| < draft-ietf-pce-disco-proto-isis-04.txt | draft-ietf-pce-disco-proto-isis-05.txt > | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Network Working Group J.L. Le Roux (Editor) | Network Working Group J.L. Le Roux (Editor) | |||
| Internet Draft France Telecom | Internet Draft France Telecom | |||
| Category: Standard Track | Intended Status: Standards Track | |||
| Expires: November 2007 J.P. Vasseur (Editor) | Expires: November 2007 J.P. Vasseur (Editor) | |||
| Cisco System Inc. | Cisco System Inc. | |||
| Yuichi Ikejiri | Yuichi Ikejiri | |||
| NTT Communications | NTT Communications | |||
| Raymond Zhang | Raymond Zhang | |||
| BT Infonet | BT Infonet | |||
| May 2007 | May 2007 | |||
| IS-IS protocol extensions for Path Computation Element (PCE) Discovery | IS-IS protocol extensions for Path Computation Element (PCE) Discovery | |||
| draft-ietf-pce-disco-proto-isis-04.txt | draft-ietf-pce-disco-proto-isis-05.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 | Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that | |||
| skipping to change at page 1, line 44 ¶ | skipping to change at page 1, line 44 ¶ | |||
| 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." | |||
| 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 November 3, 2007. | ||||
| Copyright Notice | Copyright Notice | |||
| Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007). All rights reserved. | Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007). All rights reserved. | |||
| Abstract | Abstract | |||
| There are various circumstances where it is highly desirable for a | There are various circumstances where it is highly desirable for a | |||
| Path Computation Client (PCC) to be able to dynamically and | Path Computation Client (PCC) to be able to dynamically and | |||
| automatically discover a set of Path Computation Elements (PCE), | automatically discover a set of Path Computation Elements (PCE), | |||
| along with some information that can be used for PCE selection. When | along with some information that can be used for PCE selection. When | |||
| skipping to change at page 3, line 5 ¶ | skipping to change at page 3, line 6 ¶ | |||
| 7.1. IS-IS Sub-TLV..............................................15 | 7.1. IS-IS Sub-TLV..............................................15 | |||
| 7.2. PCED Sub-TLVs registry.....................................15 | 7.2. PCED Sub-TLVs registry.....................................15 | |||
| 8. Security Considerations....................................15 | 8. Security Considerations....................................15 | |||
| 9. Manageability Considerations...............................16 | 9. Manageability Considerations...............................16 | |||
| 9.1. Control of Policy and Functions............................16 | 9.1. Control of Policy and Functions............................16 | |||
| 9.2. Information and Data Model.................................16 | 9.2. Information and Data Model.................................16 | |||
| 9.3. Liveness Detection and Monitoring..........................16 | 9.3. Liveness Detection and Monitoring..........................16 | |||
| 9.4. Verify Correct Operations..................................16 | 9.4. Verify Correct Operations..................................16 | |||
| 9.5. Requirements on Other Protocols and Functional | 9.5. Requirements on Other Protocols and Functional | |||
| Components...............................................16 | Components...............................................16 | |||
| 9.6. Impact on Network Operations...............................16 | 9.6. Impact on Network Operations...............................17 | |||
| 10. Acknowledgments............................................17 | 10. Acknowledgments............................................17 | |||
| 11. References.................................................17 | 11. References.................................................17 | |||
| 11.1. Normative References.......................................17 | 11.1. Normative References.......................................17 | |||
| 11.2. Informative References.....................................18 | 11.2. Informative References.....................................18 | |||
| 12. Editors' Addresses:........................................18 | 12. Editors' Addresses:........................................18 | |||
| 13. Contributors' Adresses:....................................18 | 13. Contributors' Adresses:....................................18 | |||
| 14. Intellectual Property Statement............................19 | 14. Intellectual Property Statement............................19 | |||
| 1. Terminology | 1. Terminology | |||
| skipping to change at page 3, line 52 ¶ | skipping to change at page 3, line 53 ¶ | |||
| path computation to be performed by a Path Computation Element. | path computation to be performed by a Path Computation Element. | |||
| 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. | |||
| PCE-Domain: In a PCE context this refers to any collection of | PCE-Domain: In a PCE context this refers to any collection of | |||
| network elements within a common sphere of address management or | network elements within a common sphere of address management or | |||
| path computational responsibility (referred to as "domain" in | path computational responsibility (referred to as "domain" in | |||
| [RFC4655]). Examples of PCE-Domains include IGP areas and | [RFC4655]). Examples of PCE-Domains include IGP areas and ASes. | |||
| Autonomous Systems. This should be distinguished from an IS-IS | ||||
| routing domain as defined by [ISO]. | This should be distinguished from an IS-IS routing domain as | |||
| defined by [ISO]. | ||||
| PCEP: Path Computation Element communication Protocol. | PCEP: Path Computation Element communication Protocol. | |||
| TE LSP: Traffic Engineered Label Switched Path. | TE LSP: Traffic Engineered Label Switched Path. | |||
| 2. Introduction | 2. Introduction | |||
| [RFC4655] describes the motivations and architecture for a Path | [RFC4655] describes the motivations and architecture for a Path | |||
| Computation Element (PCE)-based path computation model for Multi | Computation Element (PCE)-based path computation model for Multi | |||
| Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) and Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Traffic | Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) and Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Traffic | |||
| skipping to change at page 7, line 27 ¶ | skipping to change at page 7, line 27 ¶ | |||
| The IS-IS PCED sub-TLV has the following format: | The IS-IS PCED sub-TLV has the following format: | |||
| TYPE: To be assigned by IANA (suggested value = 5) | TYPE: To be assigned by IANA (suggested value = 5) | |||
| LENGTH: Variable | LENGTH: Variable | |||
| VALUE: set of sub-TLVs | VALUE: set of sub-TLVs | |||
| Sub-TLVs types are under IANA control. | Sub-TLVs types are under IANA control. | |||
| Currently six sub-TLVs are defined (suggested type values to be | Currently six sub-TLVs are defined (suggested type values to be | |||
| assigned by IANA): | assigned by IANA): | |||
| Sub-TLV type Length Name | ||||
| 1 variable PCE-ADDRESS sub-TLV | Sub-TLV type Length Name | |||
| 2 3 PATH-SCOPE sub-TLV | ||||
| 3 variable PCE-DOMAIN sub-TLV | 1 variable PCE-ADDRESS sub-TLV | |||
| 4 variable NEIG-PCE-DOMAIN sub-TLV | 2 3 PATH-SCOPE sub-TLV | |||
| 5 variable PCE-CAP-FLAGS sub-TLV | 3 variable PCE-DOMAIN sub-TLV | |||
| 6 1 CONGESTION sub-TLV | 4 variable NEIG-PCE-DOMAIN sub-TLV | |||
| 5 variable PCE-CAP-FLAGS sub-TLV | ||||
| 6 1 CONGESTION sub-TLV | ||||
| The PCE-ADDRESS and PATH-SCOPE sub-TLVs MUST always be present within | The PCE-ADDRESS and PATH-SCOPE sub-TLVs MUST always be present within | |||
| the PCED sub-TLV. | the PCED sub-TLV. | |||
| The PCE-DOMAIN and NEIG-PCE-DOMAIN sub-TLVs are optional. They | The PCE-DOMAIN and NEIG-PCE-DOMAIN sub-TLVs are optional. They | |||
| MAY be present in the PCED sub-TLV to facilitate selection of inter- | MAY be present in the PCED sub-TLV to facilitate selection of inter- | |||
| domain PCEs. | domain PCEs. | |||
| The PCE-CAP-FLAGS sub-TLV is optional and MAY be present in the PCED | The PCE-CAP-FLAGS sub-TLV is optional and MAY be present in the PCED | |||
| sub-TLV to facilitate the PCE selection process. | sub-TLV to facilitate the PCE selection process. | |||
| skipping to change at page 8, line 28 ¶ | skipping to change at page 8, line 31 ¶ | |||
| The PCE-ADDRESS sub-TLV has the following format: | The PCE-ADDRESS sub-TLV has the following format: | |||
| TYPE: To be assigned by IANA (Suggested value =1) | TYPE: To be assigned by IANA (Suggested value =1) | |||
| LENGTH: 5 for IPv4 address and 17 for IPv6 address | LENGTH: 5 for IPv4 address and 17 for IPv6 address | |||
| VALUE: This comprises one octet indicating the address-type and 4 | VALUE: This comprises one octet indicating the address-type and 4 | |||
| or 16 bytes encoding the IPv4 or IPv6 address to be used | or 16 bytes encoding the IPv4 or IPv6 address to be used | |||
| to reach the PCE. | to reach the PCE. | |||
| Address-type: | Address-type: | |||
| 1 IPv4 | 1 IPv4 | |||
| 2 IPv6 | 2 IPv6 | |||
| 4.1.2. The PATH-SCOPE Sub-TLV | 4.1.2. The PATH-SCOPE Sub-TLV | |||
| The PATH-SCOPE sub-TLV indicates the PCE path computation scope, | The PATH-SCOPE sub-TLV indicates the PCE path computation scope, | |||
| which refers to the PCE's ability to compute or take part in the | which refers to the PCE's ability to compute or take part in the | |||
| computation of intra-area, inter-area, inter-AS, or inter-layer_TE | computation of intra-area, inter-area, inter-AS, or inter-layer_TE | |||
| LSP(s). | LSP(s). | |||
| The PATH-SCOPE sub-TLV is mandatory; it MUST be present within the | The PATH-SCOPE sub-TLV is mandatory; it MUST be present within the | |||
| PCED sub-TLV. There MUST be exactly one instance of the PATH-SCOPE | PCED sub-TLV. There MUST be exactly one instance of the PATH-SCOPE | |||
| skipping to change at page 15, line 15 ¶ | skipping to change at page 15, line 15 ¶ | |||
| 7. IANA Considerations | 7. IANA Considerations | |||
| 7.1. IS-IS Sub-TLV | 7.1. IS-IS Sub-TLV | |||
| Once a registry for the IS-IS Router Capability sub-TLVs, defined in | Once a registry for the IS-IS Router Capability sub-TLVs, defined in | |||
| [IS-IS-CAP] has been assigned, IANA will assign a new sub-TLV code- | [IS-IS-CAP] has been assigned, IANA will assign a new sub-TLV code- | |||
| point for the PCED sub-TLV carried within the Router Capability TLV. | point for the PCED sub-TLV carried within the Router Capability TLV. | |||
| Value Sub-TLV References | Value Sub-TLV References | |||
| ----- -------- ---------- | ----- -------- ---------- | |||
| 5 PCED sub-TLV (this document) | 5 PCED sub-TLV (this document) | |||
| 7.2. PCED Sub-TLVs Registry | 7.2. PCED Sub-TLVs Registry | |||
| The PCED sub-TLV referenced above is constructed from sub-TLVs. Each | The PCED sub-TLV referenced above is constructed from sub-TLVs. Each | |||
| sub-TLV includes a 8-bit type identifier. | sub-TLV includes a 8-bit type identifier. | |||
| The IANA is requested to create a new sub-registry of the IS-IS | The IANA is requested to create a new sub-registry of the IS-IS | |||
| Router Capability sub-TLVs registry, named the "PCED sub-TLVs" | Router Capability sub-TLVs registry, named the "PCED sub-TLVs" | |||
| registry, and manage sub-TLV type identifiers as follows: | registry, and manage sub-TLV type identifiers as follows: | |||
| - sub-TLV Type | - sub-TLV Type | |||
| - sub-TLV Name | - sub-TLV Name | |||
| - Reference | - Reference | |||
| This document defines five sub-TLVs as follows (suggested values): | This document defines five sub-TLVs as follows (suggested values): | |||
| Value TLV name References | Sub-TLV Sub-TLV | |||
| Type Name References | ||||
| ----- -------- ---------- | ----- -------- ---------- | |||
| 1 PCE-ADDRESS This document | 1 PCE-ADDRESS This document | |||
| 2 PATH-SCOPE This document | 2 PATH-SCOPE This document | |||
| 3 PCE-DOMAIN This document | 3 PCE-DOMAIN This document | |||
| 4 NEIG-PCE-DOMAIN This document | 4 NEIG-PCE-DOMAIN This document | |||
| 5 PCE-CAP-FLAGS This document | 5 PCE-CAP-FLAGS This document | |||
| 6 CONGESTION This document | 6 CONGESTION This document | |||
| New sub-TLV type values may be allocated only by an IETF Consensus | New sub-TLV type values may be allocated only by an IETF Consensus | |||
| action. | action. | |||
| 8. Security Considerations | 8. Security Considerations | |||
| This document defines IS-IS extensions for PCE discovery within an | This document defines IS-IS extensions for PCE discovery within an | |||
| administrative domain. Hence the security of the PCE discovery relies | administrative domain. Hence the security of the PCE discovery relies | |||
| on the security of IS-IS. | on the security of IS-IS. | |||
| skipping to change at page 17, line 30 ¶ | skipping to change at page 17, line 35 ¶ | |||
| 10. Acknowledgments | 10. Acknowledgments | |||
| We would like to thank Lucy Wong, Adrian Farrel, Les Ginsberg, Mike | We would like to thank Lucy Wong, Adrian Farrel, Les Ginsberg, Mike | |||
| Shand and Lou Berger for their useful comments and suggestions. | Shand and Lou Berger for their useful comments and suggestions. | |||
| 11. References | 11. References | |||
| 11.1. Normative References | 11.1. Normative References | |||
| [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate | [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate | |||
| Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. | Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. | |||
| [ISO] "Intermediate System to Intermediate System Intra-Domain | [ISO] "Intermediate System to Intermediate System Intra-Domain | |||
| Routeing Exchange Protocol for use in Conjunction with the | Routeing Exchange Protocol for use in Conjunction with the | |||
| Protocol for Providing the Connectionless-mode Network Service | Protocol for Providing the Connectionless-mode Network | |||
| (ISO 8473)", ISO DP 10589, February 1990. | Service (ISO 8473)", ISO DP 10589, February 1990. | |||
| [RFC3784] Li, T., Smit, H., "IS-IS extensions for Traffic | [RFC3784] Li, T., Smit, H., "IS-IS extensions for Traffic | |||
| Engineering", RFC 3784, June 2004. | Engineering", RFC 3784, June 2004. | |||
| [IS-IS-CAP] Vasseur, J.P. et al., "IS-IS extensions for advertising | [IS-IS-CAP] Vasseur, J.P. et al., "IS-IS extensions for advertising | |||
| router information", draft-ietf-isis-caps, work in progress. | router information", draft-ietf-isis-caps, work in | |||
| progress. | ||||
| [RFC4655] Farrel, A., Vasseur, J.P., Ash, J., "Path Computation | ||||
| Element (PCE)-based Architecture", RFC4655, august 2006. | ||||
| [RFC4674] Le Roux, J.L., et al. "Requirements for PCE discovery", | ||||
| RFC4674, October 2006. | ||||
| [RFC3567] Li, T. and R. Atkinson, "Intermediate System to | [RFC3567] Li, T. and R. Atkinson, "Intermediate System to | |||
| Intermediate System (IS-IS) Cryptographic Authentication", RFC 3567, | Intermediate System (IS-IS) Cryptographic Authentication", | |||
| July 2003. | RFC 3567, July 2003. | |||
| [PCED-OSPF] Le Roux, Vasseur, et al. "OSPF protocol extensions for | [PCED-OSPF] Le Roux, Vasseur, et al. "OSPF protocol extensions for | |||
| Path Computation Element (PCE) Discovery", draft-ietf-pce-disco- | Path Computation Element (PCE) Discovery", draft-ietf- | |||
| proto-ospf, work in progress. | pce-disco-proto-ospf, work in progress. | |||
| 11.2. Informative References | 11.2. Informative References | |||
| [RFC4655] Farrel, A., Vasseur, J.P., Ash, J., "Path Computation | ||||
| Element (PCE)-based Architecture", RFC4655, August 2006. | ||||
| [RFC4657] Ash, J., Le Roux, J.L., "PCE Communication Protocol Generic | [RFC4657] Ash, J., Le Roux, J.L., "PCE Communication Protocol Generic | |||
| Requirements", RFC4657, September 2006. | Requirements", RFC4657, September 2006. | |||
| [PCEP] Vasseur, Le Roux, et al., "Path Computation Element (PCE) | [RFC4674] Le Roux, J.L., et al. "Requirements for PCE discovery", | |||
| communication Protocol (PCEP) - Version 1", draft-ietf-pce-pcep, work | RFC4674, October 2006. | |||
| in progress. | ||||
| [PCEP] Vasseur, Le Roux, et al., "Path Computation Element (PCE) | ||||
| communication Protocol (PCEP) - Version 1", draft-ietf-pce- | ||||
| pcep, work in progress. | ||||
| [PCED-MIB] Stephan, E., "Definitions of Managed Objects for Path | [PCED-MIB] Stephan, E., "Definitions of Managed Objects for Path | |||
| Computation Element Discovery", draft-ietf-pce-disc-mib, work in | Computation Element Discovery", draft-ietf-pce-disc-mib, | |||
| progress. | work in progress. | |||
| 12. Editors' Addresses: | 12. Editors' Addresses: | |||
| Jean-Louis Le Roux (Editor) | Jean-Louis Le Roux (Editor) | |||
| France Telecom | France Telecom | |||
| 2, avenue Pierre-Marzin | 2, avenue Pierre-Marzin | |||
| 22307 Lannion Cedex | 22307 Lannion Cedex | |||
| FRANCE | FRANCE | |||
| Email: jeanlouis.leroux@orange-ftgroup.com | Email: jeanlouis.leroux@orange-ftgroup.com | |||
| End of changes. 20 change blocks. | ||||
| 49 lines changed or deleted | 52 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/ | ||||