[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [ANCP] Agenda items for IETF71 ANCP WG meeting



Title: Agenda items for IETF71 ANCP WG meeting
Hi Woj,
 
I just submitted the attached internet draft, and will like to discuss it in
the next meeting to get it accepted as a WG item.
 
thanks,
Peter


From: ancp-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:ancp-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf Of Wojciech Dec (wdec)
Sent: 18. februar 2008 07:09
To: ancp at ietf.org
Subject: Re: [ANCP] Agenda items for IETF71 ANCP WG meeting

Hi All,
 
are there any other calls for slots at the upcoming meeting?
 
So far we have the following:
- ANCP Access-node & NAS MIB Update; Stefaan De Cnodder
- ANCP Design Team update (tentative)
 
Regards,
Woj.


From: Wojciech Dec (wdec)
Sent: 11 January 2008 14:04
To: ancp at ietf.org
Subject: [ANCP] Agenda items for IETF71 ANCP WG meeting

We're taking requests for slots in the agenda for our next ANCP WG meeting.  Please respond with any tentative requests by February 8.

Thanks,
Matthew & Woj


Internet-Draft                                              Peter Arberg
Intended status: Standards Track                        Redback Networks
Expires: August 17, 2008                                
                                                       February 17, 2008



                Vendor Specific Message for ANCP.

               draft-arberg-ancp-vendorspecific-00



Status of this Memo

   By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
   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
   aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.

   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.

   This Internet-Draft will expire on August 17, 2008.


Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008).


Abstract

   This document is aimed at presenting Access Node Control Protocol
   (ANCP) with a vendor specific protocol extension. 






Arberg                 Expires August 17, 2008                  [Page 1]

Internet-Draft      Vendor Specific Message for ANCP       February 2008

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  2
   2.  Specification of Requirements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  2
   3.  Vendor specific messages in GSMPv3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  2
   4.  Vendor specific messages in ANCP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
     4.1. Vendor Specific Capability Negotiation  . . . . . . . . . .  3
     4.2. Vendor Specific Extensions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   5.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
   6.  IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
   7. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
     7.1. Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
   Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
   Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . . .  7


1.  Introduction

   This document is aimed at presenting ANCP with a vendor specific
   protocol extension. GSMPv3 [1] which is used as foundation for the
   ANCP protocol [2] already has vendor specific functionality defined,
   but since ANCP defines new capability negotiations and only include
   few specific messages from GSMPv3, it is necessary to define a new
   vendor specific message handling for ANCP. 

   This proposal aims at collecting feedback from the ANCP community in 
   order to work towards consensus. Eventually, text derived from the 
   material in section 4. would be intended to be incorporated in the
   "ANCP Protocol I-D" [2].


2.  Specification of Requirements

   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 [RFC2119].


3.  Vendor specific messages in GSMPv3

   GSMPv3 [1] defines vendor specific ranges for vendor private 
   extensions to the GSMPv3 protocol. GSMPv3 defines vendor specific
   ranges for the following functionalities:

      -  Message Type Name Space
      -  Label Type Name Space
      -  Failure Response Message Name Space
      -  Model Type Name Space 

   The one which could be interesting to ANCP, is the Message Type Name
   Space that GSMPv3 divides into four ranges as follows:


Arberg                 Expires August 17, 2008                  [Page 2]

Internet-Draft      Vendor Specific Message for ANCP       February 2008


      -  Message Types 0-99.
              Message Types in this range are part of the GSMPv3 base
              protocol.  Message types in this range are allocated
              through an IETF consensus action [19].

      -  Message Types 100-199.
              Message Types in this range are Specification Required
              [19].  Message Types using this range must be documented
              in an RFC or other permanent and readily available
              references.

      -  Message Types 200-249.
              Message Types in this range are Specification Required
              [19] and are intended for Abstract and Resource Model
              Extension Messages.  Message Types using this range must
              be documented in an RFC or other permanent and readily
              available references.

      -  Message Types 250-255.
              Message Types in this range are reserved for vendor
              private extensions and are the responsibility of
              individual vendors.  IANA management of this range of the
              Message Type Name Space is unnecessary.


4.  Vendor specific messages in ANCP

   The proposal in this document is to define a new capability type for
   vendor specific data as part of the ANCP protocol capability 
   negotiations, and further more define a separate vendor specific 
   message extension.


4.1 Vendor Specific Capability Negotiation 

   Capability Type : Vendor-Specific Data = 0x06 (TBD)  

   Length (in bytes) : multiply of 4. 
   Every Enterprise with vendor specific data supported will add 4 
   bytes to the length field.

   Capability Data : list of Enterprise numbers.
   "Enterprise NumberN" is a vendor's Enterprise Number as registered
   with IANA [3].  It is a four-byte integer value in network byte-
   order.







Arberg                 Expires August 17, 2008                  [Page 3]

Internet-Draft      Vendor Specific Message for ANCP       February 2008


4.2 Vendor Specific Extensions

   GSMPv3 [1] "Vendor Specific" message (type 255) MUST be used by 
   the BRAS and the Access Node to exchange vendor specific data
   as part of the ANCP protocol communication.

   The Vendor Specific message uses the GSMPv3 [1] basic defined
   message format as shown below:

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   | Vers  |  Sub  | Message Type  | Result|        Code           | 
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   | Partition ID  |            Transaction Identifier             |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |I|      SubMessage Number      |           Length              |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                                                               |
   ~                          Message Body                         ~
   |                                                               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+



   The Message body in the ANCP vendor specific message MUST follow
   the format shown below:

   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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   | Message Type  |    Length     |        Enterprise Number1     |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                               |  DataLen1     |               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+               +
   \                      Vendor Specific Data1                    \
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |                      Enterprise Number2                       |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |  DataLen2     |           Vendor Specific Data2               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   \                                                               \
   .                                                               .
   .                                                               .
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


   The Message Type for Vendor Specific messages is 255 (TBD).




Arberg                 Expires August 17, 2008                  [Page 4]

Internet-Draft      Vendor Specific Message for ANCP       February 2008


   The one-byte Length field is the length of the data carried in the
   Message Body in bytes.  The length includes the length of the first
   Enterprise Number; the minimum length is 4 bytes.

   "Enterprise NumberN" is a vendor's Enterprise Number as registered
   with IANA [3].  It is a four-byte integer value in network byte-
   order. The Enterprise number used in the Vendor Specific message
   MUST match the numbers agreed upon in the capability negotiation.
   If an Enterprise number used in the Vendor Specific Message Body is
   different from the capability negotiations then the vendor specific
   data for this Enterprise number MAY silently be discard by the 
   receiver.

   DataLenN is the length of the data associated with the Enterprise
   Number.

   The Vendor Specific Data is an opaque sequence of bytes.

   The Vendor-Specific Message includes at least one Enterprise Number
   and carries opaque data defined by the organization identified by 
   the Enterprise Number. The ANCP end node, Access Node or BRAS, MAY
   include data associated with more than one vendor's Enterprise 
   Number within a single instance of the Vendor Specific Message.

   Of course, the Vendor-Specific data are vendor-specific. This
   specification does not establish any requirements on the data in the
   message. Vendors who make use of this message type are encouraged to
   document their usage in order to make interoperability possible.


5.  Security Considerations

   The BRAS and DSLAMs are implicitly in a trusted domain, so security 
   for vendor specific messages in ANCP do not put forth other security
   considerations not already mentioned in the ANCP Protocol draft [2].


6.  IANA Considerations

   This document defines a new capability type as well as a new message
   type which need to be reserved with IANA, as part of the overall
   ANCP Protocol [2] IANA reservation.










Arberg                 Expires August 17, 2008                  [Page 5]

Internet-Draft      Vendor Specific Message for ANCP       February 2008


7.  References

7.1.  Normative References

   [1]   Doria, A. et al, "General Switch Management Protocol - V3" 
         (GSMPv3), RFC 3292, June 2002. 

   [2]   S. Wadhwa, J. Moisand, .. " Protocol for Access Node Control 
         Mechanism in Broadband Networks", draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-
         02.txt 

   [3]  IANA, "Private Enterprise Numbers (http://www.iana.org/
        assignments/enterprise-numbers.html)".

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.


Authors' Addresses

   Peter Arberg 
   Redback Networks an Ericsson Company
   300 Holger Way
   San Jose, CA 95134
   USA
   Email: parberg at redback.com


























Arberg                 Expires August 17, 2008                  [Page 6]

Internet-Draft      Vendor Specific Message for ANCP       February 2008


Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008).

   This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
   contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
   retain all their rights.

   This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
   "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
   OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND
   THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS
   OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF
   THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
   WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.


Intellectual Property

   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
   Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
   pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
   this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
   might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
   made any independent effort to identify any such rights.  Information
   on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
   found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
   assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
   attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
   such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
   specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
   http://www.ietf.org/ipr.

   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
   rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
   this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF at
   ietf-ipr at ietf.org.


Acknowledgment

   Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF
   Administrative Support Activity (IASA).




Arberg                 Expires August 17, 2008                  [Page 7]

_______________________________________________
ANCP mailing list
ANCP at ietf.org
http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ancp