]> NTT Communications

Japan w.mishima@ntt.com

NTT Communications

Japan y.fukagawa@ntt.com

Routing SPRING SRv6 SFC This document describes the architecture of Segment Routing over IPv6 (SRv6) Service Function Chaining (SFC) with SR-aware functions. This architecture provides the following benefits:

• Comprehensive management: a centralized controller for SFC, handling SR Policy, link-state, and network metrics.
• Simplicity: no SFC proxies, so that reduces nodes and address resource consumption.

Discussion Venues Discussion of this document takes place on the Source Packet Routing in Networking Working Group mailing list (spring@ietf.org), which is archived at . Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at .

Introduction Segment Routing over IPv6 (SRv6) enables packet steering through a set of instructions called a segment list. Each SR segment endpoint node provides SRv6 Endpoint Behaviors, including Prefix/Adjacency segments, VPNs, and Binding Segments. Service Function Chaining (SFC) can be used in various scenarios (e.g. FW, IPS, IDS, NAT, and DPI). The SFC based on Segment Routing (SR) is defined in , which describes SFC proxies like End.AS/AD/AM are necessary to use SR-unaware functions. This document describes an architecture for SRv6 SFC with SR-aware functions, which provides comprehensive management of SRv6 network resources and services.

Terminology

Terminology Defined in Related RFCs and Internet-Drafts The following terms are used in this document as defined in the related RFCs and Internet-Drafts:

• SR, SR Domain, Segment ID (SID), SRv6, SR Policy, Prefix segment, Adjacency segment, Anycast segment, Active segment, and distributed/centralized/hybrid control plane defined in .
• SR source node, transit node, and SR segment endpoint node defined in .
• SRv6 SID function and SRv6 Endpoint behavior defined in .
• SFC, SFC proxy, and service classification function defined in .
• service segment, SR-aware service, SR-unaware Service, End.AS, End.AD and End.AM defined in .
• Headend, Color, and Endpoint defined in .
• Quality of Service (QoS), Service Level Agreement (SLA), and Service Level Objective (SLO) defined in .
• forwarding plane (FP), control plane (CP), management plane (MP), application plane (AP), northbound interface, southbound interface defined in .
• Path Computation Client (PCC), Path Computation Element (PCE), and Traffic Engineering Database (TED) defined in .
• BGP Flow Specification defined in

Newly Defined Terminology The following terms are used in this document as defined below:

• SRv6 Service Function Node: an SR segment endpoint node that provides SR-aware functions as service segments.
• Classification Rule Controller: applies sets of SR policy and flows to SR Source Nodes.
• Service Function Controller: applies service segments to SRv6 Service Function Nodes.
• SRv6 Controller: controls SRv6 services comprehensively, consisting of a Service Function Controller, a PCE, and a Classification Rule Controller.
• SRv6 Managers: manage SRv6 SFC infrastructure, consisting of a Virtualized Network Function (VNF) Manager, a Virtualized Infrastructure Manager (VIM), and a data collector of network metrics.

Requirements Language 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 when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.

Design Objectives and Assumptions ## Goals/Objectives SRv6 SFC Architecture is designed with two main objectives:

• Comprehensive management: a centralized controller for SFC, handling SR Policy, link-state, and network metrics. When providing SRv6 services, meeting SLAs for each customer is required. These SLAs consist of one or more SLOs such as availability, latency, and bandwidth. In an SRv6 SFC network, service segment provisioning, link-state collection, and SR policy calculation are required to meet SLOs, respectively. outlines a hybrid control plane that merges a distributed control plane and a centralized control plane. In this hybrid control plane, forwarding information like Node/Adjacency SIDs are advertised mutually by distributed SR nodes via IGPs such as ISIS and OSPF, while other information like SR Policies and service segments are provided by a centralized controller. Software-Defined Networking (SDN) provides centralized management of a network by a controller and a manager. Centralized management reduces operational costs through abstraction and automation. The SDN framework allows users to manage an SR domain without considering the details of a forwarding plane like a topology and node state. Operators can use a SRv6 controller to build SR policies for SFC and QoS, manage the state of network functions, issue service segments automatically, and specify disaster recovery with protection.
• Simplicity: no SFC proxies, so that reduces nodes and address resource consumption. Network complexity increases operating costs. Generally, using a variety of protocols in a network raises operational costs, including designing, building, monitoring, and troubleshooting. Using an SFC proxy may increase forwarding overhead due to additional header manipulations.

Assumptions To achieve these objectives, this architecture is based on two main assumptions:

• Straightforward extension of the SRv6 Network Programming model The protocol used in this architecture is compatible with SRv6. This streamlines the operation of services like traffic steering, including SFC, redundancy, and local protection. Standardized protocols such as BGP, PCEP, IS-IS, OSPF, TI-LFA, and Anycast SID are used in this architecture. This architecture is SRv6 compliant, enabling support for SR-unaware functions, although SR-aware functions are expected to meet the objective.
• SDN Framework compliance and comprehensive management of SRv6 SFC by controllers A controller is used to provide comprehensive management. To simplify building and operating, the controller uses standardized protocols and abstracted service interfaces. This also provides programmability by controlling policies that meet a user's intent including SFC and quality of service (QoS).

Overview of Architecture Figure 1 illustrates an overview of this architecture.

Overview of SRv6 SFC Architecture with SR-aware Functions

This architecture is based on SDN separating the forwarding plane (FP), control plane (CP), management plane (MP), and application plane (AP). Each plane has the following roles:

• Forwarding plane: classifies packets and encapsulates SRH, forwards them, and applies endpoint behavior.
  • Provides SR-aware function using End.AN.
  • Classify flow and apply them to TE application with PBR.
  • Ensures redundancy with Anycast.
  • Ensure local protection with Fast Reroute (FRR).
• Control plane: makes decisions about packet forwarding and provides rules for a forwarding plane.
  • Collects link-state including SRv6 locator, prefix, behavior, and delay.
  • Calculates and provisioning SR Policies.
  • Applies SR Policies to each flow by provisioning flow classification rules.
  • Manages the provisioning of Service Segments to SR-aware functions.
• Management plane: monitors and maintenances of SRv6 devices and services
  • Monitors and deploys network functions.
  • Manages hypervisor resources.
  • Collects metrics of devices, network functions, and SFC services.
• Application plane: provides APIs for users to use a control and management plane.
  • Provide an interface to operators or customers.
  • Applying intents defined in , including Operational, Rule, Service, and Flow intents.

Each component communicates using standardized protocols. These are designed to be loosely coupled and cooperate by using an abstraction layer. This document suggests handling a control plane by application plane, but a detailed design of an application plane is out of the scope of this document. This is because application plane components and abstraction layers should be designed based on individual network utilization and operator intent. In the following sections, details of a forwarding plane, control plane, and management plane are explained.

Forwarding Plane A forwarding plane is responsible for providing SFC through packet classification, SRv6 encapsulation, and forwarding. In this architecture, all forwarding plane components are located within the SR domain.

Forwarding Plane | / Service |------------>|Function|------------>|Function|--> | |Classification| | Node | | Node | | | | Function | | (S1) | | (S2) | | | +--------------+ +--------+ +--------+ | +-------------------------- SR domain ---------------------------+ ]]>

Figure 2 shows an example of SFC with two network functions. Firstly, the SRv6 SR source node classifies the flow and encapsulates it with an SRH containing the segment list <S1, S2>. Next, the SRv6 Service Function Node (S1) receives the packet and applies a network function associated with an End.AN S1. Finally, the SRv6 Service Function Node (S2) receives the packet and also applies a network function associated End.AN S2, thus achieving SFC.

End.AN-based Service Segment Provisioning End.AN provides an SR-aware function. Functions with the same role MAY be assigned as the same service segment within the SR domain. By using Anycast-SIDs, multiple nodes can be grouped as part of the same service segment. End.AN MAY have optional arguments. This can provide additional programmability by embedding network function instructions in the segment list. By using virtualized spaces within routers or on generic servers, network functions can be provided at any node in an SR domain. This allows for scaling and flexible redundancy of network functions.

When a Network Function Goes Down If a network function experiences a failure, the associated route MUST be promptly removed. In the case of Anycast configuration, it MUST be gracefully rerouted to other nodes. Additionally, if no alternative nodes are available, consider either dropping the packet and sending an ICMP Destination Unreachable message or forwarding it as a pass-through.

Anycast Segment The concept of the Anycast segment is introduced in . In the SRv6 SFC, it realizes to provide the same network function segment as the same Anycast segment. In such cases, the state between network functions MUST be shared mutually.

Fast Reroute The ordering of network functions in an SRv6 SFC is guaranteed by the segment list, even if an FRR occurs, When an FRR occurs, if the Active segment is an Anycast SID, it MAY be forwarded to another SRv6 Service Function Node. In such a case, since state synchronization may not have been completed, the network function MUST have a mechanism to handle rerouted packets, such as buffering to wait for synchronization.

Service Function Chains In this architecture, each SFC is represented as an SRv6 Policy . The purpose or intent of each SRv6 Policy can be identified using attributes such as color or name. In general, SFC is achieved by using loose source routing. If both SFC and QoS are desired, they can be achieved by using strict source routing or loose source routing with Flex-Algo SIDs.

Per-Flow Encapsulation In the SRv6 SR source node, which serves as the Service Classifier, packets are classified on a per-flow basis using PBR and encapsulated with SRv6 Policy. Therefore, the SRv6 SR source node MUST be capable of identifying packets using at least a 5-tuple or even more detailed information. In this architecture, aiming for comprehensive management, the service classifier has an API to communicate with the controller.

Control Plane A control plane is responsible for enabling comprehensive management of SRv6 SFC. It enables SR-aware functions as service segments and specifies SR Policies including SFC for each flow. A control plane has a Northbound API to receive user requests and a Southbound API to manipulate a forwarding plane.

Control Plane

The SRv6 Controller consists of the following three components:

• Service Function Controller: provides an SID for a network service and manages this state.
• PCE: provides SR Policies that fulfill SFC/QoS requirements from the headend to the tailend and sends them to the SRv6 SR source node.
• Classification Rule Controller: provides an Encapsulation Policy that corresponds to a specific flow and SR Policy, and sends them to the SRv6 SR source node.

Service Function Controller Service Function Controller is responsible for enabling and disabling service segments of SRv6 Service Function Nodes. To manage service segments, it utilizes the extensions provided in a BGP-LS service segment, as outlined in and TODO: draft-watal-idr-bgp-ls-sr-service-segments-enabler, and defines the following parameters:

• Behavior: End.AN
• SID: the SID of End.AN (in IPv6 Address format). Service segments that support slicing are specified here as Flex-Algo SIDs.
• Function Name: type of network function
• Action: enable
• TLV:
  • Specification of the Anycast Segment Group: when deploying multiple Network Functions within the same context, it MUST use the Anycast Group TLV to specify the same anycast segment group SID.
  • Allows for the specification of unique parameters and context associated with a particular network function.

Path Computation Element (PCE) PCE is a controller that provides SR Policy. As an Active Stateful PCE, it establishes sessions with all PEs in an SR domain and manages SFCs. SR Policies MUST support both explicit and dynamic paths. For dynamic path, Constrained Shortest Path First (CSPF) considers not only SFC but also QoS. It acquires the Traffic Engineering Database (TED) of the SR domain using BGP-LS and deploys SR Policies via PCEP or BGP SR Policy . The BGP-LS service segment is required to calculate dynamic paths based on the state of service segments and network functions.

Classification Rule Controller A Classification Rule Controller determines flows to apply specific SFC. The classification results are advertised to each SRv6 SR Source node as a set of flow, endpoints, and color with an extended protocol based on BGP Flowspec defined in .

Management Plane A management plane is responsible for configuring network function instances, monitoring resources, and collecting network metrics. The details of each manager are outside the scope of this document, as the southbound interface of the management plane may be different for each service and hardware architecture.

Management Plane

Figure 4 shows examples of managers that MAY be added to a management plane: * VNF Manager: handles deployment and scaling of network functions. * This manager considers redundancy and link utilization optimization.

• VIM: monitors hypervisor resources on SRv6 Service Function Node.
  • In SRv6 SFC, a hypervisor managed by a VIM MAY be located in virtualized spaces within routers or on generic servers.
• Network Metrics Manager: collects metrics for SRv6 policy calculation and evaluation.
  • Metrics are collected from multiple data sources, including IPFIX, TCP statistics, and SRv6 path tracing .
  • Metrics can be used for PCE calculation parameters.

Normative References The Segment Routing over IPv6 (SRv6) Network Programming framework enables a network operator or an application to specify a packet processing program by encoding a sequence of instructions in the IPv6 packet header. Each instruction is implemented on one or several nodes in the network and identified by an SRv6 Segment Identifier in the packet. This document defines the SRv6 Network Programming concept and specifies the base set of SRv6 behaviors that enables the creation of interoperable overlays with underlay optimization. This document describes an architecture for the specification, creation, and ongoing maintenance of Service Function Chains (SFCs) in a network. It includes architectural concepts, principles, and components used in the construction of composite services through deployment of SFCs, with a focus on those to be standardized in the IETF. This document does not propose solutions, protocols, or extensions to existing protocols. Cisco Systems, Inc. China Mobile Cisco Systems, Inc. Bell Canada Huawei Orange Mellanox AT&T Nokia Universita di Roma "Tor Vergata" This document defines data plane functionality required to implement service segments and achieve service programming in SR-enabled MPLS and IPv6 networks, as described in the Segment Routing architecture. Segment Routing (SR) leverages the source routing paradigm. A node steers a packet through an ordered list of instructions, called "segments". A segment can represent any instruction, topological or service based. A segment can have a semantic local to an SR node or global within an SR domain. SR provides a mechanism that allows a flow to be restricted to a specific topological path, while maintaining per-flow state only at the ingress node(s) to the SR domain. SR can be directly applied to the MPLS architecture with no change to the forwarding plane. A segment is encoded as an MPLS label. An ordered list of segments is encoded as a stack of labels. The segment to process is on the top of the stack. Upon completion of a segment, the related label is popped from the stack. SR can be applied to the IPv6 architecture, with a new type of routing header. A segment is encoded as an IPv6 address. An ordered list of segments is encoded as an ordered list of IPv6 addresses in the routing header. The active segment is indicated by the Destination Address (DA) of the packet. The next active segment is indicated by a pointer in the new routing header. Segment Routing can be applied to the IPv6 data plane using a new type of Routing Extension Header called the Segment Routing Header (SRH). This document describes the SRH and how it is used by nodes that are Segment Routing (SR) capable. Segment Routing (SR) allows a node to steer a packet flow along any path. Intermediate per-path states are eliminated thanks to source routing. SR Policy is an ordered list of segments (i.e., instructions) that represent a source-routed policy. Packet flows are steered into an SR Policy on a node where it is instantiated called a headend node. The packets steered into an SR Policy carry an ordered list of segments associated with that SR Policy. This document updates RFC 8402 as it details the concepts of SR Policy and steering into an SR Policy. This document describes the principles of traffic engineering (TE) in the Internet. The document is intended to promote better understanding of the issues surrounding traffic engineering in IP networks and the networks that support IP networking and to provide a common basis for the development of traffic-engineering capabilities for the Internet. The principles, architectures, and methodologies for performance evaluation and performance optimization of operational networks are also discussed. This work was first published as RFC 3272 in May 2002. This document obsoletes RFC 3272 by making a complete update to bring the text in line with best current practices for Internet traffic engineering and to include references to the latest relevant work in the IETF. Software-Defined Networking (SDN) refers to a new approach for network programmability, that is, the capacity to initialize, control, change, and manage network behavior dynamically via open interfaces. SDN emphasizes the role of software in running networks through the introduction of an abstraction for the data forwarding plane and, by doing so, separates it from the control plane. This separation allows faster innovation cycles at both planes as experience has already shown. However, there is increasing confusion as to what exactly SDN is, what the layer structure is in an SDN architecture, and how layers interface with each other. This document, a product of the IRTF Software-Defined Networking Research Group (SDNRG), addresses these questions and provides a concise reference for the SDN research community based on relevant peer-reviewed literature, the RFC series, and relevant documents by other standards organizations. This document specifies the Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication Protocol (PCEP) for communications between a Path Computation Client (PCC) and a PCE, or between two PCEs. Such interactions include path computation requests and path computation replies as well as notifications of specific states related to the use of a PCE in the context of Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) and Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Traffic Engineering. PCEP is designed to be flexible and extensible so as to easily allow for the addition of further messages and objects, should further requirements be expressed in the future. [STANDARDS-TRACK] This document defines a Border Gateway Protocol Network Layer Reachability Information (BGP NLRI) encoding format that can be used to distribute (intra-domain and inter-domain) traffic Flow Specifications for IPv4 unicast and IPv4 BGP/MPLS VPN services. This allows the routing system to propagate information regarding more specific components of the traffic aggregate defined by an IP destination prefix. It also specifies BGP Extended Community encoding formats, which can be used to propagate Traffic Filtering Actions along with the Flow Specification NLRI. Those Traffic Filtering Actions encode actions a routing system can take if the packet matches the Flow Specification. This document obsoletes both RFC 5575 and RFC 7674. In many standards track documents several words are used to signify the requirements in the specification. These words are often capitalized. This document defines these words as they should be interpreted in IETF documents. This document specifies an Internet Best Current Practices for the Internet Community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements. RFC 2119 specifies common key words that may be used in protocol specifications. This document aims to reduce the ambiguity by clarifying that only UPPERCASE usage of the key words have the defined special meanings. Intent and Intent-Based Networking are taking the industry by storm. At the same time, terms related to Intent-Based Networking are often used loosely and inconsistently, in many cases overlapping and confused with other concepts such as "policy." This document clarifies the concept of "intent" and provides an overview of the functionality that is associated with it. The goal is to contribute towards a common and shared understanding of terms, concepts, and functionality that can be used as the foundation to guide further definition of associated research and engineering problems and their solutions. This document is a product of the IRTF Network Management Research Group (NMRG). It reflects the consensus of the research group, having received many detailed and positive reviews by research group participants. It is published for informational purposes. LinkedIn Cisco Systems Cisco Systems Cisco Systems Bell Canada AT&T Orange Ericsson Capitalonline Futurewei Technologies Huawei Technologies Service functions are deployed as, physical or virtualized elements along with network nodes or on servers in data centers. Segment Routing (SR) brings in the concept of segments which can be topological or service instructions. Service segments are SR segments that are associated with service functions. SR Policies are used for the setup of paths for steering of traffic through service functions using their service segments. BGP Link-State (BGP-LS) enables distribution of topology information from the network to a controller or an application in general so it can learn the network topology. This document specifies the extensions to BGP-LS for the advertisement of service functions along their associated service segments. The BGP-LS advertisement of service function information along with the network nodes that they are attached to, or associated with, enables controllers compute and setup service paths in the network. Huawei Technologies Cisco Systems Cisco Systems Microsoft Google This document introduces a BGP SAFI with two NLRIs to advertise a candidate path of a Segment Routing (SR) Policy. An SR Policy is an ordered list of segments (i.e., instructions) that represent a source-routed policy. An SR Policy consists of one or more candidate paths, each consisting of one or more segment lists. A headend may be provisioned with candidate paths for an SR Policy via several different mechanisms, e.g., CLI, NETCONF, PCEP, or BGP. This document specifies how BGP may be used to distribute SR Policy candidate paths. It defines sub-TLVs for the Tunnel Encapsulation Attribute for signaling information about these candidate paths. This documents updates RFC9012 with extensions to the Color Extended Community to support additional steering modes over SR Policy. China Mobile China Mobile Huawei Technologies Verizon Communications Inc. Huawei Technologies BGP Flow Specification (FlowSpec) [RFC8955] and [RFC8956] has been proposed to distribute BGP [RFC4271] FlowSpec NLRI to FlowSpec clients to mitigate (distributed) denial-of-service attacks, and to provide traffic filtering in the context of a BGP/MPLS VPN service. Recently, traffic steering applications in the context of SR-MPLS and SRv6 using FlowSpec also attract attention. This document introduces the usage of BGP FlowSpec to steer packets into an SR Policy. Cisco Systems, Inc. Cisco Systems, Inc. Cisco Systems, Inc. Broadcom Swisscom Alibaba, Inc SoftBank Goldman Sachs Arrcus Path Tracing provides a record of the packet path as a sequence of interface ids. In addition, it provides a record of end-to-end delay, per-hop delay, and load on each egress interface along the packet delivery path. Path Tracing allows to trace 14 hops with only a 40-bytes IPv6 Hop- by-Hop extension header. Path Tracing supports fine grained timestamp. It has been designed for linerate hardware implementation in the base pipeline.

Acknowledgments The authors would like to acknowledge the review and inputs from Mitsuru Maruyama, Katsuhiro Sebayashi, Yuma Ito, and Taisei Tanabe. We partially obtained the research results from NICT's commissioned research No. JPJ012368C03101.