rfc9062xml2.original.xml | rfc9062.xml | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?> | <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> | |||
<!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd" [ | ||||
<!ENTITY RFC0792 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RF | ||||
C.0792.xml"> | ||||
<!ENTITY RFC2119 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RF | ||||
C.2119.xml"> | ||||
<!ENTITY RFC4443 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RF | ||||
C.4443.xml"> | ||||
<!ENTITY RFC5880 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RF | ||||
C.5880.xml"> | ||||
<!ENTITY RFC5881 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RF | ||||
C.5881.xml"> | ||||
<!ENTITY RFC5883 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RF | ||||
C.5883.xml"> | ||||
<!ENTITY RFC5884 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RF | ||||
C.5884.xml"> | ||||
<!ENTITY RFC6291 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RF | ||||
C.6291.xml"> | ||||
<!ENTITY RFC6425 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RF | ||||
C.6425.xml"> | ||||
<!ENTITY RFC6428 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RF | ||||
C.6428.xml"> | ||||
<!ENTITY RFC7432 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RF | ||||
C.7432.xml"> | ||||
<!ENTITY RFC7623 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RF | ||||
C.7623.xml"> | ||||
<!ENTITY RFC8029 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RF | ||||
C.8029.xml"> | ||||
<!ENTITY RFC8174 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RF | ||||
C.8174.xml"> | ||||
<!ENTITY RFC2544 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RF | ||||
C.2544.xml"> | ||||
<!ENTITY RFC2681 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RF | ||||
C.2681.xml"> | ||||
<!ENTITY RFC3393 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RF | ||||
C.3393.xml"> | ||||
<!ENTITY RFC5085 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RF | ||||
C.5085.xml"> | ||||
<!ENTITY RFC6136 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RF | ||||
C.6136.xml"> | ||||
<!ENTITY RFC6632 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RF | ||||
C.6632.xml"> | ||||
<!ENTITY RFC6673 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RF | ||||
C.6673.xml"> | ||||
<!ENTITY RFC7679 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RF | ||||
C.7679.xml"> | ||||
<!ENTITY RFC7680 SYSTEM "https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RF | ||||
C.7680.xml"> | ||||
]> | ||||
<rfc submissionType="IETF" docName="draft-ietf-bess-evpn-oam-req-frmwk-10" categ | ||||
ory="info" ipr="trust200902"> | ||||
<!-- Generated by id2xml 1.5.0 on 2021-04-28T21:49:22Z --> | ||||
<?rfc strict="yes"?> | ||||
<?rfc compact="yes"?> | ||||
<?rfc subcompact="no"?> | ||||
<?rfc symrefs="yes"?> | ||||
<?rfc sortrefs="no"?> | ||||
<?rfc text-list-symbols="-o*+"?> | ||||
<?rfc toc="yes"?> | ||||
<front> | ||||
<title abbrev="EVPN OAM Requirements/Framework">EVPN Operations, Administ | ||||
ration and Maintenance Requirements and Framework</title> | ||||
<author initials="S." surname="Salam" fullname="Samer Salam"> | ||||
<organization>Cisco</organization> | ||||
<address><email>ssalam@cisco.com</email> | ||||
</address> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="A." surname="Sajassi" fullname="Ali Sajassi"> | ||||
<organization>Cisco</organization> | ||||
<address><postal> | ||||
<street>170 West Tasman Drive</street> | ||||
<city>San Jose</city> | ||||
<region>CA</region> | ||||
<code>95134</code> | ||||
<country>United States of America</country> | ||||
</postal> | ||||
<email>sajassi@cisco.com</email> | ||||
</address> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="S." surname="Aldrin" fullname="Sam Aldrin"> | ||||
<organization abbrev="Google">Google, Inc.</organization> | ||||
<address><postal> | ||||
<street>1600 Amphitheatre Parkway</street> | ||||
<city>Mountain View</city> | ||||
<region>CA</region> | ||||
<code>94043</code> | ||||
<country>United States of America</country> | ||||
</postal> | ||||
<email>aldrin.ietf@gmail.com</email> | ||||
</address> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="J." surname="Drake" fullname="John E. Drake"> | ||||
<organization abbrev="Juniper">Juniper Networks</organization> | ||||
<address><postal> | ||||
<street>1194 N. Mathilda Ave.</street> | ||||
<city>Sunnyvale</city> | ||||
<region>CA</region> | ||||
<code>94089</code> | ||||
<country>United States of America</country> | ||||
</postal> | ||||
<email>jdrake@juniper.net</email> | ||||
</address> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="D." surname="Eastlake" fullname="Donald E. Eastlake, 3r | ||||
d"> | ||||
<organization abbrev="Futurewei">Futurewei Technologies</organization> | ||||
<address><postal> | ||||
<street>2386 Panoramic Circle</street> | ||||
<city>Apopka</city> | ||||
<region>FL</region> | ||||
<code>32703</code> | ||||
<country>United States of America</country> | ||||
</postal> | ||||
<phone>+1-508-333-2270</phone> | ||||
<email>d3e3e3@gmail.com</email> | ||||
</address> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="2021" month="April"/> | <!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629-xhtml.ent"> | |||
<!-- [rfced] Please insert any keywords (beyond those that appear in the title) for use on https://www.rfc-editor.org/search. --> | <rfc xmlns:xi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XInclude" docName="draft-ietf-bess-evpn-oa m-req-frmwk-10" number="9062" submissionType="IETF" category="info" consensus="t rue" ipr="trust200902" obsoletes="" updates="" xml:lang="en" symRefs="true" sort Refs="true" tocInclude="true" version="3" tocDepth="5"> | |||
<keyword>example</keyword> | <front> | |||
<title abbrev="EVPN OAM Requirements/Framework">Framework and Requirements f | ||||
or Ethernet VPN (EVPN) Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM)</title> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="RFC" value="9062"/> | ||||
<author initials="S." surname="Salam" fullname="Samer Salam"> | ||||
<organization>Cisco</organization> | ||||
<address> | ||||
<email>ssalam@cisco.com</email> | ||||
</address> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="A." surname="Sajassi" fullname="Ali Sajassi"> | ||||
<organization>Cisco</organization> | ||||
<address> | ||||
<postal> | ||||
<street>170 West Tasman Drive</street> | ||||
<city>San Jose</city> | ||||
<region>CA</region> | ||||
<code>95134</code> | ||||
<country>United States of America</country> | ||||
</postal> | ||||
<email>sajassi@cisco.com</email> | ||||
</address> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="S." surname="Aldrin" fullname="Sam Aldrin"> | ||||
<organization abbrev="Google">Google, Inc.</organization> | ||||
<address> | ||||
<postal> | ||||
<street>1600 Amphitheatre Parkway</street> | ||||
<city>Mountain View</city> | ||||
<region>CA</region> | ||||
<code>94043</code> | ||||
<country>United States of America</country> | ||||
</postal> | ||||
<email>aldrin.ietf@gmail.com</email> | ||||
</address> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="J." surname="Drake" fullname="John E. Drake"> | ||||
<organization abbrev="Juniper">Juniper Networks</organization> | ||||
<address> | ||||
<postal> | ||||
<street>1194 N. Mathilda Ave.</street> | ||||
<city>Sunnyvale</city> | ||||
<region>CA</region> | ||||
<code>94089</code> | ||||
<country>United States of America</country> | ||||
</postal> | ||||
<email>jdrake@juniper.net</email> | ||||
</address> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<author initials="D." surname="Eastlake 3rd" fullname="Donald E. Eastlake 3r | ||||
d"> | ||||
<organization abbrev="Futurewei">Futurewei Technologies</organization> | ||||
<address> | ||||
<postal> | ||||
<street>2386 Panoramic Circle</street> | ||||
<city>Apopka</city> | ||||
<region>FL</region> | ||||
<code>32703</code> | ||||
<country>United States of America</country> | ||||
</postal> | ||||
<phone>+1-508-333-2270</phone> | ||||
<email>d3e3e3@gmail.com</email> | ||||
</address> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="2021" month="June"/> | ||||
<abstract><t> | <keyword>PBB-EVPN</keyword> | |||
<keyword>fault management</keyword> | ||||
<keyword>performance management</keyword> | ||||
<abstract> | ||||
<t> | ||||
This document specifies the requirements and reference framework for | This document specifies the requirements and reference framework for | |||
Ethernet VPN (EVPN) Operations, Administration and Maintenance (OAM). | Ethernet VPN (EVPN) Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM). | |||
The requirements cover the OAM aspects of EVPN and PBB-EVPN (Provider | The requirements cover the OAM aspects of EVPN and Provider Backbone Bridge E | |||
Backbone Bridge EVPN). The framework defines the layered OAM model | VPN (PBB-EVPN). The framework defines the layered OAM model | |||
encompassing the EVPN service layer, network layer, underlying Packet | encompassing the EVPN service layer, network layer, underlying Packet | |||
Switched Network (PSN) transport layer, and link layer but focuses on | Switched Network (PSN) transport layer, and link layer but focuses on | |||
the service and network layers.</t> | the service and network layers.</t> | |||
</abstract> | ||||
</abstract> | </front> | |||
</front> | <middle> | |||
<section anchor="sect-1" numbered="true" toc="default"> | ||||
<middle> | <name>Introduction</name> | |||
<section title="Introduction" anchor="sect-1"><t> | <t> | |||
This document specifies the requirements and defines a reference | This document specifies the requirements and defines a reference | |||
framework for Ethernet VPN (EVPN) Operations, Administration and | framework for Ethernet VPN (EVPN) Operations, Administration, and | |||
Maintenance (OAM, <xref target="RFC6291"/>). In this context, we use the term | Maintenance (OAM) <xref target="RFC6291" format="default"/>. In this context, | |||
EVPN | we use the term "EVPN OAM" to loosely refer to the OAM functions required for a | |||
OAM to loosely refer to the OAM functions required for and/or | nd/or | |||
applicable to <xref target="RFC7432"/> and <xref target="RFC7623"/>.</t> | applicable to <xref target="RFC7432" format="default"/> and <xref target="RFC | |||
7623" format="default"/>.</t> | ||||
<t> | <t> | |||
EVPN is a Layer 2 VPN (L2VPN) solution for multipoint Ethernet | EVPN is a Layer 2 VPN (L2VPN) solution for multipoint Ethernet | |||
services, with advanced multi-homing capabilities, using BGP for | services with advanced multihoming capabilities that uses BGP for | |||
distributing customer/client MAC address reachability information | distributing Customer/Client Media Access Control (C-MAC) address reachabilit | |||
y information | ||||
over the core MPLS/IP network.</t> | over the core MPLS/IP network.</t> | |||
<t> | ||||
<t> | PBB-EVPN combines Provider Backbone Bridging (PBB) <xref target="IEEE-802.1Q" | |||
PBB-EVPN combines Provider Backbone Bridging (PBB) <xref target="IEEE-802.1Q" | format="default"/> with EVPN in | |||
/> with EVPN in | order to reduce the number of BGP MAC advertisement routes; provide client | |||
order to reduce the number of BGP MAC advertisement routes, provide client | MAC address mobility using C-MAC <xref target="RFC7623" format="default"/> ag | |||
MAC address mobility using C-MAC (Client MAC <xref target="RFC7623"/>) aggreg | gregation and | |||
ation and | Backbone MAC (B-MAC) <xref target="RFC7623" format="default"/> sub-netting; c | |||
B-MAC (Backbone MAC <xref target="RFC7623"/>) sub-netting, confine the scope | onfine the scope of C-MAC | |||
of C-MAC | learning to only active flows; offer per-site policies; and avoid C-MAC | |||
learning to only active flows, offer per site policies, and avoid C-MAC | ||||
address flushing on topology changes.</t> | address flushing on topology changes.</t> | |||
<t> | ||||
<t> | ||||
This document focuses on the fault management and performance | This document focuses on the fault management and performance | |||
management aspects of EVPN OAM. It defines the layered OAM model | management aspects of EVPN OAM. It defines the layered OAM model | |||
encompassing the EVPN service layer, network layer, underlying Packet | encompassing the EVPN service layer, network layer, underlying Packet | |||
Switched Network (PSN) transport layer, and link layer but focuses on | Switched Network (PSN) transport layer, and link layer but focuses on | |||
the service and network layers.</t> | the service and network layers.</t> | |||
<section anchor="sect-1.1" numbered="true" toc="default"> | ||||
<section title="Relationship to Other OAM Work" anchor="sect-1.1"><t> | <name>Relationship to Other OAM Work</name> | |||
<t> | ||||
This document leverages concepts and draws upon elements defined | This document leverages concepts and draws upon elements defined | |||
and/or used in the following documents:</t> | and / or used in the following documents:</t> | |||
<t> | ||||
<t> | <xref target="RFC6136" format="default"/> specifies the requirements and a re | |||
<xref target="RFC6136"/> specifies the requirements and a reference model for | ference model for OAM as | |||
OAM as | it relates to L2VPN services, pseudowires, and associated Packet | |||
it relates to L2VPN services, pseudowires and associated Packet | Switched Network (PSN) tunnels. This document focuses on Virtual Private LAN | |||
Switched Network (PSN) tunnels. This document focuses on VPLS and | Service (VPLS) and Virtual Private Wire Service (VPWS) solutions and services.</ | |||
VPWS solutions and services.</t> | t> | |||
<t> | ||||
<t> | <xref target="RFC8029" format="default"/> defines mechanisms for detecting da | |||
<xref target="RFC8029"/> defines mechanisms for detecting data plane failures | ta plane failures in | |||
in | MPLS Label Switched Paths (LSPs), including procedures to check the correct o | |||
MPLS LSPs, including procedures to check the correct operation of the | peration of the | |||
data plane, as well as mechanisms to verify the data plane against | data plane as well as mechanisms to verify the data plane against | |||
the control plane.</t> | the control plane.</t> | |||
<t> | ||||
<t> | <xref target="IEEE-802.1Q" format="default"/> specifies the Ethernet Connecti | |||
<xref target="IEEE-802.1Q"/> specifies the Ethernet Connectivity Fault Manage | vity Fault Management (CFM) | |||
ment (CFM) | ||||
protocol, which defines the concepts of Maintenance Domains, | protocol, which defines the concepts of Maintenance Domains, | |||
Maintenance Associations, Maintenance End Points, and Maintenance | Maintenance Associations, Maintenance End Points, and Maintenance | |||
Intermediate Points.</t> | Intermediate Points.</t> | |||
<t> | ||||
<t> | <xref target="Y.1731"/> extends Connectivity Fault Management in the followin | |||
[Y.1731] extends Connectivity Fault Management in the following | g | |||
areas: it defines fault notification and alarm suppression functions | areas: it defines fault notification and alarm suppression functions | |||
for Ethernet. It also specifies mechanisms for Ethernet performance | for Ethernet and specifies mechanisms for Ethernet performance | |||
management, including loss, delay, jitter, and throughput | management, including loss, delay, jitter, and throughput | |||
measurement.</t> | measurement.</t> | |||
</section> | ||||
<section anchor="sect-1.2" numbered="true" toc="default"> | ||||
<name>Specification of Requirements</name> | ||||
<t> | ||||
The key words "<bcp14>MUST</bcp14>", "<bcp14>MUST NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14>REQU | ||||
IRED</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHALL</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHALL | ||||
NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14>", "<bcp14>SHOULD NOT</bcp14>", "<bcp14> | ||||
RECOMMENDED</bcp14>", "<bcp14>NOT RECOMMENDED</bcp14>", | ||||
"<bcp14>MAY</bcp14>", and "<bcp14>OPTIONAL</bcp14>" in this document are to | ||||
be interpreted as | ||||
described in BCP 14 <xref target="RFC2119"/> <xref target="RFC8174"/> | ||||
when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here. | ||||
</t> | ||||
</section> | ||||
<section anchor="sect-1.3" numbered="true" toc="default"> | ||||
<name>Terminology</name> | ||||
<t> | ||||
This document uses the following terminology, much of which is defined | ||||
in <xref target="RFC6136" format="default"/>: | ||||
</section> | </t> | |||
<dl newline="false" spacing="normal" indent="12"> | ||||
<section title="Specification of Requirements" anchor="sect-1.2"><t> | <dt>CE</dt> | |||
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", | <dd>Customer Edge device; for example, a host, router, or switch.</dd> | |||
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and | <dt>CFM</dt> | |||
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP | <dd>Connectivity Fault Management <xref target="IEEE-802.1Q" format="d | |||
14 <xref target="RFC2119"/> <xref target="RFC8174"/> when, and only when, the | efault"/></dd> | |||
y appear in all | <dt>DF</dt> | |||
capitals, as shown here.</t> | <dd>Designated Forwarder <xref target="RFC7432" format="default"/></dd | |||
> | ||||
</section> | <dt>Down MEP</dt> | |||
<dd>A MEP that originates traffic away from and terminates | ||||
<section title="Terminology" anchor="sect-1.3"><t> | traffic towards the core of the device in whose port it is logically | |||
This document uses the following terminology much of which is defined | located.</dd> | |||
in <xref target="RFC6136"/>: | <dt>EVI</dt> | |||
<dd>An EVPN instance spanning the Provider Edge (PE) | ||||
<list style="hanging" hangIndent="6"> | devices participating in that EVPN <xref target="RFC7432" format="defau | |||
lt"/>.</dd> | ||||
<t hangText="CE">Customer Edge device, e.g., a host, router, or switch. | <dt>L2VPN</dt> | |||
</t> | <dd>Layer 2 VPN</dd> | |||
<dt>LOC</dt> | ||||
<t hangText="CFM">Connectivity Fault Management <xref target="IEEE-802. | <dd>Loss of continuity</dd> | |||
1Q"/>.</t> | <dt>MA</dt> | |||
<dd>Maintenance Association; a set of MEPs belonging | ||||
<t hangText="DF">Designated Forwarder <xref target="RFC7432"/>.</t> | to the same Maintenance Domain (MD) established to verify the | |||
integrity of a single service instance <xref target="IEEE-802.1Q" forma | ||||
<t hangText="Down MEP">A MEP that originates traffic away from and term | t="default"/>.</dd> | |||
inates | <dt>MD</dt> | |||
traffic towards the core of the device in whose port it is logically | <dd>Maintenance Domain; an OAM Domain that represents a | |||
located.</t> | region over which OAM frames can operate unobstructed <xref target="IEE | |||
E-802.1Q" format="default"/>.</dd> | ||||
<t hangText="EVI">An EVPN instance spanning the Provider Edge (PE) | <dt>MEP</dt> | |||
devices participating in that EVPN <xref target="RFC7432"/>.</t> | <dd>Maintenance End Point; it is responsible for | |||
<t hangText="L2VPN">Layer 2 VPN.</t> | ||||
<t hangText="MA">Maintenance Association is a set of MEPs belonging | ||||
to the same Maintenance Domain (MD), established to verify the | ||||
integrity of a single service instance <xref target="IEEE-802.1Q"/>.</t | ||||
> | ||||
<t hangText="MD">Maintenance Domain, an OAM Domain that represents a | ||||
region over which OAM frames can operate unobstructed <xref | ||||
target="IEEE-802.1Q"/>.</t> | ||||
<t hangText="MEP">Maintenance End Point is responsible for | ||||
origination and termination of OAM frames for a given MA. A MEP is | origination and termination of OAM frames for a given MA. A MEP is | |||
logically located in a device's port <xref target="IEEE-802.1Q"/>.</t> | logically located in a device's port <xref target="IEEE-802.1Q" format= | |||
"default"/>.</dd> | ||||
<t hangText="MIP"> Maintenance Intermediate Point is located between | <dt>MIP</dt> | |||
<dd> Maintenance Intermediate Point; it is located between | ||||
peer MEPs and can process and respond to certain OAM frames but does | peer MEPs and can process and respond to certain OAM frames but does | |||
not initiate them. A MIP is logically located in a device's port | not initiate them. A MIP is logically located in a device's port | |||
<xref target="IEEE-802.1Q"/>.</t> | <xref target="IEEE-802.1Q" format="default"/>.</dd> | |||
<dt>MP2P</dt> | ||||
<t hangText="MP2P">Multipoint to Point.</t> | <dd>Multipoint to Point</dd> | |||
<dt>NMS</dt> | ||||
<t hangText="NMS">Network Management Station <xref target="RFC6632"/>.< | <dd>Network Management Station <xref target="RFC6632" format="default" | |||
/t> | /></dd> | |||
<dt>P</dt> | ||||
<t hangText="P">Provider network interior (non-edge) node.</t> | <dd>Provider network interior (non-edge) node</dd> | |||
<dt>P2MP</dt> | ||||
<t hangText="P2MP">Point to Multipoint.</t> | <dd>Point to Multipoint</dd> | |||
<dt>PBB</dt> | ||||
<t hangText="PBB">Provider Backbone Bridge <xref target="RFC7623"/>.</t | <dd>Provider Backbone Bridge <xref target="RFC7623" format="default"/> | |||
> | </dd> | |||
<dt>PE</dt> | ||||
<t hangText="PE">Provider network Edge device.</t> | <dd>Provider Edge network device</dd> | |||
<dt>Up MEP</dt> | ||||
<t hangText="Up MEP"> A MEP that originates traffic towards and | <dd> A MEP that originates traffic towards and | |||
terminates traffic from the core of the device in whose port it is | terminates traffic from the core of the device in whose port it is | |||
logically located.</t> | logically located.</dd> | |||
<dt>VPN</dt> | ||||
<t hangText="VPN">Virtual Private Network</t> | <dd>Virtual Private Network</dd> | |||
</dl> | ||||
</list> | </section> | |||
</t> | </section> | |||
<section anchor="sect-2" numbered="true" toc="default"> | ||||
</section> | <name>EVPN OAM Framework</name> | |||
<section anchor="sect-2.1" numbered="true" toc="default"> | ||||
</section> | <name>OAM Layering</name> | |||
<t> | ||||
<section title="EVPN OAM Framework" anchor="sect-2"><section title="OAM L | ||||
ayering" anchor="sect-2.1"><t> | ||||
Multiple layers come into play for implementing an L2VPN service | Multiple layers come into play for implementing an L2VPN service | |||
using the EVPN family of solutions as listed below. The focus of this | using the EVPN family of solutions as listed below. The focus of this | |||
document is the Service and Network layers.</t> | document is the service and network layers.</t> | |||
<ul spacing="normal"> | ||||
<t><list style="symbols"> | <li>The service layer runs end to end between the sites or Ethernet | |||
segments that are being interconnected by the EVPN solution.</li> | ||||
<t>The Service Layer runs end to end between the sites or Ethernet | <li>The network layer extends between the EVPN PE (Provider Edge) node | |||
Segments that are being interconnected by the EVPN solution.</t> | s | |||
and is mostly transparent to the P (provider network interior) | ||||
<t>The Network Layer extends between the EVPN PE (Provider Edge) nodes | nodes (except where flow entropy comes into play). It leverages | |||
and is mostly transparent to the P (Provider network interior) | MPLS for service (i.e., EVI) multiplexing and split-horizon | |||
nodes (except where Flow Entropy comes into play). It leverages | functions.</li> | |||
MPLS for service (i.e., EVI) multiplexing and Split-Horizon | <li>The transport layer is dictated by the networking technology of th | |||
functions.</t> | e | |||
PSN. It may be based on either MPLS LSPs or IP.</li> | ||||
<t>The Transport Layer is dictated by the networking technology of the | <li>The link layer is dependent upon the physical technology used. | |||
PSN. It may be either based on MPLS LSPs or IP.</t> | ||||
<t>The Link Layer is dependent upon the physical technology used. | ||||
Ethernet is a popular choice for this layer, but other alternatives | Ethernet is a popular choice for this layer, but other alternatives | |||
are deployed (e.g., POS, DWDM etc.).</t> | are deployed (e.g., Packet over SONET (POS), Dense Wavelength Division Mult | |||
iplexing (DWDM), etc.).</li> | ||||
</list> | </ul> | |||
</t> | <t> | |||
<t> | ||||
This layering extends to the set of OAM protocols that are involved | This layering extends to the set of OAM protocols that are involved | |||
in the ongoing maintenance and diagnostics of EVPN networks. Figure 1 | in the ongoing maintenance and diagnostics of EVPN networks. <xref target="fi | |||
below depicts the OAM layering, and shows which devices have | g-1"/> | |||
below depicts the OAM layering and shows which devices have | ||||
visibility into what OAM layer(s).</t> | visibility into what OAM layer(s).</t> | |||
<figure anchor="fig-1"> | ||||
<figure title="OAM Layering" anchor="fig-1"><artwork><![CDATA[ | <name>OAM Layering</name> | |||
<artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt=""><![CDATA[ | ||||
+---+ +---+ | +---+ +---+ | |||
+--+ | | +---+ +---+ +---+ | | +--+ | +--+ | | +---+ +---+ +---+ | | +--+ | |||
|CE|----|PE |----| P |----| P |----| P |----|PE |----|CE| | |CE|----|PE |----| P |----| P |----| P |----|PE |----|CE| | |||
+--+ | | +---+ +---+ +---+ | | +--+ | +--+ | | +---+ +---+ +---+ | | +--+ | |||
+---+ +---+ | +---+ +---+ | |||
o-------o----------- Service OAM -----------o-------o | o-------o----------- Service OAM -----------o-------o | |||
o----------- Network OAM -----------o | o----------- Network OAM -----------o | |||
o--------o--------o--------o--------o Transport OAM | o--------o--------o--------o--------o Transport OAM | |||
o----o o----o o----o o----o o----o o----o Link OAM | o----o o----o o----o o----o o----o o----o Link OAM | |||
]]></artwork> | ]]></artwork> | |||
</figure> | </figure> | |||
<t> | <t> | |||
Service OAM and Network OAM mechanisms only have visibility to the PE | Service OAM and Network OAM mechanisms only have visibility to the PE | |||
(Provider Edge) nodes but not the P (Provider interior) nodes. As | nodes but not the P nodes. As | |||
such, they can be used to deduce whether the fault is in the</t> | such, they can be used to deduce whether the fault is in the customer's own n | |||
etwork, the local CE-PE segment, the PE-PE segment, or | ||||
<t> | ||||
customer's own network, the local CE-PE segment, the PE-PE segment or | ||||
the remote CE-PE segment(s). EVPN Transport OAM mechanisms can be | the remote CE-PE segment(s). EVPN Transport OAM mechanisms can be | |||
used for fault isolation between the PEs and P nodes.</t> | used for fault isolation between the PEs and P nodes.</t> | |||
<t> | ||||
<t> | <xref target="fig-2"/> below shows an example network where Ethernet domains | |||
Figure 2 below shows an example network where native Ethernet domains | are interconnected via EVPN using MPLS, and it shows the OAM mechanisms | |||
are interconnected via EVPN using MPLS and gives the OAM mechanisms | that are applicable at each layer. The details of the layers are described in | |||
applicable at each layer. The details of the layers are described in | ||||
the sections below.</t> | the sections below.</t> | |||
<figure anchor="fig-2"> | ||||
<figure title="EVPN OAM Example" anchor="fig-2"><artwork><![CDATA[ | <name>EVPN OAM Example</name> | |||
<artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt=""><![CDATA[ | ||||
+---+ +---+ | +---+ +---+ | |||
+--+ | | +---+ +---+ +---+ | | +--+ | +--+ | | +---+ +---+ +---+ | | +--+ | |||
|CE|----|PE |----| P |----| P |----| P |----|PE |----|CE| | |CE|----|PE |----| P |----| P |----| P |----|PE |----|CE| | |||
+--+ | | +---+ +---+ +---+ | | +--+ | +--+ | | +---+ +---+ +---+ | | +--+ | |||
+---+ +---+ | +---+ +---+ | |||
o----o---------- CFM (Service OAM) ----------o----o | o----o---------- CFM (Service OAM) ----------o----o | |||
o-------- EVPN Network OAM ---------o | o-------- EVPN Network OAM ---------o | |||
o--------o--------o--------o--------o MPLS OAM | o--------o--------o--------o--------o MPLS OAM | |||
o----o o----o o----o o----o o----o o----o [802.3] OAM | o----o o----o o----o o----o o----o o----o 802.3 OAM | |||
[IEEE-802.3] | ||||
]]></artwork> | ]]></artwork> | |||
</figure> | </figure> | |||
</section> | </section> | |||
<section anchor="sect-2.2" numbered="true" toc="default"> | ||||
<section title="EVPN Service OAM" anchor="sect-2.2"><t> | <name>EVPN Service OAM</name> | |||
The EVPN Service OAM protocol depends on what service layer | <t> | |||
technology is being interconnected by the EVPN solution. In case of | The EVPN Service OAM protocol depends on what service-layer | |||
<xref target="RFC7432"/> and <xref target="RFC7623"/>, the service layer is E | technology is being interconnected by the EVPN solution. In the case of | |||
thernet; hence, the | <xref target="RFC7432" format="default"/> and <xref target="RFC7623" format=" | |||
corresponding service OAM protocol is Ethernet Connectivity Fault | default"/>, the service layer is Ethernet; hence, the | |||
Management (CFM) <xref target="IEEE-802.1Q"/>.</t> | corresponding Service OAM protocol is Ethernet CFM <xref target="IEEE-802.1Q" | |||
format="default"/>.</t> | ||||
<t> | <t> | |||
EVPN service OAM is visible to the CEs and EVPN PEs, but not to the P | EVPN Service OAM is visible to the CEs and EVPN PEs but not to the P | |||
nodes. This is because the PEs operate at the Ethernet MAC layer in | nodes. This is because the PEs operate at the Ethernet MAC layer in | |||
<xref target="RFC7432"/> <xref target="RFC7623"/> whereas the P nodes do not. | <xref target="RFC7432" format="default"/> and <xref target="RFC7623" format=" | |||
</t> | default"/>, whereas the P nodes do not.</t> | |||
<t> | ||||
<t> | The EVPN PE <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> support MIP functions in the applicable Servi | |||
The EVPN PE MUST support MIP functions in the applicable service OAM | ce OAM | |||
protocol, for example Ethernet CFM. The EVPN PE SHOULD support MEP | protocol (for example, Ethernet CFM). The EVPN PE <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> suppo | |||
functions in the applicable service OAM protocol. This includes both | rt MEP | |||
functions in the applicable Service OAM protocol. This includes both | ||||
Up and Down MEP functions.</t> | Up and Down MEP functions.</t> | |||
<t> | ||||
<t> | As shown in <xref target="fig-3"/>, the MIP and MEP functions being referred | |||
As shown in Figure 3, the MIP and MEP functions being referred to are | to are | |||
logically located within the device's port operating at the customer | logically located within the device's port operating at the customer | |||
level. (There could be MEPs/MIPs within PE ports facing the provider | level. (There could be MEPs/MIPs within PE ports facing the provider | |||
network but they would not be relevant to EVPN Service OAM as the | network, but they would not be relevant to EVPN Service OAM as the | |||
traffic passing through them will be encapsulated/tunneled so any | traffic passing through them will be encapsulated/tunneled, so any | |||
customer level OAM messages will just be treated as data.) Down MEP</t> | customer-level OAM messages will just be treated as data.) Down MEP | |||
functions are away from the core of the device while Up MEP functions | ||||
<t> | ||||
functions are away from the core of the device while up MEP functions | ||||
are towards the core of the device (towards the PE forwarding | are towards the core of the device (towards the PE forwarding | |||
mechanism in the case of a PE). OAM messages between the PE Up MEPs | mechanism in the case of a PE). OAM messages between the PE Up MEPs | |||
shown are a type of EVPN Network OAM while such messages between the | shown are a type of EVPN Network OAM, while such messages between the | |||
CEs or from a PE to its local CE or to the remote CE are Service OAM.</t> | CEs or from a PE to its local CE or to the remote CE are Service OAMs.</t> | |||
<figure anchor="fig-3"> | ||||
<figure title="CFM Details" anchor="fig-3"><artwork><![CDATA[ | <name>CFM Details</name> | |||
<artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt=""><![CDATA[ | ||||
+-------+ +----------------+ +----------------+ +-------+ | +-------+ +----------------+ +----------------+ +-------+ | |||
|+-----+| |+--------------+| |+--------------+| |+-----+| | |+-----+| |+--------------+| |+--------------+| |+-----+| | |||
|| CE || || PE || ... || PE || || CE || | || CE || || PE || ... || PE || || CE || | |||
|+--+--+| |+---+--------+-+| |+-+--------+---+| |+--+--+| | |+--+--+| |+---+--------+-+| |+-+--------+---+| |+--+--+| | |||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |||
|+--+--+| |+---+-----+ . | | . +-----+---+| |+--+--+| | |+--+--+| |+---+-----+ . | | . +-----+---+| |+--+--+| | |||
|| MEP || || | Up ^| . | ... | . | Up ^| || || MEP || | || MEP || || | Up ^| . | ... | . | Up ^| || || MEP || | |||
||DownV|| ||MIP|MEP | . | | . |MEP |MIP|| ||DownV|| | ||DownV|| ||MIP|MEP | . | | . |MEP |MIP|| ||DownV|| | |||
|+--+--+| || |DownV| . | | . |DownV| || |+--+--+| | |+--+--+| || |DownV| . | | . |DownV| || |+--+--+| | |||
| | | |+---+-----+ | | | | +-----+---+| | | | | | | | |+---+-----+ | | | | +-----+---+| | | | | |||
+---|---+ +----|--------|--+ +--|--------|----+ +---|---+ | +---|---+ +----|--------|--+ +--|--------|----+ +---|---+ | |||
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |||
+------------+ +--- ... ---+ +------------+ | +------------+ +--- ... ---+ +------------+ | |||
]]></artwork> | ]]></artwork> | |||
</figure> | </figure> | |||
<t> | <t> | |||
The EVPN PE MUST, by default, learn the MAC address of locally | The EVPN PE <bcp14>MUST</bcp14>, by default, learn the MAC address of locally | |||
attached CE MEPs by snooping on CFM frames and advertising them to | attached CE MEPs by snooping on CFM frames and advertising them to | |||
remote PEs as a MAC/IP Advertisement route. Some means to limit the | remote PEs as a MAC/IP Advertisement route. Some means to limit the | |||
number of MAC addresses that a PE will learn SHOULD be implemented.</t> | number of MAC addresses that a PE will learn <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> be impleme | |||
nted.</t> | ||||
<t> | <t> | |||
The EVPN PE SHOULD advertise any MEP/MIP local to the PE as a MAC/IP | The EVPN PE <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> advertise any MEP/MIP local to the PE as a | |||
MAC/IP | ||||
Advertisement route. Since these are not subject to mobility, they | Advertisement route. Since these are not subject to mobility, they | |||
SHOULD be advertised with the static (sticky) bit set (see Section | <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> be advertised with the static (sticky) bit set (see <xr | |||
15.2 of <xref target="RFC7432"/>).</t> | ef target="RFC7432" sectionFormat="of" section="15.2"/>).</t> | |||
</section> | ||||
</section> | <section anchor="sect-2.3" numbered="true" toc="default"> | |||
<name>EVPN Network OAM</name> | ||||
<section title="EVPN Network OAM" anchor="sect-2.3"><t> | <t> | |||
EVPN Network OAM is visible to the PE nodes only. This OAM layer is | EVPN Network OAM is visible to the PE nodes only. This OAM layer is | |||
analogous to VCCV <xref target="RFC5085"/> in the case of VPLS/VPWS. It provi | analogous to Virtual Circuit Connectivity Verification (VCCV) <xref target="R | |||
des | FC5085" format="default"/> in the case of VPLS/VPWS. It provides | |||
mechanisms to check the correct operation of the data plane, as well | mechanisms to check the correct operation of the data plane as well | |||
as a mechanism to verify the data plane against the control plane. | as a mechanism to verify the data plane against the control plane. | |||
This includes the ability to perform fault detection and diagnostics | This includes the ability to perform fault detection and diagnostics | |||
on:</t> | on:</t> | |||
<ul spacing="normal"> | ||||
<t><list style="symbols"><t>the MP2P tunnels used for the transport of un | <li>the MP2P tunnels used for the transport of unicast traffic between | |||
icast traffic between | ||||
PEs. EVPN allows for three different models of unicast label | PEs. EVPN allows for three different models of unicast label | |||
assignment: label per EVI, label per <ESI, Ethernet Tag> and label | assignment: label per EVI, label per <ESI, Ethernet Tag>, and label | |||
per MAC address. In all three models, the label is bound to an EVPN | per MAC address. In all three models, the label is bound to an EVPN | |||
Unicast FEC. EVPN Network OAM MUST provide mechanisms to check the | Unicast Forwarding Equivalence Class (FEC). EVPN Network OAM <bcp14>MUST</ bcp14> provide mechanisms to check the | |||
operation of the data plane and verify that operation against the | operation of the data plane and verify that operation against the | |||
control plane view.</t> | control plane view.</li> | |||
<li>the MP2P tunnels used for aliasing unicast traffic destined to a | ||||
<t>the MP2P tunnels used for aliasing unicast traffic destined to a | multihomed Ethernet segment. The three label assignment models, | |||
multi-homed Ethernet Segment. The three label assignment models, | ||||
discussed above, apply here as well. In all three models, the label | discussed above, apply here as well. In all three models, the label | |||
is bound to an EVPN Aliasing FEC. EVPN Network OAM MUST provide | is bound to an EVPN Aliasing FEC. EVPN Network OAM <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> prov ide | |||
mechanisms to check the operation of the data plane and verify that | mechanisms to check the operation of the data plane and verify that | |||
operation against the control plane view.</t> | operation against the control plane view.</li> | |||
<li>the multicast tunnels (either MP2P or P2MP) used for the transport | ||||
<t>the multicast tunnels (either MP2P or P2MP) used for the transport | of broadcast, unknown unicast, and multicast traffic between PEs. In | |||
of broadcast, unknown unicast and multicast traffic between PEs. In | ||||
the case of ingress replication, a label is allocated per EVI or | the case of ingress replication, a label is allocated per EVI or | |||
per <EVI, Ethernet Tag> and is bound to an EVPN Multicast FEC. In | per <EVI, Ethernet Tag> and is bound to an EVPN Multicast FEC. In | |||
the case of LSM (Label Switched Multicast), and more specifically | the case of Label Switched Multicast (LSM) and, more specifically, | |||
aggregate inclusive trees, again a label may be allocated per EVI | aggregate inclusive trees, again, a label may be allocated per EVI | |||
or per <EVI, Ethernet Tag> and is bound to the tunnel FEC.</t> | or per <EVI, Ethernet Tag> and is bound to the tunnel FEC.</li> | |||
<li>the correct operation of the Ethernet Segment Identifier (ESI) spl | ||||
<t>the correct operation of the ESI split-horizon filtering function. | it-horizon filtering function. | |||
In EVPN, a label is allocated per multi-homed Ethernet Segment for | In EVPN, a label is allocated per multihomed Ethernet segment for | |||
the purpose of performing the access split-horizon enforcement. The | the purpose of performing the access split-horizon enforcement. The | |||
label is bound to an EVPN Ethernet Segment.</t> | label is bound to an EVPN Ethernet segment.</li> | |||
<li>the correct operation of the Designated Forwarder (DF) <xref targe | ||||
<t>the correct operation of the DF (Designated Forwarder <xref target="RF | t="RFC7432" format="default"/> | |||
C7432"/>) | filtering function. EVPN Network OAM <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> provide mechanism | |||
filtering function. EVPN Network OAM MUST provide mechanisms to | s to | |||
check the operation of the data plane and verify that operation | check the operation of the data plane and verify that operation | |||
against the control plane view for the DF filtering function.</t> | against the control plane view for the DF filtering function.</li> | |||
</ul> | ||||
</list> | <t> | |||
</t> | EVPN Network OAM mechanisms <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> provide in-band monitoring | |||
<t> | ||||
EVPN Network OAM mechanisms MUST provide in-band monitoring | ||||
capabilities. It is desirable, to the extent practical, for OAM test | capabilities. It is desirable, to the extent practical, for OAM test | |||
messages to share fate with data messages. Details of how to achieve | messages to share fate with data messages. Details of how to achieve | |||
this are beyond the scope of this document.</t> | this are beyond the scope of this document.</t> | |||
<t> | ||||
<t> | EVPN Network OAM <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> provide both proactive and on-demand | |||
EVPN Network OAM SHOULD provide both proactive and on-demand | ||||
mechanisms of monitoring the data plane operation and data plane | mechanisms of monitoring the data plane operation and data plane | |||
conformance to the state of the control plane.</t> | conformance to the state of the control plane.</t> | |||
</section> | ||||
</section> | <section anchor="sect-2.4" numbered="true" toc="default"> | |||
<name>Transport OAM for EVPN</name> | ||||
<section title="Transport OAM for EVPN" anchor="sect-2.4"><t> | <t> | |||
The transport OAM protocol depends on the nature of the underlying | The Transport OAM protocol depends on the nature of the underlying | |||
transport technology in the PSN. MPLS OAM mechanisms <xref target="RFC8029"/> | transport technology in the PSN. MPLS OAM mechanisms <xref target="RFC8029" f | |||
<xref target="RFC6425"/> as well as ICMP <xref target="RFC0792"/> / ICMPv6 <x | ormat="default"/> | |||
ref target="RFC4443"/> are applicable, | <xref target="RFC6425" format="default"/> as well as ICMP <xref target | |||
="RFC0792" format="default"/> and ICMPv6 <xref target="RFC4443" format="default" | ||||
/> are applicable, | ||||
depending on whether the PSN employs MPLS or IP transport, | depending on whether the PSN employs MPLS or IP transport, | |||
respectively. Furthermore, BFD mechanisms per <xref target="RFC5880"/>, <xre | respectively. Furthermore, Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) mechanis | |||
f target="RFC5881"/>, | ms per <xref target="RFC5880" format="default"/>, <xref target="RFC5881" format= | |||
<xref target="RFC5883"/> and <xref target="RFC5884"/> apply. Also, the BFD me | "default"/>, | |||
chanisms pertaining to | <xref target="RFC5883" format="default"/>, and <xref target="RFC5884" format= | |||
MPLS-TP LSPs per <xref target="RFC6428"/> are applicable.</t> | "default"/> apply. Also, the BFD mechanisms pertaining to | |||
MPLS-TP LSPs per <xref target="RFC6428" format="default"/> are applicable.</t | ||||
</section> | > | |||
</section> | ||||
<section title="Link OAM" anchor="sect-2.5"><t> | <section anchor="sect-2.5" numbered="true" toc="default"> | |||
Link OAM depends on the data link technology being used between the | <name>Link OAM</name> | |||
<t> | ||||
Link OAM depends on the data-link technology being used between the | ||||
PE and P nodes. For example, if Ethernet links are employed, then | PE and P nodes. For example, if Ethernet links are employed, then | |||
Ethernet Link OAM (<xref target="IEEE-802.3"/> Clause 57) may be used.</t> | Ethernet Link OAM (<xref target="IEEE-802.3" format="default"/>, Clause 57) m | |||
ay be used.</t> | ||||
</section> | </section> | |||
<section anchor="sect-2.6" numbered="true" toc="default"> | ||||
<section title="OAM Inter-working" anchor="sect-2.6"><t> | <name>OAM Interworking</name> | |||
When inter-working two networking domains, such as native Ethernet | <t> | |||
When interworking two networking domains, such as actual Ethernet | ||||
and EVPN to provide an end-to-end emulated service, there is a need | and EVPN to provide an end-to-end emulated service, there is a need | |||
to identify the failure domain and location, even when a PE supports | to identify the failure domain and location, even when a PE supports | |||
both the Service OAM mechanisms and the EVPN Network OAM mechanisms. | both the Service OAM mechanisms and the EVPN Network OAM mechanisms. | |||
In addition, scalability constraints may not allow running proactive | In addition, scalability constraints may not allow the running of proactive | |||
monitoring, such as Ethernet Continuity Check Messages (CCMs | monitoring, such as Ethernet Continuity Check Messages (CCMs) | |||
<xref target="IEEE-802.1Q"/>), at a PE to detect the failure of an EVI across | <xref target="IEEE-802.1Q" format="default"/>, at a PE to detect the failure | |||
the EVPN | of an EVI across the EVPN | |||
domain. Thus, the mapping of alarms generated upon failure detection | domain. Thus, the mapping of alarms generated upon failure detection | |||
in one domain (e.g., native Ethernet or EVPN network domain) to the | in one domain (e.g., actual Ethernet or EVPN network domain) to the | |||
other domain is needed. There are also cases where a PE may not be | other domain is needed. There are also cases where a PE may not be | |||
able to process Service OAM messages received from a remote PE over | able to process Service OAM messages received from a remote PE over | |||
the PSN even when such messages are defined, as in the Ethernet case, | the PSN even when such messages are defined, as in the Ethernet case, | |||
thereby necessitating support for fault notification message mapping | thereby necessitating support for fault notification message mapping | |||
between the EVPN Network domain and the Service domain.</t> | between the EVPN Network domain and the Service domain.</t> | |||
<t> | ||||
<t> | OAM interworking is not limited, though, to scenarios involving disparate | |||
OAM inter-working is not limited though to scenarios involving disparate | network domains. It is possible to perform OAM interworking across | |||
network domains. It is possible to perform OAM inter-working across | ||||
different layers in the same network domain. In general, alarms generated | different layers in the same network domain. In general, alarms generated | |||
within an OAM layer, as a result of proactive fault detection mechanisms, | within an OAM layer, as a result of proactive fault detection mechanisms, may | |||
may be injected into its client layer OAM mechanisms. This allows the | be injected into its client-layer OAM mechanisms. This allows the | |||
client layer OAM to trigger event-driven (i.e., asynchronous) fault | client-layer OAM to trigger event-driven (i.e., asynchronous) fault | |||
notifications. For example, alarms generated by the Link OAM mechanisms may | notifications. For example, alarms generated by the Link OAM mechanisms may | |||
be injected into the Transport OAM layer, and alarms generated by the | be injected into the Transport OAM layer, and alarms generated by the | |||
Transport OAM mechanism may be injected into the Network OAM mechanism, and | Transport OAM mechanism may be injected into the Network OAM mechanism, and | |||
so on.</t> | so on.</t> | |||
<t> | ||||
<t> | EVPN OAM <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> support interworking between the Network OAM and | |||
EVPN OAM MUST support inter-working between the Network OAM and | Service OAM mechanisms. EVPN OAM <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> support interworking amon | |||
Service OAM mechanisms. EVPN OAM MAY support inter-working among | g | |||
other OAM layers.</t> | other OAM layers.</t> | |||
</section> | ||||
</section> | </section> | |||
<section anchor="sect-3" numbered="true" toc="default"> | ||||
</section> | <name>EVPN OAM Requirements</name> | |||
<t> | ||||
<section title="EVPN OAM Requirements" anchor="sect-3"><t> | This section discusses the EVPN OAM requirements pertaining to fault | |||
This section discusses the EVPN OAM requirements pertaining to Fault | management and performance management.</t> | |||
Management and Performance Management.</t> | <section anchor="sect-3.1" numbered="true" toc="default"> | |||
<name>Fault Management Requirements</name> | ||||
<section title="Fault Management Requirements" anchor="sect-3.1"><section | <section anchor="sect-3.1.1" numbered="true" toc="default"> | |||
title="Proactive Fault Management Functions" anchor="sect-3.1.1"><t> | <name>Proactive Fault Management Functions</name> | |||
<t> | ||||
The network operator configures proactive fault management functions | The network operator configures proactive fault management functions | |||
to run periodically without a time bound. Certain actions, for | to run periodically. Certain actions (for | |||
example protection switchover or alarm indication signaling, can be | example, protection switchover or alarm indication signaling) can be | |||
associated with specific events, such as entering or clearing fault | associated with specific events, such as entering or clearing fault | |||
states.</t> | states.</t> | |||
<section anchor="sect-3.1.1.1" numbered="true" toc="default"> | ||||
<section title="Fault Detection (Continuity Check)" anchor="sect-3.1.1.1" | <name>Fault Detection (Continuity Check)</name> | |||
><t> | <t> | |||
Proactive fault detection is performed by periodically monitoring the | Proactive fault detection is performed by periodically monitoring the | |||
reachability between service endpoints, i.e., MEPs in a given MA, | reachability between service end points, i.e., MEPs in a given MA, | |||
through the exchange of Continuity Check Messages <xref target="IEEE-802.1Q"/ | through the exchange of CCMs <xref target="IEEE-802.1Q" format="default"/>. T | |||
>. The | he | |||
reachability between any two arbitrary MEPs may be monitored for:</t> | reachability between any two arbitrary MEPs may be monitored for:</t> | |||
<ul spacing="normal"> | ||||
<t><list style="symbols"><t>in-band per-flow monitoring. This enables per | <li>in-band, per-flow monitoring. This enables per-flow monitoring | |||
flow monitoring | between MEPs. EVPN Network OAM <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> support fault detection | |||
between MEPs. EVPN Network OAM MUST support fault detection with | with | |||
per user flow granularity. EVPN Service OAM MAY support fault | per-user flow granularity. EVPN Service OAM <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> support faul | |||
detection with per user flow granularity.</t> | t | |||
detection with per-user flow granularity.</li> | ||||
<t>a representative path. This enables liveness check of the nodes | <li>a representative path. This enables a liveness check of the no | |||
hosting the MEPs assuming that the loss of continuity to the MEP is | des | |||
hosting the MEPs, assuming that the loss of continuity (LOC) to the MEP is | ||||
interpreted as a failure of the hosting node. This, however, does | interpreted as a failure of the hosting node. This, however, does | |||
not conclusively indicate liveness of the path(s) taken by user | not conclusively indicate liveness of the path(s) taken by user | |||
data traffic. This enables node failure detection but not path | data traffic. This enables node failure detection but not path | |||
failure detection, through the use of a test flow. EVPN Network OAM | failure detection through the use of a test flow. EVPN Network OAM | |||
and Service OAM MUST support fault detection using test flows.</t> | and Service OAM <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> support fault detection using test flow | |||
s.</li> | ||||
<t>all paths. For MPLS/IP networks with ECMP, monitoring of all unicast | <li>all paths. For MPLS/IP networks with ECMP, the monitoring of a | |||
paths between MEPs (on non-adjacent nodes) may not be possible, since the | ll unicast | |||
paths between MEPs (on non-adjacent nodes) may not be possible since the | ||||
per-hop ECMP hashing behavior may yield situations where it is impossible | per-hop ECMP hashing behavior may yield situations where it is impossible | |||
for a MEP to pick flow entropy characteristics that result in exercising | for a MEP to pick flow entropy characteristics that result in exercising | |||
the exhaustive set of ECMP paths. Monitoring of all ECMP paths between | the exhaustive set of ECMP paths. The monitoring of all ECMP paths between | |||
MEPs (on non-adjacent nodes) is not a requirement for EVPN OAM.</t> | MEPs (on non-adjacent nodes) is not a requirement for EVPN OAM.</li> | |||
</ul> | ||||
</list> | <t> | |||
</t> | ||||
<t> | ||||
The fact that MPLS/IP networks do not enforce congruency between | The fact that MPLS/IP networks do not enforce congruency between | |||
unicast and multicast paths means that the proactive fault detection | unicast and multicast paths means that the proactive fault detection | |||
mechanisms for EVPN networks MUST provide procedures to monitor the | mechanisms for EVPN networks <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> provide procedures to monito r the | |||
unicast paths independently of the multicast paths. This applies to | unicast paths independently of the multicast paths. This applies to | |||
EVPN Service OAM and Network OAM.</t> | EVPN Service OAM and Network OAM.</t> | |||
</section> | ||||
</section> | <section anchor="sect-3.1.1.2" numbered="true" toc="default"> | |||
<name>Defect Indication</name> | ||||
<section title="Defect Indication" anchor="sect-3.1.1.2"><t> | <t> | |||
Defect indications can be categorized into two types: forward and | Defect indications can be categorized into two types: forward and | |||
reverse defect indications as described below. EVPN Service OAM MUST | reverse, as described below. EVPN Service OAM <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> | |||
support at least one of these types of event-driven defect indication | support at least one of these types of event-driven defect indications | |||
upon the detection of a connectivity defect.</t> | upon the detection of a connectivity defect.</t> | |||
<section anchor="sect-3.1.1.2.1" numbered="true" toc="default"> | ||||
<section title="Forward Defect Indication" anchor="sect-3.1.1.2.1"><t> | <name>Forward Defect Indication (FDI)</name> | |||
This is used to signal a failure that is detected by a lower layer | <t> | |||
FDI is used to signal a failure that is detected by a lower-layer | ||||
OAM mechanism. A server MEP (i.e., an actual or virtual MEP) | OAM mechanism. A server MEP (i.e., an actual or virtual MEP) | |||
transmits a Forward Defect Indication in a direction that is away | transmits a forward defect indication in a direction away | |||
from the direction of the failure (refer to Figure 4 below).</t> | from the direction of the failure (refer to <xref target="fig-4"/> below).</t | |||
> | ||||
<figure title="Forward Defect Indication" anchor="fig-4"><artwork><![CDAT | <figure anchor="fig-4"> | |||
A[ | <name>Forward Defect Indication</name> | |||
<artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt=""><![CDATA[ | ||||
Failure | Failure | |||
| | | | |||
+-----+ +-----+ V +-----+ +-----+ | +-----+ +-----+ V +-----+ +-----+ | |||
| A |------| B |--XXX--| C |------| D | | | A |------| B |--XXX--| C |------| D | | |||
+-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ | +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ | |||
<===========| |============> | <===========| |============> | |||
Forward Forward | Forward Forward | |||
Defect Defect | Defect Defect | |||
Indication Indication | Indication Indication | |||
]]></artwork> | ]]></artwork> | |||
</figure> | </figure> | |||
<t> | <t> | |||
Forward defect indication may be used for alarm suppression and/or | Forward defect indication may be used for alarm suppression and/or | |||
for purpose of inter-working with other layer OAM protocols. Alarm | for the purpose of interworking with other layer OAM protocols. Alarm | |||
suppression is useful when a transport/network level fault translates | suppression is useful when a transport-level or network-level fault translate | |||
to multiple service or flow level faults. In such a scenario, it is | s | |||
to multiple service- or flow-level faults. In such a scenario, it is | ||||
enough to alert a network management station (NMS) of the single | enough to alert a network management station (NMS) of the single | |||
transport/network level fault in lieu of flooding that NMS with a | transport-level or network-level fault in lieu of flooding that NMS with a | |||
multitude of Service or Flow granularity alarms. EVPN PEs SHOULD | multitude of Service or Flow granularity alarms. EVPN PEs <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp1 | |||
support Forward Defect Indication in the Service OAM mechanisms.</t> | 4> | |||
support forward defect indication in the Service OAM mechanisms.</t> | ||||
</section> | </section> | |||
<section anchor="sect-3.1.1.2.2" numbered="true" toc="default"> | ||||
<section title="Reverse Defect Indication (RDI)" anchor="sect-3.1.1.2.2"> | <name>Reverse Defect Indication (RDI)</name> | |||
<t> | ||||
RDI is used to signal that the advertising MEP has detected a loss of | ||||
continuity (LoC) defect. RDI is transmitted in the direction of the | ||||
failure (refer to Figure 5).</t> | ||||
<figure title="Reverse Defect Indication" anchor="fig-5"><artwork><![CDAT | <t> | |||
A[ | RDI is used to signal that the advertising MEP has detected a LOC defect. RDI | |||
is transmitted in the direction of the | ||||
failure (refer to <xref target="fig-5"/>).</t> | ||||
<figure anchor="fig-5"> | ||||
<name>Reverse Defect Indication</name> | ||||
<artwork name="" type="" align="left" alt=""><![CDATA[ | ||||
Failure | Failure | |||
| | | | |||
+-----+ +-----+ V +-----+ +-----+ | +-----+ +-----+ V +-----+ +-----+ | |||
| A |------| B |--XXX--| C |------| D | | | A |------| B |--XXX--| C |------| D | | |||
+-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ | +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ | |||
|===========> <============| | |===========> <============| | |||
Reverse Reverse | Reverse Reverse | |||
Defect Defect | Defect Defect | |||
Indication Indication | Indication Indication | |||
]]></artwork> | ]]></artwork> | |||
</figure> | </figure> | |||
<t> | <t> | |||
RDI allows single-sided management, where the network operator can | RDI allows single-sided management, where the network operator can | |||
examine the state of a single MEP and deduce the overall health of a | examine the state of a single MEP and deduce the overall health of a | |||
monitored service. EVPN PEs SHOULD support Reverse Defect Indication | monitored service. EVPN PEs <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> support reverse defect indi cation | |||
in the Service OAM mechanisms. This includes both the ability to | in the Service OAM mechanisms. This includes both the ability to | |||
signal LoC defect to a remote MEP, as well as the ability to | signal a LOC defect to a remote MEP as well as the ability to | |||
recognize RDI from a remote MEP. Note that, in a multipoint MA, RDI | recognize RDI from a remote MEP. Note that, in a multipoint MA, RDI | |||
is not a useful indicator of unidirectional fault. This is because | is not a useful indicator of unidirectional fault. This is because | |||
RDI carries no indication of the affected MEP(s) with which the | RDI carries no indication of the affected MEP(s) with which the | |||
sender had detected a LoC defect.</t> | sender had detected a LOC defect.</t> | |||
</section> | ||||
</section> | </section> | |||
</section> | ||||
</section> | <section anchor="sect-3.1.2" numbered="true" toc="default"> | |||
<name>On-Demand Fault Management Functions</name> | ||||
</section> | <t> | |||
<section title="On-Demand Fault Management Functions" anchor="sect-3.1.2" | ||||
><t> | ||||
On-demand fault management functions are initiated manually by the | On-demand fault management functions are initiated manually by the | |||
network operator and continue for a time bound period. These | network operator and continue for a bounded time period. These | |||
functions enable the operator to run diagnostics to investigate a | functions enable the operator to run diagnostics to investigate a | |||
defect condition.</t> | defect condition.</t> | |||
<section anchor="sect-3.1.2.1" numbered="true" toc="default"> | ||||
<section title="Connectivity Verification" anchor="sect-3.1.2.1"><t> | <name>Connectivity Verification</name> | |||
EVPN Network OAM MUST support on-demand connectivity verification | <t> | |||
EVPN Network OAM <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> support on-demand connectivity verificat | ||||
ion | ||||
mechanisms for unicast and multicast destinations. The connectivity | mechanisms for unicast and multicast destinations. The connectivity | |||
verification mechanisms SHOULD provide a means for specifying and | verification mechanisms <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> provide a means for specifying | |||
carrying in the messages:</t> | and | |||
carrying the following in the messages:</t> | ||||
<t><list style="symbols"><t>variable length payload/padding to test MTU ( | <ul spacing="normal"> | |||
Maximum Transmission | <li>variable-length payload/padding to test connectivity problems | |||
Unit) related connectivity problems.</t> | related to the Maximum Transmission Unit (MTU).</li> | |||
<li>test frame formats as defined in <xref target="RFC2544" sectio | ||||
<t>test frame formats as defined in Appendix C of <xref target="RFC2544"/ | nFormat="of" section="C"/> to detect | |||
> to detect | potential packet corruption.</li> | |||
potential packet corruption.</t> | </ul> | |||
<t> | ||||
</list> | EVPN Network OAM <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> support connectivity verification at per | |||
</t> | -flow | |||
<t> | ||||
EVPN Network OAM MUST support connectivity verification at per flow | ||||
granularity. This includes both user flows (to test a specific path | granularity. This includes both user flows (to test a specific path | |||
between PEs) as well as test flows (to test a representative path | between PEs) as well as test flows (to test a representative path | |||
between PEs).</t> | between PEs).</t> | |||
<t> | ||||
<t> | EVPN Service OAM <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> support connectivity verification on tes | |||
EVPN Service OAM MUST support connectivity verification on test flows | t flows | |||
and MAY support connectivity verification on user flows.</t> | and <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> support connectivity verification on user flows.</t> | |||
<t> | ||||
<t> | For multicast connectivity verification, EVPN Network OAM <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> | |||
For multicast connectivity verification, EVPN Network OAM MUST | ||||
support reporting on:</t> | support reporting on:</t> | |||
<ul spacing="normal"> | ||||
<t><list style="symbols"><t>the DF filtering status of specific port(s) o | <li>the DF filtering status of a specific port(s) or all the ports | |||
r all the ports in a | in a | |||
given bridge-domain.</t> | given bridge domain.</li> | |||
<li>the split-horizon filtering status of a specific port(s) or al | ||||
<t>the Split Horizon filtering status of specific port(s) or all the | l the | |||
ports in a given bridge-domain.</t> | ports in a given bridge domain.</li> | |||
</ul> | ||||
</list> | </section> | |||
</t> | <section anchor="sect-3.1.2.2" numbered="true" toc="default"> | |||
<name>Fault Isolation</name> | ||||
</section> | <t> | |||
EVPN OAM <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> support an on-demand fault localization function | ||||
<section title="Fault Isolation" anchor="sect-3.1.2.2"><t> | . This | |||
EVPN OAM MUST support an on-demand fault localization function. This | ||||
involves the capability to narrow down the locality of a fault to a | involves the capability to narrow down the locality of a fault to a | |||
particular port, link or node. The characteristic of forward/reverse path | particular port, link, or node. The characteristic of forward/reverse path | |||
asymmetry, in MPLS/IP, makes fault isolation a direction-sensitive | asymmetry in MPLS/IP makes fault isolation a direction-sensitive | |||
operation. That is, given two PEs A and B, localization of continuity | operation. That is, given two PEs A and B, localization of continuity | |||
failures between them requires running fault isolation procedures from PE A | failures between them requires running fault-isolation procedures from PE A | |||
to PE B as well as from PE B to PE A.</t> | to PE B as well as from PE B to PE A.</t> | |||
<t> | ||||
<t> | ||||
EVPN Service OAM mechanisms only have visibility to the PEs but not | EVPN Service OAM mechanisms only have visibility to the PEs but not | |||
the MPLS or IP P nodes. As such, they can be used to deduce whether | the MPLS or IP P nodes. As such, they can be used to deduce whether | |||
the fault is in the customer's own network, the local CE-PE segment | the fault is in the customer's own network, the local CE-PE segment, | |||
or remote CE-PE segment(s). EVPN Network and Transport OAM mechanisms | or a remote CE-PE segment(s). EVPN Network and Transport OAM mechanisms | |||
can be used for fault isolation between the PEs and P nodes.</t> | can be used for fault isolation between the PEs and P nodes.</t> | |||
</section> | ||||
</section> | </section> | |||
</section> | ||||
</section> | <section anchor="sect-3.2" numbered="true" toc="default"> | |||
<name>Performance Management</name> | ||||
</section> | <t> | |||
Performance management functions can be performed both proactively | ||||
<section title="Performance Management" anchor="sect-3.2"><t> | and on demand. Proactive management involves a recurring function, | |||
Performance Management functions can be performed both proactively | ||||
and on-demand. Proactive management involves a recurring function, | ||||
where the performance management probes are run continuously without | where the performance management probes are run continuously without | |||
a trigger. We cover both proactive and on-demand functions in this | a trigger. We cover both proactive and on-demand functions in this | |||
section.</t> | section.</t> | |||
<section anchor="sect-3.2.1" numbered="true" toc="default"> | ||||
<section title="Packet Loss" anchor="sect-3.2.1"><t> | <name>Packet Loss</name> | |||
EVPN Network OAM SHOULD provide mechanisms for measuring packet loss | <t> | |||
for a given service, for example <xref target="RFC7680"/> <xref target="RFC66 | EVPN Network OAM <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> provide mechanisms for measuring packe | |||
73"/>.</t> | t loss | |||
for a given service -- for example, <xref target="RFC7680" format="default"/> | ||||
<t> | and <xref target="RFC6673" format="default"/>.</t> | |||
<t> | ||||
Given that EVPN provides inherent support for multipoint-to-multipoint | Given that EVPN provides inherent support for multipoint-to-multipoint | |||
connectivity, then packet loss cannot be accurately measured by means of | connectivity, packet loss cannot be accurately measured by means of | |||
counting user data packets. This is because user packets can be delivered | counting user data packets. This is because user packets can be delivered | |||
to more PEs or more ports than are necessary (e.g., due to broadcast, | to more PEs or more ports than are necessary (e.g., due to broadcast, | |||
un-pruned multicast or unknown unicast flooding). As such, a statistical | unpruned multicast, or unknown unicast flooding). As such, a statistical | |||
means of approximating packet loss rate is required. This can be achieved | means of approximating the packet loss rate is required. This can be achieve | |||
d | ||||
by sending "synthetic" OAM packets that are counted only by those ports | by sending "synthetic" OAM packets that are counted only by those ports | |||
(MEPs) that are required to receive them. This provides a statistical | (MEPs) that are required to receive them. This provides a statistical | |||
approximation of the number of data frames lost, even with | approximation of the number of data frames lost, even with | |||
multipoint-to-multipoint connectivity.</t> | multipoint-to-multipoint connectivity.</t> | |||
</section> | ||||
</section> | <section anchor="sect-3.2.2" numbered="true" toc="default"> | |||
<name>Packet Delay and Jitter</name> | ||||
<section title="Packet Delay and Jitter" anchor="sect-3.2.2"><t> | <t> | |||
EVPN Service OAM SHOULD support measurement of one-way and two-way | EVPN Service OAM <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> support measurement of one-way and two | |||
-way | ||||
packet delay and delay variation (jitter) across the EVPN network. | packet delay and delay variation (jitter) across the EVPN network. | |||
Measurement of one-way delay requires clock synchronization between | Measurement of one-way delay requires clock synchronization between | |||
the probe source and target devices. Mechanisms for clock | the probe source and target devices. Mechanisms for clock | |||
synchronization are outside the scope of this document. Note that | synchronization are outside the scope of this document. Note that | |||
Service OAM performance management mechanisms defined in [Y.1731] can | Service OAM performance management mechanisms defined in <xref target="Y.1731 | |||
be used. See also <xref target="RFC7679"/>, <xref target="RFC2681"/>, and <xr | "/> can | |||
ef target="RFC3393"/></t> | be used. See also <xref target="RFC7679" format="default"/>, <xref target="RF | |||
C2681" format="default"/>, and <xref target="RFC3393" format="default"/>.</t> | ||||
<t> | <t> | |||
EVPN Network OAM MAY support measurement of one-way and two-way | EVPN Network OAM <bcp14>MAY</bcp14> support measurement of one-way and two-wa | |||
y | ||||
packet delay and delay variation (jitter) across the EVPN network.</t> | packet delay and delay variation (jitter) across the EVPN network.</t> | |||
</section> | ||||
</section> | </section> | |||
</section> | ||||
</section> | <section anchor="sect-4" numbered="true" toc="default"> | |||
<name>Security Considerations</name> | ||||
</section> | <t> | |||
EVPN OAM <bcp14>MUST</bcp14> prevent OAM packets from leaking outside of the | ||||
<section title="Security Considerations" anchor="sect-4"><t> | EVPN | |||
EVPN OAM MUST prevent OAM packets from leaking outside of the EVPN | ||||
network or outside their corresponding Maintenance Domain. This can | network or outside their corresponding Maintenance Domain. This can | |||
be done for CFM, for example, by having MEPs implement a filtering | be done for CFM, for example, by having MEPs implement a filtering | |||
function based on the Maintenance Level associated with received OAM | function based on the Maintenance Level associated with received OAM | |||
packets.</t> | packets.</t> | |||
<t> | ||||
<t> | EVPN OAM <bcp14>SHOULD</bcp14> provide mechanisms for implementation and opti | |||
EVPN OAM SHOULD provide mechanisms for implementation and optional | onal | |||
use to:</t> | use to:</t> | |||
<ul spacing="normal"> | ||||
<li>prevent denial-of-service attacks caused by exploitation of the OAM | ||||
message channel (for example, by forging messages to exceed a | ||||
Maintenance End Point's capacity to maintain state).</li> | ||||
<li>authenticate communicating end points (for example, MEPs and MIPs).< | ||||
/li> | ||||
</ul> | ||||
</section> | ||||
<section anchor="sect-5" numbered="true" toc="default"> | ||||
<name>IANA Considerations</name> | ||||
<t> | ||||
This document has no IANA actions.</t> | ||||
</section> | ||||
</middle> | ||||
<back> | ||||
<references> | ||||
<name>References</name> | ||||
<references> | ||||
<name>Normative References</name> | ||||
<xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.R | ||||
FC.0792.xml"/> | ||||
<xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.R | ||||
FC.2119.xml"/> | ||||
<xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.R | ||||
FC.4443.xml"/> | ||||
<xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.R | ||||
FC.5880.xml"/> | ||||
<xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.R | ||||
FC.5881.xml"/> | ||||
<xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.R | ||||
FC.5883.xml"/> | ||||
<xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.R | ||||
FC.5884.xml"/> | ||||
<xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.R | ||||
FC.6291.xml"/> | ||||
<xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.R | ||||
FC.6425.xml"/> | ||||
<xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.R | ||||
FC.6428.xml"/> | ||||
<xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.R | ||||
FC.7432.xml"/> | ||||
<xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.R | ||||
FC.7623.xml"/> | ||||
<xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.R | ||||
FC.8029.xml"/> | ||||
<xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.R | ||||
FC.8174.xml"/> | ||||
</references> | ||||
<references> | ||||
<name>Informative References</name> | ||||
<t><list style="symbols"><t>Prevent denial of service attacks caused by e | <reference anchor="IEEE-802.1Q"> | |||
xploitation of the OAM | <front> | |||
message channel (for example by forging messages to exceed a | <title>IEEE Standard for Local and metropolitan area networks--Bridg | |||
maintenance end point's capacity to maintain state).</t> | es and Bridged Networks</title> | |||
<author> | ||||
<t>Authenticate communicating endpoints (for example MEPs and MIPs).</t> | <organization>IEEE</organization> | |||
</author> | ||||
</list> | <date month="December" year="2014"/> | |||
</t> | </front> | |||
<seriesInfo name="IEEE" value="Std 802.1Q-2014"/> | ||||
</section> | <seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.1109/IEEESTD.2014.6991462"/> | |||
</reference> | ||||
<section title="IANA Considerations" anchor="sect-5"><t> | ||||
This document requires no IANA actions.</t> | ||||
</section> | ||||
<section title="Acknowledgements" anchor="sect-6"><t> | ||||
The authors would like to thank the following for their review of | ||||
this work and valuable comments:</t> | ||||
<figure><artwork><![CDATA[ | ||||
David Black, Martin Duke, Xiao Min, Gregory Mirsky, | ||||
Zaheduzzaman Sarker, Dave Schinazi, John Scudder, | ||||
Melinda Shore, Robert Wilton, Alexander Vainshtein, | ||||
Stig Venaas, and Eric Vyncke. | ||||
]]></artwork></figure> | ||||
</section> | ||||
</middle> | ||||
<back> | ||||
<references title="Normative References"> | ||||
&RFC0792; | ||||
&RFC2119; | ||||
&RFC4443; | ||||
&RFC5880; | ||||
&RFC5881; | ||||
&RFC5883; | ||||
&RFC5884; | ||||
&RFC6291; | ||||
&RFC6425; | ||||
&RFC6428; | ||||
&RFC7432; | ||||
&RFC7623; | ||||
&RFC8029; | ||||
&RFC8174; | ||||
</references> | ||||
<references title="Informative References"> | ||||
<reference anchor="IEEE-802.1Q"><front> | ||||
<title>IEEE Standard for Local and metropolitan area networks - Media Acc | ||||
ess Control (MAC) Bridges and Virtual Bridge Local Area Networks</title> | ||||
<author> | ||||
<organization>IEEE</organization> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="2014"/> | ||||
</front> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="IEEE" value="Std 802.1Q-2014"/> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<reference anchor="IEEE-802.3"><front> | ||||
<title>IEEE Standard for Ethernet</title> | ||||
<author> | ||||
<organization>IEEE</organization> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="2015"/> | <reference anchor="IEEE-802.3"> | |||
</front> | <front> | |||
<title>IEEE Standard for Ethernet</title> | ||||
<author> | ||||
<organization>IEEE</organization> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="2018" month="August"/> | ||||
</front> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="IEEE" value="Std 802.3-2018"/> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="DOI" value="10.1109/IEEESTD.2018.8457469"/> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="IEEE" value="Std 802.3-2015"/> | <xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.R | |||
</reference> | FC.2544.xml"/> | |||
&RFC2544; | <xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.R | |||
&RFC2681; | FC.2681.xml"/> | |||
&RFC3393; | <xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.R | |||
&RFC5085; | FC.3393.xml"/> | |||
&RFC6136; | <xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.R | |||
&RFC6632; | FC.5085.xml"/> | |||
&RFC6673; | <xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.R | |||
&RFC7679; | FC.6136.xml"/> | |||
&RFC7680; | <xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.R | |||
FC.6632.xml"/> | ||||
<xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.R | ||||
FC.6673.xml"/> | ||||
<xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.R | ||||
FC.7679.xml"/> | ||||
<xi:include href="https://xml2rfc.ietf.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.R | ||||
FC.7680.xml"/> | ||||
<!-- | <reference anchor="Y.1731"> | |||
draft-ietf-bess-evpn-oam-req-frmwk-10-manual.txt(799): Warning: Failed parsin | <front> | |||
g a | ||||
reference. Are all elements separated by commas (not periods, not just | ||||
spaces)?: | ||||
[Y.1731] "ITU-T Recommendation Y.1731 (02/08) - OAM functions and | ||||
mechanisms for Ethernet based networks", February 2008. | ||||
--> | ||||
<title>Operation, administration and maintenance (OAM) functions and | ||||
mechanisms for Ethernet-based networks</title> | ||||
<author> | ||||
<organization>ITU-T</organization> | ||||
</author> | ||||
<date year="2015" month="August"/> | ||||
</front> | ||||
<seriesInfo name="ITU-T Recommendation" value="G.8013/Y.1731"/> | ||||
</reference> | ||||
</references> | </references> | |||
</back> | </references> | |||
<section anchor="sect-6" numbered="false" toc="default"> | ||||
<name>Acknowledgements</name> | ||||
<t> | ||||
The authors would like to thank the following for their review of | ||||
this work and their valuable comments: | ||||
<contact fullname="David Black"/>, <contact fullname="Martin Duke"/>, <contact f | ||||
ullname="Xiao Min"/>, <contact fullname="Gregory Mirsky"/>, <contact fullname="Z | ||||
aheduzzaman Sarker"/>, <contact fullname="Dave Schinazi"/>, <contact fullname="J | ||||
ohn Scudder"/>, <contact fullname="Melinda Shore"/>, <contact fullname="Robert W | ||||
ilton"/>, <contact fullname="Alexander Vainshtein"/>, <contact fullname="Stig Ve | ||||
naas"/>, and <contact fullname="Éric Vyncke"/>.</t> | ||||
</section> | ||||
</back> | ||||
</rfc> | </rfc> | |||
End of changes. 103 change blocks. | ||||
691 lines changed or deleted | 663 lines changed or added | |||
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/ |