| < draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-applicability-label-adv-02.txt | draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-applicability-label-adv-03.txt > | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MPLS Working Group Kamran Raza | MPLS Working Group Kamran Raza | |||
| Internet Draft Sami Boutros | Internet Draft Sami Boutros | |||
| Updates: 5036, 4447, 5918, 6388, 3212 Luca Martini | Updates: 3212, 4447, 5036, 5918, 6388, 7140 Luca Martini | |||
| Intended status: Standards Track Cisco Systems, Inc. | Intended status: Standards Track Cisco Systems, Inc. | |||
| Expires: July 19, 2014 | Expires: October 01, 2014 | |||
| Nicolai Leymann | Nicolai Leymann | |||
| Deutsche Telekom | Deutsche Telekom | |||
| January 20, 2014 | April 02, 2014 | |||
| Label Advertisement Discipline for LDP FECs | Label Advertisement Discipline for LDP FECs | |||
| draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-applicability-label-adv-02.txt | draft-ietf-mpls-ldp-applicability-label-adv-03.txt | |||
| Abstract | Abstract | |||
| The label advertising behavior of an LDP speaker for a given FEC is | The label advertising behavior of an LDP speaker for a given FEC is | |||
| governed by the FEC type and not necessarily by the LDP session's | governed by the FEC type and not necessarily by the LDP session's | |||
| negotiated label advertisement mode. This document updates RFC 5036 | negotiated label advertisement mode. This document updates RFC 5036 | |||
| to make that fact clear, as well as updates RFC 3212, RFC 4447, | to make that fact clear, as well as updates RFC 3212, RFC 4447, RFC | |||
| RFC 5918, and RFC 6388 by specifying the label advertisement mode | 5918, RFC 6388, and RFC 7140 by specifying the label advertisement | |||
| for all currently defined FECs. | mode for all currently defined LDP FEC types. | |||
| Status of this Memo | Status of this Memo | |||
| This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the | This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the | |||
| provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. | provisions of BCP 78 and 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 | Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that | |||
| other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- | other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- | |||
| Drafts. | Drafts. | |||
| skipping to change at page 1, line 46 ¶ | skipping to change at page 1, line 46 ¶ | |||
| months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents | months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents | |||
| at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as | at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as | |||
| reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." | reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." | |||
| The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at | The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at | |||
| http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt | http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt | |||
| The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at | The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at | |||
| http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html | http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html | |||
| This Internet-Draft will expire on July 19, 2014. | This Internet-Draft will expire on October 01, 2014. | |||
| Copyright Notice | Copyright Notice | |||
| Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the | |||
| document authors. All rights reserved. | document authors. All rights reserved. | |||
| This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal | This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal | |||
| Provisions Relating to IETF Documents | Provisions Relating to IETF Documents | |||
| (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of | |||
| publication of this document. Please review these documents | publication of this document. Please review these documents | |||
| skipping to change at page 2, line 27 ¶ | skipping to change at page 2, line 27 ¶ | |||
| Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without | Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without | |||
| warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. | warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. | |||
| Table of Contents | Table of Contents | |||
| 1. Introduction 2 | 1. Introduction 2 | |||
| 2. Label Advertisement Discipline 3 | 2. Label Advertisement Discipline 3 | |||
| 2.1. Update to RFC-5036 3 | 2.1. Update to RFC-5036 3 | |||
| 2.2. Specification for LDP FECs 4 | 2.2. Specification for LDP FECs 4 | |||
| 3. Security Considerations 4 | 3. Security Considerations 4 | |||
| 4. IANA Considerations 4 | 4. IANA Considerations 5 | |||
| 5. References 5 | 5. References 7 | |||
| 5.1. Normative References 5 | 5.1. Normative References 7 | |||
| 5.2. Informative References 5 | 5.2. Informative References 7 | |||
| 6. Acknowledgments 5 | 6. Acknowledgments 8 | |||
| 1. Introduction | 1. Introduction | |||
| Label Distribution Protocol (LDP) [RFC5036] allows label | Label Distribution Protocol (LDP) [RFC5036] allows label | |||
| advertisement mode negotiation at the time of session establishment. | advertisement mode negotiation at the time of session establishment. | |||
| LDP specification also dictates that only single label advertisement | LDP specification also dictates that only single label advertisement | |||
| mode is negotiated, agreed and used for a given LDP session between | mode is negotiated, agreed and used for a given LDP session between | |||
| two LSRs. | two LSRs. | |||
| The negotiated label advertisement mode defined in RFC 5036 and | The negotiated label advertisement mode defined in RFC 5036 and | |||
| carried in the LDP Initialization message is only indicative. It | carried in the LDP Initialization message is only indicative. It | |||
| indicates how the LDP speakers on a session will advertise labels for | indicates how the LDP speakers on a session will advertise labels for | |||
| some FECs, but it is not a rule that restricts the speakers to behave | some FECs, but it is not a rule that restricts the speakers to behave | |||
| in a specific way. Furthermore, for some FEC types the advertising | in a specific way. Furthermore, for some FEC types the advertising | |||
| behavior of the LDP speaker is governed by the FEC type and not by | behavior of the LDP speaker is governed by the FEC type and not by | |||
| the negotiated behavior. | the negotiated behavior. | |||
| This document updates [RFC5036] to make that fact clear, and updates | This document updates [RFC5036] to make that fact clear, as well as | |||
| [RFC3212], [RFC4447], [RFC5036], [RFC5918], and [RFC6388] to indicate | updates [RFC3212], [RFC4447], [RFC5918], [RFC6388], and [RFC7140] to | |||
| for each FEC type that has already been defined whether the label | indicate for each FEC type that has already been defined whether the | |||
| binding advertisements for the FEC are constrained by the negotiated | label binding advertisements for the FEC are constrained by the | |||
| label advertisement mode or not. Furthermore, this document specifies | negotiated label advertisement mode or not. Furthermore, this | |||
| the label advertisement mode to be used for all currently defined | document specifies the label advertisement mode to be used for all | |||
| LDP FECs. | currently defined FECs. | |||
| 2. Label Advertisement Discipline | 2. Label Advertisement Discipline | |||
| To remove any ambiguity and conflict regarding label advertisement | To remove any ambiguity and conflict regarding label advertisement | |||
| discipline amongst different FEC types sharing a common LDP session, | discipline amongst different FEC types sharing a common LDP session, | |||
| this document specifies a label advertisement disciplines for FEC | this document specifies a label advertisement disciplines for FEC | |||
| types. | types. | |||
| This document introduces following types for specifying a label | This document introduces following types for specifying a label | |||
| advertisement discipline for a FEC type: | advertisement discipline for a FEC type: | |||
| - DU (Downstream Unsolicited) | - DU (Downstream Unsolicited) | |||
| - DoD (Downstream On Demand) | - DoD (Downstream On Demand) | |||
| - As negotiated (DU or DoD) | - As negotiated (DU or DoD) | |||
| - Upstream ([RFC6389]) | - Upstream ([RFC6389]) | |||
| - Not Applicable | - Not Applicable | |||
| - Unknown | ||||
| 2.1. Update to RFC-5036 | 2.1. Update to RFC-5036 | |||
| The section 3.5.3 of [RFC5036] is updated to add following two | The section 3.5.3 of [RFC5036] is updated to add following two | |||
| statements under the description of "A, Label Advertisement | statements under the description of "A, Label Advertisement | |||
| Discipline": | Discipline": | |||
| - Each document defining an LDP FEC must state the applicability | - Each document defining an LDP FEC must state the applicability | |||
| of the negotiated label advertisement discipline for label | of the negotiated label advertisement discipline for label | |||
| binding advertisements for that FEC. If the negotiated label | binding advertisements for that FEC. If the negotiated label | |||
| skipping to change at page 4, line 17 ¶ | skipping to change at page 4, line 17 ¶ | |||
| +----------+----------+--------------------------------+ | +----------+----------+--------------------------------+ | |||
| | 0x01 | Wildcard | Not applicable | | | 0x01 | Wildcard | Not applicable | | |||
| | 0x02 | Prefix | As negotiated (DU or DoD) | | | 0x02 | Prefix | As negotiated (DU or DoD) | | |||
| +----------+----------+--------------------------------+ | +----------+----------+--------------------------------+ | |||
| 2.2. Specification for LDP FECs | 2.2. Specification for LDP FECs | |||
| Following is the specification of label advertisement disciplines to | Following is the specification of label advertisement disciplines to | |||
| be used for currently defined LDP FEC types. | be used for currently defined LDP FEC types. | |||
| +------+----------------+--------------------------------+------+ | FEC FEC Label advertisement Notes | |||
| | FEC | FEC Name | Label advertisement discipline |RFC | | Type Name discipline | |||
| | Type | | | | | ---- ---------------- ------------------- ---------------------- | |||
| +------+----------------+--------------------------------+------+ | 0x01 Wildcard Not applicable | |||
| | 0x01 | Wildcard | Not applicable | 5036 | | 0x02 Prefix As negotiated | |||
| | 0x02 | Prefix | As negotiated (DU or DoD) | 5036 | | (DU or DoD) | |||
| | 0x04 | CR-LSP | DoD | 3212 | | 0x04 CR-LSP DoD | |||
| | 0x05 | Typed Wildcard | Not applicable | 5918 | | 0x05 Typed Wildcard Not applicable | |||
| | 0x06 | P2MP | DU | 6388 | | 0x06 P2MP DU | |||
| | 0x07 | MP2MP-up | DU | 6388 | | 0x07 MP2MP-up DU | |||
| | 0x08 | MP2MP-down | DU | 6388 | | 0x08 MP2MP-down DU | |||
| | 0x80 | PWid | DU | 4447 | | 0x09 HSMP-upstream DU | |||
| | 0x81 | Gen. PWid | DU | 4447 | | 0x10 HSMP-downstream DU, Upstream [RFC7140] Section 4 | |||
| +------+----------------+--------------------------------+------+ | 0x80 PWid DU | |||
| 0x81 Gen. PWid DU | ||||
| 0x82 P2MP PW Upstream Upstream [ID.pwe3-p2mp-pw] | ||||
| 0x84 P2MP PW Downstream DU [ID.pwe3-p2mp-pw] | ||||
| 0x83 Protection DU [ID.pwe3-endpoint- | ||||
| fast-protection] | ||||
| The above table also lists the RFC (in which given FEC type is | This document updates the RFCs in which above FECs are defined. | |||
| defined), and hence this document updates all the above listed RFCs. | ||||
| 3. Security Considerations | 3. Security Considerations | |||
| This document specification only clarifies the applicability of LDP | This document specification only clarifies the applicability of LDP | |||
| session's label advertisement mode, and hence does not add any LDP | session's label advertisement mode, and hence does not add any LDP | |||
| security mechanics and considerations to those already defined in | security mechanics and considerations to those already defined in | |||
| the LDP specification [RFC5036]. | the LDP specification [RFC5036]. | |||
| 4. IANA Considerations | 4. IANA Considerations | |||
| This document mandates the specification of a label advertisement | This document mandates the specification of a label advertisement | |||
| discipline for each defined FEC type, and hence extends IANA's | discipline for each defined FEC type, and hence extends IANA's | |||
| "Forwarding Equivalence Class (FEC) Type Name Space" registry under | "Forwarding Equivalence Class (FEC) Type Name Space" registry under | |||
| IANA's "Label Distribution Protocol (LDP) Parameters" as follows: | IANA's "Label Distribution Protocol (LDP) Parameters" as follows: | |||
| - Add a new column titled "Label advertisement discipline" with | - Add a new column titled "Label Advertisement Discipline" with | |||
| following possible values: | following possible values: | |||
| o DU | o DU | |||
| o DoD | o DoD | |||
| o As negotiated (DU or DoD) | o As negotiated (DU or DoD) | |||
| o Upstream | o Upstream | |||
| o Not applicable | o Not applicable | |||
| o Unknown | ||||
| - For the existing FEC types, populate this column with the | - For the existing FEC types, populate this column with the | |||
| values listed under section 2.2. | values listed under section 2.2. | |||
| - Keep all other columns of the registry in place and populated | ||||
| as currently. | ||||
| For the currently assigned FEC types, the updated registry looks | ||||
| like: | ||||
| +=====+====+===============+==============+=========+============+ | ||||
| |Value|Hex | Name |Label |Reference|Notes/ | | ||||
| | | | |Advertisement | |Registration| | ||||
| | | | |Discipline | |Date | | ||||
| +=====+====+===============+==============+=========+============+ | ||||
| | 0 |0x00|Reserved | | | | | ||||
| +-----+----+---------------+--------------+---------+------------+ | ||||
| | 1 |0x01|Wildcard |Not applicable|[RFC5036]| | | ||||
| | | | | |[thisRFC]| | | ||||
| +-----+----+---------------+--------------+---------+------------+ | ||||
| | 2 |0x02|Prefix |As negotiated |[RFC5036]| | | ||||
| | | | |(DU or DoD) |[thisRFC]| | | ||||
| +-----+----+---------------+--------------+---------+------------+ | ||||
| | 4 |0x04|CR-LSP |DoD |[RFC3212]| | | ||||
| | | | | |[thisRFC]| | | ||||
| +-----+----+---------------+--------------+---------+------------+ | ||||
| +-----+----+---------------+--------------+---------+------------+ | ||||
| | 5 |0x05|Typed Wildcard |Not applicable|[RFC5918]| | | ||||
| | | |FEC Element | |[thisRFC]| | | ||||
| +-----+----+---------------+--------------+---------+------------+ | ||||
| | 6 |0x06|P2MP |DU |[RFC6388]| | | ||||
| | | | | |[thisRFC]| | | ||||
| +-----+----+---------------+--------------+---------+------------+ | ||||
| | 7 |0x07|MP2MP-up |DU |[RFC6388]| | | ||||
| | | | | |[thisRFC]| | | ||||
| +-----+----+---------------+--------------+---------+------------+ | ||||
| | 8 |0x08|MP2MP-down |DU |[RFC6388]| | | ||||
| | | | | |[thisRFC]| | | ||||
| +-----+----+---------------+--------------+---------+------------+ | ||||
| | 9 |0x09|HSMP-upstream |DU |[RFC7140]| | | ||||
| | | | | |[thisRFC]| | | ||||
| +-----+----+---------------+--------------+---------+------------+ | ||||
| | 10 |0x0A|HSMP-downstream|DU, Upstream |[RFC7140]| | | ||||
| | | | | |[thisRFC]| | | ||||
| +-----+----+---------------+--------------+---------+------------+ | ||||
| | 128 |0x80|PWid |DU |[RFC4447]| | | ||||
| | | |FEC Element | |[thisRFC]| | | ||||
| +-----+----+---------------+--------------+---------+------------+ | ||||
| | 129 |0x81|Generalized |DU |[RFC4447]| | | ||||
| | | |PWid | |[thisRFC]| | | ||||
| | | |FEC Element | | | | | ||||
| +-----+----+---------------+--------------+---------+------------+ | ||||
| | 130 |0x82|P2MP PW |Upstream |[draft- | | | ||||
| | | |Upstream | |ietf-pwe3| | | ||||
| | | |FEC Element | |-p2mp-pw]| | | ||||
| | | | | |[thisRFC]| | | ||||
| +-----+----+---------------+--------------+---------+------------+ | ||||
| | 131 |0x83|Protection |DU |[draft-ietf| | | ||||
| | | |FEC Element | |-pwe3-end | | | ||||
| | | | | |point-fast | | | ||||
| | | | | |protection]| | | ||||
| | | | | |[thisRFC] | | | ||||
| +-----+----+---------------+--------------+---------+------------+ | ||||
| | 132 |0x84|P2MP PW |DU |[draft- | | | ||||
| | | |Downstream | |ietf-pwe3| | | ||||
| | | |FEC Element | |-p2mp-pw]| | | ||||
| | | | | |[thisRFC]| | | ||||
| +-----+----+---------------+--------------+---------+------------+ | ||||
| 5. References | 5. References | |||
| 5.1. Normative References | 5.1. Normative References | |||
| [RFC5036] L. Andersson, I. Minei, and B. Thomas, "LDP | [RFC5036] L. Andersson, I. Minei, and B. Thomas, "LDP | |||
| Specification", RFC 5036, September 2007. | Specification", RFC 5036, September 2007. | |||
| [RFC3212] B. Jamoussi, et al., "Constraint-Based LSP Setup using | [RFC3212] B. Jamoussi, et al., "Constraint-Based LSP Setup using | |||
| LDP", RFC 3212, January 2002 | LDP", RFC 3212, January 2002 | |||
| skipping to change at page 5, line 40 ¶ | skipping to change at page 7, line 29 ¶ | |||
| [RFC5918] R. Asati, I. Minei, and B. Thomas, "Label Distribution | [RFC5918] R. Asati, I. Minei, and B. Thomas, "Label Distribution | |||
| Protocol Typed Wildcard FEC", RFC 5918, August 2010. | Protocol Typed Wildcard FEC", RFC 5918, August 2010. | |||
| [RFC6388] I. Minei, I. Wijnands, K. Kompella, and B. Thomas, "LDP | [RFC6388] I. Minei, I. Wijnands, K. Kompella, and B. Thomas, "LDP | |||
| Extensions for P2MP and MP2MP LSPs", RFC 6388, November | Extensions for P2MP and MP2MP LSPs", RFC 6388, November | |||
| 2011. | 2011. | |||
| [RFC6389] R. Aggarwal, and JL. Le Roux, "MPLS Upstream Label | [RFC6389] R. Aggarwal, and JL. Le Roux, "MPLS Upstream Label | |||
| Assignment for LDP", RFC 6389, November 2011. | Assignment for LDP", RFC 6389, November 2011. | |||
| [RFC7140] L. Jin, F. Jounay, I. Wijnands , and N. Leymann, "LDP | ||||
| Extensions for Hub and Spoke Multipoint Label Switched | ||||
| Path", RFC 7140, March 2014. | ||||
| [ID.pwe3-p2mp-pw] S. Sivabalan et al., "Signaling Root-Initiated | ||||
| Point-to-Multipoint PseudoWire using LDP", draft-ietf- | ||||
| pwe3-p2mp-pw-04, Work in progress, March 2012. | ||||
| [ID.pwe3-endpoint-fast-protection] Y. Shen, R. Aggarwal, W. | ||||
| Henderickx, and Y. Jiang, "PW Endpoint Fast Failure | ||||
| Protection", draft-ietf-pwe3-endpoint-fast-protection-00, | ||||
| Work in progress, December 2013. | ||||
| 5.2. Informative References | 5.2. Informative References | |||
| None. | None. | |||
| 6. Acknowledgments | 6. Acknowledgments | |||
| We acknowledge Eric Rosen and Rajiv Asati for their initial review | We acknowledge Eric Rosen and Rajiv Asati for their initial review | |||
| and input on the document. | and input on the document. | |||
| This document was prepared using 2-Word-v2.0.template.dot. | This document was prepared using 2-Word-v2.0.template.dot. | |||
| End of changes. 14 change blocks. | ||||
| 47 lines changed or deleted | 131 lines changed or added | |||
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/ | ||||