Re: The usecase of the BFD application

"Weiqiang Cheng" <chengweiqiang@chinamobile.com> Tue, 12 November 2019 07:57 UTC

Return-Path: <chengweiqiang@chinamobile.com>
X-Original-To: rtg-bfd@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtg-bfd@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 408241200A1; Mon, 11 Nov 2019 23:57:18 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 kyCB3ewEgWQQ; Mon, 11 Nov 2019 23:57:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from cmccmta3.chinamobile.com (cmccmta3.chinamobile.com [221.176.66.81]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 238A91201E3; Mon, 11 Nov 2019 23:57:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from spf.mail.chinamobile.com (unknown[172.16.121.13]) by rmmx-syy-dmz-app10-12010 (RichMail) with SMTP id 2eea5dca65b08b9-cae16; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 15:56:32 +0800 (CST)
X-RM-TRANSID: 2eea5dca65b08b9-cae16
X-RM-TagInfo: emlType=0
X-RM-SPAM-FLAG: 00000000
Received: from cmcc (unknown[10.2.51.55]) by rmsmtp-syy-appsvr07-12007 (RichMail) with SMTP id 2ee75dca65a5de0-08d87; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 15:56:32 +0800 (CST)
X-RM-TRANSID: 2ee75dca65a5de0-08d87
From: "Weiqiang Cheng" <chengweiqiang@chinamobile.com>
To: "'Jeffrey Haas'" <jhaas@pfrc.org>
Cc: <bfd-chairs@ietf.org>, <rtg-bfd@ietf.org>, =?gb2312?B?J831yPDRqSc=?= <wangruixue@chinamobile.com>, <liu.aihua@zte.com.cn>
References: <028a01d59380$e2350480$a69f0d80$@com> <20191109191204.GC19227@pfrc.org>
In-Reply-To: <20191109191204.GC19227@pfrc.org>
Subject: Re: The usecase of the BFD application
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2019 15:56:23 +0800
Message-ID: <001b01d5992e$adf704d0$09e50e70$@com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gb2312"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: AdWXMjfxz+DIgR8dQ9G8QVxBdyIqswB+WqSg
Content-Language: zh-cn
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtg-bfd/mN_8UN7TDOeTzn6bl9lzZjLD4b0>
X-BeenThere: rtg-bfd@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "RTG Area: Bidirectional Forwarding Detection DT" <rtg-bfd.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtg-bfd>, <mailto:rtg-bfd-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rtg-bfd/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtg-bfd@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtg-bfd-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtg-bfd>, <mailto:rtg-bfd-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2019 07:57:18 -0000

Hi Jeffrey,
Thanks for your comments. 

We will cover those points in the presentation.  
We just have a quick review on TR-146, where it says that Echo function is 
used and the destination IP is set to an IP address of the sender (the 
latter is similar to the One-arm idea) for unidirectional failure detection.
 
But based on our understanding, BFD Echo requires that the receiver must be 
able to recognize and process BFD control packet. One-arm idea assumes that 
the receiving end is completely unaware of BFD, it just forwards the packet 
based on routing. This is very useful in the scenario (e.g., Data Center or 
4G/5G Telecom Cloud) where large number of BFD sessions may be needed, and 
the receiver cannot handle too much BFD sessions with limited resource.  

The idea is straight forward, we will include more details (e.g., session 
establishment, state machine, YANG etc.) in the next version.

That is nice to have a slot to discuss the topic.  
B.R.
Weiqiang Cheng


-----邮件原件-----
发件人: Jeffrey Haas [mailto:jhaas@pfrc.org] 
发送时间: 2019年11月10日 03:12
收件人: Weiqiang Cheng
抄送: bfd-chairs@ietf.org; rtg-bfd@ietf.org; '王瑞雪'; liu.aihua@zte.com.cn
主题: Re: The usecase of the BFD application

Weiqiang Cheng,

BFD appears to be likely to have a small amount of business at the upcoming
IETF-106. The working grooup needs to find a secretary to commit to minutes
for us to meet.

If we do meet, you may have 10 minutes to discuss this.

I will ask you to include the following information in your presentation:
- How does this proposal differ from BBF TR-146?
  (https://www.broadband-forum.org/download/TR-146.pdf)
- What are the implications for BFD clients?  This would include BFD yang
  models.

-- Jeff

On Tue, Nov 05, 2019 at 10:29:43AM +0800, Weiqiang Cheng wrote:
> Hi Chairs,
> 
> We prepared a draft to use BFD in datacenter application scenario.
> 
> Because the time zone difference, we missed the submission deadline and we
> will upload it on Nov. 16.
> 
> If possible, we still hope to apply a slot to present it. Could you see if
> it is Ok for the group?
> 
>  
> 
> B.R.
> 
> Weiqiang Cheng
> 

> 
> 
> 
> BFD Working Group                                                R. Wang
> Internet-Draft                                                  W. Cheng
> Intended status: Informational                              China Mobile
> Expires: May 7, 2020                                             Y. Zhao
>                                                                   A. Liu
>                                                                      ZTE
>                                                         November 4, 2019
> 
> 
>                    Using One-Arm BFD in Cloud Network
>                    draft-wang-bfd-one-arm-use-case-00
> 
> Abstract
> 
>    Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD) is a fault detection
>    protocol that can quickly determine a communication failure between
>    devices and notify upper-layer applications [RFC5880].  BFD has
>    asynchronous detecting mode and demand detection mode to satisfy
>    different scenarios, also supports echo function to reduce the device
>    requirement for BFD.  One-Arm BFD this draft descripted supports
>    another BFD detecting function rather than the echo as described in
>    [RFC5880] [RFC5881], it needs nothing BFD capability to one of the
>    devices deployed BFD detecting.  Using One-Arm BFD function, the one
>    device works on BFD detecting normally and the other device just
>    loopback the BFD packets like echo function.  One-Arm BFD is suitable
>    for the cloud virtualization network, the One-Arm BFD is deploy on
>    NFV gateways, and NFV virtual machine vNICs just enable the echo/
>    loopback process.
> 
> Status of This Memo
> 
>    This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
>    provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
> 
>    Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
>    Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
>    working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
>    Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
> 
>    Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
>    and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
>    time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
>    material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
> 
>    This Internet-Draft will expire on May 7, 2020.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wang, et al.               Expires May 7, 2020                  [Page 1]
> 

> Internet-Draft     Using One-Arm BFD in Cloud Network      November 2019
> 
> 
> Copyright Notice
> 
>    Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
>    document authors.  All rights reserved.
> 
>    This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
>    Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
>    (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
>    publication of this document.  Please review these documents
>    carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
>    to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
>    include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
>    the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
>    described in the Simplified BSD License.
> 
> Table of Contents
> 
>    1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
>      1.1.  Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
>        1.1.1.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
>        1.1.2.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
>    2.  One-Arm BFD Use Case  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
>    3.  Discussion  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
>    4.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
>    5.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
>    6.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
>    7.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
>    Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
> 
> 1.  Introduction
> 
>    To minimize the impact of device faults on services and improve
>    network availability, a network device must be able to quickly detect
>    faults in communication with adjacent devices.  Measures can then be
>    taken to promptly rectify the faults to ensure service continuity.
> 
>    BFD is a low-overhead, short-duration method to detect faults on the
>    path between adjacent forwarding engines.  The faults can be
>    interface, data link, and even forwarding engine faults.  It is a
>    single, unified mechanism to monitor any media and protocol layers in
>    real time.
> 
>    BFD has asynchronous detecting mode and demand detection mode to
>    satisfy different scenarios, also supports echo function to reduce
>    the device requirement for BFD.  BFD echo function is used when two
>    devices are connected but only one of them supports full BFD
>    capability.  When the echo function is activated, the local system
>    sends a BFD control packet and the remote system loops back the
> 
> 
> 
> Wang, et al.               Expires May 7, 2020                  [Page 2]
> 

> Internet-Draft     Using One-Arm BFD in Cloud Network      November 2019
> 
> 
>    packet through the forwarding channel.  If several consecutive echo
>    packets are not received, the session is declared to be Down.  BFD
>    echo function reduces one of the two devices requirement for BFD.
> 
>    With the development of network cloud and NFV virtualization, there
>    are many connections between gateway devices and the virtual machine
>    devices.  The virtual machine devices don't support BFD capacity at
>    all.  There is difficult to deploy BFD between the gateway devices
>    and the virtual machine vNICs.  One-Arm BFD supports this scenario,
>    it supports gateway enable full BFD capability and virtual machine
>    don't support BFD at all, just simply loopback BFD packets on vNICs.
> 
> 1.1.  Conventions Used in This Document
> 
> 1.1.1.  Terminology
> 
>    BFD: Bidirectional Forwarding Detection
> 
>    NFV: Network Function Virtualization
> 
> 1.1.2.  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 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
>    capitals, as shown here.
> 
> 2.  One-Arm BFD Use Case
> 
>    With the development of network cloud and NFV virtualization, there
>    are many connections between gateway devices and the virtual machine
>    devices.  The virtual machine(VM) devices don't support BFD capacity
>    at all.  If the gateway devices are deployed BFD protocol, there are
>    some problems including scalability, detecting period and so on.  And
>    the VM can't support BFD protocol currently.  One-Arm echo BFD can
>    resolve these problems.  One-arm echo BFD is used when two devices
>    are connected and only one of them supports BFD.  A one-arm BFD echo
>    session can be established on the device that supports BFD, the other
>    device just loopback BFD packets.
> 
>    After receiving a one-arm BFD echo session packet, the device that
>    does not support BFD immediately loops back the packet, implementing
>    quick link failure detection.  As shown in Figure 1, Device A such as
>    a NFV gateway supports BFD, whereas Device B such as a virtual
>    machine does not.  To rapidly detect faults in the link between
>    Device A and Device B, configure a one-arm BFD echo session on Device
>    A.  After receiving a one-arm BFD echo session packet from Device A,
> 
> 
> 
> Wang, et al.               Expires May 7, 2020                  [Page 3]
> 

> Internet-Draft     Using One-Arm BFD in Cloud Network      November 2019
> 
> 
>    Device B immediately loops back the packet, implementing rapid link
>    fault detection.
> 
> 
>    Device A               One-Arm Echo        Device B
>    +--------+             BFD session         +---------+
>    |   A    |---------------------------------|   B     |
>    |        |Inf 1                       Inf 1|         |
>    +--------+10.1.1.1/24           10.1.1.2/24+---------+
>    BFD is supported.                          BFD is not supported.
> 
> 
>                  Figure 1: One-Arm BFD deploying scenario
> 
> 3.  Discussion
> 
>    One-Arm BFD detecting function is better than BFD echo function mode.
>    First One-Arm BFD can use full BFD capacity in the BFD-supported
>    device.  So One-Arm BFD can also support fast detecting and manage
>    BFD sessions effectively.  Second it is scalable using one-arm BFD
>    detecting to adapt the NFV virtualization.  Finally, it is the same
>    process in the non-BFD-supported devices with echo function.  So one-
>    arm BFD can be deployed to the cloud network, and the VMs don't
>    require to support BFD capacity.
> 
> 4.  Security Considerations
> 
>    TBD.
> 
> 5.  IANA Considerations
> 
>    This document has no IANA action requested.
> 
> 6.  Acknowledgements
> 
>    TBD.
> 
> 7.  Normative References
> 
>    [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
>               Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
>               DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
>               <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>;.
> 
>    [RFC5880]  Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection
>               (BFD)", RFC 5880, DOI 10.17487/RFC5880, June 2010,
>               <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5880>;.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wang, et al.               Expires May 7, 2020                  [Page 4]
> 

> Internet-Draft     Using One-Arm BFD in Cloud Network      November 2019
> 
> 
>    [RFC5881]  Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding Detection
>               (BFD) for IPv4 and IPv6 (Single Hop)", RFC 5881,
>               DOI 10.17487/RFC5881, June 2010,
>               <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5881>;.
> 
>    [RFC8174]  Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
>               2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
>               May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>;.
> 
> Authors' Addresses
> 
>    Ruixue Wang
>    China Mobile
>    Beijing
>    CN
> 
>    Email: wangruixue@chinamobile.com
> 
> 
>    Weiqiang Cheng
>    China Mobile
>    Beijing
>    CN
> 
>    Email: chengweiqiang@chinamobile.com
> 
> 
>    Yanhua Zhao
>    ZTE
>    Nanjing
>    CN
> 
>    Email: zhao.yanhua3@zte.com.cn
> 
> 
>    Aihua Liu
>    ZTE
>    Shenzhen
>    CN
> 
>    Email: liu.aihua@zte.com.cn
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Wang, et al.               Expires May 7, 2020                  [Page 5]
>