idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-mpls-tp-ach-tlv-00.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The document seems to lack a License Notice according IETF Trust Provisions of 28 Dec 2009, Section 6.b.i or Provisions of 12 Sep 2009 Section 6.b -- however, there's a paragraph with a matching beginning. Boilerplate error? (You're using the IETF Trust Provisions' Section 6.b License Notice from 12 Feb 2009 rather than one of the newer Notices. See https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info/.) 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 : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (June 5, 2009) is 5439 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) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 4379 (ref. '2') (Obsoleted by RFC 8029) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 2460 (ref. '4') (Obsoleted by RFC 8200) == Outdated reference: A later version (-10) exists of draft-ietf-mpls-tp-requirements-08 == Outdated reference: A later version (-12) exists of draft-ietf-mpls-tp-framework-00 == Outdated reference: A later version (-06) exists of draft-ietf-mpls-tp-gach-dcn-03 Summary: 3 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 4 warnings (==), 1 comment (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 MPLS S. Boutros 3 Internet-Draft S. Bryant, Ed. 4 Intended status: Standards Track S. Sivabalan 5 Expires: December 7, 2009 G . Swallow 6 D. Ward 7 Cisco Systems 8 June 5, 2009 10 Definition of ACH TLV Structure 11 draft-ietf-mpls-tp-ach-tlv-00 13 Status of this Memo 15 This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the 16 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 18 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 19 Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that 20 other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- 21 Drafts. 23 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 24 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 25 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 26 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 28 The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at 29 http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. 31 The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at 32 http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. 34 This Internet-Draft will expire on December 7, 2009. 36 Copyright Notice 38 Copyright (c) 2009 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 in effect on the date of 43 publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info). 44 Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights 45 and restrictions with respect to this document. 47 Abstract 49 In some application of the associated channel header (ACH), it is 50 necessary to have the ability to include a set of TLVs to provide 51 additional context information for the ACH payload. This document 52 defines a number of TLV types. 54 The following notes (up until the start of "Requirements Language" 55 will be deleted before Working Group Last Call 57 NOTE the family of Address Types is known to be incomplete. The 58 authors request that members of the MPLS-TP community provide details 59 of their required address formats in the form of text for the 60 creation of an additional sections similar to Section 3.1. 62 NOTE other TLV types will be added in further revisions of this 63 document. The authors request that members if the MPLS-TP community 64 requiring new TLVs to complete there MPLS-TP specifications provide 65 details of their required TLV in the form of text for the creation of 66 additional sections similar to Section 2.2. 68 NOTE The intension is to keep this document as a living list of TLVs 69 for some time. When the Working Groups consider that we have 70 captured the majority of the TLVs we will close the document and 71 submit for publication. 73 Requirements Language 75 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 76 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 77 document are to be interpreted as described in RFC2119 [1]. 79 Table of Contents 81 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 82 2. ACH TLV Object Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 83 2.1. The Null TLV Object . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 84 2.2. Source Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 85 2.3. Destination Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 86 2.4. Label Switched Path Identifier (LSPI) . . . . . . . . . . 6 87 2.5. Pseudowire Identifier (PWI) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 88 3. ACH Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 89 3.1. IPv4 Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 90 3.2. IPv6 Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 91 4. ACH Protocol ID TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 92 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 93 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 94 7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 95 7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 96 7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 97 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 99 1. Introduction 101 The MPLS generic associated channel header specification [7] (GACH) 102 describes a TLV structure that is used to provide additional context 103 information for the ACH payload. This document defines a number of 104 TLVs that are required by the MPLS-TP design [8], [9]. One use of 105 these TLVs to identify the source and/or intended destination of the 106 ACH payload for use in transport networks. However the use of this 107 construct is not limited to providing addressing information nor is 108 the applicability restricted to transport network applications. 110 Additionally TLVs from defined in this document may be used as sub- 111 TLVs in the construction of compound TLV structures. 113 2. ACH TLV Object Definitions 115 This section provides the definition for a number of ACH TLV objects. 116 In each case the length in the TLV header is the length of just the 117 value component. 119 2.1. The Null TLV Object 121 The Null TLV provides an OPTIONAL mechanism of restoring 32bit 122 alignment of the following element in the packet and also provides an 123 OPTIONAL mechanism to reserve space in the packet to be used by TLV 124 objects that will be written by LSR that perform some operation on 125 the packet at a later time. For security reasons the value must be 126 zero. 128 0 1 2 3 129 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 1 130 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 131 | AchTlvType = 0 | Length | 132 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 133 ~ Value = 0 ~ 134 | | 135 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 137 Figure 1: Null TLV Object 139 2.2. Source Address 141 This TLV specifies the source address (SA) of an ACH packet. 143 Where the packet is associated with a maintenance request/response 144 operation it refers to the requester of the operation, i.e. It is 145 the address of the Maintenance End Point that initiated the operation 146 being either requested, or being responded to. 148 The address is an ACH address as described in Section 3. 150 0 1 2 3 151 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 1 152 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 153 | AchTlvType = 1 | Length | 154 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 155 ~ Address | 156 | | 157 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 159 Figure 2: Source Address 161 2.3. Destination Address 163 This TLV specifies the destination address (DA) of an ACH packet. 165 Where the packet is associated with a maintenance request/response 166 operation it refers to the target of the operation, i.e. It is the 167 address of the Maintenance End Point or Maintenance Intermediate 168 Point that has been requested to execute the operation being either 169 requested, or being responded to. 171 The address is an ACH address as described in Section 3. 173 0 1 2 3 174 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 1 175 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 176 | AchTlvType = 2 | Length | 177 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 178 ~ Address | 179 | | 180 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 182 Figure 3: Destination Address 184 2.4. Label Switched Path Identifier (LSPI) 186 This TLV is used to identify a Label Switched Path (LSP). 188 0 1 2 3 189 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 1 190 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 191 | AchTlvType = 3 | Length | 192 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 193 ~ TBD | 194 | | 195 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 197 Figure 4: Label Switched Path Identifier 199 This will draw on the contents of [2]. Further material will be 200 added in a future version of this document. 202 2.5. Pseudowire Identifier (PWI) 204 This TLV is used to identify a pseudowire. 206 0 1 2 3 207 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 1 208 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 209 | AchTlvType = 4 | Length | 210 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 211 ~ TBD | 212 | | 213 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 215 Figure 5: Pseudowire Identifier 217 This will draw on the contents of [2]. Further material will be 218 added in a future version of this document. 220 3. ACH Addresses 222 This section is incomplete. Definitions of other address types will 223 be provided in a future version of this document. The authors would 224 like to take input from other members of the MPLS-TP design community 225 as to the required additional addressing types and the correct way to 226 represent them in this framework. 228 Addresses are expressed in the following TLV format. This 229 representation allows ACH TLVs to be specified in a format that is 230 independent of the address that are to be used in the TV instance. 231 Although many address types are of fixed length, and some which are 232 not incorporate a length indicator, this may not always be the case 233 and hence a length field is incorporated in the address TLV. 235 0 1 2 3 236 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 1 237 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 238 | AdrType | Length | 239 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 240 ~ Address | 241 | | 242 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 244 3.1. IPv4 Address 245 0 1 2 3 246 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 1 247 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 248 | AdrType = 1 | Length = 4 | 249 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 250 | IPv4 Address | 251 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 253 This address TLV contains an IPv4 address as defined in [3]. 255 3.2. IPv6 Address 257 0 1 2 3 258 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 1 259 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 260 | AdrType = 2 | Length = 16 | 261 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 262 ~ IPv6 Address | 263 | | 264 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 266 This address TLV contains an IPv6 address as defined in [4] 268 4. ACH Protocol ID TLV 270 The ACH Protocol ID TLV is used to identify the payload protocol type 271 for a message carried on the GACH. The TLV is OPTIONAL in the GACH 272 header, but MUST be present for the Data Communications Network (DCN) 273 [10] . 275 0 1 2 3 276 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 1 277 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 278 | AchTLVType = 5 | Length = 2 | 279 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 280 | PID | 281 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 283 The value of the Protocol Identifier field is taken from PPP DLL 284 Protocol Number Registry [5], [6]. 286 5. Security Considerations 288 This specification defines a mechanism to identify a set of protocol 289 parameters. The necessary security considerations will be described 290 in the definition of the protocols that uses these parameters. 292 6. IANA Considerations 294 IANA is requested to create two new registries in the pseudowire name 295 spaces: the ACH TLV Registry and the ACH Address Type Registry. 297 The ACH TLV Registry should be initialized with the following 298 entries. The allocation policy for this registry is IETF consensus. 300 Name Type Length Description Reference 301 (octets) 302 Null 0 3 Null TLV This Draft 303 SA 1 var Source Addr This Draft 304 DA 2 var Dest Addr This Draft 305 LSPI 3 var LSP Identifier This Draft 306 PWI 4 var PW Identifier This Draft 307 PID 5 2 ACH Protocol ID This Draft 309 The ACH Address Type Registry should be initialized with the 310 following entries. The allocation policy for this registry is IETF 311 consensus. 313 Name Type Length Description Reference 314 (octets) 315 Null 0 Reserved 316 IPv4 1 4 IPv4 Address This Draft 317 IPv6 2 16 IPv6 Address This Draft 319 7. References 321 7.1. Normative References 323 [1] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement 324 Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 326 [2] Kompella, K. and G. Swallow, "Detecting Multi-Protocol Label 327 Switched (MPLS) Data Plane Failures", RFC 4379, February 2006. 329 [3] Postel, J., "Internet Protocol", STD 5, RFC 791, 330 September 1981. 332 [4] Deering, S. and R. Hinden, "Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6) 333 Specification", RFC 2460, December 1998. 335 [5] Simpson, W., "The Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP)", STD 51, 336 RFC 1661, July 1994. 338 [6] Schryver, V., "IANA Considerations for the Point-to-Point 339 Protocol (PPP)", BCP 88, RFC 3818, June 2004. 341 7.2. Informative References 343 [7] Bocci, M., Vigoureux, M., Bryant, S., Swallow, G., Ward, D., 344 and R. Aggarwal, "MPLS Generic Associated Channel", 345 draft-ietf-mpls-tp-gach-gal-06 (work in progress), May 2009. 347 [8] Niven-Jenkins, B., Brungard, D., Betts, M., Sprecher, N., and 348 S. Ueno, "MPLS-TP Requirements", 349 draft-ietf-mpls-tp-requirements-08 (work in progress), 350 May 2009. 352 [9] Bocci, M., Bryant, S., and L. Levrau, "A Framework for MPLS in 353 Transport Networks", draft-ietf-mpls-tp-framework-00 (work in 354 progress), November 2008. 356 [10] Beller, D. and A. Farrel, "An Inband Data Communication Network 357 For the MPLS Transport Profile", draft-ietf-mpls-tp-gach-dcn-03 358 (work in progress), May 2009. 360 Authors' Addresses 362 Sami Boutros 363 Cisco Systems 365 Phone: 366 Fax: 367 Email: sboutros@cisco.com 368 URI: 370 Stewart Bryant (editor) 371 Cisco Systems 373 Phone: 374 Fax: 375 Email: stbryant@cisco.com 376 URI: 378 Siva Sivabalan 379 Cisco Systems 381 Phone: 382 Fax: 383 Email: msiva@cisco.com 384 URI: 386 George Swallow 387 Cisco Systems 389 Phone: 390 Fax: 391 Email: swallow@cisco.com 392 URI: 394 David Ward 395 Cisco Systems 397 Phone: 398 Fax: 399 Email: dward@cisco.com 400 URI: