<?xml version="1.0" encoding="US-ASCII"?>
<!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd">
<?rfc toc="yes"?>
<?rfc tocompact="yes"?>
<?rfc tocdepth="3"?>
<?rfc tocindent="yes"?>
<?rfc symrefs="yes"?>
<?rfc sortrefs="no"?>
<?rfc comments="yes"?>
<?rfc inline="yes"?>
<?rfc compact="yes"?>
<?rfc subcompact="no"?>
<rfc category="info" docName="draft-shi-cats-ipv6-based-con-00"
     ipr="trust200902" updates="">
  <front>
    <title abbrev="IPv6 based CON">IPv6-based Cloud-Oriented Networking
    (CON)</title>

    <author fullname="Hang Shi" initials="H." surname="Shi">
      <organization>Huawei Technologies</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>Huawei Campus, No. 156 Beiqing Rd.</street>

          <city>Beijing</city>

          <region/>

          <code>100095</code>

          <country>China</country>
        </postal>

        <phone/>

        <facsimile/>

        <email>shihang9@huawei.com</email>

        <uri/>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Cheng Li" initials="C." surname="Li">
      <organization>Huawei Technologies</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>Huawei Campus, No. 156 Beiqing Rd.</street>

          <city>Beijing</city>

          <region/>

          <code>100095</code>

          <country>China</country>
        </postal>

        <phone/>

        <facsimile/>

        <email>c.l@huawei.com</email>

        <uri/>
      </address>
    </author>

    <author fullname="Zhenbin Li" initials="Z." surname="Li">
      <organization>Huawei Technologies</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>Huawei Campus, No. 156 Beiqing Rd.</street>

          <city>Beijing</city>

          <region/>

          <code>100095</code>

          <country>China</country>
        </postal>

        <phone/>

        <facsimile/>

        <email>lizhenbin@huawei.com</email>

        <uri/>
      </address>
    </author>

    <date day="9" month="March" year="2023"/>

    <area>Routing Area</area>

    <workgroup>SPRING Working Group</workgroup>

    <abstract>
      <t>This document describes the scenarios, requirements and technologies
      for IPv6-based Cloud-oriented Networking.</t>

      <t/>
    </abstract>
  </front>

  <middle>
    <section title="Introduction">
      <t>With the development of cloud computing, increasing services have
      been migrated from enterprises to cloud data centers. Compared with
      interconnections between branches and headquarters, new connections
      between enterprise sites to cloud data centers and inter-cloud are
      added, which bring new requirements and challenges for existing
      networks.</t>

      <t/>

      <t>When enterprises have workloads &amp; applications &amp; data split
      among different data centers, especially for those enterprises with
      multiple sites that are already interconnected by VPNs (e.g., MPLS
      L2VPN/L3VPN), challenges are introduced. <xref
      target="I-D.ietf-rtgwg-net2cloud-problem-statement"/> describes the
      problems that enterprises face today when interconnecting their branch
      offices with dynamic workloads in third party data centers (a.k.a. Cloud
      DCs).</t>

      <t>SD-WAN is a flexible WAN architecture that enables flexible
      network-to-cloud and inter-clouds connections. It supports to use
      alternative paths like internet or 4G / 5G connection instead of
      expensive MPLS leased lines to exchange data between sites and clouds.
      However, when a WAN path travels multiple MPLS domains, the
      configurations are complicated due to multiple services touch points
      need to be configured. Therefore, it is hard to support end-to-end path
      programming in IPv4/MPLS based SD-WAN.</t>

      <t>When using VXLAN in SD-WAN, only the overlay path or anchor points
      can be specified while the underlay forwarding path can not be
      specified. Therefore, strict TE requirements like deterministic delay,
      specified path forwarding can not be satisfied.</t>

      <t>In order to resolve these challenges, this document propose
      IPv6-based Cloud-Oriented Networking (CON). In addition, it describes
      the challenges for existing networks when clouds and networks are
      converged, requirements that IPv6-based CON should satisfy, and the
      solutions in IPv6-based CON that satisfy the requirements.</t>

      <t>IPv6-based CON supports quick and flexible connections between sites
      and clouds and inter-clouds, it also supports end-to-end path
      programming, which can be used for many use cases, such as strict path
      traffic engineering, deterministic delay forwarding, and service
      function chaining, to provide better network services for cloud-network
      and inter-cloud interconnections.</t>
    </section>

    <section title="Terminology">
      <t>This document makes use of the terms defined in <xref
      target="RFC8754"/> and <xref target="RFC8200"/>, and the reader is
      assumed to be familiar with that terminology. This document introduces
      the following terms:</t>

      <t>POP: Point of Presence</t>

      <t>CON: Cloud-Oriented Networking.</t>

      <t>EC: Edge Computing.</t>

      <t>EDC: Edge Data center</t>

      <t>RDC: Regional Data Center</t>

      <t>CDC: Core Data Center</t>

      <t/>

      <t/>

      <section title="Requirements Language">
        <t>The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
        "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
        "OPTIONAL" 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>

    <section title="Problem Statement">
      <t>As development of cloud, many clouds have been deployed, such as
      Private cloud, Public Cloud, and Hybrid Cloud. The cloud services can be
      provided by a third party, such as an OTT (Over-The-Top) content
      provider, and it can be provided by a network operator as well.
      Furthermore, cloud can be deployed not only in IT data centers but also
      CT data centers.</t>

      <t>With the development and successful application of cloud native
      design in the IT field and Network Functions Virtualization (NFV)
      technologies, virtualization and cloudification have gradually matured
      and evolved to provide a new level of productivity, offering a new
      approach to telecom network construction. Building cloud-based telecom
      networks (also known as telco clouds) becomes a new way of telecom
      network construction.</t>

      <t>In order to support low latency communication, the request should be
      responded at the near cloud data center, therefore edge computing data
      center (a.k.a Edge Cloud) is introduced. Telecommunication services and
      third-party OTT services can be deployed in the edge cloud.</t>

      <t>As the deployment of clouds, the traffic pattern in the network has
      changed significantly, which results in new challenges for existing
      networks.</t>

      <t/>

      <section title="Underlay">
        <t>From the aspect of underlay, cloud services requires the network to
        provide quick and flexible connection.</t>

        <t>The typical topology of telco cloud is shown in figure 1.</t>

        <t><figure>
            <artwork><![CDATA[  

              +++++++        +++++++            ++++++ 
              | EDC |        | RDC |            | CDC|
              +++++++        +++++++            ++++++  
                 |   *********  |   ************  |                       
                 |   *       *  |   *          *  |
   OLT/CSG/CPE---PE--* Metro *--PE--* Backbone *--PE--IGW---Internet
                     *       *      *          *
                     *********      ************
 
            Figure 1.Typical topology of telco cloud

]]></artwork>
          </figure></t>

        <t>The edge cloud is deployed in edge data center (EDC) in the access
        network usually, so that the servers in the edge cloud can respond to
        the delay-sensitive requests rapidly, like 5G URLLC traffic. The
        traffic is not delay-sensitive can be responded in regional cloud DC,
        which is located in the metro or core network. Most cloud services may
        be deployed in the core cloud DC considering reducing the cost, which
        is far from the end user. Like, the UPF may locate in the regional
        cloud DC or Core cloud DC, so that it can support more users.</t>

        <t>The traffic from end users to cloud servers are forwarded along
        with different paths due to the different locations of the end users
        and the cloud servers.</t>

        <t>In addition, when deploying new services, for instance, deploying a
        leased line from an enterprise site to a cloud data center, it will
        take probably weeks in the current IPv4/MPLS carrier network. Because
        the VPN configuration is needed to be done at multiple PE nodes if the
        leased line travels multiple domains (when using Option A between
        domains). Also, the cloud operator needs to negotiate with network
        operators if the cloud services and the network services are provided
        by different operators. For example, thousands of chain stores such as
        grocery stores or super markets are needed to connect to their
        enterprise VPNs, and they may use the cloud services. However, in
        IPv4/MPLS network, it may take weeks to establish a new VPN connection
        from a site to headquarter or cloud tenant networks.</t>

        <t>Furthermore, different traffic of different enterprise/tenant/users
        are treated differently in clouds, and they MAY be forwarded along
        with different service function chains (SFC). However, it is hard to
        support SFC in IPv4 or MPLS based network in carrier's networks or
        data center networks. Normally, to support SFC, the traffic steering
        policies are configured at multiple nodes along the SFC path, which is
        complicated.</t>
      </section>

      <section title="Overlay">
        <t>In order to provide quick and flexible cloud connection, overlay
        connection is provided by cloud providers, especially the OTT cloud
        providers.</t>

        <t>SD-WAN is a typical fabric for DCI connection between clouds and
        sites, which provides a cheaper and smarter WAN connection. Many
        SD-WAN providers builds their own WAN backbone network by connecting
        their POP GWs to provide better SLA assurance for tenants. The typical
        topology of SD-WAN with POP GWs is shown in figure 2.</t>

        <t><figure>
            <artwork><![CDATA[
   

  Site CPE1--POP GW1 --------------------------POP GW2---Site CPE2
                |                                 |
                |          SD-WAN Backbone        |        
                |                                 | 
    Cloud1---POP GW3---------------------------POP GW4--Cloud2

              Figure 2. Typical topology of SD-WAN

]]></artwork>
          </figure></t>

        <t>Currently, the traffic from the CPE to POP GW is forwarded through
        the shortest forwarding path over the Internet, or an MPLS tunnel.</t>

        <t>In addition, traffic from POP GW to another POP GW can be forwarded
        along with the MPLS tunnel that is a leased line, or over the
        internet, depending on the forwarding policies.</t>

        <t>When the traffic is forwarded over the internet, it can be
        forwarded over a VXLAN tunnel. However, when using VXLAN, only the
        overlay connection is provided to enterprises/tenants, while the
        underlay forwarding path can not be specified and programmed.
        Therefore the SLA requirements can not be guaranteed when the traffic
        is forwarded overlay.</t>

        <t/>
      </section>
    </section>

    <section title="IPv6-based Cloud-Oriented Networking">
      <t>This document describes a networking architecture called IPv6-based
      Cloud-Oriented Networking (CON). IPv6-based CON is an IPv6-based
      networking which provide quick, flexible connection to support dynamic
      site to cloud, and inter-cloud connections. Also, it supports end-to-end
      underlay forwarding path programming, so that services like strict path
      TE and SFC can be supported better.</t>

      <t>The following section describes the requirements in IPv6-based CON,
      and the related solutions that meet the requirements.</t>

      <t/>

      <section title="Requirements">
        <t>This section describes the overall requirements which need to be
        fulfilled by IPv6-based Cloud-Oriented Networking.</t>

        <t/>

        <section title="Quick Connection">
          <t>Enterprise sites can locate at any location around the world,
          they need to connect to the clouds or other sites in any time, from
          any where. Also, enterprises may have some Virtual Private Clouds
          (VPC) in different clouds, they need to connect to each other in
          real time as well. The servers may locate in different cloud data
          centers or enterprise sites, which provide services for employees or
          other users. Therefore quick connection is required in IPv6-based
          CON.</t>
        </section>

        <section title="Hybrid Network Connection">
          <t>The enterprise VPN traffic can be forwarded around the world,
          which may travel heterogeneous networks, such as IPv4, MPLS and
          IPv6.</t>

          <t>Typically, when a SD-WAN network connects multiple sites and
          clouds, it may cover hybrid networks. For example, the sub-path from
          the CPE to POP WG could be an IPv4 sub-path without any resource
          guarantee. The sub-path between POP GWs could be an MPLS LSP with
          resource reservation.</t>

          <t>Therefore, connection over hybrid networks MUST be supported in
          IPv6-based CON.</t>
        </section>

        <section title="Path Programming">
          <t>When the enterprise VPN traffic is forwarded among sites or
          clouds, it may be forwarded along different paths. Each path has
          different performance such as different bandwidth, delay, etc. For
          instance, path A is the shortest path from site 1 to cloud 1, which
          has the lowest delay, while the path B can provide more bandwidth
          than path A. Therefore, the delay-sensitive traffic like PC gaming
          traffic SHOULD be forwarded along with path A, and the traffic that
          is delay-insensitive but requiring large bandwidth SHOULD be
          forwarded along with path B.</t>

          <t>In order to meet the different SLA requirements, IPv6-based CON
          MUST support path programming.</t>

          <t/>
        </section>

        <section title="Resource Assurance">
          <t>In RSVP-TE MPLS, resources like bandwidth can be reserved for an
          LSP. When the traffic is forwarded along the LSP, the bandwidth can
          be guaranteed, which makes sure that the traffic will not be
          affected by other traffic. In order to provide SLA guaranteed
          services, IPv6-based CON MUST support Resource Assurance.</t>

          <t>Network slicing is an approach to provide separate and
          independent end-to-end logical network over the physical network
          infrastructure. Each Network Slicing has its own resources, which
          can meet the specific SLA requirements. In order to provide SLA
          guaranteed services, IPv6-based CON MUST support network
          slicing.</t>

          <t/>
        </section>

        <section title="Deterministic Delay">
          <t>Delay-sensitive traffic has the strict requirements of network
          delay. Especially, when the servers moved to clouds instead of
          locating locally within the enterprise site, the long physical
          distance of packet forwarding path will introduce larger delay. In
          the traditional network, the shortest forwarding path is calculated
          based on the metric, and the metric is usually associated to the
          physical hops instead of latency. However, minimum delay forwarding
          is required for delay-sensitive traffic, like real-time video
          broadcast and video meeting.</t>

          <t>Therefore, IPv6-based CON MUST have the capability to support
          path computing based on delay. Also, it MUST be able to provide
          deterministic delay forwarding.</t>

          <t/>
        </section>

        <section title="Service Function Chaining">
          <t>Service Function Chaining <xref target="RFC7665"/> is a mechanism
          to provide different value-added services (VAS) for packets.</t>

          <t>A service function chain defines an ordered set of abstract
          service functions and ordering constraints that must be applied to
          packets and/or frames and/or flows selected as a result of
          classification <xref target="RFC7665"/>.</t>

          <t>An example of an abstract service function is "a firewall".
          Typically, different tenant's traffic in cloud data center will
          traverse different services function chain containing Firewall, DPI
          or other VAS.</t>

          <t>Therefore, IPv6-based CON MUST have the capability to support
          SFC.</t>

          <t/>
        </section>

        <section title="Performance Measurement">
          <t>Many OAM mechanisms are used to support network operation.
          Performance Measurement (PM) is one of the most important part of
          OAM. With PM, the real-time QoS of the forwarding path, like delay,
          packet loss ratio and throughput, can be measured.</t>

          <t>PM can be implemented in one of three ways: active, passive, or
          hybrid <xref target="RFC7799"/>, differing in whether OAM packets
          need to be proactively sent.</t>

          <t>On-path telemetry <xref target="I-D.song-opsawg-ifit-framework"/>
          is an hybrid mode OAM/PM mechanism, which provides better accuracy
          than active PM. Therefore, on-path Performance Measurement MUST be
          supported in IPv6-based CON.</t>

          <t/>
        </section>

        <section title="Reliability">
          <t>In Cloud-Network Interconnection scenarios, the enterprise
          traffic is forwarded over the WAN paths. The traffic can be
          sensitive to delay or packet losing, so high reliability is required
          in these scenarios. Therefore, protection of node and links MUST be
          supported in IPv6-based CON. Furthermore, redundancy transmission
          SHOULD be supported.</t>

          <t/>
        </section>

        <section title="Security">
          <t>As mentioned above, the enterprise traffic is forwarded over the
          WAN paths in IPv6-based CON. The security of the traffic MUST be
          ensured.</t>

          <t>Also, in SD-WAN scenarios, customers are most concerned about
          security.</t>

          <t>Therefore, IPv6-based CON MUST support secure connection, and
          MUST provide security assurance for the traffic in transmission.</t>

          <t/>
        </section>

        <section title="Forwarding Efficiency">
          <t>Tenants/Customers rent the physical or logical WAN links/paths
          from network operators for building they cloud-network
          interconnection enterprise network, so the forwarding efficiency is
          important for the WAN path tenant.</t>

          <t>Path Maximum Transmission Unit indicates the maximum size of a
          packet that it can be forwarded along a path. Setting an appropriate
          PMTU for packets can avoid fragmentation or dropping, so that the
          forwarding efficiency can be raised.</t>

          <t>Also, the overhead of packets MUST be added very carefully since
          it affects the forwarding efficiency directly. Especially, when many
          SIDs are inserted in an SRv6 packet, the overhead of the SID list is
          too large. <xref
          target="I-D.srcompdt-spring-compression-requirement"/> describes the
          requirements of SRv6 compression.</t>

          <t>Therefore, the IPv6-based CON MUST support PMTU probing and
          configuration. In addition, it MUST support SRv6 compression.</t>

          <t/>
        </section>

        <section title="Application-Aware Networking">
          <t>Network operators are typically unaware of which applications are
          traversing their networks, which is because the network layer is
          decoupled from application layer. Adding application knowledge to
          the network layer enables finer granularity requirements of
          applications to be specified to the network operator. As IPv6 is
          being widely deployed, the programmability provided by IPv6
          encapsulations can be augmented by conveying application
          information.</t>

          <t>In IPv6-based CON, many types of applications' traffic is
          exchanged between sites and clouds. They have various requirements
          of QoS, and should be treated differently. In order to provide finer
          granularity traffic engineering to reduce the cost of WAN services,
          application-aware networking SHOULD be supported in IPv6-based
          CON.</t>

          <t/>
        </section>
      </section>

      <section title="Solutions">
        <t>This section describes the candidate solutions that meet the
        requirements in IPv6-based CON.</t>

        <t/>

        <section title="VPN">
          <t>VPN is a basic and essential services for cloud-networks
          interconnections.</t>

          <t>SRv6 supports VPN by encoding the VPN information into the VPN
          SID <xref target="I-D.ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming"/>.</t>

          <t>Based on IPv6, SRv6 VPN can be established across multiple
          domains. It avoids configuring VPN services at each boundary nodes
          at each domain like the way in IPv4/MPLS networks (Option A).
          Deploying VPN based on SRv6 can shorten the duration
          significantly.</t>

          <t>Also, L2VPN and L3VPN can be supported uniformly based on EVPN
          control plane <xref target="I-D.ietf-bess-srv6-services"/>.
          Therefore, combining the SRv6 data plane and EVPN control plane, the
          VPN can be deployed in an easy and flexible way in IPv6-based
          CON.</t>

          <t/>
        </section>

        <section title="Path Programming">
          <t>Based on SRv6, the traffic forwarding path can be programmed at
          the ingress of the SRv6 domain, so that the traffic from sites to
          clouds or inter-cloud can be forwarded through the specific underlay
          path.</t>

          <t>For instance, in SD-WAN scenarios, the POP GW can choose a
          specific underlay forwarding path in WAN by choosing a binding SID
          <xref target="I-D.dukes-spring-sr-for-sdwan"/>. If the CPE supports
          SRv6, a controller can convey the programmed path information to the
          CPE via BGP SRv6 policy <xref
          target="I-D.ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy"/> or PCEP SRv6
          policy <xref target="I-D.ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp"/>.</t>

          <t>If the WAN connection travels multiple domains, the WAN path can
          be connected by multiple tunnels, such as VXLAN, GRE tunnel. <xref
          target="I-D.dunbar-sr-sdwan-over-hybrid-networks"/> describes how to
          associated the tunnels.</t>

          <t>In order to shorten the delay, a CPE or PE can choose the nearest
          server in a specific cloud, and forward the packets through
          programmed paths.</t>

          <t/>
        </section>

        <section title="Service Function Chaining">
          <t>SFC is required in IPv6-based CON since different tenants
          subscribe different value-added services.</t>

          <t><xref target="I-D.ietf-spring-sr-service-programming"/> defines
          the mechanism to support SFC in SRv6. Each service function (SF) can
          be represented as an SRv6 SID if it supports SRv6. If the SF is
          SRv6-unaware device, then proxy SID is used. By programming service
          SIDs into the SRH, the SFC can be supported in SRv6.</t>

          <t>Thanks to IPv6 reachability, SRv6 supports to program the
          end-to-end forwarding path from the carrier network to the inside
          the cloud data center, even to multiple clouds.</t>

          <t>If NSH-based SFC has been deployed, a transition solution should
          be considered, and <xref target="I-D.ietf-spring-nsh-sr"/> describes
          a NSH and SR integration SFC solution.</t>

          <t/>
        </section>

        <section title="IPv6 based Network Slicing">
          <t>The tenant traffic MUST be isolated in WAN to avoid affecting by
          other internet traffic.</t>

          <t>A framework, Enhanced VPN (VPN+), to form an enhanced
          connectivity services between customer sites is defined as per <xref
          target="I-D.ietf-teas-enhanced-vpn"/>. Typically, VPN+ will be used
          to form the underpinning of network slicing. It also defines Virtual
          Transport Network (VTN). A VTN is a virtual underlay network that
          connects customer edge points with the capability of providing the
          isolation and performance characteristics required by an enhanced
          VPN customer. A VTN usually has a customized topology and a set of
          dedicated or shared network resources <xref
          target="I-D.ietf-teas-enhanced-vpn"/>.</t>

          <t>A VTN-ID option in IPv6 HBH header is defined in <xref
          target="I-D.dong-6man-enhanced-vpn-vtn-id"/> to identify the Virtual
          Transport Network (VTN) the packet belongs to. A VTN can be used as
          the underlay for one or a group of VPNs to provide enhanced VPN
          (VPN+) services.</t>

          <t>By using VTN-ID, an end-to-end IPv6 network slicing is identified
          in transport network. Tenant traffic in WAN can be forwarded in the
          VTN with guaranteed resource.</t>

          <t/>
        </section>

        <section title="IPv6-based On-path Measurement">
          <t/>

          <t>The extension of supporting Alternate Marking Method <xref
          target="RFC8321"/> in IPv6 is defined in <xref
          target="I-D.ietf-6man-ipv6-alt-mark"/>. It describes how the
          Alternate Marking Method to be used as the hybrid performance
          measurement tool in an IPv6 domain by defining a new Extension
          Header Option.</t>

          <t>Alternate Marking Method is a hybrid on-path performance
          measurement method, and the metadata of each node can be collected
          by the collector to compute the performance of the path.</t>

          <t>IOAM is another on-path measurement method. <xref
          target="I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-ipv6-options"/> defines a new IPv6
          option, called IOAM option to support carrying IOAM metadata in the
          IPv6 data packet. However, carrying all the metadata in the data
          packet will bring challenges for hardware processing. For instance,
          long-length metadata may cause recircle in processing. Therefore,
          <xref target="I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-direct-export"/> defines a direct
          export option in IOAM, which enables the nodes to export the
          metadata to collector directly. Furthermore,<xref
          target="I-D.song-opsawg-ifit-framework"/> outlines a high-level
          framework to provide an operational environment that utilizes
          existing and emerging on-path telemetry techniques to enable the
          collection and correlation of performance information from the
          network.</t>

          <t/>
        </section>

        <section title="Reliability">
          <t/>

          <section title="Local Protection">
            <t>Local protection mechanisms like Fast Reroute (FRR) provide 50
            ms protection on nodes for traffic.</t>

            <t>Regarding link failures, TI-LFA <xref
            target="I-D.ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa"/> provides a fast
            reroute mechanism by sending the traffic to an expected
            post-convergence paths from the point of local repair.</t>

            <t>Regarding the middle endpoint node failures, <xref
            target="I-D.hu-spring-segment-routing-proxy-forwarding"/> defines
            a mechanism for fast reroute protection against the failure of a
            SR-TE path. It can provide fast reroute protection for an
            adjacency segment, a node segment and a binding segment of the
            path. Also, <xref
            target="I-D.chen-rtgwg-srv6-midpoint-protection"/> defines
            midpoint protection, which enables the direct neighbor of the
            failed endpoint to perform the function of the endpoint, replace
            the IPv6 destination address to the next endpoint, and choose the
            next hop based on the new destination address.</t>

            <t>Regarding the egress node failures, <xref
            target="I-D.ietf-rtgwg-srv6-egress-protection"/> defines a local
            protection solution using the mirror SID.</t>
          </section>

          <section title="End-to-End Protection">
            <t>End-to-End Protection is also required in IPv6-based CON.
            Normally, host-standby nodes are deployed for supporting traffic
            switching from the failed node to the alternative node. In order
            to detect the failure, End-to-end BFD is required. Once the BFD
            session is failed, the traffic can be steered into a disjoint
            forwarding path, and the traffic will be forwarded to the
            host-standby node.</t>

            <t/>
          </section>

          <section title="Redundancy Protection">
            <t>In order to avoid losing packets, <xref
            target="I-D.geng-spring-sr-redundancy-protection"/> defines a
            redundancy transmission solution.</t>

            <t>The document defines two types of segment including Redundancy
            Segment and Merging Segment to empower the Segment Routing with
            the capability of redundancy protection.</t>

            <t/>
          </section>
        </section>

        <section title="Security">
          <t>As per <xref
          target="I-D.li-spring-srv6-security-consideration"/>, SRv6 inherits
          potential security vulnerabilities from Source Routing and IPv6, but
          it does not introduce new critical security threats.</t>

          <t>Regarding a limited domain, SPRING architecture <xref
          target="RFC8402"/> defines clear trusted domain boundaries so that
          source-routing information is only available within the trusted
          domain and never exposed to the outside of the domain. It is
          expected that, by default, explicit routing is only used within the
          boundaries of the administered domain. Therefore, the data plane
          does not expose any source-routing information when a packet leaves
          the trusted domain. The traffic is filtered at the domain boundaries
          <xref target="RFC8402"/>.</t>

          <t/>

          <t>However, it has been noted that the AH and ESP are not directly
          applicable in order to reduce the vulnerabilities of SRv6 due to the
          presence of mutable fields in the SRH <xref
          target="I-D.li-spring-srv6-security-consideration"/>. In order to
          resolve this problem, <xref target="RFC8754"/> defines a mechanism
          to carry HMAC TLV in the SRH to verify the integrity of packets
          including the SRH fields.</t>

          <t>Regarding end-to-end security protection across multiple domains,
          an end-to-end IPSec tunnel is suggested to be deployed.</t>

          <t>In typical SD-WAN scenarios, the IPSec tunnel should be used
          between the CPE and POP GW.</t>

          <t/>
        </section>

        <section title="IPv6 Forwarding Efficiency">
          <section title="PMTU">
            <t>The host may discover the PMTU by Path MTU Discovery (PMTUD)
            <xref target="RFC8201"/> or other means. But the ingress node
            still needs to examine the packet size to drop too large packets
            to avoid malicious packets or error packets attack. Also, the
            packet size may exceed the PMTU because of the new encapsulation
            of SR-MPLS or SRv6 at the ingress. In order to check whether the
            packet size exceeds the PMTU or not, the ingress node need to know
            the Path MTU associated to the forwarding path.</t>

            <t>However, the path maximum transmission unit (MTU) information
            for SR path is not available since the SR does not require
            signaling. <xref target="I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-ls-link-mtu"/> proposes
            a BGP-LS extensions to collect the link MTU of the links in the
            networks. <xref target="I-D.ietf-idr-sr-policy-path-mtu"/> and
            <xref target="I-D.li-pce-pcep-pmtu"/> defines extensions to
            distribute path MTU information within BGP and PCEP SR policies,
            respectively. In this way, the controller can compute the
            appropriate PMTU for an SR path.</t>

            <t/>
          </section>

          <section title="SRv6 Compression">
            <t>The overhead of SRv6 encapsulation brings challenges for
            hardware processing and transmission. <xref
            target="I-D.srcompdt-spring-compression-requirement"/> describes
            the requirements of SRv6 compression.</t>

            <t>G-SRv6 is proposed in <xref
            target="I-D.cl-spring-generalized-srv6-np"/>, which supports to
            encode multiple types of SIDs in SRH. This SRH is called
            Generalized SRH <xref target="I-D.lc-6man-generalized-srh"/> while
            the SID is called Generalized SID.</t>

            <t>G-SRv6 supports to encode the compressed SIDs in the SRH to
            reduce the size of SRv6 SID list in SRH <xref
            target="I-D.cl-spring-generalized-srv6-for-cmpr"/>. A COC
            (Continuation of Compression) flavor is defined to indicate the
            continuation of SRv6 compressed SIDs in the SID list.</t>
          </section>
        </section>

        <section title="Application-aware IPv6 Networking">
          <t/>

          <t>Application-aware Networking (APN) is proposed by <xref
          target="I-D.li-apn-framework"/>, where application characteristic
          information such as application identification and its network
          performance requirements is carried in the packet encapsulation in
          order to facilitate service provisioning, perform application-level
          traffic steering and network resource adjustment.</t>

          <t>Application-aware IPv6 Networking (APN6) framework makes use of
          IPv6 encapsulation in order to convey the application-aware
          information along with the data packet to the network so to
          facilitate the service deployment and SLA guarantee. <xref
          target="I-D.li-6man-app-aware-ipv6-network"/> defines the encodings
          of the application characteristic information, for the APN6
          framework, that can be exchanged between an application and the
          network infrastructure through IPv6 extension headers.</t>

          <t/>

          <t/>
        </section>
      </section>
    </section>

    <section anchor="IANA" title="IANA Considerations">
      <t>TBD</t>
    </section>

    <section anchor="Security" title="Security Considerations">
      <t>TBD</t>

      <t/>
    </section>

    <section title="Contributors">
      <t><figure>
          <artwork><![CDATA[TBD


]]></artwork>
        </figure></t>
    </section>

    <section title="Acknowledgements ">
      <t/>
    </section>
  </middle>

  <back>
    <references title="Normative References">
      <?rfc include="reference.RFC.2119"?>

      <?rfc include='reference.RFC.8174'?>

      <?rfc include='reference.RFC.8200'?>

      <?rfc include='reference.RFC.8754'?>

      <?rfc include='reference.RFC.8402'?>
    </references>

    <references title="Informative References">
      <?rfc include='reference.I-D.ietf-rtgwg-net2cloud-problem-statement'?>

      <?rfc include='reference.I-D.ietf-spring-srv6-network-programming'?>

      <?rfc include='reference.I-D.ietf-bess-srv6-services'?>

      <?rfc include='reference.RFC.7665'?>

      <?rfc ?>

      <?rfc ?>

      <?rfc include='reference.RFC.7799'?>

      <?rfc include='reference.I-D.dukes-spring-sr-for-sdwan'?>

      <?rfc include='reference.I-D.dunbar-sr-sdwan-over-hybrid-networks'?>

      <?rfc ?>

      <?rfc include='reference.I-D.ietf-idr-segment-routing-te-policy'?>

      <?rfc include='reference.I-D.ietf-pce-segment-routing-policy-cp'?>

      <?rfc include='reference.I-D.ietf-spring-sr-service-programming'?>

      <?rfc include='reference.I-D.ietf-spring-nsh-sr'?>

      <?rfc include='reference.I-D.ietf-teas-enhanced-vpn'?>

      <?rfc include='reference.I-D.dong-6man-enhanced-vpn-vtn-id'?>

      <?rfc include='reference.RFC.8321'?>

      <?rfc include='reference.I-D.ietf-6man-ipv6-alt-mark'?>

      <?rfc include='reference.I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-ipv6-options'
?>

      <?rfc include='reference.I-D.ietf-ippm-ioam-direct-export'?>

      <?rfc include='reference.I-D.song-opsawg-ifit-framework'?>

      <?rfc ?>

      <?rfc include='reference.I-D.ietf-rtgwg-segment-routing-ti-lfa'?>

      <?rfc include='reference.I-D.hu-spring-segment-routing-proxy-forwarding'?>

      <?rfc include='reference.I-D.chen-rtgwg-srv6-midpoint-protection'?>

      <?rfc include='reference.I-D.ietf-rtgwg-srv6-egress-protection'?>

      <?rfc include='reference.I-D.geng-spring-sr-redundancy-protection'?>

      <?rfc include='reference.I-D.li-spring-srv6-security-consideration'?>

      <?rfc include='reference.RFC.8201'?>

      <?rfc include='reference.I-D.ietf-idr-bgp-ls-link-mtu'?>

      <?rfc include='reference.I-D.ietf-idr-sr-policy-path-mtu'
?>

      <?rfc include='reference.I-D.li-pce-pcep-pmtu'?>

      <?rfc include='reference.I-D.srcompdt-spring-compression-requirement'?>

      <?rfc ?>

      <?rfc include='reference.I-D.cl-spring-generalized-srv6-np'?>

      <?rfc ?>

      <?rfc include='reference.I-D.lc-6man-generalized-srh'?>

      <?rfc include='reference.I-D.cl-spring-generalized-srv6-for-cmpr'?>

      <?rfc include='reference.I-D.li-apn-framework'?>

      <?rfc include='reference.I-D.li-6man-app-aware-ipv6-network'?>

      <?rfc ?>
    </references>
  </back>
</rfc>
