Routing Area Working Group G. Mirsky
Internet-Draft Ericsson
Intended status: Standards Track E. Nordmark
Expires: January 9, 2017 Arista Networks
C. Pignataro
N. Kumar
D. Kumar
Cisco Systems, Inc.
M. Chen
Y. Li
Huawei Technologies
D. Mozes
Mellanox Technologies Ltd.
I. Bagdonas
July 8, 2016

OAM Header for use in Overlay Networks


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

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 January 9, 2017.

Copyright Notice

Copyright (c) 2016 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 ( 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

New protocols that support overlay networks like VxLAN-GPE [I-D.ietf-nvo3-vxlan-gpe], GUE [I-D.ietf-nvo3-gue], Geneve [I-D.ietf-nvo3-geneve], BIER [I-D.ietf-bier-mpls-encapsulation], and NSH [I-D.ietf-sfc-nsh] support multi-protocol payload, e.g. Ethernet, IPv4/IPv6, and recognize Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) as one of distinct types. That ensures that Overlay OAM packets are sharing fate with Overlay data packet traversing the underlay.

This document introduces Overlay OAM Header to be used in overlay networks to de-multiplex Overlay OAM protocols.

1.1. Conventions used in this document

1.1.1. Terminology

Term "Overlay OAM" used in this document interchangeably with longer version "set of OAM protocols, methods and tools for Overlay networks".

CC Continuity Check

CV Connectivity Verification

FM Fault Management

G-ACh Generic Associated Channel

Geneve Generic Network Virtualization Encapsulation

GUE Generic UDP Encapsulation

MPLS Multiprotocol Label Switching

NVO3 Network Virtualization Overlays

OAM Operations, Administration, and Maintenance

SFC Service Function Chaining

SFP Service Function Path

VxLAN Virtual eXtensible Local Area Network

VxLAN-GPE Generic Protocol Extension for VxLAN

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 [RFC2119].

2. Overlay OAM Header

 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
| V | Msg Type  |     Flags     |          Length               |
~                  OOAM Control Packet                          ~

Figure 1: Overlay OAM Header format

 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
|  QTF  |  RTF  |                   Reserved                    |
|                           Timestamp 1                         |
|                                                               |
~                                                               ~
|                           Timestamp 4                         |
|                                                               |

Figure 2: Timestamp block format

The OOAM header may be followed by the Timestamp control block Figure 2 and then by OOAM Control Packet identified by the Msg Type field.


  • QTF - Querier timestamp format
  • RTF - Responder timestamp format
  • Timestamp 1-4 - 64-bit timestamp values

3. IANA Considerations

IANA is requested to create new registry called "Overlay OAM Protocol Types". All code points in the range 1 through 32767 in this registry shall be allocated according to the "IETF Review" procedure as specified in [RFC5226] . Remaining code points are allocated according to the table Table 1:

Overlay OAM Protocol type
Value Description Reference
0 Reserved
1 - 32767 Reserved IETF Consensus
32768 - 65530 Reserved First Come First Served
65531 - 65534 Reserved Private Use
65535 Reserved

4. Security Considerations


5. Acknowledgement


6. References

6.1. 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.

6.2. Informative References

[I-D.ietf-bier-mpls-encapsulation] Wijnands, I., Rosen, E., Dolganow, A., Tantsura, J. and S. Aldrin, "Encapsulation for Bit Index Explicit Replication in MPLS Networks", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-bier-mpls-encapsulation-04, April 2016.
[I-D.ietf-nvo3-geneve] Gross, J. and I. Ganga, "Geneve: Generic Network Virtualization Encapsulation", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-nvo3-geneve-01, January 2016.
[I-D.ietf-nvo3-gue] Herbert, T., Yong, L. and O. Zia, "Generic UDP Encapsulation", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-nvo3-gue-04, July 2016.
[I-D.ietf-nvo3-vxlan-gpe] Kreeger, L. and U. Elzur, "Generic Protocol Extension for VXLAN", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-nvo3-vxlan-gpe-02, April 2016.
[I-D.ietf-sfc-nsh] Quinn, P. and U. Elzur, "Network Service Header", Internet-Draft draft-ietf-sfc-nsh-05, May 2016.
[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226, DOI 10.17487/RFC5226, May 2008.

Authors' Addresses

Greg Mirsky Ericsson EMail:
Erik Nordmark Arista Networks EMail:
Carlos Pignataro Cisco Systems, Inc. EMail:
Nagendra Kumar Cisco Systems, Inc. EMail:
Deepak Kumar Cisco Systems, Inc. EMail:
Mach Chen Huawei Technologies EMail:
Yizhou Li Huawei Technologies EMail:
David Mozes Mellanox Technologies Ltd. EMail:
Ignas Bagdonas EMail: