrown
for operator to make configuration changes. Furthermore, the errored
MAC route MUST be ignored.
6. BGP Encoding
This document defines one new BGP Extended Community for EVPN.
6.1. Attachment Circuit ID Extended Community
A new EVPN BGP Extended Community called Attachment Circuit ID is
introduced. This new extended community is a transitive extended
community with the Type field of 0x06 (EVPN) and the Sub-Type of TBD.
It is advertised along with EVPN MAC/IP Advertisement Route (Route
Type 2) per [RFC7432] for AC-Aware Bundling Service Interface. It
may also be advertised along with EVPN Multicast Route (Route Type 7
and 8) as per [RFC9251]. Generically speaking, the new extended
community must be attached to any routes which require specific VLAN
identification.
The Attachment Circuit ID Extended Community is encoded as an 8-octet
value as follows:
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=0x06 | Sub-Type=TBD | Reserved (16 bits) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Attachment Circuit ID (32 bits) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Attachment Circuit ID Extended Community
The attachment circuit ID plays the role of normalized VID. It is
defined as per [I-D.ietf-bess-evpn-vpws-fxc].
Sajassi, et al. Expires 16 March 2023 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft EVPN AC-Aware Bundling Service Interface September 2022
6.2. Ethernet-tag Field vs AC ID Extended Community
The current proposal is entirely backward compabitible with [RFC7432]
VLAN-aware bundling mode since the Ethernet-tag field remains intact.
However, it has its own drawbacks. For instance with multicast, the
same (S,G) maybe be used over different subnets. In that case, the
same route MUST carry multiple AC ID Extended Community; one per
attachment Circuit ID / VLAN. It may happen that the number of VLAN
is faily large. Multiple routes with different RD may be required to
carry such amount of Extended Community. This approach is
complexifying the overall solution and implementation.
To remedy to that situation, the attachment Circuit ID MAY be set to
0xFFFF_FFFF. That value tells peer PE that the attachment Circuit ID
is carried has part of the Ethernet Tag field of the associated
route. Since the key of the EVPN route is unique, multiple AC ID
Extended Community per route is no longer required. There is
drawback. It pose backward interoperability issue with PE expecting
a zero Ethernet-TAG ID.
7. Security Considerations
The same Security Considerations described in [RFC7432] are valid for
this document.
8. IANA Considerations
A new transitive extended community Type of 0x06 and Sub-Type of 0x0E
for EVPN Attachment Circuit Extended Community has been allocated by
IANA.
9. Acknowledgement
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,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
10.2. Informative References
Sajassi, et al. Expires 16 March 2023 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft EVPN AC-Aware Bundling Service Interface September 2022
[I-D.ietf-bess-evpn-vpws-fxc]
Sajassi, A., Brissette, P., Uttaro, J., Drake, J.,
Boutros, S., and J. Rabadan, "EVPN VPWS Flexible Cross-
Connect Service", Work in Progress, Internet-Draft, draft-
ietf-bess-evpn-vpws-fxc-07, 16 June 2022,
<https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-bess-evpn-
vpws-fxc-07.txt>.
[RFC4364] Rosen, E. and Y. Rekhter, "BGP/MPLS IP Virtual Private
Networks (VPNs)", RFC 4364, DOI 10.17487/RFC4364, February
2006, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4364>.
[RFC7365] Lasserre, M., Balus, F., Morin, T., Bitar, N., and Y.
Rekhter, "Framework for Data Center (DC) Network
Virtualization", RFC 7365, DOI 10.17487/RFC7365, October
2014, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7365>.
[RFC7432] Sajassi, A., Ed., Aggarwal, R., Bitar, N., Isaac, A.,
Uttaro, J., Drake, J., and W. Henderickx, "BGP MPLS-Based
Ethernet VPN", RFC 7432, DOI 10.17487/RFC7432, February
2015, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7432>.
[RFC8365] Sajassi, A., Ed., Drake, J., Ed., Bitar, N., Shekhar, R.,
Uttaro, J., and W. Henderickx, "A Network Virtualization
Overlay Solution Using Ethernet VPN (EVPN)", RFC 8365,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8365, March 2018,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8365>.
[RFC9136] Rabadan, J., Ed., Henderickx, W., Drake, J., Lin, W., and
A. Sajassi, "IP Prefix Advertisement in Ethernet VPN
(EVPN)", RFC 9136, DOI 10.17487/RFC9136, October 2021,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9136>.
[RFC9251] Sajassi, A., Thoria, S., Mishra, M., Patel, K., Drake, J.,
and W. Lin, "Internet Group Management Protocol (IGMP) and
Multicast Listener Discovery (MLD) Proxies for Ethernet
VPN (EVPN)", RFC 9251, DOI 10.17487/RFC9251, June 2022,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc9251>.
Authors' Addresses
Ali Sajassi
Cisco Systems
Email: sajassi@cisco.com
Patrice Brissette
Cisco Systems
Sajassi, et al. Expires 16 March 2023 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft EVPN AC-Aware Bundling Service Interface September 2022
Email: pbrisset@cisco.com
Mankamana Mishra
Cisco Systems
Email: mankamis@cisco.com
Samir Thoria
Cisco Systems
Email: sthoria@cisco.com
Jorge Rabadan
Nokia
Email: jorge.rabadan@nokia.com
John Drake
Juniper Networks
Email: jdrake@juniper.net
Sajassi, et al. Expires 16 March 2023 [Page 13]
