Network N. So Internet Draft D. McDysan Intended status: Informational Verizon, Inc Expires: April 2012 H.Yu TW Telecom J. Heinz CenturyLink Maria Napierala James Uttaro AT&T October 24, 2011 Requirements of Layer 3 Virtual Private Network for Data Centers draft-so-vpn4dc-00.txt Status of this Memo This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. This document may not be modified, and derivative works of it may not be created, and it may not be published except as an Internet-Draft. This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. This document may not be modified, and derivative works of it may not be created, except to publish it as an RFC and to translate it into languages other than English. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- Drafts. 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." The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2011 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 (http://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. Abstract This contribution addresses service provider requirements to provide host-to-host connectivity through Layer 3 Virtual Private Networks (L3VPNs). It describes the use cases and the characteristics of hosts in data centers automatically joining the L3VPN. It specifies the requirements on how to maintain and manage such host-to-host connectivity through L3VPN, so that automated provisioning, monitoring, and reporting of the cloud services can be achieved. Table of Contents 1. Introduction.................................................3 2. Conventions used in this document............................3 3. Definitions..................................................3 4. Use case utlizing L3VPN for DC ............................4 5. Connectivity requirments for hosts in DCs joining L3VPN......5 6. Authors' addresses...........................................7 7. Acknowledgement..............................................7 So Expires April 24,2011 [Page 2] Internet-Draft VPN-oriented Data Center Services October 2011 1. Introduction L3VPN services offer secure and logically dedicated connectivity among multiple sites for enterprises. Capabilities allowing hosts in data centers to join L3VPN via inband signaling and/or protocol interworking is suited for those VPN customers who want to temporarily offload or augment some dedicated user data center operations such as software, compute, and storage, to the shared carrier data centers. These customers often view the public Internet as less secure than a L3VPN. Therefore, L3VPN is the primary network accessing and handling the traffic between the customer (user and user data centers) and the carrier multi-tenant data centers. Furthermore, if technology were developed to make the carrier data center a natural extension of the VPN they are already using, the benefits of a multi-tenant data center could be achieved while retaining as much control, security and isolation as currently delivered by the L3VPN service. The seamless host-to-host connectivity through L3VPN is the foundation for controlled communication interworking between the Virtual Machines (VM) hosts and Virtual Network Attached Storage (vNAS) in a Virtual Data Center (VDC) logically dedicated to an enterprise spanning provider DCs and enterprise DCs. For example, the L3VPN network can be used as a common control point for host-to-host communications as well as access to other virtualized data center resources, such as firewalls, security functions and load balancers. Extensions to L3VPN could automate at least the following aspects of a VDC: service ordering/provisioning, monitoring/troubleshooting, logging and auditing, security assurance, and location control of VMs. 2. Conventions used in this document The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC-2119 [RFC2119]. In this document, these words will appear with that interpretation only when in ALL CAPS. Lower case uses of these words are not to be interpreted as carrying RFC-2119 significance. 3. Definitions DC: Data Center VM: Virtual Machine So Expires April 24,2011 [Page 3] Internet-Draft VPN-oriented Data Center Services October 2011 Host: VM or dedicated server in data center VPN Gateway (VPN GW): a VPN CE router (Data Center gateway switch/router) function that allows the VPN4DC connectivity to be established through the CE router. Virtual Data Center (VDC): a resource pool on top of the virtualized data center infrastructures, including hypervisors, VM/servers, intra-DC networks, and storage. A VDC may provide control of reachability within the VDC as well as access to the VDC within one enterprise or between enterprises. 4. Use Cases Utilizing L3VPN for DCs 4.1. Automated M-to-M Service Ordering/Provisioning: Today's cloud service ordering/provisioning and management are often a manual process even for standard services and with physical infrastructure already in place. The ability to automatically integrate with the L3VPN and control other aspects are missing, such as bandwidth and QoS on access and between VDC sites. Many functions performed manually can be automated via common/standard protocol exchanges and APIs, thus reducing the provisioning time as well as providing additionally features, such as dynamically allocated bandwidth and QoS. Standard protocol exchange is the preferred method of controlling VPN reachability and service parameters versus the alternative of management systems (DCs and L3VPN) interworking because of the following reasons: . Management systems' interworking is often not practical from the operational perspective. Data Center management systems and L3VPN network management system often have different owners and operators, and of course the enterprise data center and the service provider owner and operators differ. Additionally, non-standard legacy mechanisms make backward compatibility and interworking difficult. . In-band signaling of data plane between DC gateway switch/router (VPN CE) and L3VPN Provider Edge (PE) router can be much faster, making just-in-time access to data center resource capacity expansion/contraction possible. 4.2. End-to-end Service Monitoring/Trouble Shooting: When carrier DC is used as overflow or augmentation for the enterprise DCs, the service provider has the responsibility of So Expires April 24,2011 [Page 4] Internet-Draft VPN-oriented Data Center Services October 2011 operating the L3VPN network and the provider DCs. The customer has the responsibility of operating the customer DCs. A particular set of services can be running on both the customer DCs and provider DCs simultaneously. It is important to the customer as well as the provider, in real-time or near real-time, to know when, where, and how the services are being hosted. This real-time visibility can be particularly important during failure recovery and troubleshooting situations where mission critical services are interrupted. Today all segments of the host-to-host connection supporting the services are managed independently, with no direct visibility beyond each segment's management domain. If standard protocols are used for hosts in DCs to join L3VPN, the entire path of the connection can be known to L3VPN. A standard OAM (e.g. Y.1731 and BFD)can be set up between PE router and the CE router (DC gateway switch/router) associated with hosts in DCs to monitor that portion of the host-to-host connection's condition. The trouble shooting/congestion detection on any segment of the host-to-host connection can happen quickly (even automatically) from both ends, so the customer's service (hosts) can be moved to the secondary DCs/paths quickly with minimal impact to the services. Furthermore, if a standard agent were running on the enterprise hosts (VMs), this monitoring and troubleshooting could be extended host-host. 5. Connectivity Requirements for Hosts in DCs Joining L3VPN o Once the hypervisor or Top Of Rack switch is configured to connect the host to a DC gateway, the hosts in DC SHALL be able to signal to DC gateway switch/router (L3VPN CE) to join a specific VPN. The join request CAN include the basic service requirements such as bandwidth and QoS. o The DC gateway switch/router (CE) SHALL be able to signal to L3VPN PE to join a specific VPN for establishing connectivity between the hosts in DC and the PE router. o The DC gateway switch/router (CE) SHALL be able to signal to L3VPN the basic service requirements such as bandwidth and QoS, as aggregated from the host requests. o The DC gateway switch/router SHALL be able to signal to L3VPN PE the host IDs (IP/MAC/VDC addresses) that are joining and/or leaving the VPN. VDC address space/scheme SHOULD be defined to allow addressing hierarchy and support aggregation and access control within and between the DCs which comprise the VDC. So Expires April 24,2011 [Page 5] Internet-Draft VPN-oriented Data Center Services October 2011 o The DC gateway switch/router SHALL be able to signal to L3VPN PE how the connectivity is provisioned within the DC network between PE and the hosts. For example, provider multi-tenant DC gateway router SHALL be able to indicate to PE the required reachability between sets of hosts in the VPN is achieved within its VDC. PE router SHALL then be able to signal the required reachability to the other DC gateway routers in the same VDC. This information CAN be used for connectivity security verification and auditing/reporting purposes. o DC GW switch/router SHALL be able to signal to PE router whether the reachability control capability is supported. o The DC gateway switch/router SHOULD signal to L3VPN PE any host and/or connectivity changes within its own VDC. The changes SHALL be signaled to all the DC gateway switch/routers associated with this VDC. o DC gateway switch/router (VPN CE) and VPN PE router SHOULD be able to record all the hosts and connectivity information associated with the VDC and VPN. o The PE router SHALL be able to signal to the DC GW switch/router (e.g. provider DC) how a new logical connectivity should be established based the customer DCs' service requirements, such as bandwidth and QoS. o Once host-to-host agent connection has been established through L3VPN, additional configuration messages SHALL be allowed to use this connection. For example, additional security configurations can be performed from one host to a remote host via the connection. o Once host-to-host agent connection has been established through L3VPN, it SHOULD be strictly maintained. Hosts on both customer and provider sides SHOULD be notified and agreed to any configuration changes prior to the change taking place o The host-to-host agent connection SHOULD support OAM interworking mechanisms per DC pair per VPN to allow end-to-end management of the service. For example, upon detection of a segment of the infrastructure failure and/or congestion, the user CAN move the host to an alternative DC instead of waiting for the repair/relieve. The solution SHOULD use existing protocols(e.g., IEEE 802.1ag, ITU-T Y.1731, BFD) wherever possible to facilitate interoperability with existing OAM deployments. So Expires April 24,2011 [Page 6] Internet-Draft VPN-oriented Data Center Services October 2011 6. Authors' Addresses Ning So Verizon Inc. 2400 N. Glenville Ave., Richardson, TX75082 ning.so@verizonbusiness.com Dave McDysan Verizon Inc. 22001 Loudoun County PKWY. Ashburn, VA 20147 Dave.mcdysan@verizon.com Henry Yu TW Telecom 10475 Park Meadows Dr. Littleton, CO 80124 Henry.yu@twtelecom.com John M. Heinz CenturyLink 600 New Century PKWY KSNCAA0420-4B116 New Century, KS 66031 john.m.heinz@centurylink.com 7. Acknowledgments This document was prepared using 2-Word-v2.0.template.dot. So Expires April 24,2011 [Page 7]