idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-isis-gmpls-extensions-07.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) == 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 (~~), 4 warnings (==), 3 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group K. Kompella (Juniper Networks) 3 Internet Draft Y. Rekhter (Juniper Networks) 4 Expiration Date: July 2002 A. Banerjee (Calient Networks) 5 J. Drake (Calient Networks) 6 G. Bernstein (Ciena) 7 D. Fedyk (Nortel Networks) 8 E. Mannie (GTS Network) 9 D. Saha (Tellium) 10 V. Sharma (Metanoia, Inc.) 12 IS-IS Extensions in Support of Generalized MPLS 14 draft-ietf-isis-gmpls-extensions-07.txt 16 1. Status of this Memo 18 This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with 19 all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. 21 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 22 Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that 23 other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- 24 Drafts. 26 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 27 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 28 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 29 material or to cite them other than as ``work in progress.'' 31 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at 32 http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt 34 The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at 35 http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. 37 2. Abstract 39 This document specifies encoding of extensions to the IS-IS routing 40 protocol in support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching 41 (GMPLS). The description of the extensions is specified in [GMPLS- 42 ROUTING]. 44 3. Summary for Sub-IP Area 46 3.1. Summary 48 This document specifies encoding of extensions to the IS-IS routing 49 protocol in support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching 50 (GMPLS). The description of the extensions is specified in [GMPLS- 51 ROUTING]. 53 3.2. Where does it fit in the Picture of the Sub-IP Work 55 This work fits squarely in either CCAMP or IS-IS boxes. 57 3.3. Why is it Targeted at this WG 59 This draft is targeted at either the CCAMP or IS-IS WGs, because this 60 draft specifies the extensions to the IS-IS routing protocols in 61 support of GMPLS, because GMPLS is within the scope of CCAMP WG, and 62 because IS-IS is within the scope of the IS-IS WG. 64 3.4. Justification 66 The WG should consider this document as it specifies the extensions 67 to the IS-IS routing protocols in support of GMPLS. 69 4. Introduction 71 This document specifies extensions to the IS-IS routing protocol in 72 support of carrying link state information for Generalized Multi- 73 Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS). The set of required enhancements to 74 IS-IS are outlined in [GMPLS-ROUTING]. 76 5. IS-IS Routing Enhancements 78 In this section we define the enhancements to the TE properties of 79 GMPLS TE links that can be announced in IS-IS TE LSAs. 81 In this document, we enhance the sub-TLVs for the extended IS 82 reachability TLV (see [ISIS-TE]) in support of GMPLS. Specifically, 83 we add sub-TLVs for: Outgoing/Incoming Interface Identifier, Link 84 Protection Type, and Interface Switching Capability Descriptor. This 85 brings the list of sub-TLVs of the extended IS reachability TLV to: 87 Sub-TLV Type Length Name 88 3 4 Administrative group (color) 89 4 4 Link Local Identifier 90 5 4 Link Remote Identifier 91 6 4 IPv4 interface address 92 8 4 IPv4 neighbor address 93 9 4 Maximum link bandwidth 94 10 4 Reservable link bandwidth 95 11 32 Unreserved bandwidth 96 18 3 TE Default metric 97 20 2 Link Protection Type 98 21 variable Interface Switching Capability Descriptor 99 250-254 - Reserved for cisco specific extensions 100 255 - Reserved for future expansion 102 We further add one new TLV to the TE LSAs. 104 TLV Type Length Name 105 138 (TBD) variable Shared Risk Link Group 107 Finally, we add one more TLV to the Hello PDUs. 109 TLV Type Length Name 110 (TBD) 4 Link Identifier 111 5.1. Link Local Identifier 113 A Link Local Interface Identifier is a sub-TLV of the extended IS 114 reachability TLV with type 4, and length 4. 116 5.2. Link Remote Identifier 118 A Link Remote Identifier is a sub-TLV of the extended IS reachability 119 TLV with type 5, and length 4. 121 5.3. Link Protection Type 123 The Link Protection Type is is a sub-TLV (of type 20) of the 124 extended IS reachability TLV, with length two octets, the first of 125 which is a bit vector describing the protection capabilities of the 126 link. They are: 128 0x01 Extra Traffic 130 0x02 Unprotected 132 0x04 Shared 134 0x08 Dedicated 1:1 136 0x10 Dedicated 1+1 138 0x20 Enhanced 140 0x40 Reserved 142 0x80 Reserved 144 5.4. Interface Switching Capability Descriptor 146 The Interface Switching Capability Descriptor is a sub-TLV (of type 147 21) of the extended IS reachability TLV. The length is the length of 148 value field in octets. The format of the value field is as shown 149 below: 151 0 1 2 3 152 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 1 153 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 154 | Switching Cap | Encoding | Reserved | 155 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 156 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 0 | 157 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 158 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 1 | 159 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 160 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 2 | 161 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 162 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 3 | 163 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 164 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 4 | 165 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 166 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 5 | 167 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 168 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 6 | 169 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 170 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 7 | 171 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 172 | Switching Capability-specific information | 173 | (variable) | 174 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 176 The Switching Capability (Switching Cap) field contains one of the 177 following values: 179 1 Packet-Switch Capable-1 (PSC-1) 180 2 Packet-Switch Capable-2 (PSC-2) 181 3 Packet-Switch Capable-3 (PSC-3) 182 4 Packet-Switch Capable-4 (PSC-4) 183 51 Layer-2 Switch Capable (L2SC) 184 100 Time-Division-Multiplex Capable (TDM) 185 150 Lambda-Switch Capable (LSC) 186 200 Fiber-Switch Capable (FSC) 188 The Encoding field contains one of the values specified in Section 189 3.1.1 of [GMPLS-SIG]. 191 Maximum LSP Bandwidth is encoded as a list of eight 4 octet fields in 192 the IEEE floating point format, with priority 0 first and priority 7 193 last. The units are bytes (not bits!) per second. 195 The content of the Switching Capability specific information field 196 depends on the value of the Switching Capability field. 198 When the Switching Capability field is PSC-1, PSC-2, PSC-3, or PSC-4, 199 the specific information includes Interface MTU and Minimum LSP 200 Bandwidth. The Interface MTU is encoded as a two octets integer. The 201 Minimum LSP Bandwidth is is encoded in a 4 octets field in the IEEE 202 floating point format. The units are bytes (not bits!) per second. 204 When the Switching Capability field is L2SC, there is no specific 205 information. 207 When the Switching Capability field is TDM, the specific information 208 includes Minimum LSP Bandwidth, and an indication whether the 209 interface supports Standard or Arbitrary SONET/SDH. The Minimum LSP 210 Bandwidth is encoded in a 4 octets field in the IEEE floating point 211 format. The units are bytes (not bits!) per second. The indication 212 whether the interface supports Standard or Arbitrary SONET/SDH is 213 encoded as 1 octet. The value of this octet is 0 if the interface 214 supports Standard SONET/SDH, and 1 if the interface supports 215 Arbitrary SONET/SDH. 217 When the Switching Capability field is LSC, there is no specific 218 information. 220 The Interface Switching Capability Descriptor sub-TLV may occur more 221 than once within the extended IS reachability TLV (this is needed to 222 handle interfaces that support multiple switching capabilities). 224 5.5. Shared Risk Link Group TLV 226 The proposed SRLG (of type 138 TBD) contains a new data structure 227 consisting of: 229 7 octets of System ID and Pseudonode Number 230 1 octet Flag 231 4 octets of IPv4 interface address or 4 octets of an Outgoing 232 Interface Identifier 233 4 octets of IPv4 neighbor address or 4 octets of an Incoming 234 Interface Identifier 236 and a list of SRLG values, where each element in the list has 4 237 octets. The length of this TLV is 16 + 4 * (number of SRLG values). 238 The Least Significant Bit of the Flag octet indicates whether the 239 interface is numbered (set to 1), or unnumbered (set to 0). All other 240 bits are reserved and should be set to 0. 242 5.6. Link Identifier for Unnumbered Interfaces 244 The Link Identifier TLV is carried as part of the Point-to-point ISIS 245 Hello PDUs. The Type field of this TLV is TBD. The Length field of 246 this TLV is set to 4. The Value field of this TLV contains 4 octets 247 that encode the Identifier assigned to the link over which this PDU 248 is to be transmitted by the LSR that transmits the PDU. 250 6. Security Considerations 252 The extensions proposed in this document does not raise any new 253 security concerns. 255 7. Acknowledgements 257 The authors would like to thank Suresh Katukam, Jonathan Lang and 258 Quaizar Vohra for their comments on the draft. 260 8. References 262 [ISIS-TE] Smit, H., Li, T., "IS-IS Extensions for Traffic 263 Engineering", 264 draft-ietf-isis-traffic-03.txt (work in progress) 266 [GMPLS-SIG] Generalized MPLS Group, "Generalized MPLS - Signaling 267 Functional 268 Description", draft-ietf-mpls-generalized-signaling-04.txt (work 269 in progress) 271 [GMPLS-ROUTING] "Routing Extensions in Support of Generalized MPLS", 272 draft-many-ccamp-gmpls-routing-00.txt 274 9. Authors' Information 276 Kireeti Kompella 277 Juniper Networks, Inc. 278 1194 N. Mathilda Ave 279 Sunnyvale, CA 94089 280 Email: kireeti@juniper.net 281 Yakov Rekhter 282 Juniper Networks, Inc. 283 1194 N. Mathilda Ave 284 Sunnyvale, CA 94089 285 Email: yakov@juniper.net 287 Ayan Banerjee 288 Calient Networks 289 5853 Rue Ferrari 290 San Jose, CA 95138 291 Phone: +1.408.972.3645 292 Email: abanerjee@calient.net 294 John Drake 295 Calient Networks 296 5853 Rue Ferrari 297 San Jose, CA 95138 298 Phone: (408) 972-3720 299 Email: jdrake@calient.net 301 Greg Bernstein 302 Ciena Corporation 303 10480 Ridgeview Court 304 Cupertino, CA 94014 305 Phone: (408) 366-4713 306 Email: greg@ciena.com 308 Don Fedyk 309 Nortel Networks Corp. 310 600 Technology Park Drive 311 Billerica, MA 01821 312 Phone: +1-978-288-4506 313 Email: dwfedyk@nortelnetworks.com 314 Eric Mannie 315 GTS Network Services 316 RDI Department, Core Network Technology Group 317 Terhulpsesteenweg, 6A 318 1560 Hoeilaart, Belgium 319 Phone: +32-2-658.56.52 320 E-mail: eric.mannie@gtsgroup.com 322 Debanjan Saha 323 Tellium Optical Systems 324 2 Crescent Place 325 P.O. Box 901 326 Ocean Port, NJ 07757 327 Phone: (732) 923-4264 328 Email: dsaha@tellium.com 330 Vishal Sharma 331 Metanoia, Inc. 332 335 Elan Village Lane, Unit 203 333 San Jose, CA 95134-2539 334 Phone: +1 408-943-1794 335 Email: v.sharma@ieee.org