idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-isis-gmpls-extensions-15.txt: 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? Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** 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. ** There is 1 instance of too long lines in the document, the longest one being 3 characters in excess of 72. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the RFC 3978 Section 5.4 Copyright Line does not match the current year == Line 464 has weird spacing: '...for the purpo...' -- 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.) -- The document date (December 2002) is 7797 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Informational ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Summary: 5 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 2 warnings (==), 2 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group K. Kompella (Editor) 3 Internet Draft Y. Rekhter (Editor) 4 Category: Informational Juniper Networks 5 Expires: June 2003 December 2002 7 IS-IS Extensions in Support of Generalized MPLS 9 draft-ietf-isis-gmpls-extensions-15.txt 11 Status of this Memo 13 This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with 14 all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. 16 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 17 Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that 18 other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- 19 Drafts. 21 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 22 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 23 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 24 material or to cite them other than as ``work in progress.'' 26 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at 27 http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt 29 The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at 30 http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. 32 Copyright Notice 34 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2002). All Rights Reserved. 36 Abstract 38 This document specifies encoding of extensions to the IS-IS routing 39 protocol in support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching. 41 Summary for Sub-IP Area 43 (To be removed before publication) 45 0.1. 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 0.2. 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 0.3. 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 0.4. 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 1. Specification of Requirements 70 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 71 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 72 document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. 74 2. Introduction 76 This document specifies extensions to the IS-IS routing protocol in 77 support of carrying link state information for Generalized Multi- 78 Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS). The set of required enhancements 79 to IS-IS are outlined in [GMPLS-ROUTING]. 81 3. IS-IS Routing Enhancements 83 In this section we define the enhancements to the TE properties of 84 GMPLS TE links that can be announced in IS-IS TE LSAs. 86 In this document, we enhance the sub-TLVs for the extended IS 87 reachability TLV (see [ISIS-TE]) in support of GMPLS. Specifically, 88 we add the following sub-TLVs: 90 Sub-TLV Type Length Name 91 4 8 Link Local/Remote Identifiers 92 20 2 Link Protection Type 93 21 variable Interface Switching Capability Descriptor 95 We further add one new TLV to the TE LSAs. 97 TLV Type Length Name 98 138 variable Shared Risk Link Group 100 3.1. Link Local/Remote Identifiers 102 A Link Local Interface Identifiers is a sub-TLV of the extended IS 103 reachability TLV. The type of this sub-TLV is 4, and length is eight 104 octets. The value field of this sub-TLV contains four octets of Link 105 Local Identifier followed by four octets of Link Remote Idenfier (see 106 Section "Support for unnumbered links" of [GMPLS-ROUTING]). If the 107 Link Remote Identifier is unknown, it is set to 0. 109 0 1 2 3 110 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 1 111 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 112 | Link Local Identifier | 113 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 114 | Link Remote Identifier | 115 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 117 3.2. 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. 122 0 1 123 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 124 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 125 |Protection Cap | Reserved | 126 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 128 The first octet is a bit vector describing the protection 129 capabilities of the link (see Section "Link Protection Type" of 130 [GMPLS-ROUTING]). They are: 132 0x01 Extra Traffic 134 0x02 Unprotected 136 0x04 Shared 138 0x08 Dedicated 1:1 140 0x10 Dedicated 1+1 142 0x20 Enhanced 144 0x40 Reserved 146 0x80 Reserved 148 The second octet SHOULD be set to zero by the sender, and SHOULD be 149 ignored by the receiver. 151 The Link Protection Type sub-TLV may occur at most once within the 152 extended IS reachability TLV. 154 3.3. Interface Switching Capability Descriptor 156 The Interface Switching Capability Descriptor is a sub-TLV (of type 157 21) of the extended IS reachability TLV. The length is the length of 158 value field in octets. The format of the value field is as shown 159 below: 161 0 1 2 3 162 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 1 163 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 164 | Switching Cap | Encoding | Reserved | 165 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 166 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 0 | 167 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 168 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 1 | 169 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 170 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 2 | 171 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 172 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 3 | 173 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 174 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 4 | 175 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 176 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 5 | 177 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 178 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 6 | 179 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 180 | Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 7 | 181 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 182 | Switching Capability-specific information | 183 | (variable) | 184 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 186 The Switching Capability (Switching Cap) field contains one of the 187 following values: 189 1 Packet-Switch Capable-1 (PSC-1) 190 2 Packet-Switch Capable-2 (PSC-2) 191 3 Packet-Switch Capable-3 (PSC-3) 192 4 Packet-Switch Capable-4 (PSC-4) 193 51 Layer-2 Switch Capable (L2SC) 194 100 Time-Division-Multiplex Capable (TDM) 195 150 Lambda-Switch Capable (LSC) 196 200 Fiber-Switch Capable (FSC) 198 The Encoding field contains one of the values specified in Section 199 3.1.1 of [GMPLS-SIG]. 201 Maximum LSP Bandwidth is encoded as a list of eight 4 octet fields in 202 the IEEE floating point format, with priority 0 first and priority 7 203 last. The units are bytes (not bits!) per second. 205 The content of the Switching Capability specific information field 206 depends on the value of the Switching Capability field. 208 When the Switching Capability field is PSC-1, PSC-2, PSC-3, or PSC-4, 209 the Switching Capability specific information field includes Minimum 210 LSP Bandwidth and Interface MTU. 212 0 1 2 3 213 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 1 214 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 215 | Minimum LSP Bandwidth | 216 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 217 | Interface MTU | 218 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 220 The Minimum LSP Bandwidth is is encoded in a 4 octets field in the 221 IEEE floating point format. The units are bytes (not bits!) per 222 second. The Interface MTU is encoded as a 2 octets integer. 224 When the Switching Capability field is L2SC, there is no Switching 225 Capability specific information field present. 227 When the Switching Capability field is TDM, the Switching Capability 228 specific information field includes Minimum LSP Bandwidth and an 229 indication whether the interface supports Standard or Arbitrary 230 SONET/SDH. 232 0 1 2 3 233 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 1 234 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 235 | Minimum LSP Bandwidth | 236 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 237 | Indication | 238 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 240 The Minimum LSP Bandwidth is encoded in a 4 octets field in the IEEE 241 floating point format. The units are bytes (not bits!) per second. 242 The indication whether the interface supports Standard or Arbitrary 243 SONET/SDH is encoded as 1 octet. The value of this octet is 0 if the 244 interface supports Standard SONET/SDH, and 1 if the interface 245 supports Arbitrary SONET/SDH. 247 When the Switching Capability field is LSC, there is no Switching 248 Capability specific information field present. 250 To support interfaces that have more than one Interface Switching 251 Capability Descriptor (see Section "Interface Switching Capability 252 Descriptor" of [GMPLS-ROUTING]) the Interface Switching Capability 253 Descriptor sub-TLV may occur more than once within the extended IS 254 reachability TLV. 256 3.4. Shared Risk Link Group TLV 258 The SRLG TLV (of type 138 TBD) contains a data structure consisting 259 of: 261 6 octets of System ID 262 1 octet of Pseudonode Number 263 1 octet Flag 264 4 octets of IPv4 interface address or 4 octets of a Link Local 265 Identifier 266 4 octets of IPv4 neighbor address or 4 octets of a Link Remote 267 Identifier 269 and a list of SRLG values, where each element in the list has 4 270 octets. The length of this TLV is 16 + 4 * (number of SRLG values). 271 The Least Significant Bit of the Flag octet indicates whether the 272 interface is numbered (set to 1), or unnumbered (set to 0). All 273 other bits are reserved and should be set to 0. 275 The neighbor is identified by its System Id (6-octets), plus one 276 octet to indicate the pseudonode number if the neighbor is on a LAN 277 interface. 279 0 1 2 3 280 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 1 281 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 282 | System ID | 283 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 284 | System ID (cont.) | Pseudonode num| Flags | 285 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 286 | IPv4 interface address/Link Local Identifier | 287 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 288 | IPv4 neighbors address/Link Remote Identifier | 289 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 290 | Shared Risk Link Group Value | 291 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 292 | ............ | 293 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 294 | Shared Risk Link Group Value | 295 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 297 This TLV carries the Shared Risk Link Group information (see Section 298 "Shared Risk Link Group Information" of [GMPLS-ROUTING]). 300 3.5. Link Identifier for Unnumbered Interfaces 302 Link Identifiers are exchanged in the Extended Local Circuit ID field 303 of the "Point-to-Point Three-Way Adjacency" IS-IS Option type 304 [ISIS-3way]. 306 4. Implications on Graceful Restart 308 The restarting node should follow the ISIS restart procedures [ISIS- 309 RESTART], and the RSVP-TE restart procedures [GMPLS-RSVP]. 311 When the restarting node is going to originate its TE LSAs, these 312 LSAs should be originated with 0 unreserved bandwidth, Traffic 313 Engineering Default metric set to 0xffffff, and if the Link has LSC 314 or FSC as its Switching Capability then also with 0 as Max LSP 315 Bandwidth, until the node is able to determine the amount of 316 unreserved resources taking into account the resources reserved by 317 the already established LSPs that have been preserved across the 318 restart. Once the restarting node determines the amount of 319 unreserved resources, taking into account the resources reserved by 320 the already established LSPs that have been preserved across the 321 restart, the node should advertise these resources in its TE LSAs. 323 In addition in the case of a planned restart prior to restarting, the 324 restarting node SHOULD originate the TE LSAs with 0 as unreserved 325 bandwidth, and if the Link has LSC or FSC as its Switching Capability 326 then also with 0 as Max LSP Bandwidth. This would discourage new LSP 327 establishment through the restarting router. 329 Neighbors of the restarting node should continue advertise the actual 330 unreserved bandwidth on the TE links from the neighbors to that node. 332 Regular graceful restart should not be aborted if a TE LSA or TE 333 topology changes. TE graceful restart need not be aborted if a TE 334 LSA or TE topology changes. 336 5. Normative References 338 [GMPLS-ROUTING] Kompella, K., and Rekhter, Y. (Editors), "Routing 339 Extensions in Support of Generalized MPLS", (work in progress) 341 [GMPLS-RSVP] Berger, L. (Editors), "Generalized MPLS Signaling - 342 RSVP-TE Extensions", (work in progress) 344 [GMPLS-SIG] Berger, L. (Editor), "Generalized MPLS - Signaling 345 Functional Description", (work in progress) 347 [ISIS-3way] Katz, D., and Saluja, R., "Three-Way Handshake for IS-IS 348 Point-to-Point Adjacencies", (work in progress) 350 [ISIS-RESTART] Shand, M., "Restart signaling for ISIS", (work in 351 progress) 353 [ISIS-TE] Smit, H., Li, T., "IS-IS Extensions for Traffic 354 Engineering", (work in progress) 356 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 357 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 359 6. Security Considerations 361 The extensions proposed in this document do not raise any new 362 security concerns. 364 7. Acknowledgements 366 The authors would like to thank Jim Gibson, Suresh Katukam, Jonathan 367 Lang and Quaizar Vohra for their comments on the draft. 369 8. Contributors 371 Ayan Banerjee 372 Calient Networks 373 5853 Rue Ferrari 374 San Jose, CA 95138 375 Phone: +1.408.972.3645 376 Email: abanerjee@calient.net 377 John Drake 378 Calient Networks 379 5853 Rue Ferrari 380 San Jose, CA 95138 381 Phone: (408) 972-3720 382 Email: jdrake@calient.net 384 Greg Bernstein 385 Ciena Corporation 386 10480 Ridgeview Court 387 Cupertino, CA 94014 388 Phone: (408) 366-4713 389 Email: greg@ciena.com 391 Don Fedyk 392 Nortel Networks Corp. 393 600 Technology Park Drive 394 Billerica, MA 01821 395 Phone: +1-978-288-4506 396 Email: dwfedyk@nortelnetworks.com 398 Eric Mannie 399 Independent Consultant 400 E-mail: eric_mannie@hotmail.com 402 Debanjan Saha 403 Tellium Optical Systems 404 2 Crescent Place 405 P.O. Box 901 406 Ocean Port, NJ 07757 407 Phone: (732) 923-4264 408 Email: dsaha@tellium.com 410 Vishal Sharma 411 Metanoia, Inc. 412 335 Elan Village Lane, Unit 203 413 San Jose, CA 95134-2539 414 Phone: +1 408-943-1794 415 Email: v.sharma@ieee.org 417 9. Authors' Information 418 Kireeti Kompella 419 Juniper Networks, Inc. 420 1194 N. Mathilda Ave 421 Sunnyvale, CA 94089 422 Email: kireeti@juniper.net 424 Yakov Rekhter 425 Juniper Networks, Inc. 426 1194 N. Mathilda Ave 427 Sunnyvale, CA 94089 428 Email: yakov@juniper.net 430 10. Intellectual Property Rights Notices 432 The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any 433 intellectual property or other rights that might be claimed to 434 pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in 435 this document or the extent to which any license under such rights 436 might or might not be available; neither does it represent that it 437 has made any effort to identify any such rights. Information on the 438 IETF's procedures with respect to rights in standards-track and 439 standards-related documentation can be found in BCP-11. Copies of 440 claims of rights made available for publication and any assurances of 441 licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to 442 obtain a general license or permission for the use of such 443 proprietary rights by implementors or users of this specification can 444 be obtained from the IETF Secretariat. 446 The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any 447 copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary 448 rights which may cover technology that may be required to practice 449 this standard. Please address the information to the IETF Executive 450 Director. 452 Full Copyright Statement 454 Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2002). All Rights Reserved. 456 This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to 457 others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it 458 or assist in its implmentation may be prepared, copied, published and 459 distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind, 460 provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are 461 included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this 462 document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing 463 the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other 464 Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of 465 developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for 466 copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be 467 followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than 468 English. 470 The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be 471 revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns. 473 This document and the information contained herein is provided on an 474 "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING 475 TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING 476 BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION 477 HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF 478 MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.