Network Working Group Luca Martini Internet Draft Expiration Date: April 2006 Cisco Systems Inc. October 2005 IANA Allocations for pseudo Wire Edge to Edge Emulation (PWE3) draft-ietf-pwe3-iana-allocation-14.txt 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/1id-abstracts.html The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. Abstract This document allocates the fixed Pseudo-wire identifier , and other fixed protocol values for protocols that have been defined in the pseudo wire edge to edge working group. ( PWE3 ) Detailed IANA allocation instructions are also included in this document. Martini [Page 1] Internet Draft draft-ietf-pwe3-iana-allocation-14.txt October 2005 Table of Contents 1 Specification of Requirements .......................... 2 2 Introduction ........................................... 2 3 IANA Considerations .................................... 3 3.1 Expert Review Directives ............................... 3 3.2 MPLS Pseudowire Type ................................... 3 3.3 Interface Parameters Sub-TLV type ...................... 4 3.4 Attachment Identifiers ................................. 5 3.4.1 Attachment Individual Identifier Type .................. 5 3.4.2 Attachment Group Identifier (AGI) Type ................. 6 3.5 Pseudo Wire Status ..................................... 6 4 Security Considerations ................................ 7 5 Full Copyright Statement ............................... 7 6 Intellectual Property Statement ........................ 7 7 Normative References ................................... 8 8 Informative References ................................. 8 9 Author Information ..................................... 10 1. 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] 2. Introduction Most of the new IANA registries, and respective iana allocation processes for protocols defined in the PWE3 IETF working group can be found in this document. The IANA registries defined here, are in general subdivided into three main ranges: a range to be allocated by IETF consensus according to [RFC2434], a range to be allocated by the expert review process according to [RFC2434], and a range to be allocated in a first come first served basis reserved for vendor proprietary allocations. It should be noted that vendor proprietary types MUST NOT be registered for IETF standards or extensions of those, whether still in development or already completed. Martini [Page 2] Internet Draft draft-ietf-pwe3-iana-allocation-14.txt October 2005 3. IANA Considerations IANA is requested to create several registries as described in the following paragraphs. Each of these registries contains numeric values used to identify data types. In each of these registries the value of 0 is reserved, and MUST not be used. 3.1. Expert Review Directives Throughout this document allocation procedures for several registries call for an expert review process according to [RFC2434]. The expert should consider the following points: * Avoid Duplication of code point allocations. * A brief clear description of the code point allocation requested. * Whether the type allocation requested is appropriate for the particular requested value range in the registry. The Expert reviewing the request MUST provide an answer, approving, or disapproving the request within 10 business days from when the he or she received the expert review request. 3.2. MPLS Pseudowire Type IANA needs to set up a registry of "MPLS Pseudowire Type". These are 15-bit values. PW Type values 1 through 30 are specified in this document, PW Type values 31 through 1024 are to be assigned by IANA, using the "Expert Review" policy defined in [RFC2434]. PW Type values 1025 through 4096, and 32767 are to be allocated using the IETF consensus policy defined in [RFC2434]. PW Type values 4097 through 32766 are reserved for vendor proprietary extensions and are to be assigned by IANA, using the "First Come First Served" policy defined in [RFC2434]. A Pseudowire Type description is required for any assignment from this registry. Additionally, for the vendor proprietary extensions range a citation of a person or company name is also required. A document reference should also be provided. Initial Pseudowire type value allocations are specified below: PW type Description Reference 0x0001 Frame Relay DLCI ( Martini Mode ) [FRAME] 0x0002 ATM AAL5 SDU VCC transport [ATM] 0x0003 ATM transparent cell transport [ATM] 0x0004 Ethernet Tagged Mode [ETH] 0x0005 Ethernet [ETH] 0x0006 HDLC [PPPHDLC] Martini [Page 3] Internet Draft draft-ietf-pwe3-iana-allocation-14.txt October 2005 0x0007 PPP [PPPHDLC] 0x0008 SONET/SDH Circuit Emulation Service Over MPLS [CEP] 0x0009 ATM n-to-one VCC cell transport [ATM] 0x000A ATM n-to-one VPC cell transport [ATM] 0x000B IP Layer2 Transport [RFC3032] 0x000C ATM one-to-one VCC Cell Mode [ATM] 0x000D ATM one-to-one VPC Cell Mode [ATM] 0x000E ATM AAL5 PDU VCC transport [ATM] 0x000F Frame-Relay Port mode [FRAME] 0x0010 SONET/SDH Circuit Emulation over Packet [CEP] 0x0011 Structure-agnostic E1 over Packet [SAToP] 0x0012 Structure-agnostic T1 (DS1) over Packet [SAToP] 0x0013 Structure-agnostic E3 over Packet [SAToP] 0x0014 Structure-agnostic T3 (DS3) over Packet [SAToP] 0x0015 CESoPSN basic mode [CESoPSN] 0x0016 TDMoIP AAL1 Mode [TDMoIP] 0x0017 CESoPSN TDM with CAS [CESoPSN] 0x0018 TDMoIP AAL2 Mode [TDMoIP] 0x0019 Frame Relay DLCI [FRAME] 0x001A ROHC Transport Header-compressed Packets [RFC3095] 0x001B eCRTP Transport Header-compressed Packets [RFC3545] 3.3. Interface Parameters Sub-TLV type IANA needs to set up a registry of "Pseudowire Interface Parameter Sub-TLV types". These are 8 bit values. Sub-TLV types 1 through 12 are specified in this document. Sub-TLV types 13 through 64 are to be assigned by IANA, using the "Expert Review" policy defined in [RFC2434]. Sub-TLV types 65 through 127, and 255 are to be allocated using the IETF consensus policy defined in [RFC2434]. Sub-TLV types values 128 through 254 are reserved for vendor proprietary extensions and are to be assigned by IANA, using the "First Come First Served" policy defined in [RFC2434]. Any assignments requested from this registry require a description up to 54 characters. For each allocation a length field MUST also be specified in one of the following formats: - A decimal integer - Text as follows:"up to X", where X is a decimal integer - Up to 3 different decimal integers. Additionally, for the vendor proprietary extensions range a citation of a person or company name is also required. A document reference should also be provided. Martini [Page 4] Internet Draft draft-ietf-pwe3-iana-allocation-14.txt October 2005 Initial Pseudowire Interface Parameter Sub-TLV type allocations are specified below: Parameter ID Length Description Reference 0x01 4 Interface MTU in octets [CONTROL] 0x02 4 Maximum Number of concatenated ATM cells [ATM] 0x03 up to 82 Optional Interface Description string[CONTROL] 0x04 4 CEP/TDM Payload Bytes [CEP/TDM] 0x05 4 CEP options [CEP] 0x06 4 Requested VLAN ID [ETH] 0x07 6 CEP/TDM bit-rate [CEP/TDM] 0x08 4 Frame-Relay DLCI Length [FRAME] 0x09 4 Fragmentation indicator [FRAG] 0x0A 4 FCS retention indicator [FCS] 0x0B 4/8/12 TDM options [TDMoIP] 0x0C 4 VCCV parameter [VCCV] 0x0D Variable Length IPCP [RFC1332] 0x0F Variable Length IPV6CP [RFC2472] Note that the Length field is defined as the length of the Sub-TLV including the Sub-TLV type and length field itself. 3.4. Attachment Identifiers 3.4.1. Attachment Individual Identifier Type IANA needs to set up a registry of "Attachment Individual Identifier (AII) Type". These are 8-bit values. AII Type value 1 is defined in this document. AII Type values 2 through 64 are to be assigned by IANA using the "Expert Review" policy defined in [RFC2434]. AII Type values 65 through 127, and 255 are to be allocated using the IETF consensus policy defined in [RFC2434]. AII types values 128 through 254 are reserved for vendor proprietary extensions and are to be assigned by IANA, using the "First Come First Served" policy defined in [RFC2434]. Any assignments requested from this registry require a description up to 54 characters. For each allocation a length field MUST also be specified as a decimal integer. Additionally, for the vendor proprietary extensions range a citation of a person or company name is also required. A document reference should also be provided. Initial Attachment Individual Identifier (AII) Type allocations are Martini [Page 5] Internet Draft draft-ietf-pwe3-iana-allocation-14.txt October 2005 specified below: AII Type Length Description Reference 0x01 4 A 32 bit unsigned number local identifier. [SIG] 3.4.2. Attachment Group Identifier (AGI) Type IANA needs to set up a registry of "Attachment Group Identifier (AGI) Type". These are 8-bit values. AGI Type value 1 is defined in this document. AGI Type values 2 through 64 are to be assigned by IANA using the "Expert Review" policy defined in [RFC2434]. AGI Type values 65 through 127, and 255 are to be allocated using the IETF consensus policy defined in [RFC2434]. AGI types values 128 through 254 are reserved for vendor proprietary extensions and are to be assigned by IANA, using the "First Come First Served" policy defined in [RFC2434]. Any assignments requested from this registry require a description up to 54 characters. For each allocation a length field MUST also be specified as a decimal integer. Additionally, for the vendor proprietary extensions range a citation of a person or company name is also required. A document reference should also be provided. Initial Attachment Group Identifier (AGI) Type allocations are specified below: AGI Type Length Description Reference 0x01 8 Route distinguisher (RD) [SIG] 3.5. Pseudo Wire Status IANA needs to set up a registry of "Pseudowire Status Codes". These are bit strings of length 32. Status bits 0 to 4 are defined in this document. Status bits 5 to 31 are to be assigned by IANA using the "Expert Review" policy defined in [RFC2434]. Any requests for allocation from this registry require a description up to 65 characters. Initial Pseudowire Status Codes value allocations are as follows: Bit MaskDescription Martini [Page 6] Internet Draft draft-ietf-pwe3-iana-allocation-14.txt October 2005 0x00000000 - Pseudo Wire forwarding ( clear all failures ) 0x00000001 - Pseudo Wire Not Forwarding 0x00000002 - Local Attachment Circuit ( ingress ) Receive Fault 0x00000004 - Local Attachment Circuit ( egress ) Transmit Fault 0x00000008 - Local PSN-facing PW ( ingress ) Receive Fault 0x00000010 - Local PSN-facing PW ( egress ) Transmit Fault 4. Security Considerations This document specifies only fixed identifiers, and not the protocols used to carry the encapsulated packets across the network. Each such protocol may have its own set of security issues, but those issues are not affected by the identifiers specified herein. 5. Full Copyright Statement Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005). 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 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. 6. Intellectual Property Statement 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 Martini [Page 7] Internet Draft draft-ietf-pwe3-iana-allocation-14.txt October 2005 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@ietf.org. 7. Normative References [RFC2434] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 2434, October 1998. [RFC2277] Alvestrand, H., "IETF Policy on Character Sets and Languages", BCP 18, RFC 2277, January 1998. [RFC2119] S. Bradner, "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. [BCP79] S. Bradner, Ed., "Intellectual Property Rights in IETF Technology", BCP 79, RFC 3979, March 2005. [BCP78] S. Bradner, Ed., "IETF Rights in Contributions", BCP 78, RFC 3978, March 2005. 8. Informative References [CONTROL] "Pseudowire Setup and Maintenance using LDP", Martini, L., et al., draft-ietf-pwe3-control-protocol-16.txt, April 2005. (work in progress) [VCCV] T. D. Nadeau, R. Aggarwal, "Pseudo Wire Virtual Circuit Connectivity Verification (VCCV)", draft-ietf-pwe3-vccv-07.txt, August 2005. (work in progress) [FRAG] Andrew G. Malis, W. Mark Townsley, "PWE3 Fragmentation and Reassembly", draft-ietf-pwe3-fragmentation-09.txt, September 2005. (work in progress) [FCS] Andrew G. Malis, David Allan, Nick Del Regno, "PWE3 Frame Check Sequence Retention", draft-ietf-pwe3-fcs-retention-04.txt, September 2005. (work in progress) Martini [Page 8] Internet Draft draft-ietf-pwe3-iana-allocation-14.txt October 2005 [CEP] "SONET/SDH Circuit Emulation Service Over Packet (CEP)", draft-ietf-pwe3-sonet-11.txt (work in progress) [SAToP] "Structure-Agnostic TDM over Packet (SAToP)", draft-ietf-pwe3-satop-03.txt (work in progress) [FRAME] "Frame Relay over Pseudo-Wires", draft-ietf-pwe3-frame-relay-02.txt (work in progress ) [ATM] "Encapsulation Methods for Transport of ATM Cells/Frame Over IP and MPLS Networks", draft-ietf-pwe3-atm-encap-05.txt (work in progress) [PPPHDLC] "Encapsulation Methods for Transport of PPP/HDLC Frames Over IP and MPLS Networks", draft-ietf-pwe3-hdlc-ppp-encap-05.txt (work in progress) [ETH] "Encapsulation Methods for Transport of Ethernet Frames Over IP/MPLS Networks", draft-ietf-pwe3-ethernet-encap-06.txt. (work in progress) [CESoPSN] A.Vainshtein et al, "TDM Circuit Emulation Service over Packet Switched Network (CESoPSN)", Work in Progress, July 2005, draft-ietf-pwe3-cesopsn-03.txt (work in progress) [TDMoIP] Y. Stein, "TDM over IP", February 2005, draft-ietf-pwe3-tdmoip-04.txt (work in progress). [RFC1144] V. Jacobson, "Compressing TCP/IP Headers for Low-Speed Serial Links", RFC 1144, February 1990. [RFC2507] M. Degermark, B. Nordgren, S. Pink, "IP Header Compression", rfc 2507, February 1999. [RFC2508] S. Casner, V. Jacobson, "Compressing IP/UDP/RTP Headers for Low-Speed Serial Links' [RFC3032] E. Rosen, et al., "MPLS Label Stack Encoding" RFC 3032, January 2001. [RFC3095] C. Bormann, Ed. "RObust Header Compression (ROHC): Framework and four profiles: RTP, UDP, ESP, and uncompressed", RFC 3095, July 2001. [RFC3545] T. Koren, et al., "Enhanced Compressed RTP (CRTP) for Links with High Delay, Packet Loss and Reordering", RFC 3545, July 2003. [SIG] E. Rosen, W. Luo, B. Davie, "Provisioning, Autodiscovery, Martini [Page 9] Internet Draft draft-ietf-pwe3-iana-allocation-14.txt October 2005 and Signaling in L2VPNs", draft-ietf-l2vpn-signaling-06.txt, September 2005. (work in progress) 9. Author Information Luca Martini Cisco Systems, Inc. 9155 East Nichols Avenue, Suite 400 Englewood, CO, 80112 e-mail: lmartini@cisco.com Martini [Page 10]