| < draft-martini-l2circuit-trans-mpls-07.txt | draft-martini-l2circuit-trans-mpls-08.txt > | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Network Working Group Luca Martini | Network Working Group Luca Martini | |||
| Internet Draft Nasser El-Aawar | Internet Draft Nasser El-Aawar | |||
| Expiration Date: January 2002 Level 3 Communications, LLC. | Expiration Date: May 2002 Level 3 Communications, LLC. | |||
| Steve Vogelsang Daniel Tappan | Steve Vogelsang Daniel Tappan | |||
| John Shirron Eric C. Rosen | John Shirron Eric C. Rosen | |||
| Toby Smith Alex Hamilton | Toby Smith Alex Hamilton | |||
| Laurel Networks, Inc. Jayakumar Jayakumar | Laurel Networks, Inc. Jayakumar Jayakumar | |||
| Cisco Systems, Inc. | Cisco Systems, Inc. | |||
| Vasile Radoaca Dimitri Stratton Vlachos | Vasile Radoaca Dimitri Stratton Vlachos | |||
| Nortel Networks Mazu Networks, Inc. | Nortel Networks Mazu Networks, Inc. | |||
| Andrew G. Malis Chris Liljenstolpe | Andrew G. Malis Chris Liljenstolpe | |||
| Vinai Sirkay Cable & Wireless | Vinai Sirkay Cable & Wireless | |||
| Vivace Networks, Inc. | Vivace Networks, Inc. | |||
| Giles Heron | Giles Heron | |||
| Dave Cooper Gone2 Ltd. | Dave Cooper PacketExchange Ltd. | |||
| Global Crossing | Global Crossing | |||
| Kireeti Kompella | Kireeti Kompella | |||
| Juniper Networks | Juniper Networks | |||
| July 2001 | November 2001 | |||
| Transport of Layer 2 Frames Over MPLS | Transport of Layer 2 Frames Over MPLS | |||
| draft-martini-l2circuit-trans-mpls-07.txt | draft-martini-l2circuit-trans-mpls-08.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. | |||
| skipping to change at page 2, line 17 ¶ | skipping to change at page 2, line 17 ¶ | |||
| 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 .......................... 3 | |||
| 2 Introduction ........................................... 3 | 2 Introduction ........................................... 3 | |||
| 3 Tunnel Labels and VC Labels ............................ 3 | 3 Tunnel Labels and VC Labels ............................ 3 | |||
| 4 Protocol-Specific Details .............................. 5 | 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 ......................... 6 | 4.2.3 ATM VCC and VPC Cell Transport ......................... 6 | |||
| 4.2.4 OAM Cell Support ....................................... 6 | 4.2.4 OAM Cell Support ....................................... 6 | |||
| 4.2.5 ILMI Support ........................................... 7 | 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 ................................................... 7 | 4.5 HDLC ................................................... 7 | |||
| 4.6 PPP .................................................... 8 | 4.6 PPP .................................................... 8 | |||
| 5 LDP .................................................... 8 | 5 LDP .................................................... 8 | |||
| 5.1 Interface Parameters Field ............................. 9 | 5.1 Interface Parameters Field ............................. 10 | |||
| 5.2 LDP label Withdrawal procedures ........................ 11 | 5.2 C Bit handling procedures .............................. 11 | |||
| 6 IANA Considerations .................................... 11 | 5.2.1 VC types for which the control word is REQUIRED ........ 11 | |||
| 7 Security Considerations ................................ 12 | 5.2.2 VC types for which the control word is NOT mandatory ... 11 | |||
| 8 References ............................................. 12 | 5.2.3 Status codes ........................................... 13 | |||
| 9 Author Information ..................................... 13 | 5.3 LDP label Withdrawal procedures ........................ 13 | |||
| 5.4 Sequencing Considerations .............................. 14 | ||||
| 5.4.1 Label Mapping Advertisements ........................... 14 | ||||
| 5.4.2 Label Mapping Release .................................. 14 | ||||
| 6 IANA Considerations .................................... 15 | ||||
| 7 Security Considerations ................................ 15 | ||||
| 8 References ............................................. 15 | ||||
| 9 Author Information ..................................... 16 | ||||
| 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 | |||
| In an MPLS network, it is possible to carry the Protocol Data Units | In an MPLS network, it is possible to carry the Protocol Data Units | |||
| skipping to change at page 4, line 21 ¶ | skipping to change at page 4, line 27 ¶ | |||
| 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, and | bidirectional operation. It is REQUIRED to assign the same VC ID, and | |||
| VC type for a given circuit in both directions. The group id MUST NOT | VC type for a given circuit in both directions. The group ID (see | |||
| be required to match in both directions. The transported frame MAY be | below) MUST NOT be required to match in both directions. The | |||
| modified when it reaches the egress router. If the header of the | transported frame MAY be modified when it reaches the egress router. | |||
| transported layer 2 frame is modified, this MUST be done at the | If the header of the transported layer 2 frame is modified, this MUST | |||
| egress LSR only. | be done at the egress LSR only. | |||
| Note that the VC label must always be at the bottom of the label | Note that the VC label must always be at the bottom of the label | |||
| stack, and the tunnel label, if present, must be immediately above | stack, and the tunnel label, if present, must be immediately above | |||
| the VC label. Of course, as the packet is transported across the MPLS | the VC label. Of course, as the packet is transported across the MPLS | |||
| network, additional labels may be pushed on (and then popped off) as | network, additional labels may be pushed on (and then popped off) as | |||
| needed. Even R1 itself may push on additional labels above the tunnel | needed. Even R1 itself may push on additional labels above the tunnel | |||
| label. If R1 and R2 are directly adjacent LSRs, then it may not be | label. If R1 and R2 are directly adjacent LSRs, then it may not be | |||
| necessary to use a tunnel label at all. | 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. When signaling is | implementations SHOULD provide support for this. When 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 session be | downstream unsolicited mode; this requires that an LDP session be | |||
| created between R1 and R2. It should be noted that this LDP session | created between R1 and R2. It should be noted that this LDP session | |||
| is not necessarily transported along the same path as the Layer2 | is not necessarily transported along the same path as the Layer 2 | |||
| PDUs. [1] In addition, when using LDP to distribute the VC label, | PDUs. [1] In addition, when using LDP to distribute the VC label, | |||
| liberal label retention mode SHOULD be used. However, as required in | liberal label retention mode SHOULD be used. However, as required in | |||
| [1], the label request operation (mainly used by conservative label | [1], the label request operation (mainly used by conservative label | |||
| retention mode) MUST be implemented. VC labels MUST be allocated from | retention mode) MUST be implemented. VC labels MUST be allocated from | |||
| the per-platform label space. | the per-platform label space. | |||
| 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. | |||
| skipping to change at page 5, line 23 ¶ | skipping to change at page 5, line 28 ¶ | |||
| 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 egress 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-SDUs are encapsulated according to [7] ATM AAL5 CPCS- | |||
| PDU mode. This mode allows the transport of ATM AAL5 CSPS-PDUs | SDU mode. This mode allows the transport of ATM AAL5 CSPS-SDUs | |||
| traveling on a particular ATM PVC across the MPLS network to another | traveling on a particular ATM PVC across the MPLS network to another | |||
| ATM PVC. | 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 | |||
| cell concatenation the ingress LSR, R1, should only concatenate cells | cell concatenation the ingress LSR, R1, should only concatenate cells | |||
| up to the "Maximum Number of concatenated ATM cells" parameter | up to the "Maximum Number of concatenated ATM cells" parameter | |||
| received as part of the FEC element. | received as part of the FEC element. | |||
| 4.2.3. ATM VCC and VPC Cell Transport | 4.2.3. ATM VCC and VPC Cell Transport | |||
| This mode is similar to the ATM AAL5 VCC transport except that only | This mode is similar to the ATM AAL5 VCC transport except that cells | |||
| cells are transported. Every cell that is received on a pre-defined | are transported. Every cell that is received on a pre-defined ATM | |||
| ATM PVC, or ATM PVP, at the ingress ATM port on the ingress LSR, R1, | PVC, or ATM PVP, at the ingress ATM port on the ingress LSR, R1, is | |||
| is encapsulated according to [7], ATM cell mode, and sent across the | encapsulated according to [7], ATM cell mode, and sent across the LSP | |||
| LSP to the egress LSR R2. Grouping of ATM cells is OPTIONAL for | 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 CPCS-PDU transport mode if it does not support transport of | in AAL5 CPCS-SDU transport mode if it does not support transport of | |||
| ATM 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 SDU 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: | |||
| A pair of LSRs may emulate a bidrectional ATM VC by two uni- | A pair of LSRs MAY emulate a bidrectional ATM VC by two uni- | |||
| directioal LSPs. If an F5 end-to-end OAM cell is received from a ATM | directional LSPs. If an F5 end-to-end OAM cell is received from a | |||
| VC, by either LSR that is transporting this ATM VC, with a loopback | ATM VC, by either LSR that is transporting this ATM VC, with a | |||
| indication value of 1, and the LSR has a label mapping for the ATM | loopback indication value of 1, and the LSR has a label mapping for | |||
| VC, then the LSR MUST decrement the loopback indication value and | the ATM VC, then the LSR MUST decrement the loopback indication value | |||
| loop back the cell on the ATM VC. Otherwise the loopback cell MUST be | and loop back the cell on the ATM VC. Otherwise the loopback cell | |||
| discarded by the LSR. | 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 8, line 18 ¶ | skipping to change at page 8, line 18 ¶ | |||
| the MPLS edge LSR detects that the physical link has failed, or the | the MPLS edge LSR detects that the physical link has failed, or the | |||
| port is adminstratively disabled, it MUST withdraw the label mapping | port is adminstratively disabled, it MUST withdraw the label mapping | |||
| that corresponds to the PPP link. | that corresponds to the PPP link. | |||
| 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 and 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] Note that if the tunnel | defined. The FEC element type is 128. [note1] Only a single VC FEC | |||
| label is not available, the VC label SHOULD NOT be advertised. | element MUST be advertised per LDP VC label. 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 | | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| | VC ID | | | VC ID | | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| skipping to change at page 9, line 10 ¶ | skipping to change at page 9, line 9 ¶ | |||
| 0x0004 Ethernet VLAN | 0x0004 Ethernet VLAN | |||
| 0x0005 Ethernet | 0x0005 Ethernet | |||
| 0x0006 HDLC | 0x0006 HDLC | |||
| 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 | |||
| - 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. | |||
| Please see the section "C Bit handling procedures" for further | ||||
| explenation. | ||||
| - VC information length | - VC information length | |||
| Length of the VC ID field and the interface parameters field in | Length of the VC ID field and the interface parameters field in | |||
| octets. If this value is 0, then it references all VCs using the | octets. If this value is 0, then it references all VCs using the | |||
| specified group ID and there is no VC ID present, nor any | specified group ID and there is no VC ID present, nor any | |||
| interface parameters. | interface parameters. | |||
| - Group ID | - Group ID | |||
| An arbitrary 32 bit value which represents a group of VCs that is | An arbitrary 32 bit value which represents a group of VCs that is | |||
| used to create groups in the VC space. The group ID is intended | used to create groups in the VC space. The group ID is intended | |||
| to be used as a port index, or a virtual tunnel index. To | to be used as a port index, or a virtual tunnel index. To | |||
| simplify configuration a particular VC ID at ingress could be | simplify configuration a particular VC ID at ingress could be | |||
| part of the virtual tunnel for transport to the egress router. | part of the virtual tunnel for transport to the egress router. | |||
| The Group ID is very useful to send a wild card label withdrawals | The Group ID is very useful to send wild card label withdrawals | |||
| to remote LSRs upon physical port failure. | to remote LSRs upon physical port failure. | |||
| - VC ID | - VC ID | |||
| A non zero 32-bit connection ID that together with the VC type, | A non zero 32-bit connection ID that together with the VC type, | |||
| identifies a particular VC. | identifies a particular VC. | |||
| - 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 interface specific parameters. When aplicable, | |||
| SHOULD be used to validate that the LSRs, and the ingress and egress | it MUST 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 defined 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 | | |||
| | " | | | " | | |||
| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | |||
| skipping to change at page 11, line 5 ¶ | skipping to change at page 11, line 13 ¶ | |||
| but MUST NOT exceed it. This parameter is applicable only to VC | but MUST NOT exceed it. This parameter is applicable only to VC | |||
| types 3, 9, and 0x0a, and is REQUIRED for these VC types. This | types 3, 9, and 0x0a, and is REQUIRED for these VC types. This | |||
| parameter does not need to match in both directions of a specific | parameter does not need to match in both directions of a specific | |||
| VC. | 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 string length is | |||
| and can be up to 80 octets. | variable, and can be from 0 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. See [8] for | - CEM Options. An optional 16 Bit value of CEM Flags. See [8] for | |||
| the definition of the bit values. | the definition of the bit values. | |||
| 5.2. LDP label Withdrawal procedures | 5.2. C Bit handling procedures | |||
| 5.2.1. VC types for which the control word is REQUIRED | ||||
| The Label Mapping messages which are sent in order to set up these | ||||
| VCs MUST have c=1. When a Label Mapping message for a VC of one of | ||||
| these types is received, and c=0, a Label Release MUST be sent, with | ||||
| an "Illegal C-bit" status code. In this case, the VC will not come | ||||
| up. | ||||
| 5.2.2. VC types for which the control word is NOT mandatory | ||||
| If a system is capable of sending and receiving the control word on | ||||
| VC types for which the control word is not mandatory, then each such | ||||
| VC endpoint MUST be configurable with a parameter that specifies | ||||
| whether the use of the control word is PREFERRED or NOT PREFERRED. | ||||
| For each VC, there MUST be a default value of this parameter. This | ||||
| specification does NOT state what the default value should. | ||||
| If a system is NOT capable of sending and receiving the control word | ||||
| on VC types for which the control word is not mandatory, then it | ||||
| behaves as exactly as if it were configured for the use of the | ||||
| control word to be NOT PREFERRED. | ||||
| If a Label Mapping message for the VC has already been received, but | ||||
| no Label Mapping message for the VC has yet been sent, then the | ||||
| procedure is the following: | ||||
| -i. If the received Label Mapping message has c=0, send a Label | ||||
| Mapping message with c=0, and the control word is not used. | ||||
| -ii. If the received Label Mapping message has c=1, and the VC is | ||||
| locally configured such that the use of the control word is | ||||
| preferred, then send a Label Mapping message with c=1, and | ||||
| the control word is used. | ||||
| -iii. If the received Label Mapping message has c=1, and the VC is | ||||
| locally configured such that the use of the control word is | ||||
| not preferred or the control word is not supported, then act | ||||
| as if no Label Mapping message for the VC had been received | ||||
| (i.e., proceed to the next paragraph). | ||||
| If a Label Mapping message for the VC has not already been received | ||||
| (or if the received Label Mapping message had c=1 and either local | ||||
| configuration says that the use of the control word is not preferred | ||||
| or the control word is not supported), then send a Label Mapping | ||||
| message in which the c bit is set to correspond to the locally | ||||
| configured preference for use of the control word. (I.e., set c=1 if | ||||
| locally configured to prefer the control word, set c=0 if locally | ||||
| configured to prefer not to use the control word or if the control | ||||
| word is not supported). | ||||
| The next action depends on what control message is next received for | ||||
| that VC. The possibilities are: | ||||
| -i. A Label Mapping message with the same c bit value as | ||||
| specified in the Label Mapping message that was sent. VC | ||||
| setup is now complete, and the control word is used if c=1 | ||||
| but not used if c=0. | ||||
| -ii. A Label Mapping message with c=1, but the Label Mapping | ||||
| message that was sent has c=0. In this case, ignore the | ||||
| received Label Mapping message, and continue to wait for the | ||||
| next control message for the VC. | ||||
| -iii. A Label Mapping message with c=0, but the Label Mapping | ||||
| message that was sent has c=1. In this case, send a Label | ||||
| Withdraw message with a "Wrong c-bit" status code, followed | ||||
| by a Label Mapping message that has c=0. VC setup is now | ||||
| complete, and the control word is not used. | ||||
| -iv. A Label Withdraw message with the "Wrong c-bit" status code. | ||||
| Treat as a normal Label Withdraw, but do not respond. | ||||
| Continue to wait for the next control message for the VC. | ||||
| If at any time after a Label Mapping message has been received, a | ||||
| corresponding Label Withdraw or Release is received, the action taken | ||||
| is the same as for any Label Withdraw or Release that might be | ||||
| received at any time. Note that receiving a Label Withdraw should not | ||||
| cause a corresponding Label Release to be sent. | ||||
| If both endpoints prefer the use of the control word, this procedure | ||||
| will cause it to be used. If either endpoint prefers not to use the | ||||
| control word, or does not support the control word, this procedure | ||||
| will cause it not to be used. If one endpoint prefers to use the | ||||
| control word but the other does not, the one that prefers not to use | ||||
| it is has no extra protocol to execute, it just waits for a Label | ||||
| Mapping message that has c=0. | ||||
| 5.2.3. Status codes | ||||
| RFC 3036 has a range of Status Code values which are assigned by IANA | ||||
| on a First Come, First Served basis. These are in the range | ||||
| 0x20000000-0x3effffff [note 2]. The following new status codes are | ||||
| defined: | ||||
| 0x20000001 "Illegal C-Bit" | ||||
| 0x20000002 "Wrong C-Bit" | ||||
| 5.3. LDP label Withdrawal procedures | ||||
| As mentioned above the Group ID field can be used to withdraw all VC | As mentioned above the Group ID field can be used to withdraw all VC | |||
| labels associated with a particular group ID. This procedure is | labels associated with a particular group ID. This procedure is | |||
| OPTIONAL, and if it is implemented the LDP label withdraw message | OPTIONAL, and if it is implemented the LDP label withdraw message | |||
| should be as follows: the VC information length field is set to 0, | 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 | the VC ID field is not present, and the interface paramenters field | |||
| is not present. For the purpose of this document this is called the | is not present. For the purpose of this document this is called the | |||
| "wild card withdraw procedure", and all LSRs implementing this design | "wild card withdraw procedure", and all LSRs implementing this design | |||
| are REQUIRED to accept such a withdraw message, but are not required | are REQUIRED to accept such a withdraw message, but are not required | |||
| to send it. | to send it. | |||
| The interface parameters field MUST NOT be present in any LDP VC | The interface parameters field MUST NOT be present in any LDP VC | |||
| label withdrawal message or release message. A wildcard release | label withdrawal message or release message. A wildcard release | |||
| message MUST include only the group ID. | message MUST include only the group ID.A Label Release message | |||
| initiated from the imposition router must always include the VC ID. | ||||
| 5.4. Sequencing Considerations | ||||
| In the case where the router considers the sequence number field in | ||||
| the control word, it is important to note the following when | ||||
| advertising labels | ||||
| 5.4.1. Label Mapping Advertisements | ||||
| After a label has been withdrawn by the disposition router and/or | ||||
| released by the imposition router, care must be taken to not re- | ||||
| advertise (re-use) the released label until the disposition router | ||||
| can be reasonably certain that old packets containing the released | ||||
| label no longer persist in the MPLS network. | ||||
| This precaution is required to prevent the imposition router from | ||||
| restarting packet forwarding with sequence number of 1 when it | ||||
| receives the same label mapping if there are still older packets | ||||
| persisting in the network with sequence number between 1 and 32768. | ||||
| For example, if there is a packet with sequence number=n where n is | ||||
| in the interval[1,32768] travelling through the network, it would be | ||||
| possible for the disposition router to receive that packet after it | ||||
| re-advertises the label. Since the label has been released by the | ||||
| imposition router, the disposition router SHOULD be expecting the | ||||
| next packet to arrive with sequence number to be 1. Receipt of a | ||||
| packet with sequence number equal to n will result in n packets | ||||
| potentially being rejected by the disposition router until the | ||||
| imposition router imposes a sequence number of n+1 into a packet. | ||||
| Possible methods to avoid this is for the disposition router to | ||||
| always advertise a different VC label, or for the disposition router | ||||
| to wait for a sufficient time before attempting to re-advertised a | ||||
| recently released label. This is only an issue when sequence number | ||||
| processing at the disposition router is enabled. | ||||
| 5.4.2. Label Mapping Release | ||||
| In situations where the imposition router wants to restart forwarding | ||||
| of packets with sequence number 1, the router shall 1) Send to | ||||
| disposition router a label mapping release, and 2) Send to | ||||
| disposition router a label mapping request. When sequencing is | ||||
| supported, advertisement of a vc label in response to a label mapping | ||||
| request MUST also consider the issues discussed in 5.3.1 | ||||
| 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 10 are defined in this document. VC Type values 11 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 6 are defined in this document. Parameter ID values 7 | through 5 are defined in this document. Parameter ID values 6 | |||
| 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 40 ¶ | skipping to change at page 15, line 51 ¶ | |||
| [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-02.txt ( Work in progress ) | MPLS", draft-martini-l2circuit-encap-mpls-04.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-04.txt ( Work in progress | Encapsulation", draft-malis-sonet-ces-mpls-05.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. [note2] | |||
| Status codes assigment 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 | |||
| Gone2 Ltd. | PacketExchange Ltd. | |||
| c/o MDP | The Truman Brewery | |||
| One Curzon Street | 91 Brick Lane | |||
| London | LONDON E1 6QL | |||
| W1J 5HD | ||||
| United Kingdom | United Kingdom | |||
| e-mail: giles@goneto.net | e-mail: giles@packetexchange.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 | |||
| skipping to change at page 13, line 39 ¶ | skipping to change at page 17, line 4 ¶ | |||
| 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 | |||
| e-mail: jjayakum@cisco.com | e-mail: jjayakum@cisco.com | |||
| Alex Hamilton, | Alex Hamilton, | |||
| Cisco Systems Inc. | Cisco Systems Inc. | |||
| 285 W. Tasman, MS-SJCI/3/4, | 285 W. Tasman, MS-SJCI/3/4, | |||
| San Jose, CA, 95134 | San Jose, CA, 95134 | |||
| e-mail: tahamilt@cisco.com | e-mail: tahamilt@cisco.com | |||
| Eric Rosen | Eric Rosen | |||
| Cisco Systems, Inc. | Cisco Systems, Inc. | |||
| 250 Apollo Drive | 250 Apollo Drive | |||
| Chelmsford, MA, 01824 | Chelmsford, MA, 01824 | |||
| e-mail: erosen@cisco.com | e-mail: erosen@cisco.com | |||
| Steve Vogelsang | Steve Vogelsang | |||
| Laurel Networks, Inc. | Laurel Networks, Inc. | |||
| Omega Corporate Center | Omega Corporate Center | |||
| 1300 Omega Drive | 1300 Omega Drive | |||
| Pittsburg, PA 15205 | Pittsburgh, PA 15205 | |||
| e-mail: sjv@laurelnetworks.com | e-mail: sjv@laurelnetworks.com | |||
| John Shirron | John Shirron | |||
| Omega Corporate Center | Omega Corporate Center | |||
| 1300 Omega Drive | 1300 Omega Drive | |||
| Pittsburg, PA 15205 | Pittsburgh, PA 15205 | |||
| Laurel Networks, Inc. | Laurel Networks, Inc. | |||
| e-mail: jshirron@laurelnetworks.com | e-mail: jshirron@laurelnetworks.com | |||
| Toby Smith | ||||
| Omega Corporate Center | ||||
| 1300 Omega Drive | ||||
| Pittsburgh, PA 15205 | ||||
| Laurel Networks, Inc. | ||||
| e-mail: tob@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: sirkay@technologist.com | |||
| Vasile Radoaca | Vasile Radoaca | |||
| Nortel Networks | Nortel Networks | |||
| 600 Technology Park | 600 Technology Park | |||
| Billerica MA 01821 | Billerica MA 01821 | |||
| e-mail: vasile@nortelnetworks.com | e-mail: vasile@nortelnetworks.com | |||
| Chris Liljenstolpe | Chris Liljenstolpe | |||
| Cable & Wireless | Cable & Wireless | |||
| 11700 Plaza America Drive | 11700 Plaza America Drive | |||
| Reston, VA 20190 | Reston, VA 20190 | |||
| End of changes. 35 change blocks. | ||||
| 61 lines changed or deleted | 213 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/ | ||||