idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-isis-gmpls-extensions-03.txt: ** The Abstract section seems to be numbered Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** Looks like you're using RFC 2026 boilerplate. This must be updated to follow RFC 3978/3979, as updated by RFC 4748. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The document seems to lack a 1id_guidelines paragraph about 6 months document validity -- however, there's a paragraph with a matching beginning. Boilerplate error? == No 'Intended status' indicated for this document; assuming Proposed Standard == The page length should not exceed 58 lines per page, but there was 8 longer pages, the longest (page 2) being 61 lines Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The document seems to lack an Introduction section. ** The document seems to lack an IANA Considerations section. (See Section 2.2 of https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist for how to handle the case when there are no actions for IANA.) ** The document seems to lack an Authors' Addresses Section. ** The document seems to lack separate sections for Informative/Normative References. All references will be assumed normative when checking for downward references. ** There is 1 instance of too long lines in the document, the longest one being 3 characters in excess of 72. ** The abstract seems to contain references ([GMPLS-ROUTING]), which it shouldn't. Please replace those with straight textual mentions of the documents in question. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- The document seems to lack a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, but may have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008. If you have contacted all the original authors and they are all willing to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust, then this is fine, and you can ignore this comment. If not, you may need to add the pre-RFC5378 disclaimer. (See the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.) -- Couldn't find a document date in the document -- date freshness check skipped. Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) -- Looks like a reference, but probably isn't: '3' on line 80 == Unused Reference: 'ISIS-TE' is defined on line 234, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Outdated reference: A later version (-05) exists of draft-ietf-isis-traffic-03 ** Downref: Normative reference to an Informational draft: draft-ietf-isis-traffic (ref. 'ISIS-TE') == Outdated reference: A later version (-09) exists of draft-ietf-mpls-generalized-signaling-04 -- Possible downref: Normative reference to a draft: ref. 'GMPLS-ROUTING' Summary: 10 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 5 warnings (==), 4 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 Network Working Group K. Kompella (Juniper Networks) 2 Internet Draft Y. Rekhter (Juniper Networks) 3 Expiration Date: February 2002 A. Banerjee (Calient Networks) 4 J. Drake (Calient Networks) 5 G. Bernstein (Ciena) 6 D. Fedyk (Nortel Networks) 7 E. Mannie (GTS Network) 8 D. Saha (Tellium) 9 V. Sharma (Tellabs) 11 IS-IS Extensions in Support of Generalized MPLS 13 draft-ietf-isis-gmpls-extensions-03.txt 15 1. Status of this Memo 17 This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with 18 all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. 20 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 21 Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that 22 other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- 23 Drafts. 25 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 26 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 27 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 28 material or to cite them other than as ``work in progress.'' 30 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at 31 http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt 33 The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at 34 http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. 36 2. Abstract 38 This document specifies encoding of extensions to the IS-IS routing 39 protocol in support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching 40 (GMPLS). The description of the extensions is specified in [GMPLS- 41 ROUTING]. 43 3. Summary for Sub-IP Area 45 3.1. Summary 47 This document specifies encoding of extensions to the IS-IS routing 48 protocol in support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching 49 (GMPLS). The description of the extensions is specified in [GMPLS- 50 ROUTING]. 52 3.2. Where does it fit in the Picture of the Sub-IP Work 54 This work fits squarely in either CCAMP or IS-IS boxes. 56 3.3. Why is it Targeted at this WG 58 This draft is targeted at either the CCAMP or IS-IS WGs, because this 59 draft specifies the extensions to the IS-IS routing protocols in 60 support of GMPLS, because GMPLS is within the scope of CCAMP WG, and 61 because IS-IS is within the scope of the IS-IS WG. 63 3.4. Justification 65 The WG should consider this document as it specifies the extensions 66 to the IS-IS routing protocols in support of GMPLS. 68 4. Introduction 70 This document specifies extensions to the IS-IS routing protocol in 71 support of carrying link state information for Generalized Multi- 72 Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS). The set of required enhancements to 73 IS-IS are outlined in [GMPLS-ROUTING]. 75 5. IS-IS Routing Enhancements 77 In this section we define the enhancements to the TE properties of 78 GMPLS TE links that can be announced in IS-IS TE LSAs. In this 79 document, we enhance the sub-TLVs for the extended IS reachability 80 TLV (see [3]) in support of GMPLS. Specifically, we add sub-TLVs 81 for: Outgoing/Incoming Interface Identifier, Link Protection Type, 82 and Interface Switching Capability Descriptor. This brings the list 83 of sub-TLVs of the extended IS reachability TLV to: 85 Sub-TLV Type Length Name 86 3 4 Administrative group (color) 87 4 4 Outgoing Interface Identifier 88 5 4 Incoming Interface Identifier 89 6 4 IPv4 interface address 90 8 4 IPv4 neighbor address 91 9 4 Maximum link bandwidth 92 10 4 Reservable link bandwidth 93 11 32 Unreserved bandwidth 94 18 3 TE Default metric 95 20 2 Link Protection Type 96 21 variable Interface Switching Capability Descriptor 97 250-254 - Reserved for cisco specific extensions 98 255 - Reserved for future expansion 100 We further add one new TLV. 102 TLV Type Length Name 103 138 (TBD) variable Shared Risk Link Group 105 5.1. Outgoing Interface Identifier 107 An Outgoing Interface Identifier is a sub-TLV of the extended IS 108 reachability TLV with type 4, length 4 and value equal to the 109 assigned identifier. 111 5.2. Incoming Interface Identifier 113 An Incoming Interface Identifier is a sub-TLV of the extended IS 114 reachability TLV with type 5, length 4 and value equal to L's 115 incoming interface identifier. 117 5.3. Link Protection Type 119 The Link Protection Type is is a sub-TLV (of type 20) of the 120 extended IS reachability TLV, with length two octets, the first of 121 which is a bit vector describing the protection capabilities of the 122 link. They are: 124 0x01 Extra Traffic 126 0x02 Unprotected 128 0x04 Shared 130 0x08 Dedicated 1:1 132 0x10 Dedicated 1+1 134 0x20 Enhanced 136 0x40 Reserved 138 0x80 Reserved 140 5.4. Interface Switching Capability Descriptor 142 The Interface Switching Capability Descriptor is a sub-TLV (of type 143 21) of the extended IS reachability TLV. The length is the length of 144 value field in octets. The format of the value field is as shown 145 below: 147 0 1 2 3 148 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 1 149 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 150 | Switching Cap | Encoding | Reserved | 151 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 152 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 0 | 153 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 154 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 1 | 155 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 156 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 2 | 157 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 158 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 3 | 159 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 160 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 4 | 161 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 162 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 5 | 163 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 164 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 6 | 165 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 166 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 7 | 167 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 168 | Switching Capability-specific information | 169 | (variable) | 170 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 172 The Switching Capability (Switching Cap) field contains one of the 173 following values: 175 1 Packet-Switch Capable-1 (PSC-1) 176 2 Packet-Switch Capable-2 (PSC-2) 177 3 Packet-Switch Capable-3 (PSC-3) 178 4 Packet-Switch Capable-4 (PSC-4) 179 51 Layer-2 Switch Capable (L2SC) 180 100 Time-Division-Multiplex Capable (TDM) 181 150 Lambda-Switch Capable (LSC) 182 200 Fiber-Switch Capable (FSC) 184 The Encoding field contains one of the values specified in Section 185 3.1.1 of [GMPLS-SIG]. 187 Maximum LSP Bandwidth is encoded as a list of eight 4 octet fields in 188 the IEEE floating point format, with priority 0 first and priority 7 189 last. 191 The content of the Switching Capability specific information field 192 depends on the value of the Switching Capability field. 194 When the Switching Capability field is PSC-1, PSC-2, PSC-3, PSC-4, or 195 L2SC, there is no specific information. 197 When the Switching Capability field is TDM, the specific information 198 includes Minimum LSP Bandwidth, which is is encoded in a 4 octets 199 field in the IEEE floating point format. 201 When the Switching Capability field is LSC, there is no specific 202 information. 204 5.5. Shared Risk Link Group TLV 206 The proposed SRLG (of type 138 TBD) contains a new data structure 207 consisting of: 209 7 octets of System ID and Pseudonode Number 210 1 octet Flag 211 4 octets of IPv4 interface address or 4 octets of an Outgoing 212 Interface Identifier 213 4 octets of IPv4 neighbor address or 4 octets of an Incoming 214 Interface Identifier 216 and a list of SRLG values, where each element in the list has 4 217 octets. The length of this TLV is 16 + 4 * (number of SRLG values). 218 The Least Significant Bit of the Flag octet indicates whether the 219 interface is numbered (set to 1), or unnumbered (set to 0). All other 220 bits are reserved and should be set to 0. 222 6. Security Considerations 224 The extensions proposed in this document does not raise any new 225 security concerns. 227 7. Acknowledgements 229 The authors would like to thank Suresh Katukam, Jonathan Lang and 230 Quaizar Vohra for their comments on the draft. 232 8. References 234 [ISIS-TE] Smit, H., Li, T., "IS-IS Extensions for Traffic 235 Engineering", 236 draft-ietf-isis-traffic-03.txt (work in progress) 238 [GMPLS-SIG] Generalized MPLS Group, "Generalized MPLS - Signaling 239 Functional 240 Description", draft-ietf-mpls-generalized-signaling-04.txt (work 241 in progress) 243 [GMPLS-ROUTING] "Routing Extensions in Support of Generalized MPLS", 244 draft-many-ccamp-gmpls-routing-00.txt 246 9. Authors' Information 248 Kireeti Kompella 249 Juniper Networks, Inc. 250 1194 N. Mathilda Ave 251 Sunnyvale, CA 94089 252 Email: kireeti@juniper.net 254 Yakov Rekhter 255 Juniper Networks, Inc. 256 1194 N. Mathilda Ave 257 Sunnyvale, CA 94089 258 Email: yakov@juniper.net 260 Ayan Banerjee 261 Calient Networks 262 5853 Rue Ferrari 263 San Jose, CA 95138 264 Phone: +1.408.972.3645 265 Email: abanerjee@calient.net 266 John Drake 267 Calient Networks 268 5853 Rue Ferrari 269 San Jose, CA 95138 270 Phone: (408) 972-3720 271 Email: jdrake@calient.net 273 Greg Bernstein 274 Ciena Corporation 275 10480 Ridgeview Court 276 Cupertino, CA 94014 277 Phone: (408) 366-4713 278 Email: greg@ciena.com 280 Don Fedyk 281 Nortel Networks Corp. 282 600 Technology Park Drive 283 Billerica, MA 01821 284 Phone: +1-978-288-4506 285 Email: dwfedyk@nortelnetworks.com 287 Eric Mannie 288 GTS Network Services 289 RDI Department, Core Network Technology Group 290 Terhulpsesteenweg, 6A 291 1560 Hoeilaart, Belgium 292 Phone: +32-2-658.56.52 293 E-mail: eric.mannie@gtsgroup.com 295 Debanjan Saha 296 Tellium Optical Systems 297 2 Crescent Place 298 P.O. Box 901 299 Ocean Port, NJ 07757 300 Phone: (732) 923-4264 301 Email: dsaha@tellium.com 302 Vishal Sharma 303 Jasmine Networks, Inc. 304 3061 Zanker Rd, Suite B 305 San Jose, CA 95134 306 Phone: (408) 895-5000