Re: Request for comments: draft-jain-nvo3-overlay-oam-01.txt

Sam Aldrin <aldrin.ietf@gmail.com> Fri, 28 February 2014 05:25 UTC

Return-Path: <aldrin.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 999851A0705 for <l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 21:25:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aYKy9UEKdIJl for <l2vpn@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 21:25:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pa0-x22b.google.com (mail-pa0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::22b]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A1F51A06E7 for <l2vpn@ietf.org>; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 21:25:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pa0-f43.google.com with SMTP id bj1so189692pad.16 for <l2vpn@ietf.org>; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 21:25:09 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :message-id:references:to; bh=vx6zvYJYrlhebAJ9OmuKlrsQ8xGWl0xQExEQ4j9sprA=; b=ogP41d13QSjIk3IIbt9zsCXYLgehVtzJMBS8hCfC8O3/wCLUPD4r91sv/0Drddovw1 XUG9rMlbnSwh2R04iTI3VZotsgK/GXGgep4VBHDnoRS2UvTIs3M3kyewSTghf5bTyT98 cWPVVN2XdBhkndb/zrZg/CvkSpDuPmphPczDvLoIYpKz8Lq09UsmEqjWI5xWEpTOU8xF 9c3BvIfUOP5lBBate2d3KK3BZphyfSAGCLfZ8DvCd6OJLP0MPtsbQ3Iz/88yTejnXl4H ru9kQ4MWxTREkMR6tUhlBMmrzKgWMzFlsQxA8s2mpLUyyt9qeZYcRC96ZGuF/AS5LIAw O/ng==
X-Received: by 10.68.133.138 with SMTP id pc10mr1272704pbb.98.1393565109582; Thu, 27 Feb 2014 21:25:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.2] (c-107-3-154-60.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [107.3.154.60]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id yg4sm4631932pab.19.2014.02.27.21.25.07 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 27 Feb 2014 21:25:08 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_096AB678-CF07-4955-8A96-E1000B71E201"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\))
Subject: Re: Request for comments: draft-jain-nvo3-overlay-oam-01.txt
From: Sam Aldrin <aldrin.ietf@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CF35D405.B2563%wim.henderickx@alcatel-lucent.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 21:25:06 -0800
Message-Id: <7A311A7D-7F51-4E41-9605-E349352007C3@gmail.com>
References: <CAPCgso32vYqPEq4upa1FG78quZwBOJpzsCSCYTX2R7XgHzLiNA@mail.gmail.com> <B23247FA-7CED-4F78-8858-076CA83F613C@broadcom.com> <CF351FD5.B21EA%wim.henderickx@alcatel-lucent.com> <1393545054.56142.YahooMailNeo@web162501.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> <CF35D405.B2563%wim.henderickx@alcatel-lucent.com>
To: "Henderickx, Wim (Wim)" <wim.henderickx@alcatel-lucent.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/l2vpn/ed_MNWHjql4sGb0Gw-zN74nynF4
Cc: "l2vpn@ietf.org" <l2vpn@ietf.org>, Vinay Bannai <vbannai@paypal.com>, Ravi Shekhar <rshekhar@juniper.net>
X-BeenThere: l2vpn@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Layer 2 Virtual Private Networks <l2vpn.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/l2vpn>, <mailto:l2vpn-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/l2vpn/>
List-Post: <mailto:l2vpn@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:l2vpn-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/l2vpn>, <mailto:l2vpn-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2014 05:25:14 -0000

Performing OAM at overlay layer is very important. Extrapolating faults from underlying layers may provide certain degree of measurement but cannot completely fulfill the need. This applies to NVo3 as well, IMO.
If there are existing mechanisms, one should be able to make use of it, without having to redo the same.

Having said that, we initially published a solution draft around Berlin IETF. We now have three drafts targeting solution (excluding BFD :D). The goal is to have 'the' solution meeting the requirements. If BFD or any other existing solutions meet those, it would be good to outline that (informational doc?)

Looking forward to a good discussion about OAM solution in the NVo3 WG session.

-sam
On Feb 27, 2014, at 8:50 PM, Henderickx, Wim (Wim) <wim.henderickx@alcatel-lucent.com> wrote:

> Having different OAM for IP and ETH is not very friendly to the operations people.
> 
> From: "S. Davari" <davarish@yahoo.com>
> Reply-To: "S. Davari" <davarish@yahoo.com>
> Date: Friday 28 February 2014 00:50
> To: Wim Henderickx <wim.henderickx@alcatel-lucent.com>om>, Shahram Davari <davari@broadcom.com>om>, Kanwar Singh <kanwar@nuagenetworks.net>
> Cc: "l2vpn@ietf.org" <l2vpn@ietf.org>rg>, Pradeep Jain <pradeep@nuagenetworks.net>et>, Vinay Bannai <vbannai@paypal.com>om>, Ravi Shekhar <rshekhar@juniper.net>
> Subject: Re: Request for comments: draft-jain-nvo3-overlay-oam-01.txt
> 
> I meant using BFD inside the payload. not for the outer tunnel. You could also use Ethernet OAM for L2 endpoints.
> 
> Thx
> SD
> 
> 
> From: "Henderickx, Wim (Wim)" <wim.henderickx@alcatel-lucent.com>
> To: Shahram Davari <davari@broadcom.com>om>; Kanwar Singh <kanwar@nuagenetworks.net> 
> Cc: "l2vpn@ietf.org" <l2vpn@ietf.org>rg>; Pradeep Jain <pradeep@nuagenetworks.net>et>; Vinay Bannai <vbannai@paypal.com>om>; Ravi Shekhar <rshekhar@juniper.net> 
> Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2014 8:02:45 AM
> Subject: Re: Request for comments: draft-jain-nvo3-overlay-oam-01.txt
> 
> Because we also need to trace L2 endpoints besides IP endpoint.
> 
> From: Shahram Davari <davari@broadcom.com>
> Date: Thursday 27 February 2014 16:58
> To: Kanwar Singh <kanwar@nuagenetworks.net>
> Cc: "l2vpn@ietf.org" <l2vpn@ietf.org>rg>, Pradeep Jain <pradeep@nuagenetworks.net>et>, Vinay Bannai <vbannai@paypal.com>om>, Ravi Shekhar <rshekhar@juniper.net>
> Subject: Re: Request for comments: draft-jain-nvo3-overlay-oam-01.txt
> 
> Hi
> 
> Why don't you use existing IP based OAM messages such as BFD, OWAMP, TWAMP, etc.
> 
> Regards,
> Shahram
> 
> 
> On Feb 27, 2014, at 7:46 AM, "Kanwar Singh" <kanwar@nuagenetworks.net> wrote:
> 
>> Dear All,
>> 
>> We have submitted the below draft that proposes Generic OAM and Datapath Failure Detection Mechanism(s) for Overlay Networks.
>> 
>> We would like to solicit inputs from the members of L2VPN WG.
>> 
>> Please review the same and update us with your inputs/feedback.
>> 
>> Warm Regards
>> - Kanwar
>> 
>> 
>> A new version of I-D, draft-jain-nvo3-overlay-oam-01.txt has been successfully submitted by Kanwar Singh and posted to the
>> IETF repository.
>> 
>> Name:           draft-jain-nvo3-overlay-oam
>> Revision:       01
>> Title:          Generic Overlay OAM and Datapath Failure Detection
>> Document date:  2014-02-12
>> Group:          Individual Submission
>> Pages:          44
>> URL:            http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-jain-nvo3-overlay-oam-01.txt
>> Status:         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-jain-nvo3-overlay-oam/
>> Htmlized:      http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jain-nvo3-overlay-oam-01
>> Diff:              http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-jain-nvo3-overlay-oam-01
>> 
>> Abstract:
>>    This proposal describes a mechanism that can be used to detect Data
>>    Path Failures of various overlay technologies as VXLAN, NVGRE,
>>    MPLSoGRE and MPLSoUDP and verifying/sanity of their Control and Data
>>    Plane for given Overlay Segment.  This document defines the following
>>    for each of the above Overlay Technologies:
>> 
>>    o  Encapsulation of OAM Packet, such that it has same Outer and
>>       Overlay Header as any End-System's data going over the same
>>       Overlay Segment.
>> 
>>    o  The mechanism to trace the Underlay that is exercised by any
>>       Overlay Segment.
>> 
>>    o  Procedure to verify presence of any given Tenant VM or End-System
>>       within a given Overlay Segment at Overlay End-Point.
>> 
>>    Even though the present proposal addresses Overlay OAM for VXLAN,
>>    NVGRE, MPLSoGRE and MPLSoUDP, but the procedures described are
>>    generic enough to accommodate OAM for any other Overlay Technology.
> 
>