Network Working Group G. Mirsky Internet-Draft X. Min Intended status: Standards Track ZTE Corp. Expires: September 2, 2018 G. Jun ZTE Corporation H. Nydell Accedian Networks R. Foote Nokia March 1, 2018 Simple Two-way Active Measurement Protocol Optional Extensions draft-mirsky-ippm-stamp-option-tlv-00 Abstract This document describes an optional extensions to Simple Two-way Active Measurement Protocol (STAMP) which enable measurement performance metrics in addition to ones enabled by the STAMP base specification. 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 September 2, 2018. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2018 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 Mirsky, et al. Expires September 2, 2018 [Page 1] Internet-Draft STAMP Extensions March 2018 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 2. Conventions used in this document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2.1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2.2. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. Theory of Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4. TLV Extensions to STAMP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4.1. Extra Padding TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4.2. Location TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4.3. Timestamp Information TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4.4. Class of Service TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4.5. Direct Measurement TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 5.1. STAMP TLV Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 5.2. Synchronization Source Sub-registry . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5.3. Timestamp Method Sub-registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5.4. CoS Operation Sub-registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 7. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 8. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 1. Introduction Simple Two-way Active Measurement Protocol (STAMP) [I-D.ietf-ippm-stamp] supports use of optional extensions that use Type-Length-Value (TLV) encoding. Such extensions are to enhance the STAMP base functions, such as measurement of one-way and round-trip delay, latency, packet loss, as well as ability to detect packet duplication and out-of-order delivery of the test packets. This specification provides definitions of optional STAMP extensions, their formats and theory of operation. 2. Conventions used in this document 2.1. Terminology STAMP - Simple Two-way Active Measurement Protocol DSCP - Differentiated Services Code Point Mirsky, et al. Expires September 2, 2018 [Page 2] Internet-Draft STAMP Extensions March 2018 ECN - Explicit Congestion Notification NTP - Network Time Protocol PTP - Precision Time Protocol HMAC Hashed Message Authentication Code TLV Type-Length-Value 2.2. 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. 3. Theory of Operation STAMP Session-Sender transmits test packets toward STAMP Session- Reflector. STAMP Session-Reflector receives Session-Sender's packet and acts according to the configuration and optional control information communicated in the Session-Sender's test packet. STAMP defines two different test packet formats, one for packets transmitted by the STAMP-Session-Sender and one for packets transmitted by the STAMP-Session-Reflector. STAMP supports three modes: unauthenticated, authenticated, and encrypted. Unauthenticated STAMP test packets are compatible on the wire with unauthenticated TWAMP-Test [RFC5357] packet formats. By default STAMP uses symmetrical packets, i.e. size of the packet transmitted by Session-Reflector equals to the size of the packet received by the Session-Reflector. 4. TLV Extensions to STAMP TBA 4.1. Extra Padding TLV TBA Mirsky, et al. Expires September 2, 2018 [Page 3] Internet-Draft STAMP Extensions March 2018 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Extra Padding Type | Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | ~ Extra Padding ~ | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Figure 1: Extra Padding TLV where fields are defined as the following: o Extra Padding Type - TBA1 allocated by IANA Section 5.1 o Length - 2 octets long field equals length on the Extra Padding field in octets. o Extra Padding - pseudo-random sequence of numbers. The field MAY be filled with all zeroes. 4.2. Location TLV STAMP session-sender MAY include the Location TLV to request information from the session-reflector. The session-sender SHOULD NOT fill any information fields except for Type and Length. The session-reflector MUST validate the Length value against address family of the transport encapsulating the STAMP test packet. If the value of the Length field is invalid, the session-reflector MUST zero all fields and MUST NOT return any information to the session-sender. The session-reflector MUST ignore all other fields of the received Location TLV. Mirsky, et al. Expires September 2, 2018 [Page 4] Internet-Draft STAMP Extensions March 2018 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Location Type | Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Source MAC | + +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | Reserved A | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ~ Destination IP Address ~ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ~ Source IP Address ~ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Dest.port | Src.Port | Reserved B | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Figure 2: Session-Reflector Location TLV where fields are defined as the following: o Location Type - TBA2 allocated by IANA Section 5.1 o Length - 2 octets long field equals length on the Value field in octets. Length field value MUST be 20 octets for IPv4 address family. For IPv6 address family value of the Length field MUST be 44 octets. All other values are invalid o Source MAC - 6 octets 48 bits long field. The session-reflector MUST copy Source MAC of received STAMP packet into this field. o Reserved A - two octets long field. MUST be zeroed on transmission and ignored on reception. o Destination IP Address - IPv4 or IPv6 destination address of the received by the session-reflector STAMP packet. o Source IP Address - IPv4 or IPv6 source address of the received by the session-reflector STAMP packet. o Dest.port - one octet long UDP destination port number of the received STAMP packet. o Src.port - one octet long UDP source port number of the received STAMP packet. o Reserved B - two octets long field. MUST be zeroed on transmission and ignored on reception. Mirsky, et al. Expires September 2, 2018 [Page 5] Internet-Draft STAMP Extensions March 2018 4.3. Timestamp Information TLV STAMP session-sender MAY include the Timestamp Information TLV to request information from the session-reflector. The session-sender SHOULD NOT fill any information fields except for Type and Length. The session-reflector MUST validate the Length value of the STAMP test packet. If the value of the Length field is invalid, the session-reflector MUST zero all fields and MUST NOT return any information to the session-sender. 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Timestamp Information Type | Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Synchronization Source | Timestamp Method | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Figure 3: Timestamp Information TLV where fields are defined as the following: o Timestamp Information Type - TBA3 allocated by IANA Section 5.1 o Length - 2 octets long field, equals 4 octets. o Synchronization Source - two octets long field that characterizes the source of clock synchronization at the session-reflector. The value is one of Section 5.2. o Timestamp Method - two octets long field that characterizes timestamping method at the session-reflector. The value is one of Section 5.3. [Ed.note: Should it be split for ingress and egress?] 4.4. Class of Service TLV The STAMP session-sender MAY include Class of Service TLV in the STAMP test packet. If the Class of Service TLV is present in the STAMP test packet and the value of the Op field equals Report (TBA5) value Section 5.4, then the STAMP session-reflector MUST copy Differentiated Services Code Point (DSCP) and Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) values from the received STAMP test packet into DSCP and ECN fields of the Class of Service TLV of the reflected STAMP test packet. If the value of the Op field equals Set and Report (TBA6) Section 5.4, then the STAMP session-reflector MUST use DSCP value from the Class of Service TLV in the received STAMP test packet as DSCP value of STAMP reflected test packet and MUST copy Mirsky, et al. Expires September 2, 2018 [Page 6] Internet-Draft STAMP Extensions March 2018 DSCP and ECN values of the received STAMP test packet into DSCP and ECN fields of Class of Service TLV in the STAMP reflected packet. 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Class of Service Type | Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Op | Reserved | DSCP |ECN| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Figure 4: Class of Service TLV where fields are defined as the following: o Class of Service Type - TBA4 allocated by IANA Section 5.1 o Length - 2 octets long field, equals 4 octets. o Op - 4 bits long field with value set to operation code point: * TBA5 - Report CoS values by STAMP Session-Reflector * TBA6 - Set and Report CoS values to be used for reflected STAMP test packet o Reserved - 20 bits long field, must be zeroed in transmission and ignored on receipt. o DSCP - Differentiated Services Code Point (DSCP). o ECN - Explicit Congestion Notification. 4.5. Direct Measurement TLV The Direct Measurement TLV enables collection of "in profile" IP packets that had been transmitted and received by the Session-Sender and Session-Reflector respectfully. The definition of "in-profile packet" is outside the scope of this document. Mirsky, et al. Expires September 2, 2018 [Page 7] Internet-Draft STAMP Extensions March 2018 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Direct Measurement Type | Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Session-Sender Tx counter (S_TxC) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Session-Reflector Rx counter (R_RxC) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Session-Reflector Tx counter (R_TxC) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Figure 5: Direct Measurement TLV where fields are defined as the following: o Direct Measurement Type - TBA5 allocated by IANA Section 5.1 o Length - 2 octets long field equals length on the Value field in octets. Length field value MUST be 12 octets. o Session-Sender Tx counter (S_TxC) is four octets long field. o Session-Reflector Rx counter (R_RxC) is four octets long field. MUST be zeroed by the Session-Sender and filled by the Session- Reflector. o Session-Reflector Tx counter (R_TxC).is four octets long field. MUST be zeroed by the Session-Sender and filled by the Session- Reflector. 5. IANA Considerations 5.1. STAMP TLV Registry IANA is requested to create STAMP TLV Type registry. All code points in the range 1 through 32759 in this registry shall be allocated according to the "IETF Review" procedure as specified in [RFC8126]. Code points in the range 32760 through 65279 in this registry shall be allocated according to the "First Come First Served" procedure as specified in [RFC8126]. Remaining code points are allocated according to the Table 1: Mirsky, et al. Expires September 2, 2018 [Page 8] Internet-Draft STAMP Extensions March 2018 +---------------+--------------+-------------------------+ | Value | Description | Reference | +---------------+--------------+-------------------------+ | 0 | Reserved | This document | | 1- 32759 | Unassigned | IETF Review | | 32760 - 65279 | Unassigned | First Come First Served | | 65280 - 65519 | Experimental | This document | | 65520 - 65534 | Private Use | This document | | 65535 | Reserved | This document | +---------------+--------------+-------------------------+ Table 1: STAMP TLV Type Registry This document defines the following new values in STAMP TLV Type registry: +-------+-----------------------+---------------+ | Value | Description | Reference | +-------+-----------------------+---------------+ | TBA1 | Extra Padding | This document | | TBA2 | Location | This document | | TBA3 | Timestamp Information | This document | | TBA4 | Class of Service | This document | | TBA5 | Direct Measurement | This document | +-------+-----------------------+---------------+ Table 2: STAMP Types 5.2. Synchronization Source Sub-registry TBD 5.3. Timestamp Method Sub-registry TBD 5.4. CoS Operation Sub-registry TBD 6. Security Considerations Use of HMAC in authenticated and encrypted modes may be used to simultaneously verify both the data integrity and the authentication of the STAMP test packets. Mirsky, et al. Expires September 2, 2018 [Page 9] Internet-Draft STAMP Extensions March 2018 7. Acknowledgments TBD 8. Normative References [I-D.ietf-ippm-stamp] Mirsky, G., Jun, G., and H. Nydell, "Simple Two-way Active Measurement Protocol", draft-ietf-ippm-stamp-00 (work in progress), January 2018. [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, . [RFC5357] Hedayat, K., Krzanowski, R., Morton, A., Yum, K., and J. Babiarz, "A Two-Way Active Measurement Protocol (TWAMP)", RFC 5357, DOI 10.17487/RFC5357, October 2008, . [RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017, . [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, May 2017, . Authors' Addresses Greg Mirsky ZTE Corp. Email: gregimirsky@gmail.com Xiao Min ZTE Corp. Email: xiao.min2@zte.com.cn Mirsky, et al. Expires September 2, 2018 [Page 10] Internet-Draft STAMP Extensions March 2018 Guo Jun ZTE Corporation 68# Zijinghua Road Nanjing, Jiangsu 210012 P.R.China Phone: +86 18105183663 Email: guo.jun2@zte.com.cn Henrik Nydell Accedian Networks Email: hnydell@accedian.com Richard Foote Nokia Email: footer.foote@nokia.com Mirsky, et al. Expires September 2, 2018 [Page 11]