< draft-symmvo-rtgwg-cl-use-cases-00.txt		draft-symmvo-rtgwg-cl-use-cases-01.txt >
	RTGWG N. So		RTGWG S. Ning
	Internet-Draft A. Malis		Internet-Draft Tata Communications
	Intended status: Informational D. McDysan		Intended status: Informational A. Malis
	Expires: August 25, 2012 Verizon		Expires: December 22, 2012 D. McDysan
			Verizon
	L. Yong		L. Yong
	Huawei USA		Huawei USA
	C. Villamizar		C. Villamizar
	Outer Cape Cod Network		Outer Cape Cod Network
	Consulting		Consulting
	February 22, 2012		June 20, 2012
	Composite Link USe Cases and Design Considerations		Composite Link Use Cases and Design Considerations
	draft-symmvo-rtgwg-cl-use-cases-00		draft-symmvo-rtgwg-cl-use-cases-01
	Abstract		Abstract
	This document provides a set of use cases and design considerations		This document provides a set of use cases and design considerations
	for composite links.		for composite links.
	Composite link is a formalization of multipath techniques currently		Composite link is a formalization of multipath techniques currently
	in use in IP and MPLS networks and a set of extensions to multipath		in use in IP and MPLS networks and a set of extensions to multipath
	techniques.		techniques.
	skipping to change at page 1, line 45 ¶		skipping to change at page 1, line 46 ¶
	Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering		Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
	Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute		Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
	working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-		working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
	Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.		Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
	Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months		Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
	and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any		and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
	time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference		time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
	material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."		material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
	This Internet-Draft will expire on August 25, 2012.		This Internet-Draft will expire on December 22, 2012.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the		Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
	document authors. All rights reserved.		document authors. All rights reserved.
	This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal		This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
	Provisions Relating to IETF Documents		Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
	(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of		(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
	publication of this document. Please review these documents		publication of this document. Please review these documents
	carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect		carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
	to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must		to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
	include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of		include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
	skipping to change at page 2, line 38 ¶		skipping to change at page 2, line 39 ¶
	7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12		7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
	8. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13		8. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
	9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13		9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
	9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13		9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
	9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13		9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
	Appendix A. More Details on Existing Network Operator		Appendix A. More Details on Existing Network Operator
	Practices and Protocol Usage . . . . . . . . . . . . 15		Practices and Protocol Usage . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
	Appendix B. Existing Multipath Standards and Techniques . . . . . 17		Appendix B. Existing Multipath Standards and Techniques . . . . . 17
	B.1. Common Multpath Load Spliting Techniques . . . . . . . . . 18		B.1. Common Multpath Load Spliting Techniques . . . . . . . . . 18
	B.2. Simple and Adaptive Load Balancing Multipath . . . . . . . 19		B.2. Simple and Adaptive Load Balancing Multipath . . . . . . . 19
	B.3. Traffic Split over Parallel Links . . . . . . . . . . . . 19		B.3. Traffic Split over Parallel Links . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
	B.4. Traffic Split over Multiple Paths . . . . . . . . . . . . 20		B.4. Traffic Split over Multiple Paths . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
	Appendix C. Characteristics of Transport in Core Networks . . . . 20		Appendix C. Characteristics of Transport in Core Networks . . . . 20
	Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22		Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
	1. Introduction		1. Introduction
	Composite link requirements are specified in		Composite link requirements are specified in
	[I-D.ietf-rtgwg-cl-requirement]. A composite link framework is		[I-D.ietf-rtgwg-cl-requirement]. A composite link framework is
	defined in [I-D.so-yong-rtgwg-cl-framework].		defined in [I-D.so-yong-rtgwg-cl-framework].
	skipping to change at page 13, line 12 ¶		skipping to change at page 13, line 12 ¶
	techniques, will be documented in the framework document if specific		techniques, will be documented in the framework document if specific
	to the overall framework of Composite Link, or in protocol extensions		to the overall framework of Composite Link, or in protocol extensions
	if specific to a given protocol extension defined later to support		if specific to a given protocol extension defined later to support
	Composite Link.		Composite Link.
	8. Acknowledgments		8. Acknowledgments
	Authors would like to thank [ no one so far ] for their reviews and		Authors would like to thank [ no one so far ] for their reviews and
	great suggestions.		great suggestions.
			In the interest of full disclosure of affiliation and in the interest
			of acknowledging sponsorship, past affiliations of authors are noted.
			Much of the work done by Ning So occurred while Ning was at Verizon.
			Much of the work done by Curtis Villamizar occurred while at
			Infinera. Infinera continues to sponsor this work on a consulting
			basis.
	9. References		9. References
	9.1. Normative References		9.1. Normative References
	[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate		[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
	Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.		Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
	9.2. Informative References		9.2. Informative References
	[I-D.ietf-rtgwg-cl-requirement]		[I-D.ietf-rtgwg-cl-requirement]
	skipping to change at page 22, line 32 ¶		skipping to change at page 22, line 39 ¶
	The important point is that IP/MPLS core network links have long ago		The important point is that IP/MPLS core network links have long ago
	exceeded 100 Gb/s and a small number of IP/MPLS LSP exceed 100 Gb/s.		exceeded 100 Gb/s and a small number of IP/MPLS LSP exceed 100 Gb/s.
	By the time 100 Gb/s circuits are widely deployed, IP/MPLS core		By the time 100 Gb/s circuits are widely deployed, IP/MPLS core
	network links are likely to exceed 1 Tb/s and many IP/MPLS LSP		network links are likely to exceed 1 Tb/s and many IP/MPLS LSP
	capacities are likely to exceed 100 Gb/s. Therefore multipath		capacities are likely to exceed 100 Gb/s. Therefore multipath
	techniques are likely here to stay.		techniques are likely here to stay.
	Authors' Addresses		Authors' Addresses
	So Ning		So Ning
	Verizon		Tata Communications
	2400 N. Glenville Ave.
	Richardson, TX 75082
	Phone: +1 972-729-7905
	Email: ning.so@verizonbusiness.com
			Email: ning.so@tatacommunications.com
	Andrew Malis		Andrew Malis
	Verizon		Verizon
	117 West St.		117 West St.
	Waltham, MA 02451		Waltham, MA 02451
	Phone: +1 781-466-2362		Phone: +1 781-466-2362
	Email: andrew.g.malis@verizon.com		Email: andrew.g.malis@verizon.com
	Dave McDysan		Dave McDysan
	Verizon		Verizon
	22001 Loudoun County PKWY		22001 Loudoun County PKWY
	Ashburn, VA 20147		Ashburn, VA 20147
	Email: dave.mcdysan@verizon.com		Email: dave.mcdysan@verizon.com
	Lucy Yong		Lucy Yong
	Huawei USA		Huawei USA
	1700 Alma Dr. Suite 500		5340 Legacy Dr.
	Plano, TX 75075		Plano, TX 75025
	Phone: +1 469-229-5387		Phone: +1 469-277-5837
	Email: lucyyong@huawei.com		Email: lucy.yong@huawei.com
	Curtis Villamizar		Curtis Villamizar
	Outer Cape Cod Network Consulting		Outer Cape Cod Network Consulting
	Email: curtis@occnc.com		Email: curtis@occnc.com
End of changes. 12 change blocks.
	20 lines changed or deleted		24 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/