draft-ietf-mpls-explicit-resource-control-bundle-01.txt   draft-ietf-mpls-explicit-resource-control-bundle-02.txt 
MPLS Working Group MPLS Working Group
Internet Draft Anca Zamfir Internet Draft Anca Zamfir
Zafar Ali Zafar Ali
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
D. Papadimitriou D. Papadimitriou
Alcatel Alcatel
Document: draft-ietf-mpls-explicit- Document: draft-ietf-mpls-explicit-
resource-control-bundle-01.txt resource-control-bundle-02.txt
Expires: August 2006 February 2006 Expires: April 2006 October 2006
Component Link Recording and Resource Control for GMPLS Link Bundles Component Link Recording and Resource Control for GMPLS Link Bundles
draft-ietf-mpls-explicit-resource-control-bundle-01.txt draft-ietf-mpls-explicit-resource-control-bundle-02.txt
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79. aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other
skipping to change at page 2, line 5 skipping to change at page 2, line 5
Abstract Abstract
Record Route is a useful administrative tool that has been used Record Route is a useful administrative tool that has been used
extensively by the service providers. However, when TE links are extensively by the service providers. However, when TE links are
bundled, identification of label resource in RRO is not enough for bundled, identification of label resource in RRO is not enough for
the administrative purpose. Network service providers would like to the administrative purpose. Network service providers would like to
know the component link within a TE link that is being used by a know the component link within a TE link that is being used by a
Zamfir, A., Ali, Z., Papadimitriou, D. Zamfir, A., Ali, Z., Papadimitriou, D.
draft-ietf-mpls-mpls-explicit-resource-control-bundle-01.txt Feb. 2006 draft-ietf-mpls-mpls-explicit-resource-control-bundle-02.txt Feb. 2006
given LSP. In other words, when link bundling is used, resource given LSP. In other words, when link bundling is used, resource
recording requires mechanisms to specify the component link recording requires mechanisms to specify the component link
identifier, along with the TE link identifier and Label. As , it is identifier, along with the TE link identifier and Label. As , it is
not possible to record component link in the RRO, this draft defines not possible to record component link in the RRO, this draft defines
the extensions to RSVP-TE [RFC3209] and [RFC3473] to specify the extensions to RSVP-TE [RFC3209] and [RFC3473] to specify
component link identifiers for resource recording purposes. component link identifiers for resource recording purposes.
This draft also defines the ERO counterpart of the RRO extension. The This draft also defines the ERO counterpart of the RRO extension. The
ERO extensions are needed to perform explicit label/ resource control ERO extensions are needed to perform explicit label/ resource control
skipping to change at page 3, line 4 skipping to change at page 3, line 4
10. Author's Addresses...........................................11 10. Author's Addresses...........................................11
11. Full Copyright Statement.....................................11 11. Full Copyright Statement.....................................11
1. Terminology 1. Terminology
TE Link: Unless specified otherwise, it refers to a bundled Traffic TE Link: Unless specified otherwise, it refers to a bundled Traffic
Engineering link as defined in [BUNDLE]. Furthermore, the terms TE Engineering link as defined in [BUNDLE]. Furthermore, the terms TE
Link and bundled TE Link are used interchangeably in this draft. Link and bundled TE Link are used interchangeably in this draft.
Zamfir, A., Ali, Z., Papadimitriou, D Zamfir, A., Ali, Z., Papadimitriou, D
draft-ietf-mpls-explicit-resource-control-bundle-01.txt Feb. 2006 draft-ietf-mpls-explicit-resource-control-bundle-02.txt Feb. 2006
Component (interface) link: refers (locally) to a component link as Component (interface) link: refers (locally) to a component link as
part of a bundled TE link. A component link is numbered/ unnumbered part of a bundled TE link. A component link is numbered/ unnumbered
in its own right. For unnumbered component links, the component link in its own right. For unnumbered component links, the component link
ID is assumed to be unique on an advertising node. For numbered ID is assumed to be unique on an advertising node. For numbered
component links, the component link ID is assumed to be unique within component links, the component link ID is assumed to be unique within
a domain. a domain.
Component Interface Identifier: Refers to an ID used to uniquely Component Interface Identifier: Refers to an ID used to uniquely
identify a Component Interface. On a bundled link a combination of identify a Component Interface. On a bundled link a combination of
skipping to change at page 4, line 4 skipping to change at page 4, line 4
both upstream and downstream information may be specified. Therefore, both upstream and downstream information may be specified. Therefore,
explicit resource control and recording over a bundled TE link also explicit resource control and recording over a bundled TE link also
requires ability to specify a component link within the TE link. requires ability to specify a component link within the TE link.
This draft defines extensions to and describes the use of RSVP-TE This draft defines extensions to and describes the use of RSVP-TE
[RFC3209], [RFC3471], [RFC3473] to specify the component link [RFC3209], [RFC3471], [RFC3473] to specify the component link
identifier for resource recording and explicit resource control over identifier for resource recording and explicit resource control over
GMPLS link bundles. Specifically, in this document, component GMPLS link bundles. Specifically, in this document, component
Zamfir, A., Ali, Z., Papadimitriou, D Zamfir, A., Ali, Z., Papadimitriou, D
draft-ietf-mpls-explicit-resource-control-bundle-01.txt Feb. 2006 draft-ietf-mpls-explicit-resource-control-bundle-02.txt Feb. 2006
interface identifier RRO and ERO subobjects are defined to complement interface identifier RRO and ERO subobjects are defined to complement
their Label RRO and ERO counterparts. Furthermore, procedures for their Label RRO and ERO counterparts. Furthermore, procedures for
processing component interface identifier RRO and ERO subobjects and processing component interface identifier RRO and ERO subobjects and
how they can co-exist with the Label RRO and ERO subobjects are how they can co-exist with the Label RRO and ERO subobjects are
specified. specified.
3. LSP Resource Recording 3. LSP Resource Recording
This refers to the ability to record the resources used by an LSP. This refers to the ability to record the resources used by an LSP.
skipping to change at page 5, line 4 skipping to change at page 5, line 4
Type Type
10 (TBD) Component Interface identifier IPv4 10 (TBD) Component Interface identifier IPv4
11 (TBD) Component Interface identifier IPv6 11 (TBD) Component Interface identifier IPv6
12 (TBD) Component Interface identifier Unnumbered 12 (TBD) Component Interface identifier Unnumbered
Length Length
Zamfir, A., Ali, Z., Papadimitriou, D Zamfir, A., Ali, Z., Papadimitriou, D
draft-ietf-mpls-explicit-resource-control-bundle-01.txt Feb. 2006 draft-ietf-mpls-explicit-resource-control-bundle-02.txt Feb. 2006
The Length contains the total length of the subobject in The Length contains the total length of the subobject in
bytes, including the Type and Length fields. The Length is bytes, including the Type and Length fields. The Length is
8 bytes for the Component Interface identifier IPv4 and 8 bytes for the Component Interface identifier IPv4 and
Component Interface identifier Unnumbered types. For Component Interface identifier Unnumbered types. For
Component Interface identifier IPv6 type of sub-object, the Component Interface identifier IPv6 type of sub-object, the
length field is 20 bytes. length field is 20 bytes.
U: 1 bit U: 1 bit
skipping to change at page 6, line 4 skipping to change at page 6, line 4
desires label recording, it sets the Label_Recording flag in the desires label recording, it sets the Label_Recording flag in the
SESSION_ATTRIBUTE object. SESSION_ATTRIBUTE object.
When a Path message with the "Component Link Recording desired" flag When a Path message with the "Component Link Recording desired" flag
set is received by an intermediate node, if a new Path message is to set is received by an intermediate node, if a new Path message is to
be sent for a downstream bundled TE link, the node adds a new be sent for a downstream bundled TE link, the node adds a new
Component Link subobject to the RRO and appends the resulting RRO to Component Link subobject to the RRO and appends the resulting RRO to
the Path message before transmission. the Path message before transmission.
Zamfir, A., Ali, Z., Papadimitriou, D Zamfir, A., Ali, Z., Papadimitriou, D
draft-ietf-mpls-explicit-resource-control-bundle-01.txt Feb. 2006 draft-ietf-mpls-explicit-resource-control-bundle-02.txt Feb. 2006
Note also that, unlike Labels, Component Link identifiers are always Note also that, unlike Labels, Component Link identifiers are always
known on receipt of the Path message. known on receipt of the Path message.
When the destination node of an RSVP session receives a Path message When the destination node of an RSVP session receives a Path message
with an RRO and the "Component Link Recording desired" flag set, this with an RRO and the "Component Link Recording desired" flag set, this
indicates that the sender node needs TE route as well as component indicates that the sender node needs TE route as well as component
link recording. The destination node initiates the RRO process by link recording. The destination node initiates the RRO process by
adding an RRO to Resv messages. The processing mirrors that of the adding an RRO to Resv messages. The processing mirrors that of the
Path messages Path messages
skipping to change at page 7, line 4 skipping to change at page 7, line 4
L: 1 bit L: 1 bit
This bit must be set to 0. This bit must be set to 0.
Type Type
10 (TBD) Component Interface identifier IPv4 10 (TBD) Component Interface identifier IPv4
11 (TBD) Component Interface identifier IPv6 11 (TBD) Component Interface identifier IPv6
Zamfir, A., Ali, Z., Papadimitriou, D Zamfir, A., Ali, Z., Papadimitriou, D
draft-ietf-mpls-explicit-resource-control-bundle-01.txt Feb. 2006 draft-ietf-mpls-explicit-resource-control-bundle-02.txt Feb. 2006
12 (TBD) Component Interface identifier Unnumbered 12 (TBD) Component Interface identifier Unnumbered
Length Length
The Length contains the total length of the subobject in The Length contains the total length of the subobject in
bytes, including the Type and Length fields. The Length is bytes, including the Type and Length fields. The Length is
8 bytes for the Component Interface identifier types: IPv4 8 bytes for the Component Interface identifier types: IPv4
and Component Interface identifier Unnumbered. For and Component Interface identifier Unnumbered. For
Component Interface identifier IPv6 type of sub-object, Component Interface identifier IPv6 type of sub-object,
skipping to change at page 8, line 4 skipping to change at page 8, line 4
If a node implements the component interface identifier subobject, it If a node implements the component interface identifier subobject, it
must check if it represents a component interface in the bundled TE must check if it represents a component interface in the bundled TE
Link specified in the preceding subobject that contains the IPv4/IPv6 Link specified in the preceding subobject that contains the IPv4/IPv6
address or interface identifier of the TE Link. If the content of the address or interface identifier of the TE Link. If the content of the
component interface identifier subobject does not match a component component interface identifier subobject does not match a component
interface in the TE link, a "Bad EXPLICIT_ROUTE object" error SHOULD interface in the TE link, a "Bad EXPLICIT_ROUTE object" error SHOULD
be reported as "Routing Problem" (error code 24). be reported as "Routing Problem" (error code 24).
Zamfir, A., Ali, Z., Papadimitriou, D Zamfir, A., Ali, Z., Papadimitriou, D
draft-ietf-mpls-explicit-resource-control-bundle-01.txt Feb. 2006 draft-ietf-mpls-explicit-resource-control-bundle-02.txt Feb. 2006
If U-bit of the subobject being examined is cleared (0) and the If U-bit of the subobject being examined is cleared (0) and the
upstream interface specified in this subobject is acceptable, then upstream interface specified in this subobject is acceptable, then
the value of the upstream component interface is translated locally the value of the upstream component interface is translated locally
in the TLV of the IF_ID RSVP HOP object [RFC 3471]. The local in the TLV of the IF_ID RSVP HOP object [RFC 3471]. The local
decision normally used to select the upstream component link is decision normally used to select the upstream component link is
bypassed except for local translation into the outgoing interface bypassed except for local translation into the outgoing interface
identifier from the received incoming remote interface identifier. If identifier from the received incoming remote interface identifier. If
this interface is not acceptable, a "Bad EXPLICIT_ROUTE object" error this interface is not acceptable, a "Bad EXPLICIT_ROUTE object" error
SHOULD be reported as "Routing Problem" (error code 24). SHOULD be reported as "Routing Problem" (error code 24).
skipping to change at page 9, line 4 skipping to change at page 9, line 4
component link within the TE link and any label on the selected component link within the TE link and any label on the selected
component link. component link.
o When the Label subobject is only present for a bundled link, then o When the Label subobject is only present for a bundled link, then
the selection of the component link within the bundle is a local the selection of the component link within the bundle is a local
decision and the node may select any appropriate component link, decision and the node may select any appropriate component link,
which can assume the label specified in the Label ERO. which can assume the label specified in the Label ERO.
o When only the component interface identifier ERO subobject is o When only the component interface identifier ERO subobject is
present, a node MUST select the component interface specified in the present, a node MUST select the component interface specified in the
Zamfir, A., Ali, Z., Papadimitriou, D Zamfir, A., Ali, Z., Papadimitriou, D
draft-ietf-mpls-explicit-resource-control-bundle-01.txt Feb. 2006 draft-ietf-mpls-explicit-resource-control-bundle-02.txt Feb. 2006
ERO and may select any appropriate label value at the specified ERO and may select any appropriate label value at the specified
component link. component link.
o When both component interface identifier ERO subobject and Label o When both component interface identifier ERO subobject and Label
ERO subobject are present, the node MUST select the locally ERO subobject are present, the node MUST select the locally
corresponding component link and the specified label value on that corresponding component link and the specified label value on that
component link. When present, both subobjects may appear in any component link. When present, both subobjects may appear in any
relative order to each other but they MUST appear after the TE Link relative order to each other but they MUST appear after the TE Link
sub-object that they refer to. sub-object that they refer to.
skipping to change at page 10, line 4 skipping to change at page 10, line 4
if nodes traversed by the LSP are compliant with the proposed if nodes traversed by the LSP are compliant with the proposed
extensions. extensions.
6. Security Considerations 6. Security Considerations
This document does not introduce new security issues. The security This document does not introduce new security issues. The security
considerations pertaining to the original RSVP protocol [RFC2205] considerations pertaining to the original RSVP protocol [RFC2205]
remain relevant. remain relevant.
Zamfir, A., Ali, Z., Papadimitriou, D Zamfir, A., Ali, Z., Papadimitriou, D
draft-ietf-mpls-explicit-resource-control-bundle-01.txt Feb. 2006 draft-ietf-mpls-explicit-resource-control-bundle-02.txt Feb. 2006
7. IANA Considerations 7. IANA Considerations
Type of Component Interface Identifier ERO subobject needs to be Type of Component Interface Identifier ERO subobject needs to be
assigned. assigned.
8. Intellectual Property Considerations 8. Intellectual Property Considerations
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
skipping to change at page 11, line 4 skipping to change at page 11, line 4
[BUNDLE] "Link Bundling in MPLS Traffic Engineering", draft-ietf- [BUNDLE] "Link Bundling in MPLS Traffic Engineering", draft-ietf-
mpls-bundle-05.txt, K. Kompella, et al, January 2003. mpls-bundle-05.txt, K. Kompella, et al, January 2003.
[RFC3471] Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) [RFC3471] Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)
Signaling Functional Description, RFC 3471, L. Berger, et al, Signaling Functional Description, RFC 3471, L. Berger, et al,
January 2003. January 2003.
[RFC3473] "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) [RFC3473] "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)
Signaling Resource ReserVation Protocol-Traffic Engineering (RSVP- Signaling Resource ReserVation Protocol-Traffic Engineering (RSVP-
TE) Extensions", RFC 3473, L. Berger, et al, January 2003. TE) Extensions", RFC 3473, L. Berger, et al, January 2003.
Zamfir, A., Ali, Z., Papadimitriou, D Zamfir, A., Ali, Z., Papadimitriou, D
draft-ietf-mpls-explicit-resource-control-bundle-01.txt Feb. 2006 draft-ietf-mpls-explicit-resource-control-bundle-02.txt Feb. 2006
[RFC3477] "Signaling Unnumbered Links in Resource ReSerVation [RFC3477] "Signaling Unnumbered Links in Resource ReSerVation
Protocol - Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) ", RFC 3477, K. Kompella, Protocol - Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) ", RFC 3477, K. Kompella,
Y. Rekhter, January 2003. Y. Rekhter, January 2003.
[RFC2119] "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", [RFC2119] "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels",
RFC 2119, S. Bradner, March 1997. RFC 2119, S. Bradner, March 1997.
9.2 Informative Reference 9.2 Informative Reference
[RSVP-TE-ATTRIBUTE] "Encoding of Attributes for Multiprotocol Label [RSVP-TE-ATTRIBUTE] "Encoding of Attributes for Multiprotocol Label
skipping to change at page 11, line 51 skipping to change at page 11, line 51
11. Full Copyright Statement 11. Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006). This document is subject Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006). This document is subject
to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and
except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights. except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
Zamfir, A., Ali, Z., Papadimitriou, D
draft-ietf-mpls-explicit-resource-control-bundle-01.txt Feb. 2006
ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Zamfir, A., Ali, Z., Papadimitriou, D Zamfir, A., Ali, Z., Papadimitriou, D
draft-ietf-mpls-explicit-resource-control-bundle-02.txt Feb. 2006
Zamfir, A., Ali, Z., Papadimitriou, D
 End of changes. 14 change blocks. 
17 lines changed or deleted 13 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.33. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/