< draft-ietf-pce-association-policy-02.txt		draft-ietf-pce-association-policy-03.txt >
	PCE Working Group D. Dhody, Ed.		PCE Working Group D. Dhody, Ed.
	Internet-Draft Huawei Technologies		Internet-Draft Huawei Technologies
	Intended status: Standards Track S. Sivabalan		Intended status: Standards Track S. Sivabalan
	Expires: August 31, 2018 Cisco Systems, Inc.		Expires: December 21, 2018 Cisco Systems, Inc.
	S. Litkowski		S. Litkowski
	Orange		Orange
	J. Tantsura		J. Tantsura
	Individual		Individual
	J. Hardwick		J. Hardwick
	Metaswitch Networks		Metaswitch Networks
	February 27, 2018		June 19, 2018
	Path Computation Element communication Protocol extension for		Path Computation Element communication Protocol extension for
	associating Policies and LSPs		associating Policies and LSPs
	draft-ietf-pce-association-policy-02		draft-ietf-pce-association-policy-03
	Abstract		Abstract
	This document introduces a simple mechanism to associate policies to		This document introduces a simple mechanism to associate policies to
	a group of Label Switched Paths (LSPs) via an extension to the Path		a group of Label Switched Paths (LSPs) via an extension to the Path
	Computation Element (PCE) Communication Protocol (PCEP).		Computation Element (PCE) Communication Protocol (PCEP).
	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
	skipping to change at page 1, line 40 ¶		skipping to change at page 1, line 40 ¶
	Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering		Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
	Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute		Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
	working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-		working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
	Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.		Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
	Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months		Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
	and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any		and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
	time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference		time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
	material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."		material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
	This Internet-Draft will expire on August 31, 2018.		This Internet-Draft will expire on December 21, 2018.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the		Copyright (c) 2018 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
	(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of		(https://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 3, line 43 ¶		skipping to change at page 3, line 43 ¶
	2. Terminology		2. Terminology
	The following terminology is used in this document.		The following terminology is used in this document.
	Association parameters: As described in		Association parameters: As described in
	[I-D.ietf-pce-association-group], the combination of the mandatory		[I-D.ietf-pce-association-group], the combination of the mandatory
	fields Association type, Association ID and Association Source in		fields Association type, Association ID and Association Source in
	the ASSOCIATION object uniquely identify the association group.		the ASSOCIATION object uniquely identify the association group.
	If the optional TLVs - Global Association Source or Extended		If the optional TLVs - Global Association Source or Extended
	Association ID are included, then they MUST be included in		Association ID are included, then they are included in combination
	combination with mandatory fields to uniquely identifying the		with mandatory fields to uniquely identifying the association
	association group.		group.
	Association information: As described in		Association information: As described in
	[I-D.ietf-pce-association-group], the ASSOCIATION object MAY		[I-D.ietf-pce-association-group], the ASSOCIATION object could
	include other optional TLVs based on the association types, that		include other optional TLVs based on the association types, that
	provides 'information' related to the association type.		provides 'information' related to the association.
	LSR: Label Switch Router.		LSR: Label Switch Router.
	LSR: Label Switch Router.		LSR: Label Switch Router.
	MPLS: Multiprotocol Label Switching.		MPLS: Multiprotocol Label Switching.
	PAG: Policy Association Group.		PAG: Policy Association Group.
	PCC: Path Computation Client. Any client application requesting a		PCC: Path Computation Client. Any client application requesting a
	skipping to change at page 4, line 25 ¶		skipping to change at page 4, line 25 ¶
	PCE: Path Computation Element. An entity (component, application,		PCE: Path Computation Element. An entity (component, application,
	or network node) that is capable of computing a network path or		or network node) that is capable of computing a network path or
	route based on a network graph and applying computational		route based on a network graph and applying computational
	constraints.		constraints.
	PCEP: Path Computation Element Communication Protocol.		PCEP: Path Computation Element Communication Protocol.
	3. Motivation		3. Motivation
	Paths computed using PCE MAY be subjected to various policies on both		Paths computed using PCE can be subjected to various policies on both
	PCE and PCC. For example, in a centralized traffic engineering		PCE and PCC. For example, in a centralized traffic engineering
	scenario, network operators may instantiate LSPs and specifies		scenario, network operators may instantiate LSPs and specifies
	policies for traffic steering, path monitoring, etc., for some LSPs		policies for traffic steering, path monitoring, etc., for some LSPs
	via the stateful PCE. Similarly, a PCC may request a user- or		via the stateful PCE. Similarly, a PCC could request a user- or
	service-specific policy to be applied at the PCE, such as constraints		service-specific policy to be applied at the PCE, such as constraints
	relaxation to meet optimal QoS and resiliency.		relaxation to meet optimal QoS and resiliency.
	PCEP speaker can use the generic mechanism as per		PCEP speaker can use the generic mechanism as per
	[I-D.ietf-pce-association-group] to associate a set of LSPs with		[I-D.ietf-pce-association-group] to associate a set of LSPs with a
	policy, without the need to know the details of such policies, which		policy, without the need to know the details of such a policy, which
	simplifies network operations, avoids frequent software upgrades, as		simplifies network operations, avoids frequent software upgrades, as
	well provides an ability to introduce new policy faster.		well provides an ability to introduce new policy faster.
	PAG Y		PAG Y
	{Service-Specific Policy		{Service-Specific Policy
	for constraint		for constraint
	Initiate & Monitor LSP relaxation}		Initiate & Monitor LSP relaxation}
	| |		| |
	| PAG X PCReq |		| PAG X PCReq |
	V {Monitor LSP} {PAG Y} V		V {Monitor LSP} {PAG Y} V
	+-----+ ----------------> +-----+		+-----+ ----------------> +-----+
	_ _ _ _ _ _| PCE | | | PCE |		_ _ _ _ _ _| PCE | | | PCE |
	| +-----+ | ----------> +-----+		| +-----+ | ----------> +-----+
	| PCEInitiate | | PCReq		| PCEInitiate | | PCReq
	|{PAG X} | | {PAG Y}		|{PAG X} | | {PAG Y}
	skipping to change at page 6, line 24 ¶		skipping to change at page 6, line 24 ¶
	As per [I-D.ietf-pce-association-group], LSPs are associated with		As per [I-D.ietf-pce-association-group], LSPs are associated with
	other LSPs with which they interact by adding them to a common		other LSPs with which they interact by adding them to a common
	association group. Grouping can also be used to define association		association group. Grouping can also be used to define association
	between LSPs and policies associated to them. One new Association		between LSPs and policies associated to them. One new Association
	Type is defined in this document, based on the generic Association		Type is defined in this document, based on the generic Association
	object -		object -
	o Association type = TBD1 ("Policy Association Type") for Policy		o Association type = TBD1 ("Policy Association Type") for Policy
	Association Group (PAG)		Association Group (PAG)
			[I-D.ietf-pce-association-group] specify the mechanism for the
			capability advertisement of the association types supported by a PCEP
			speaker by defining a ASSOC-Type-List TLV to be carried within an
			OPEN object. This capability exchange for the association type
			described in this document (i.e. Policy Association Type) MUST be
			done before using the policy association. Thus the PCEP speaker MUST
			include the Policy Association Type (TBD1) in the ASSOC-Type-List TLV
			before using the PAG in the PCEP messages.
	This Association-Type is operator-configured association in nature		This Association-Type is operator-configured association in nature
	and created by the operator manually on the PCEP peers. The LSP		and created by the operator manually on the PCEP peers. The LSP
	belonging to this associations is conveyed via PCEP messages to the		belonging to this associations is conveyed via PCEP messages to the
	PCEP peer. Operator-configured Association Range SHOULD NOT be set		PCEP peer. Operator-configured Association Range SHOULD NOT be set
	for this association-type, and MUST be ignored, so that the full		for this association-type, and MUST be ignored, so that the full
	range of association identifier can be utilized.		range of association identifier can be utilized.
	A PAG can have one or more LSPs and its associated policy(s). The		A PAG can have one or more LSPs and its associated policy. The
	association parameters including association identifier, type		association parameters including association identifier, type
	(Policy), as well as the association source IP address is manually		(Policy), as well as the association source IP address is manually
	configured by the operator and is used to identify the PAG as		configured by the operator and is used to identify the PAG as
	described in [I-D.ietf-pce-association-group].		described in [I-D.ietf-pce-association-group]. The Global
			Association Source and Extended Association ID MAY also be included.
	As per the processing rules specified in section 5.4 of		As per the processing rules specified in section 5.4 of
	[I-D.ietf-pce-association-group], if a PCEP speaker does not support		[I-D.ietf-pce-association-group], if a PCEP speaker does not support
	this Policy association-type, it MUST return a PCErr message with		this Policy association-type, it would return a PCErr message with
	Error-Type 26 (Early allocation by IANA) "Association Error" and		Error-Type 26 (Early allocation by IANA) "Association Error" and
	Error-Value 1 "Association-type is not supported". Since the PAG is		Error-Value 1 "Association-type is not supported". Since the PAG is
	opaque in nature, the PAG and the policy MUST be configured on the		opaque in nature, the PAG and the policy MUST be configured on the
	PCEP peers as per the operator-configured association procedures.		PCEP peers as per the operator-configured association procedures.
	All processing is as per section 5.4 of		All processing is as per section 5.4 of
	[I-D.ietf-pce-association-group]. If a PCE speaker receives PAG in a		[I-D.ietf-pce-association-group]. If a PCE speaker receives PAG in a
	PCEP message, and the association information is not configured, it		PCEP message, and the policy association information is not
	MUST return a PCErr message with Error-Type TBD "Association Error"		configured, it MUST return a PCErr message with Error-Type TBD
	and Error- Value 4 "Association unknown". If some of the association		"Association Error" and Error- Value 4 "Association unknown". If
	information [I-D.ietf-pce-association-group] (the TLVs defined in		some of the association information [I-D.ietf-pce-association-group]
	this document) received from the peer does not match the local		(the TLVs defined in this document) received from the peer does not
	configured values, the PCEP speaker will reject the PCEP message and		match the local configured values, the PCEP speaker MUST reject the
	send a PCErr message with Error-Type 26 (Early allocation by IANA)		PCEP message and send a PCErr message with Error-Type 26 (Early
	"Association Error" and Error-Value 5 "Operator-configured		allocation by IANA) "Association Error" and Error-Value 5 "Operator-
	association information mismatch".		configured association information mismatch".
	5. Policy Association Group		5. Policy Association Group
	Association groups and their memberships are defined using the		Association groups and their memberships are defined using the
	ASSOCIATION object defined in [I-D.ietf-pce-association-group]. Two		ASSOCIATION object defined in [I-D.ietf-pce-association-group]. Two
	object types for IPv4 and IPv6 are defined. The ASSOCIATION object		object types for IPv4 and IPv6 are defined. The ASSOCIATION object
	includes "Association type" indicating the type of the association		includes "Association type" indicating the type of the association
	group. This document add a new Association type -		group. This document add a new Association type -
	Association type = TBD1 ("Policy Association Type") for PAG.		Association type = TBD1 ("Policy Association Type") for PAG.
	skipping to change at page 7, line 36 ¶		skipping to change at page 7, line 46 ¶
	5.1. Policy Parameters TLV		5.1. Policy Parameters TLV
	The POLICY-PARAMETERS-TLV is an optional TLV that can be carried in		The POLICY-PARAMETERS-TLV is an optional TLV that can be carried in
	ASSOCIATION object (with "Policy Association Type") to carry opaque		ASSOCIATION object (with "Policy Association Type") to carry opaque
	information needed to apply the policy at the PCEP peer. In some		information needed to apply the policy at the PCEP peer. In some
	cases to apply a PCE policy successfully, it is required to also		cases to apply a PCE policy successfully, it is required to also
	associate some policy parameters that needs to be evaluated to		associate some policy parameters that needs to be evaluated to
	successfully apply the said policy. This TLV is used to carry those		successfully apply the said policy. This TLV is used to carry those
	policy parameters. The TLV could include one or more policy related		policy parameters. The TLV could include one or more policy related
	parameter. The encoding format and the order MUST be known to the		parameter. The encoding format and the order MUST be known to the
	PCEP peers, this could be done during configuration of policy and		PCEP peers, this could be done during configuration of policy (and
	association parameters for the PAG. The TLV format is as per the		its association parameters) for the PAG. The TLV format is as per
	format of all PCEP TLVs, as defined in [RFC5440], and shown in		the format of the PCEP TLVs, as defined in [RFC5440], and shown in
	Figure 2. Only one POLICY-PARAMETERS-TLV can be carried and only the		Figure 2. Only one POLICY-PARAMETERS-TLV can be carried and only the
	first occurrence is processed and any others MUST be ignored.		first occurrence is processed and any others MUST be ignored.
	0 1 2 3		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		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
	+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+		+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
	| Type=TBD2 | Length |		| Type=TBD2 | Length |
	+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+		+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
			| |
	// Policy Parameters //		// Policy Parameters //
			| |
	+---------------------------------------------------------------+		+---------------------------------------------------------------+
	Figure 2: The POLICY-PARAMETERS-TLV format		Figure 2: The POLICY-PARAMETERS-TLV format
	The type of the POLICY-PARAMETERS-TLV is TBD2 and it has a variable		The type of the POLICY-PARAMETERS-TLV is TBD2 and it has a variable
	length. The Value field is variable field padded to a 4-bytes		length. The Value field is variable field padded to a 4-bytes
	alignment; padding is not included in 'Len' field. The 'Len' field		alignment; padding is not included in the Length field. The PCEP
	is 1-byte followed by the opaque variable. The PCEP peer		peer implementation need to be aware of the encoding format, order,
	implementation need to be aware of the encoding format, order, and		and meaning of the 'Policy Parameters' well in advance based on the
	meaning of the 'Policy Parameters' well in advance based on the
	policy. Note that from the protocol point of view this data is		policy. Note that from the protocol point of view this data is
	opaque and can be used to carry parameters in any format understood		opaque and can be used to carry parameters in any format understood
	by the PCEP peers and associated to the policy. The exact use of		by the PCEP peers and associated to the policy. The exact use of
	this TLV is beyond the scope of this document.		this TLV is beyond the scope of this document.
	If the PCEP peer is unaware of the policy parameters associated with		If the PCEP peer is unaware of the policy parameters associated with
	the policy and it receives the POLICY-PARAMETERS-TLV, it MUST ignore		the policy and it receives the POLICY-PARAMETERS-TLV, it MUST ignore
	the TLV and SHOULD log this event. Further, if one or more		the TLV and SHOULD log this event. Further, if one or more
	parameters received in the POLICY-PARAMETERS-TLV received by the PCEP		parameters received in the POLICY-PARAMETERS-TLV received by the PCEP
	speaker are considered as unacceptable in the context of the		speaker are considered as unacceptable in the context of the
	skipping to change at page 11, line 9 ¶		skipping to change at page 11, line 9 ¶
	[RFC8231] Crabbe, E., Minei, I., Medved, J., and R. Varga, "Path		[RFC8231] Crabbe, E., Minei, I., Medved, J., and R. Varga, "Path
	Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)		Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)
	Extensions for Stateful PCE", RFC 8231,		Extensions for Stateful PCE", RFC 8231,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC8231, September 2017,		DOI 10.17487/RFC8231, September 2017,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8231>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8231>.
	[I-D.ietf-pce-association-group]		[I-D.ietf-pce-association-group]
	Minei, I., Crabbe, E., Sivabalan, S., Ananthakrishnan, H.,		Minei, I., Crabbe, E., Sivabalan, S., Ananthakrishnan, H.,
	Dhody, D., and Y. Tanaka, "PCEP Extensions for		Dhody, D., and Y. Tanaka, "PCEP Extensions for
	Establishing Relationships Between Sets of LSPs", draft-		Establishing Relationships Between Sets of LSPs", draft-
	ietf-pce-association-group-04 (work in progress), August		ietf-pce-association-group-06 (work in progress), June
	2017.		2018.
	10.2. Informative References		10.2. Informative References
	[RFC4655] Farrel, A., Vasseur, J., and J. Ash, "A Path Computation		[RFC4655] Farrel, A., Vasseur, J., and J. Ash, "A Path Computation
	Element (PCE)-Based Architecture", RFC 4655,		Element (PCE)-Based Architecture", RFC 4655,
	DOI 10.17487/RFC4655, August 2006,		DOI 10.17487/RFC4655, August 2006,
	<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4655>.		<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4655>.
	[RFC5394] Bryskin, I., Papadimitriou, D., Berger, L., and J. Ash,		[RFC5394] Bryskin, I., Papadimitriou, D., Berger, L., and J. Ash,
	"Policy-Enabled Path Computation Framework", RFC 5394,		"Policy-Enabled Path Computation Framework", RFC 5394,
	skipping to change at page 11, line 51 ¶		skipping to change at page 11, line 51 ¶
	[I-D.ietf-pce-segment-routing]		[I-D.ietf-pce-segment-routing]
	Sivabalan, S., Filsfils, C., Tantsura, J., Henderickx, W.,		Sivabalan, S., Filsfils, C., Tantsura, J., Henderickx, W.,
	and J. Hardwick, "PCEP Extensions for Segment Routing",		and J. Hardwick, "PCEP Extensions for Segment Routing",
	draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-11 (work in progress),		draft-ietf-pce-segment-routing-11 (work in progress),
	November 2017.		November 2017.
	[I-D.ietf-pce-pcep-yang]		[I-D.ietf-pce-pcep-yang]
	Dhody, D., Hardwick, J., Beeram, V., and J. Tantsura, "A		Dhody, D., Hardwick, J., Beeram, V., and J. Tantsura, "A
	YANG Data Model for Path Computation Element		YANG Data Model for Path Computation Element
	Communications Protocol (PCEP)", draft-ietf-pce-pcep-		Communications Protocol (PCEP)", draft-ietf-pce-pcep-
	yang-06 (work in progress), January 2018.		yang-07 (work in progress), March 2018.
	Appendix A. Contributor Addresses		Appendix A. Contributor Addresses
	Qin Wu		Qin Wu
	Huawei Technologies		Huawei Technologies
	101 Software Avenue, Yuhua District		101 Software Avenue, Yuhua District
	Nanjing, Jiangsu 210012		Nanjing, Jiangsu 210012
	China		China
	EMail: sunseawq@huawei.com		EMail: sunseawq@huawei.com
End of changes. 22 change blocks.
	36 lines changed or deleted		47 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/