| < draft-martini-l2circuit-trans-mpls-05.txt | draft-martini-l2circuit-trans-mpls-06.txt > | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Network Working Group Luca Martini | Network Working Group Luca Martini | |||
| Internet Draft Nasser El-Aawar | Internet Draft Nasser El-Aawar | |||
| Expiration Date: August 2001 Giles Heron | Expiration Date: November 2001 Level 3 Communications, LLC. | |||
| Level 3 Communications, LLC. | ||||
| Daniel Tappan | Steve Vogelsang Daniel Tappan | |||
| Eric C. Rosen | John Shirron Eric C. Rosen | |||
| Alex Hamilton | Toby Smith Alex Hamilton | |||
| Jayakumar Jayakumar | Laurel Networks, Inc. Jayakumar Jayakumar | |||
| Cisco Systems, Inc. | Cisco Systems, Inc. | |||
| Steve Vogelsang | Vasile Radoaca Dimitri Stratton Vlachos | |||
| John Shirron | Nortel Networks Mazu Networks, Inc. | |||
| Toby Smith | ||||
| Laurel Networks, Inc. | ||||
| Andrew G. Malis | ||||
| Vinai Sirkay | ||||
| Vivace Networks, Inc. | ||||
| Dimitri Stratton Vlachos | Andrew G. Malis Chris Liljenstolpe | |||
| Mazu Networks, Inc. | Vinai Sirkay Cable & Wireless | |||
| Vivace Networks, Inc. | ||||
| Giles Heron | ||||
| Gone2 Ltd. | ||||
| February 2001 | May 2001 | |||
| Transport of Layer 2 Frames Over MPLS | Transport of Layer 2 Frames Over MPLS | |||
| draft-martini-l2circuit-trans-mpls-05.txt | draft-martini-l2circuit-trans-mpls-06.txt | |||
| Status of this Memo | Status of this Memo | |||
| This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with | This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with | |||
| all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. | all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. | |||
| 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 other | Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other | |||
| groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. | groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. | |||
| 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." | |||
| 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 | ||||
| http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. | ||||
| 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. | |||
| Abstract | Abstract | |||
| This document describes methods for transporting the Protocol Data | This document describes methods for transporting the Protocol Data | |||
| Units (PDUs) of layer 2 protocols such as Frame Relay, ATM AAL5, | Units (PDUs) of layer 2 protocols such as Frame Relay, ATM AAL5, | |||
| Ethernet, and providing a SONET circuit emulation service across an | Ethernet, and providing a SONET circuit emulation service across an | |||
| MPLS network. | MPLS network. | |||
| Table of Contents | Table of Contents | |||
| 1 Specification of Requirements .......................... 2 | 1 Specification of Requirements .......................... 2 | |||
| 2 Introduction ........................................... 3 | 2 Introduction ........................................... 3 | |||
| 3 Tunnel Labels and VC Labels ............................ 3 | 3 Tunnel Labels and VC Labels ............................ 3 | |||
| 4 Protocol-Specific Details .............................. 4 | 4 Protocol-Specific Details .............................. 5 | |||
| 4.1 Frame Relay ............................................ 5 | 4.1 Frame Relay ............................................ 5 | |||
| 4.2 ATM .................................................... 5 | 4.2 ATM .................................................... 5 | |||
| 4.2.1 ATM AAL5 VCC Transport ................................. 5 | 4.2.1 ATM AAL5 VCC Transport ................................. 5 | |||
| 4.2.2 ATM Transparent Cell Transport ......................... 5 | 4.2.2 ATM Transparent Cell Transport ......................... 5 | |||
| 4.2.3 ATM VCC and VPC Cell Transport ......................... 5 | 4.2.3 ATM VCC and VPC Cell Transport ......................... 5 | |||
| 4.2.4 OAM Cell Support ....................................... 6 | 4.2.4 OAM Cell Support ....................................... 6 | |||
| 4.2.5 ILMI Support ........................................... 6 | 4.2.5 ILMI Support ........................................... 7 | |||
| 4.3 Ethernet VLAN .......................................... 7 | 4.3 Ethernet VLAN .......................................... 7 | |||
| 4.4 Ethernet ............................................... 7 | 4.4 Ethernet ............................................... 7 | |||
| 4.5 HDLC ( Cisco ) ......................................... 7 | 4.5 HDLC ( Cisco ) ......................................... 7 | |||
| 4.6 PPP .................................................... 7 | 4.6 PPP .................................................... 7 | |||
| 4.7 Static MPLS ............................................ 7 | ||||
| 5 LDP .................................................... 8 | 5 LDP .................................................... 8 | |||
| 5.1 Interface Parameters Field ............................. 9 | 5.1 Interface Parameters Field ............................. 9 | |||
| 5.2 LDP label Withdrawal procedures ........................ 11 | ||||
| 6 IANA Considerations .................................... 11 | 6 IANA Considerations .................................... 11 | |||
| 7 Security Considerations ................................ 11 | 7 Security Considerations ................................ 12 | |||
| 8 References ............................................. 11 | 8 References ............................................. 12 | |||
| 9 Author Information ..................................... 12 | 9 Author Information ..................................... 12 | |||
| 1. Specification of Requirements | 1. Specification of Requirements | |||
| The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", | The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", | |||
| "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this | "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this | |||
| document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119. | document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119. | |||
| 2. Introduction | 2. Introduction | |||
| skipping to change at page 3, line 23 ¶ | skipping to change at page 3, line 23 ¶ | |||
| An accompanying document [8] also describes a method for transporting | An accompanying document [8] also describes a method for transporting | |||
| time division multiplexed (TDM) digital signals (TDM circuit | time division multiplexed (TDM) digital signals (TDM circuit | |||
| emulation) over a packet-oriented MPLS network. The transmission | emulation) over a packet-oriented MPLS network. The transmission | |||
| system for circuit-oriented TDM signals is the Synchronous Optical | system for circuit-oriented TDM signals is the Synchronous Optical | |||
| Network (SONET)[5]/Synchronous Digital Hierarchy (SDH) [6]. To | Network (SONET)[5]/Synchronous Digital Hierarchy (SDH) [6]. To | |||
| support TDM traffic, which includes voice, data, and private leased | support TDM traffic, which includes voice, data, and private leased | |||
| line service, the MPLS network must emulate the circuit | line service, the MPLS network must emulate the circuit | |||
| characteristics of SONET/SDH payloads. MPLS labels and a new circuit | characteristics of SONET/SDH payloads. MPLS labels and a new circuit | |||
| emulation header are used to encapsulate TDM signals and provide the | emulation header are used to encapsulate TDM signals and provide the | |||
| Circuit Emulation Service over MPLS (CEM). This encapsulation method | Circuit Emulation Service over MPLS (CEM). | |||
| is described in [8]. | ||||
| 3. Tunnel Labels and VC Labels | 3. Tunnel Labels and VC Labels | |||
| Suppose it is desired to transport layer 2 PDUs from ingress LSR R1 | Suppose it is desired to transport layer 2 PDUs from ingress LSR R1 | |||
| to egress LSR R2, across an intervening MPLS network. We assume that | to egress LSR R2, across an intervening MPLS network. We assume that | |||
| there is an LSP from R1 to R2. That is, we assume that R1 can cause a | there is an LSP from R1 to R2. That is, we assume that R1 can cause a | |||
| packet to be delivered to R2 by pushing some label onto the packet | packet to be delivered to R2 by pushing some label onto the packet | |||
| and sending the result to one of its adjacencies. Call this label the | and sending the result to one of its adjacencies. Call this label the | |||
| "tunnel label", and the corresponding LSP the "tunnel LSP". | "tunnel label", and the corresponding LSP the "tunnel LSP". | |||
| skipping to change at page 3, line 51 ¶ | skipping to change at page 3, line 50 ¶ | |||
| tells R2 how to treat the received packet. Call this label the "VC | tells R2 how to treat the received packet. Call this label the "VC | |||
| label". | label". | |||
| So when R1 sends a layer 2 PDU to R2, it first pushes a VC label on | So when R1 sends a layer 2 PDU to R2, it first pushes a VC label on | |||
| its label stack, and then (if R1 is not adjacent to R2) pushes on a | its label stack, and then (if R1 is not adjacent to R2) pushes on a | |||
| tunnel label. The tunnel label gets the MPLS packet from R1 to R2; | tunnel label. The tunnel label gets the MPLS packet from R1 to R2; | |||
| the VC label is not visible until the MPLS packet reaches R2. R2's | the VC label is not visible until the MPLS packet reaches R2. R2's | |||
| disposition of the packet is based on the VC label. | disposition of the packet is based on the VC label. | |||
| Note that the tunnel could be a GRE encapsulated MPLS tunnel between | Note that the tunnel could be a GRE encapsulated MPLS tunnel between | |||
| R1 and R2. In this case R1 would be adjacent to R2 , and only the VC | R1 and R2. In this case R1 would be adjacent to R2, and only the VC | |||
| label would be used, and the intervening network need only carry IP | label would be used, and the intervening network need only carry IP | |||
| packets. | packets. | |||
| If the payload of the MPLS packet is, for example, an ATM AAL5 PDU, | If the payload of the MPLS packet is, for example, an ATM AAL5 PDU, | |||
| the VC label will generally correspond to a particular ATM VC at R2. | the VC label will generally correspond to a particular ATM VC at R2. | |||
| That is, R2 needs to be able to infer from the VC label the outgoing | That is, R2 needs to be able to infer from the VC label the outgoing | |||
| interface and the VPI/VCI value for the AAL5 PDU. If the payload is a | interface and the VPI/VCI value for the AAL5 PDU. If the payload is a | |||
| Frame Relay PDU, then R2 needs to be able to infer from the VC label | Frame Relay PDU, then R2 needs to be able to infer from the VC label | |||
| the outgoing interface and the DLCI value. If the payload is an | the outgoing interface and the DLCI value. If the payload is an | |||
| Ethernet frame, then R2 needs to be able to infer from the VC label | Ethernet frame, then R2 needs to be able to infer from the VC label | |||
| the outgoing interface, and perhaps the VLAN identifier. This process | the outgoing interface, and perhaps the VLAN identifier. This process | |||
| is unidirectional, and will be repeated independently for | is unidirectional, and will be repeated independently for | |||
| bidirectional operation. It is REQUIRED to assign the same VC ID for | bidirectional operation. It is REQUIRED to assign the same VC ID, and | |||
| a given circuit in both directions. The transported frame MAY be | VC type for a given circuit in both directions. The group id MUST NOT | |||
| be required to match in both directions. The transported frame MAY be | ||||
| modified when it reaches the egress router. If the header of the | modified when it reaches the egress router. If the header of the | |||
| transported layer 2 frame is modified, this MUST be done at the | transported layer 2 frame is modified, this MUST be done at the | |||
| egress LSR only. Note that the VC label must always be at the bottom | egress LSR only. | |||
| of the label stack, and the tunnel label, if present, must be | ||||
| immediately above the VC label. Of course, as the packet is | Note that the VC label must always be at the bottom of the label | |||
| transported across the MPLS network, additional labels may be pushed | stack, and the tunnel label, if present, must be immediately above | |||
| on (and then popped off) as needed. Even R1 itself may push on | the VC label. Of course, as the packet is transported across the MPLS | |||
| additional labels above the tunnel label. If R1 and R2 are directly | network, additional labels may be pushed on (and then popped off) as | |||
| adjacent LSRs, then it may not be necessary to use a tunnel label at | needed. Even R1 itself may push on additional labels above the tunnel | |||
| all. | label. If R1 and R2 are directly adjacent LSRs, then it may not be | |||
| necessary to use a tunnel label at all. | ||||
| This document does not specify a method for distributing the tunnel | This document does not specify a method for distributing the tunnel | |||
| label or any other labels that may appear above the VC label on the | label or any other labels that may appear above the VC label on the | |||
| stack. Any acceptable method of MPLS label distribution will do. | stack. Any acceptable method of MPLS label distribution will do. | |||
| This document does specify a method for assigning and distributing | This document does specify a method for assigning and distributing | |||
| the VC label. Static label assignment MAY be used, and | the VC label. Static label assignment MAY be used, and | |||
| implementations SHOULD provide support for this. If signaling is | implementations SHOULD provide support for this. If signaling is | |||
| used, the VC label MUST be distributed from R2 to R1 using LDP in the | used, the VC label MUST be distributed from R2 to R1 using LDP in the | |||
| downstream unsolicited mode; this requires that an LDP connection be | downstream unsolicited mode; this requires that an LSP session be | |||
| created between R1 and R2. [1] | created between R1 and R2. [1] When using LDP to distribute the VC | |||
| label, liberal label retention mode SHOULD be used. | ||||
| Note that this technique allows an unbounded number of layer 2 "VCs" | Note that this technique allows an unbounded number of layer 2 "VCs" | |||
| to be carried together in a single "tunnel". Thus it scales quite | to be carried together in a single "tunnel". Thus it scales quite | |||
| well in the network backbone. | well in the network backbone. | |||
| While this document currently defines the emulation of Frame Relay | ||||
| and ATM PVC services, it specifically does not preclude future | ||||
| enhancements to support switched service (SVC and SPVC) emulation. | ||||
| 4. Protocol-Specific Details | 4. Protocol-Specific Details | |||
| 4.1. Frame Relay | 4.1. Frame Relay | |||
| The Frame Relay PDUs are encapsulated according to the procedures | The Frame Relay PDUs are encapsulated according to the procedures | |||
| defined in [7]. The MPLS edge LSR MUST provide Frame Relay PVC status | defined in [7]. The MPLS edge LSR MUST provide Frame Relay PVC status | |||
| signaling to the Frame Relay network. If the MPLS edge LSR detects a | signaling to the Frame Relay network. If the MPLS edge LSR detects a | |||
| service affecting condition as defined in [2] Q.933 Annex A.5 sited | service affecting condition as defined in [2] Q.933 Annex A.5 sited | |||
| in IA FRF1.1, it MUST withdraw the label that corresponds to the | in IA FRF1.1, it MUST withdraw the label that corresponds to the | |||
| frame relay DLCI. The Egress LSR SHOULD generate the corresponding | frame relay DLCI. The Egress LSR SHOULD generate the corresponding | |||
| errors and alarms as defined in [2] on the Frame relay VC. | errors and alarms as defined in [2] on the Frame relay VC. | |||
| 4.2. ATM | 4.2. ATM | |||
| 4.2.1. ATM AAL5 VCC Transport | 4.2.1. ATM AAL5 VCC Transport | |||
| ATM AAL5 CSPS-PDUs are encapsulated according to [7] ATM AAL5 CPCS- | ATM AAL5 CSPS-PDUs are encapsulated according to [7] ATM AAL5 CPCS- | |||
| PDU mode. At the edge LSRs, R1 and R2, if ATM ILMI signaling is | PDU mode. This mode allows the transport of ATM AAL5 CSPS-PDUs | |||
| supported it SHOULD be connected to VC signaling. This mode allows | traveling on a particular ATM PVC across the MPLS network to another | |||
| the transport of ATM AAL5 CSPS-PDUs traveling on a particular ATM PVC | ATM PVC. | |||
| across the mpls network to another ATM PVC. | ||||
| 4.2.2. ATM Transparent Cell Transport | 4.2.2. ATM Transparent Cell Transport | |||
| This mode is similar to the Ethernet port mode. Every cell that is | This mode is similar to the Ethernet port mode. Every cell that is | |||
| received at the ingress ATM port on the ingress LSR, R1, is | received at the ingress ATM port on the ingress LSR, R1, is | |||
| encapsulated according to [7], ATM cell mode, and sent across the LSP | encapsulated according to [7], ATM cell mode, and sent across the LSP | |||
| to the egress LSR, R2. This mode allows an ATM port to be connected | to the egress LSR, R2. This mode allows an ATM port to be connected | |||
| to only one other ATM port. [7] allows for grouping of multiple cells | to only one other ATM port. [7] allows for grouping of multiple cells | |||
| into a single MPLS frame. Grouping of ATM cells is OPTIONAL for | into a single MPLS frame. Grouping of ATM cells is OPTIONAL for | |||
| transmission at the ingress LSR, R1. If the Egress LSR R2 supports | transmission at the ingress LSR, R1. If the Egress LSR R2 supports | |||
| skipping to change at page 6, line 8 ¶ | skipping to change at page 6, line 8 ¶ | |||
| is encapsulated according to [7], ATM cell mode, and sent across the | is encapsulated according to [7], ATM cell mode, and sent across the | |||
| LSP to the egress LSR R2. Grouping of ATM cells is OPTIONAL for | LSP to the egress LSR R2. Grouping of ATM cells is OPTIONAL for | |||
| transmission at the ingress LSR, R1. If the Egress LSR R2 supports | transmission at the ingress LSR, R1. If the Egress LSR R2 supports | |||
| cell concatenation the ingress LSR, R1, MUST only concatenate cells | cell concatenation the ingress LSR, R1, MUST only concatenate cells | |||
| up to the "Maximum Number of concatenated ATM cells in a frame" | up to the "Maximum Number of concatenated ATM cells in a frame" | |||
| parameter received as part of the FEC element. | parameter received as part of the FEC element. | |||
| 4.2.4. OAM Cell Support | 4.2.4. OAM Cell Support | |||
| OAM cells MAY be transported on the VC LSP. When the LSR is operating | OAM cells MAY be transported on the VC LSP. When the LSR is operating | |||
| in AAL5 PDU transport mode if it does not support transport of ATM | in AAL5 CPCS-PDU transport mode if it does not support transport of | |||
| cells, the LSR MUST discard incoming MPLS frames on an ATM VC LSP | ATM cells, the LSR MUST discard incoming MPLS frames on an ATM VC LSP | |||
| that contain a VC label with the T bit set [7]. When operating in | that contain a VC label with the T bit set [7]. When operating in | |||
| AAL5 PDU transport mode an LSR that supports transport of OAM cells | AAL5 PDU transport mode an LSR that supports transport of OAM cells | |||
| using the T bit defined in [7], or an LSR operating in any of the | using the T bit defined in [7], or an LSR operating in any of the | |||
| three cell transport modes MUST follow the procedures outlined in [9] | three cell transport modes MUST follow the procedures outlined in [9] | |||
| section 8 for mode 0 only, in addition to the applicable procedures | section 8 for mode 0 only, in addition to the applicable procedures | |||
| specified in [6]. | specified in [6]. | |||
| 4.2.4.1. OAM Cell Emulation Mode | 4.2.4.1. OAM Cell Emulation Mode | |||
| AN LSR that does not support transport of OAM cells across an LSP MAY | AN LSR that does not support transport of OAM cells across an LSP MAY | |||
| provide OAM support on ATM PVCs using the following procedures: | provide OAM support on ATM PVCs using the following procedures: | |||
| If an F5 end-to-end OAM cell is received from a ATM VC by an ingress | A pair of LSRs may emulate a bidrectional ATM VC by two uni- | |||
| LSR or egress LSR, with a loopback indication value of 1 and the LSR | directioal LSPs. If an F5 end-to-end OAM cell is received from a ATM | |||
| has a label mapping for the ATM VC, the LSR MUST decrement the | VC, by either LSR that is transporting this ATM VC, with a loopback | |||
| loopback indication value and loop back the cell on the ATM VC. | indication value of 1, and the LSR has a label mapping for the ATM | |||
| Otherwise the loopback cell MUST be discarded by the LSR. | VC, then the LSR MUST decrement the loopback indication value and | |||
| loop back the cell on the ATM VC. Otherwise the loopback cell MUST be | ||||
| discarded by the LSR. | ||||
| The ingress LSR, R1, may also optionally be configured to | The ingress LSR, R1, may also optionally be configured to | |||
| periodically generate F5 end-to-end loopback OAM cells on a VC. If | periodically generate F5 end-to-end loopback OAM cells on a VC. If | |||
| the LSR fails to receive a response to an F5 end-to-end loopback OAM | the LSR fails to receive a response to an F5 end-to-end loopback OAM | |||
| cell for a pre-defined period of time it MUST withdraw the label | cell for a pre-defined period of time it MUST withdraw the label | |||
| mapping for the VC. | mapping for the VC. | |||
| If an ingress LSR, R1, receives an AIS F5 OAM cell, fails to receive | If an ingress LSR, R1, receives an AIS F5 OAM cell, fails to receive | |||
| a pre-defined number of the End-to-End loop OAM cells, or a physical | a pre-defined number of the End-to-End loop OAM cells, or a physical | |||
| interface goes down, it MUST withdraw the label mappings for all VCs | interface goes down, it MUST withdraw the label mappings for all VCs | |||
| skipping to change at page 7, line 11 ¶ | skipping to change at page 7, line 19 ¶ | |||
| switch has deleted a VC, or if the physical interface goes down, it | switch has deleted a VC, or if the physical interface goes down, it | |||
| MUST withdraw the label mappings for all VCs associated with the | MUST withdraw the label mappings for all VCs associated with the | |||
| failure. When a VC label mapping is withdrawn, the egress LSR SHOULD | failure. When a VC label mapping is withdrawn, the egress LSR SHOULD | |||
| notify its client of this failure by deleting the VC using ILMI. | notify its client of this failure by deleting the VC using ILMI. | |||
| 4.3. Ethernet VLAN | 4.3. Ethernet VLAN | |||
| The Ethernet frame will be encapsulated according to the procedures | The Ethernet frame will be encapsulated according to the procedures | |||
| in [7]. It should be noted that if the VLAN identifier is modified | in [7]. It should be noted that if the VLAN identifier is modified | |||
| by the egress LSR, according to the procedures outlined above, the | by the egress LSR, according to the procedures outlined above, the | |||
| Ethernet spanning tree protocol might fail to work properly. | Ethernet spanning tree protocol might fail to work properly. If the | |||
| LSR detects a failure on the Ethernet physical port, or the port is | ||||
| administratively disabled, it MUST withdraw the label mappings for | ||||
| all VCs associated with the port. | ||||
| 4.4. Ethernet | 4.4. Ethernet | |||
| The Ethernet frame will be encapsulated according to the procedures | The Ethernet frame will be encapsulated according to the procedures | |||
| in [7]. If the LSR detects a failure on the Ethernet physical port, | in [7]. If the LSR detects a failure on the Ethernet physical port, | |||
| or the port is administratively disabled, the corresponding VC label | or the port is administratively disabled, the corresponding VC label | |||
| mapping MAY be withdrawn. If the egress LSR, R2, does not have a VC | mapping MUST be withdrawn. | |||
| label mapping for the corresponding Ethernet port, the Ethernet port | ||||
| physical layer MAY be disabled. | ||||
| 4.5. HDLC ( Cisco ) | 4.5. HDLC ( Cisco ) | |||
| If the MPLS edge LSR detects that the physical link has failed it | HDLC frames are encapsulated according to the procedures in [7]. If | |||
| MUST withdraw the label that corresponds to the HDLC link. The Egress | the MPLS edge LSR detects that the physical link has failed, or the | |||
| LSR SHOULD notify the CE device of this failure by using a physical | port is adminstratively disabled, it MUST withdraw the label mapping | |||
| layer mechanism to take the link out of service. | that corresponds to the HDLC link. | |||
| 4.6. PPP | 4.6. PPP | |||
| If the MPLS edge LSR detects that the physical link has failed it | PPP frames are encapsulated according to the procedures in [7]. If | |||
| MUST withdraw the label that corresponds to the PPP link. The Egress | the MPLS edge LSR detects that the physical link has failed, or the | |||
| LSR SHOULD notify the CE device of this failure by using a physical | port is adminstratively disabled, it MUST withdraw the label mapping | |||
| layer mechanism to take the link out of service. | that corresponds to the PPP link. | |||
| 4.7. Static MPLS | ||||
| The MPLS frames encapsulated according to [3] using any layer 2 | ||||
| technology that is commonly used to transport MPLS can be transported | ||||
| across the service provider MPLS network using the methods described | ||||
| in this document. The VC label in this case is the statically | ||||
| configured label that is accepted at the ingress LSR R1, and | ||||
| advertised with an associated VC ID in LDP. The VC ID has to match in | ||||
| both directions on a particular VC. At the egress LSR, R2 a common | ||||
| MPLS label swap operation will swap the VC label with the label that | ||||
| is statically configured for this particular VC. This transport mode | ||||
| can be used to offer packet transport using different kinds of layer | ||||
| 2 access infrastructures. | ||||
| 5. LDP | 5. LDP | |||
| The VC label bindings are distributed using the LDP downstream | The VC label bindings are distributed using the LDP downstream | |||
| unsolicited mode described in [1]. The LSRs will establish an LDP | unsolicited mode described in [1]. The LSRs will establish an LDP | |||
| session using the Extended Discovery mechanism described in [1, | session using the Extended Discovery mechanism described in [1, | |||
| section 2.4-2.5], for this purpose a new type of FEC element is | section 2.4.2 and 2.5], for this purpose a new type of FEC element is | |||
| defined. The FEC element type is 128. [note1] | defined. The FEC element type is 128. [note1] Note that if the tunnel | |||
| label is not available, the VC label MUST NOT be advertized. | ||||
| The Virtual Circuit FEC element, is defined as follows: | The Virtual Circuit FEC element, is defined as follows: | |||
| 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 | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| | VC tlv |C| VC Type |VC info Length | | | VC tlv |C| VC Type |VC info Length | | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| | Group ID | | | Group ID | | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| skipping to change at page 8, line 46 ¶ | skipping to change at page 8, line 47 ¶ | |||
| 0x0001 Frame Relay DLCI | 0x0001 Frame Relay DLCI | |||
| 0x0002 ATM AAL5 VCC transport | 0x0002 ATM AAL5 VCC transport | |||
| 0x0003 ATM transparent cell transport | 0x0003 ATM transparent cell transport | |||
| 0x0004 Ethernet VLAN | 0x0004 Ethernet VLAN | |||
| 0x0005 Ethernet | 0x0005 Ethernet | |||
| 0x0006 HDLC ( Cisco ) | 0x0006 HDLC ( Cisco ) | |||
| 0x0007 PPP | 0x0007 PPP | |||
| 0x8008 CEM [8] | 0x8008 CEM [8] | |||
| 0x0009 ATM VCC cell transport | 0x0009 ATM VCC cell transport | |||
| 0x000A ATM VPC cell transport | 0x000A ATM VPC cell transport | |||
| 0x000B MPLS | ||||
| - Control word bit (C) | - Control word bit (C) | |||
| The highest order bit (C) of the Vc type is used to flag the | The highest order bit (C) of the Vc type is used to flag the | |||
| presence of a control word ( defined in [7] ) as follows: | presence of a control word ( defined in [7] ) as follows: | |||
| bit 15 = 1 control word present on this VC. | bit 15 = 1 control word present on this VC. | |||
| bit 15 = 0 no control word present on this VC. | bit 15 = 0 no control word present on this VC. | |||
| - VC information length | - VC information length | |||
| skipping to change at page 9, line 40 ¶ | skipping to change at page 9, line 40 ¶ | |||
| - Interface parameters | - Interface parameters | |||
| This variable length field is used to provide interface specific | This variable length field is used to provide interface specific | |||
| parameters, such as interface MTU. | parameters, such as interface MTU. | |||
| 5.1. Interface Parameters Field | 5.1. Interface Parameters Field | |||
| This field specifies edge facing interface specific parameters and | This field specifies edge facing interface specific parameters and | |||
| SHOULD be used to validate that the LSRs, and the ingress and egress | SHOULD be used to validate that the LSRs, and the ingress and egress | |||
| ports at the edges of the circuit have the necessary capabilities to | ports at the edges of the circuit, have the necessary capabilities to | |||
| interoperate with each other. The field structure is defines as | interoperate with each other. The field structure is defined as | |||
| follows: | follows: | |||
| 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 | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| | Parameter ID | Length | Variable Length Value | | | Parameter ID | Length | Variable Length Value | | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| | Variable Length Value | | | Variable Length Value | | |||
| | " | | | " | | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| The parameter ID is defined as follows: | The parameter ID is defined as follows: | |||
| Parameter ID Length Description | Parameter ID Length Description | |||
| 0x01 4 Interface MTU in octets. | 0x01 4 Interface MTU in octets. | |||
| 0x02 4 Maximum Number of concatenated ATM cells. | 0x02 4 Maximum Number of concatenated ATM cells. | |||
| 0x03 up to 82 Optional Interface Description string. | 0x03 up to 82 Optional Interface Description string. | |||
| 0x04 4 CEM [8] Payload Bytes. | 0x04 4 CEM [8] Payload Bytes. | |||
| 0x05 4 CEM options. | 0x05 4 CEM options. | |||
| The Length field is defined as the length of the interface parameter | The Length field is defined as the length of the interface parameter | |||
| including the parameter id and length field itself. | including the parameter id and length field itself. | |||
| - Interface MTU | - Interface MTU | |||
| A 2 octet value indicating the MTU in bytes. This is the Maximum | A 2 octet value indicating the MTU in octets. This is the Maximum | |||
| Transmit Unit of the egress packet interface that will be | Transmission Unit, excluding encapsulation overhead, of the | |||
| transmitting the decapsulated PDU that is received from the MPLS | egress packet interface that will be transmitting the | |||
| network. This parameter is REQUIRED, and SHOULD match in both | decapsulated PDU that is received from the MPLS network. This | |||
| direction of a specific circuit. The MTU is specified in bytes, | parameter is applicable only to VC types 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, and 7, | |||
| and if it does not match on a specific circuit, that circuit | and is REQUIRED for these VC types. If this parameter does not | |||
| should not be enabled. This parameter is applicable only to VC | match in both directions of a specific VC, that VC MUST NOT be | |||
| types 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 0x0b. | enabled. | |||
| - Maximum Number of concatenated ATM cells | - Maximum Number of concatenated ATM cells | |||
| This 2 octet parameter specifies the maximum number of | A 2 octet value specifying the maximum number of concatenated ATM | |||
| concatenated ATM cells that can be processed as a single PDU by | cells that can be processed as a single PDU by the egress LSR. An | |||
| the egress LSR. This parameter does not need to match in both | ingress LSR transmitting concatenated cells on this VC can | |||
| directions of a specific LSR. This parameter is REQUIRED for the | concatenate a number of cells up to the value of this parameter, | |||
| following VC types: 3, 9, and 0x0a. An LSR transmitting | but MUST NOT exceed it. This parameter is applicable only to VC | |||
| concatenated cells on this VC can concatenate a number of cells | types 3, 9, and 0x0a, and is REQUIRED for these VC types. This | |||
| up to the value of this parameter, but MUST NOT exceed it. | parameter does not need to match in both directions of a specific | |||
| VC. | ||||
| - Optional Interface Description string | - Optional Interface Description string | |||
| This arbitrary, OPTIONAL, interface description string can be | This arbitrary, OPTIONAL, interface description string can be | |||
| used to send an administrative description text string to the | used to send an administrative description text string to the | |||
| remote LSR. This parameter is OPTIONAL, and is applicable to all | remote LSR. This parameter is OPTIONAL, and is applicable to all | |||
| VC types. The interface description parameter length is variable, | VC types. The interface description parameter length is variable, | |||
| and can be up to 80 octets. | and can be up to 80 octets. | |||
| - Payload Bytes | - Payload Bytes | |||
| A 2 octet value indicating the the number of TDM payload octets | A 2 octet value indicating the the number of TDM payload octets | |||
| contained in all packets on the CEM stream, from 48 to 1,023 | contained in all packets on the CEM stream, from 48 to 1,023 | |||
| octets. All of the packets in a given CEM stream have the same | octets. All of the packets in a given CEM stream have the same | |||
| number of payload bytes. Note that there is a possibility that | number of payload bytes. Note that there is a possibility that | |||
| the packet size may exceed the SPE size in the case of an STS-1 | the packet size may exceed the SPE size in the case of an STS-1 | |||
| SPE, which could cause two pointers to be needed in the CEM | SPE, which could cause two pointers to be needed in the CEM | |||
| header, since the payload may contain two J1 bytes for | header, since the payload may contain two J1 bytes for | |||
| consecutive SPEs. For this reason, the number of payload bytes | consecutive SPEs. For this reason, the number of payload bytes | |||
| must be less than or equal to 783 for STS-1 SPEs. | must be less than or equal to 783 for STS-1 SPEs. | |||
| - CEM Options. An optional 16 Bit value of CEM Flags. Bit 0 is | - CEM Options. An optional 16 Bit value of CEM Flags. Bit 0 is | |||
| defined being set to indicate CEM-DBA in operation. | defined being set to indicate CEM-DBA in operation. | |||
| 5.2. LDP label Withdrawal procedures | ||||
| As mentioned above the Group ID field can be used to withdraw all VC | ||||
| labels associated with a particular group ID. This procedure is | ||||
| OPTIONAL, and if it is implemented the LDP label withdraw message | ||||
| should be as follows: the VC information length field is set to 0, | ||||
| the VC ID field is not present, and the interface paramenters field | ||||
| is not present. | ||||
| The interface parameters field MUST NOT be present in any LDP VC | ||||
| label withdrawal message or release message. A wildcard release | ||||
| message MUST include only the group ID. | ||||
| 6. IANA Considerations | 6. IANA Considerations | |||
| As specified in this document, a Virtual Circuit FEC element contains | As specified in this document, a Virtual Circuit FEC element contains | |||
| the VC Type field. VC Type value 0 is reserved. VC Type values 1 | the VC Type field. VC Type value 0 is reserved. VC Type values 1 | |||
| through 11 are defined in this document. VC Type values 12 through 63 | through 10 are defined in this document. VC Type values 11 through 63 | |||
| are to be assigned by IANA using the "IETF Consensus" policy defined | are to be assigned by IANA using the "IETF Consensus" policy defined | |||
| in RFC2434. VC Type values 64 through 127 are to be assigned by IANA, | in RFC2434. VC Type values 64 through 127 are to be assigned by IANA, | |||
| using the "First Come First Served" policy defined in RFC2434. VC | using the "First Come First Served" policy defined in RFC2434. VC | |||
| Type values 128 through 32767 are vendor-specific, and values in this | Type values 128 through 32767 are vendor-specific, and values in this | |||
| range are not to be assigned by IANA. | range are not to be assigned by IANA. | |||
| As specified in this document, a Virtual Circuit FEC element contains | As specified in this document, a Virtual Circuit FEC element contains | |||
| the Interface Parameters field, which is a list of one or more | the Interface Parameters field, which is a list of one or more | |||
| parameters, and each parameter is identified by the Parameter ID | parameters, and each parameter is identified by the Parameter ID | |||
| field. Parameter ID value 0 is reserved. Parameter ID values 1 | field. Parameter ID value 0 is reserved. Parameter ID values 1 | |||
| through 5 are defined in this document. Parameter ID values 6 | through 6 are defined in this document. Parameter ID values 7 | |||
| through 63 are to be assigned by IANA using the "IETF Consensus" | through 63 are to be assigned by IANA using the "IETF Consensus" | |||
| policy defined in RFC2434. Parameter ID values 64 through 127 are to | policy defined in RFC2434. Parameter ID values 64 through 127 are to | |||
| be assigned by IANA, using the "First Come First Served" policy | be assigned by IANA, using the "First Come First Served" policy | |||
| defined in RFC2434. Parameter ID values 128 through 255 are vendor- | defined in RFC2434. Parameter ID values 128 through 255 are vendor- | |||
| specific, and values in this range are not to be assigned by IANA. | specific, and values in this range are not to be assigned by IANA. | |||
| 7. Security Considerations | 7. Security Considerations | |||
| This document does not affect the underlying security issues of MPLS. | This document does not affect the underlying security issues of MPLS. | |||
| skipping to change at page 12, line 12 ¶ | skipping to change at page 12, line 29 ¶ | |||
| [4] "IEEE 802.3ac-1998" IEEE standard specification. | [4] "IEEE 802.3ac-1998" IEEE standard specification. | |||
| [5] American National Standards Institute, "Synchronous Optical | [5] American National Standards Institute, "Synchronous Optical | |||
| Network Formats," ANSI T1.105-1995. | Network Formats," ANSI T1.105-1995. | |||
| [6] ITU Recommendation G.707, "Network Node Interface For The | [6] ITU Recommendation G.707, "Network Node Interface For The | |||
| Synchronous Digital Hierarchy", 1996. | Synchronous Digital Hierarchy", 1996. | |||
| [7] "Encapsulation Methods for Transport of Layer 2 Frames Over | [7] "Encapsulation Methods for Transport of Layer 2 Frames Over | |||
| MPLS", draft-martini-l2circuit-encap-mpls-01.txt ( Work in progress ) | MPLS", draft-martini-l2circuit-encap-mpls-02.txt ( Work in progress ) | |||
| [8] "SONET/SDH Circuit Emulation Service Over MPLS (CEM) | [8] "SONET/SDH Circuit Emulation Service Over MPLS (CEM) | |||
| Encapsulation", draft-malis-sonet-ces-mpls-01.txt ( Work in progress | Encapsulation", draft-malis-sonet-ces-mpls-04.txt ( Work in progress | |||
| ) | ) | |||
| [9] "Frame Based ATM over SONET/SDH Transport (FAST)," 2000. | [9] "Frame Based ATM over SONET/SDH Transport (FAST)," 2000. | |||
| [note1] FEC element type 128 is pending IANA approval. | [note1] FEC element type 128 is pending IANA approval. | |||
| 9. Author Information | 9. Author Information | |||
| Luca Martini | Luca Martini | |||
| Level 3 Communications, LLC. | Level 3 Communications, LLC. | |||
| skipping to change at page 12, line 29 ¶ | skipping to change at page 13, line 4 ¶ | |||
| [note1] FEC element type 128 is pending IANA approval. | [note1] FEC element type 128 is pending IANA approval. | |||
| 9. Author Information | 9. Author Information | |||
| Luca Martini | Luca Martini | |||
| Level 3 Communications, LLC. | Level 3 Communications, LLC. | |||
| 1025 Eldorado Blvd. | 1025 Eldorado Blvd. | |||
| Broomfield, CO, 80021 | Broomfield, CO, 80021 | |||
| e-mail: luca@level3.net | e-mail: luca@level3.net | |||
| Nasser El-Aawar | Nasser El-Aawar | |||
| Level 3 Communications, LLC. | Level 3 Communications, LLC. | |||
| 1025 Eldorado Blvd. | 1025 Eldorado Blvd. | |||
| Broomfield, CO, 80021 | Broomfield, CO, 80021 | |||
| e-mail: nna@level3.net | e-mail: nna@level3.net | |||
| Giles Heron | Giles Heron | |||
| Level 3 Communications | Gone2 Ltd. | |||
| 66 Prescot Street | c/o MDP | |||
| One Curzon Street | ||||
| London | London | |||
| E1 8HG | W1J 5HD | |||
| United Kingdom | United Kingdom | |||
| e-mail: giles@level3.net | e-mail: giles@goneto.net | |||
| Dimitri Stratton Vlachos | Dimitri Stratton Vlachos | |||
| Mazu Networks, Inc. | Mazu Networks, Inc. | |||
| 125 Cambridgepark Drive | 125 Cambridgepark Drive | |||
| Cambridge, MA 02140 | Cambridge, MA 02140 | |||
| e-mail: d@mazunetworks.com | e-mail: d@mazunetworks.com | |||
| Dan Tappan | Dan Tappan | |||
| Cisco Systems, Inc. | Cisco Systems, Inc. | |||
| 250 Apollo Drive | 250 Apollo Drive | |||
| Chelmsford, MA, 01824 | Chelmsford, MA, 01824 | |||
| e-mail: tappan@cisco.com | e-mail: tappan@cisco.com | |||
| Jayakumar Jayakumar, | Jayakumar Jayakumar, | |||
| Cisco Systems Inc. | Cisco Systems Inc. | |||
| 225, E.Tasman, MS-SJ3/3, | 225, E.Tasman, MS-SJ3/3, | |||
| San Jose, CA, 95134 | San Jose, CA, 95134 | |||
| skipping to change at page 14, line 4 ¶ | skipping to change at page 14, line 21 ¶ | |||
| Laurel Networks, Inc. | Laurel Networks, Inc. | |||
| 2607 Nicholson Rd. | 2607 Nicholson Rd. | |||
| Sewickley, PA 15143 | Sewickley, PA 15143 | |||
| e-mail: sjv@laurelnetworks.com | e-mail: sjv@laurelnetworks.com | |||
| John Shirron | John Shirron | |||
| Laurel Networks, Inc. | Laurel Networks, Inc. | |||
| 2607 Nicholson Rd. | 2607 Nicholson Rd. | |||
| Sewickley, PA 15143 | Sewickley, PA 15143 | |||
| e-mail: jshirron@laurelnetworks.com | e-mail: jshirron@laurelnetworks.com | |||
| Andrew G. Malis | Andrew G. Malis | |||
| Vivace Networks, Inc. | Vivace Networks, Inc. | |||
| 2730 Orchard Parkway | 2730 Orchard Parkway | |||
| San Jose, CA 95134 | San Jose, CA 95134 | |||
| Phone: +1 408 383 7223 | Phone: +1 408 383 7223 | |||
| Email: Andy.Malis@vivacenetworks.com | Email: Andy.Malis@vivacenetworks.com | |||
| Vinai Sirkay | Vinai Sirkay | |||
| Vivace Networks, Inc. | Vivace Networks, Inc. | |||
| 2730 Orchard Parkway | 2730 Orchard Parkway | |||
| San Jose, CA 95134 | San Jose, CA 95134 | |||
| e-mail: vinai.sirkay@vivacenetworks.com | e-mail: vinai.sirkay@vivacenetworks.com | |||
| Vasile Radoaca | ||||
| Nortel Networks | ||||
| 600 Technology Park | ||||
| Billerica MA 01821 | ||||
| e-mail: vasile@nortelnetworks.com | ||||
| Chris Liljenstolpe | ||||
| Cable & Wireless | ||||
| 11700 Plaza America Drive | ||||
| Reston, VA 20190 | ||||
| chris@cw.net | ||||
| End of changes. 46 change blocks. | ||||
| 111 lines changed or deleted | 116 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/ | ||||