Internet DRAFT - draft-xu-nvo3-isis-cp
draft-xu-nvo3-isis-cp
Network Working Group X. Xu
Internet-Draft Huawei
Intended status: Standards Track H. Shah
Expires: April 20, 2016 Ciena Corp
Y. Fan
China Telecom
October 18, 2015
NVo3 Control Plane Protocol Using IS-IS
draft-xu-nvo3-isis-cp-01
Abstract
This document describes the use of IS-IS as a light-weight control
plane protocol for Network Virtualization over L3 (NVo3) overlay
networks. This light-weight control plane protocol is intended for
small and even medium sized data center networks and is applicable to
any specific NVo3 data encapsulation formats.
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 http://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 April 20, 2016.
Copyright 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
Xu, et al. Expires April 20, 2016 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft NVo3 CP using ISIS October 2015
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
1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. VN Membership Auto-discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1. VN Membership Info Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. Tunnel Encapsulation Capability Advertisement . . . . . . . . 4
5. VN MAC Reachability Info Advertisement . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1. Introduction
[RFC7364] discusses the need of an overlay-based network
virtualization approach, referred to as Network Virtualization over
Layer3 (NVo3), for providing multi-tenancy capabilities in large data
centers networks and outlines the needs for a control plane protocol
to facilitate running these NVo3 overlay networks. [RFC7365]
provides a framework for NVo3 overlay networks and meanwhile
describes the needs for a control plane protocol to provide the
following capabilities such as auto-provisioning/service discovery,
address mapping advertisement and tunnel management.
IS-IS protocol [IS-IS] is a much proven and well-known routing
protocol which has been widely deployed in many large carrier
networks and data center networks for many years. Due to its
extendibility, IS-IS protocol now is not only used for propagating IP
reachability information in Layer3 networks (see [RFC1195]), but also
used for propagating MAC reachability information in Layer2 networks
or Layer2 overlay networks [RFC6165].
This document accordingly proposes using IS-IS as a simple control
plane protocol of NVo3 overlay networks which can be workable with
any specific NVo3 data encapsulation formats such as MPLS-in-
UDP[RFC7510], VXLAN [RFC7348], VXLAN-GPE [I-D.ietf-nvo3-vxlan-gpe] ,
MPLS-in-GRE [RFC4023] and NVGRE [RFC7637], It's no doubt that Border
Gateway Protocol (BGP) is more scalable than IS-IS and hence the
former is more suitable to be used as a common NVo3 control plane in
Xu, et al. Expires April 20, 2016 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft NVo3 CP using ISIS October 2015
large data center network environments. However, for some small and
even medium sized data center networks, the complexity of BGP is
perhaps too much and even unaffordable. IS-IS -based common NVo3
control plane could be a light-weight choice for these small and even
medium data center networks where automating (e.g., no need for
manually configuring BGP peers) and simplifying the network
provisioning (e.g., only a single protocol to be deployed) is
particularly important.
1.1. 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].
2. Terminology
This memo makes use of the terms defined in [RFC7365] and
[I-D.ietf-bier-architecture].
3. VN Membership Auto-discovery
By propagating the VN membership info among Network Virtualization
Edges (NVEs), NVEs belonging to the same VN instance could discover
one another automatically. The VN membership info is carried in a VN
Membership Info sub-TLV (as shown in Section 3.1) which is associated
to a routable IP address of a NVE and MAY be present in any of the
following TLVs originated by that NVE:
1. TLV-135 (IPv4) defined in [RFC5305]
2. TLV-236 (IPv6) defined in [RFC5308]
When the above TLV is propagated across level boundaries, the VN
Membership Info sub-TLV contained in that TLV SHOULD be kept.
3.1. VN Membership Info Sub-TLV
The VN Membership Info sub-TLV has the following format:
Xu, et al. Expires April 20, 2016 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft NVo3 CP using ISIS October 2015
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=TBD | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| VN ID | Sub-domain ID |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| MPLS Label | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
: :
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| VN ID | Sub-domain ID |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| MPLS Label | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Type: TBD;
Length: Variable;
VN ID: This field is filled with a 24-bit globally significant VN
ID for a particular attached VN instance.
Sub-domain ID: This field is filled with a 8-bit BIER sub-domain
ID to which the VN has been associated
[I-D.ietf-bier-architecture]. The field is only useful in the
case where the Broadcast, Unknown-unicast and Multicast (BUM)
packets within a VN are transported across the underlay by using
the BIER forwarding mode.
MPLS Label: This field is filled with a locally significant MPLS
label associated with the VN ID. This field is only meaningful in
the case where MPLS labels are used for identifying specific VN
instances that the encapsulated packets belong to. Otherwise,
this field MUST be set to zero.
4. Tunnel Encapsulation Capability Advertisement
To reach a consensus on what specific tunnel encapsulation format to
be used between ingress and egress NVE pairs automatically, egress
NVEs SHOULD advertise their own tunnel encapsulation capabilities by
using the Encapsulation Capability sub-TLV as defined in
[I-D.xu-isis-encapsulation-cap]
Xu, et al. Expires April 20, 2016 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft NVo3 CP using ISIS October 2015
5. VN MAC Reachability Info Advertisement
For those Layer2 overlay approaches which adopts the control-plane
based MAC address learning mechanism, MAC reachability information of
a given VN instance would be exchanged across NVEs of that VN
instance. Upon learning MAC addresses of their local TES's somehow,
NVEs SHOULD immediately advertise these MAC addresses to remote NVEs
of the same VN instance by using the MAC-Reachability TLV as defined
in [RFC6165]. One or more MAC-Reachability TLVs are carried in a LSP
which in turn is encapsulated with an Ethernet header. The source
MAC address is the originating NVE's MAC address whereas the
destination MAC address is a to-be-defined multicast MAC address
specifically identifying all NVEs. Such Ethernet frames containing
IS-IS LSPs are forwarded towards remote NVEs as if they were customer
multicast Ethernet frames. Egress NVEs receiving the above frames
SHOULD intercept them and accordingly process them. The routable IP
address of the NVE originating these MAC routes could be derived
either from the "IP Interface Address" field contained in the
corresponding LSPs (Note that the IP address here SHOULD be identical
to the routable IP address associated with the VN membership Info) or
from the tunnel source IP address of the NVo3 encapsulated packet
containing such MAC routes. Since these LSPs are fully transparent
to core routers of the underlying networks (i.e., non-NVE routers),
there is no impact on the control plane of core routers at all.
6. IANA Considerations
The type code for VN Membership Info sub-TLV is required to be
allocated by IANA.
7. Security Considerations
This document doesn't introduce additional security risk to IS-IS,
nor does it provide any additional security feature for IS-IS.
8. Acknowledgements
TBD
9. References
9.1. 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>.
Xu, et al. Expires April 20, 2016 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft NVo3 CP using ISIS October 2015
[RFC4971] Vasseur, JP., Ed., Shen, N., Ed., and R. Aggarwal, Ed.,
"Intermediate System to Intermediate System (IS-IS)
Extensions for Advertising Router Information", RFC 4971,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4971, July 2007,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4971>.
[RFC5305] Li, T. and H. Smit, "IS-IS Extensions for Traffic
Engineering", RFC 5305, DOI 10.17487/RFC5305, October
2008, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5305>.
[RFC5308] Hopps, C., "Routing IPv6 with IS-IS", RFC 5308,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5308, October 2008,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5308>.
9.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-bier-architecture]
Wijnands, I., Rosen, E., Dolganow, A., Przygienda, T., and
S. Aldrin, "Multicast using Bit Index Explicit
Replication", draft-ietf-bier-architecture-02 (work in
progress), July 2015.
[I-D.ietf-nvo3-vxlan-gpe]
Quinn, P., Manur, R., Kreeger, L., Lewis, D., Maino, F.,
Smith, M., Agarwal, P., Yong, L., Xu, X., Elzur, U., Garg,
P., and D. Melman, "Generic Protocol Extension for VXLAN",
draft-ietf-nvo3-vxlan-gpe-00 (work in progress), May 2015.
[I-D.xu-isis-encapsulation-cap]
Xu, X., Decraene, B., Raszuk, R., Chunduri, U., Contreras,
L., and L. Jalil, "Advertising Tunnelling Capability in
IS-IS", draft-xu-isis-encapsulation-cap-05 (work in
progress), June 2015.
[IS-IS] "ISO/IEC 10589, "Intermediate System to Intermediate
System Intra-Domain Routing Exchange Protocol for use in
Conjunction with the Protocol for Providing the
Connectionless-mode Network Service (ISO 8473)", 2005.".
[RFC1195] Callon, R., "Use of OSI IS-IS for routing in TCP/IP and
dual environments", RFC 1195, DOI 10.17487/RFC1195,
December 1990, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc1195>.
[RFC4023] Worster, T., Rekhter, Y., and E. Rosen, Ed.,
"Encapsulating MPLS in IP or Generic Routing Encapsulation
(GRE)", RFC 4023, DOI 10.17487/RFC4023, March 2005,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4023>.
Xu, et al. Expires April 20, 2016 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft NVo3 CP using ISIS October 2015
[RFC6165] Banerjee, A. and D. Ward, "Extensions to IS-IS for Layer-2
Systems", RFC 6165, DOI 10.17487/RFC6165, April 2011,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6165>.
[RFC7348] Mahalingam, M., Dutt, D., Duda, K., Agarwal, P., Kreeger,
L., Sridhar, T., Bursell, M., and C. Wright, "Virtual
eXtensible Local Area Network (VXLAN): A Framework for
Overlaying Virtualized Layer 2 Networks over Layer 3
Networks", RFC 7348, DOI 10.17487/RFC7348, August 2014,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7348>.
[RFC7364] Narten, T., Ed., Gray, E., Ed., Black, D., Fang, L.,
Kreeger, L., and M. Napierala, "Problem Statement:
Overlays for Network Virtualization", RFC 7364,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7364, October 2014,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7364>.
[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, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7365>.
[RFC7510] Xu, X., Sheth, N., Yong, L., Callon, R., and D. Black,
"Encapsulating MPLS in UDP", RFC 7510,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7510, April 2015,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7510>.
[RFC7637] Garg, P., Ed. and Y. Wang, Ed., "NVGRE: Network
Virtualization Using Generic Routing Encapsulation",
RFC 7637, DOI 10.17487/RFC7637, September 2015,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7637>.
Authors' Addresses
Xiaohu Xu
Huawei
Email: xuxiaohu@huawei.com
Himanshu Shah
Ciena Corp
Email: hshah@ciena.com
Xu, et al. Expires April 20, 2016 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft NVo3 CP using ISIS October 2015
Yongbing Fan
China Telecom
Email: fanyb@gsta.com
Xu, et al. Expires April 20, 2016 [Page 8]
