idnits 2.17.1 draft-hu-pce-stitching-lsp-association-00.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** There is 1 instance of too long lines in the document, the longest one being 14 characters in excess of 72. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (Dec 10, 2018) is 1965 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) == Unused Reference: 'I-D.cheng-spring-mpls-path-segment' is defined on line 194, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Outdated reference: A later version (-01) exists of draft-hu-mpls-sr-inter-domain-use-cases-00 == Outdated reference: A later version (-10) exists of draft-ietf-pce-association-group-06 == Outdated reference: A later version (-02) exists of draft-xiong-pce-stateful-pce-sr-inter-domain-00 Summary: 1 error (**), 0 flaws (~~), 5 warnings (==), 1 comment (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 PCE workgroup Fangwei Hu 3 Internet-Draft Quan Xiong 4 Intended status: Standards Track Greg Mirsky 5 Expires: June 13, 2019 ZTE Corporation 6 Weiqiang Cheng 7 China Mobile 8 Dec 10, 2018 10 Stitching LSP Association 11 draft-hu-pce-stitching-lsp-association-00.txt 13 Abstract 15 This document defines the stitching LSP association type and 16 stitching LSP association TLV for the inter-domain Segment Routing 17 MPLS-TP network. 19 Status of This Memo 21 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 22 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 24 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 25 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 26 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 27 Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 29 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 30 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 31 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 32 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 34 This Internet-Draft will expire on June 13, 2019. 36 Copyright Notice 38 Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 39 document authors. All rights reserved. 41 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 42 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 43 (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 44 publication of this document. Please review these documents 45 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 46 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 47 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 48 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 49 described in the Simplified BSD License. 51 Table of Contents 53 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 54 2. Conventions used in this document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 55 2.1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 56 2.2. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 57 3. Operation Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 58 4. Stitching LSP Association Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 59 4.1. Stitching LSP Association Object . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 60 4.2. Stitching TLV format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 61 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 62 6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 63 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 64 7.1. Association Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 65 7.2. Stitching Association TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 66 8. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 67 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 69 1. Introduction 71 [I-D.hu-mpls-sr-inter-domain-use-cases] provides stitching path label 72 to indicate the the packet from the border nodes to forward to 73 another AS domain. The border nodes should install the following 74 MPLS data entries: 76 incomging label: Stiching Path Label 77 outgoing label: the SID list of the next AS domain + next Stitching Path label 79 [I-D.xiong-pce-stateful-pce-sr-inter-domain] introduces the procedure 80 and the PCEP extension to form the inter-domain MPLS-TP MPLS data 81 entries. This document proposes the related LSP association group 82 extension. 84 2. Conventions used in this document 86 2.1. Terminology 88 2.2. Requirements Language 90 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 91 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and 92 "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 93 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all 94 capitals, as shown here. 96 3. Operation Overview 98 [I-D.ietf-pce-association-group] introduces a generic mechanism to 99 create a grouping of LSPs. This grouping can then be used to define 100 associations between sets of LSPs or between a set of LSPs and a set 101 of attributes. This document proposes a new optional association 102 object type called "stitching Association LSP type" and the related 103 TLV called "stitching association LSP TLV" to form the inter-domain 104 MPLS forwarding entry for the border nodes. 106 As defined in [I-D.ietf-pce-association-group], stitching LSP 107 Association could be created dynamically or configured by the 108 operator when operator-configured association is needed. 110 4. Stitching LSP Association Group 112 4.1. Stitching LSP Association Object 114 A new Association Type for the Association Object is defined in this 115 document, 117 Association Type (TBD) = Stitching Path Segment LSP Association 118 Group. 120 The Association Types is operator-configured associations in nature 121 and statically created by the operator on the PCEP peers. The LSP 122 belonging to these associations is conveyed via PCEP messages to the 123 PCEP peer. Operator-configured Association Range TLV 124 [I-D.ietf-pce-association-group] MUST NOT be sent for this 125 Association Type, and MUST be ignored, so that the entire range of 126 association ID can be used for it. 128 The Association ID, Association Source, optional Global Association 129 Source and optional Extended Association ID in the Stitching Path 130 Segment LSP Association Group Object are initialized using the 131 procedures defined in [I-D.ietf-pce-association-group] and [RFC7551]. 133 4.2. Stitching TLV format 135 The format of the Stitching LSP Association Group TLV is shown in 136 Figure 1. 138 0 1 2 3 139 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 1 140 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 141 | Type | Length | 142 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 143 | Reserved | 144 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 146 Figure 1: Stitching LSP Association Group TLV 148 The fields of the Stitching LSP Association Group TLV are following: 150 Type:16bits, it indicates the stitching LSP Association Group 151 TLV(TBD2, the value is assigned by IANA). 153 Length: the value is 4, it indicates the length of the TLV is 4 154 bytes. 156 Reserved: it is reserved for future use. 158 5. Security Considerations 160 6. Acknowledgements 162 7. IANA Considerations 164 7.1. Association Types 166 IANA is requested to make the assignment of values for the sub- 167 registry "ASSOCIATION Type Field" as follows: 169 +--------+------------------+ 170 | Value | Reference | 171 +--------+------------------+ 172 | TBD1 | [this document] | 173 +--------+------------------+ 175 Table 1 177 7.2. Stitching Association TLV 179 This document defines a new TLV for carrying additional information 180 of LSPs within a Stitching LSP Association Group. IANA is requested 181 to add the assignment of a new value in the existing "PCEP TLV Type 182 Indicators" registry as follows: 184 +-------+-------------------------------------+------------------+ 185 | Type | Description | Reference | 186 +-------+-------------------------------------+------------------+ 187 | TBD2 | Stitching LSP Association Group TLV | [this document] | 188 +-------+-------------------------------------+------------------+ 190 Table 2 192 8. Normative References 194 [I-D.cheng-spring-mpls-path-segment] 195 Cheng, W., Wang, L., Li, H., Chen, M., Gandhi, R., Zigler, 196 R., and S. Zhan, "Path Segment in MPLS Based Segment 197 Routing Network", draft-cheng-spring-mpls-path-segment-03 198 (work in progress), October 2018. 200 [I-D.hu-mpls-sr-inter-domain-use-cases] 201 hu, f., Xiong, Q., Mirsky, G., and W. Cheng, "Segment 202 Routing in MPLS-TP Inter-domain Use Cases", draft-hu-mpls- 203 sr-inter-domain-use-cases-00 (work in progress), December 204 2018. 206 [I-D.ietf-pce-association-group] 207 Minei, I., Crabbe, E., Sivabalan, S., Ananthakrishnan, H., 208 Dhody, D., and Y. Tanaka, "PCEP Extensions for 209 Establishing Relationships Between Sets of LSPs", draft- 210 ietf-pce-association-group-06 (work in progress), June 211 2018. 213 [I-D.xiong-pce-stateful-pce-sr-inter-domain] 214 Xiong, Q., hu, f., Mirsky, G., and W. Cheng, "Stateful PCE 215 for SR-MPLS-TP Inter-domain", draft-xiong-pce-stateful- 216 pce-sr-inter-domain-00 (work in progress), December 2018. 218 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 219 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, 220 DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, 221 . 223 [RFC7551] Zhang, F., Ed., Jing, R., and R. Gandhi, Ed., "RSVP-TE 224 Extensions for Associated Bidirectional Label Switched 225 Paths (LSPs)", RFC 7551, DOI 10.17487/RFC7551, May 2015, 226 . 228 [RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC 229 2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174, 230 May 2017, . 232 Authors' Addresses 234 Fangwei Hu 235 ZTE Corporation 236 No.889 Bibo Rd 237 Shanghai 201203 238 China 240 Phone: +86 21 68896273 241 Email: hu.fangwei@zte.com.cn 243 Quan Xiong 244 ZTE Corporation 245 No.6 Huashi Park Rd 246 Wuhan, Hubei 430223 247 China 249 Phone: +86 27 83531060 250 Email: xiong.quan@zte.com.cn 252 Greg Mirsky 253 ZTE Corporation 254 USA 256 Email: gregimirsky@gmail.com 258 Weiqiang Cheng 259 China Mobile 260 Beijing 261 China 263 Email: chengweiqiang@chinamobile.com