| 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/ | ||||