[Docs] [txt|pdf] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]

Versions: 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 RFC 4205

Network Working Group                                K. Kompella, Editor
Internet Draft                                       Y. Rekhter,  Editor
Category: Informational                                 Juniper Networks
Updates: <isis te>                                          October 2003
Expires: April 2004

               IS-IS Extensions in Support of Generalized
                     Multi-Protocol Label Switching

                draft-ietf-isis-gmpls-extensions-19.txt


Status of this Memo

   This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
   all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that
   other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
   Drafts.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as ``work in progress.''

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.


Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003).  All Rights Reserved.














Kompella & Rekhter            Informational                     [Page 1]

Internet Draft         IS-IS Extensions for GMPLS           October 2003


Abstract

   This document specifies encoding of extensions to the IS-IS routing
   protocol in support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching.


Specification of Requirements

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].


Changes since last revision

   (RFC Editor: remove this section before publication.)

   Incorporated IESG comments: updated Security Considerations and IANA
   Considerations.


1. Introduction

   This document specifies extensions to the IS-IS routing protocol in
   support of carrying link state information for Generalized
   Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS).  The set of required
   enhancements to IS-IS are outlined in [GMPLS-ROUTING].  Support for
   unnumbered interfaces assumes support for the "Point-to-Point
   Three-Way Adjacency" IS-IS Option type [ISIS-3way].

   In this section we define the enhancements to the Traffic Engineering
   (TE) properties of GMPLS TE links that can be announced in IS-IS Link
   State Protocol Data Units.

   In this document, we enhance the sub-TLVs for the extended IS
   reachability TLV (see [ISIS-TE]) in support of GMPLS.  Specifically,
   we add the following sub-TLVs:

      Sub-TLV Type      Length    Name
                 4           8    Link Local/Remote Identifiers
                20           2    Link Protection Type
                21    variable    Interface Switching Capability
                                  Descriptor

   We further add one new TLV to the TE TLVs:

          TLV Type      Length    Name
               138    variable    Shared Risk Link Group



Kompella & Rekhter            Informational                     [Page 2]

Internet Draft         IS-IS Extensions for GMPLS           October 2003


1.1. Link Local/Remote Identifiers

   A Link Local Interface Identifiers is a sub-TLV of the extended IS
   reachability TLV.  The type of this sub-TLV is 4, and length is eight
   octets.  The value field of this sub-TLV contains four octets of Link
   Local Identifier followed by four octets of Link Remote Idenfier (see
   Section "Support for unnumbered links" of [GMPLS-ROUTING]).  If the
   Link Remote Identifier is unknown, it is set to 0.

   The following illustrates encoding of the Value field of the Link
   Local/Remote Identifiers sub-TLV.

       0                   1                   2                   3
       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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                  Link Local Identifier                        |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                  Link Remote Identifier                       |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   The Link Local/Remote Identifiers sub-TLV MUST NOT occur more than
   once within the extended IS reachability TLV.  If the Link
   Local/Remote Idenfitiers sub-TLV occurs more than once within the
   extended IS reachability TLV, the receiver SHOULD ignore all these
   sub-TLVs.

1.2. Link Protection Type

   The Link  Protection Type is is a sub-TLV (of type 20) of the
   extended IS reachability TLV, with length two octets.

   The following illustrates encoding of the Value field of the Link
   Protection Type sub-TLV.

       0                   1
       0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |Protection Cap |    Reserved   |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   The first octet is a bit vector describing the protection
   capabilities of the link (see Section "Link Protection Type" of
   [GMPLS-ROUTING]).  They are:

      0x01  Extra Traffic

      0x02  Unprotected




Kompella & Rekhter            Informational                     [Page 3]

Internet Draft         IS-IS Extensions for GMPLS           October 2003


      0x04  Shared

      0x08  Dedicated 1:1

      0x10  Dedicated 1+1

      0x20  Enhanced

      0x40  Reserved

      0x80  Reserved

   The second octet SHOULD be set to zero by the sender, and SHOULD be
   ignored by the receiver.

   The Link Protection Type sub-TLV MUST NOT occur more than once within
   the extended IS reachability TLV.  If the Link Protection Type
   sub-TLV occurs more than once within the extended IS reachability
   TLV, the receiver SHOULD ignore all these sub-TLVs.

1.3. Interface Switching Capability Descriptor

   The Interface Switching Capability Descriptor is a sub-TLV (of type
   21) of the extended IS reachability TLV.  The length is the length of
   value field in octets.  The following illustrates encoding of the
   Value field of the Interface Switching Capability Descriptor sub-TLV.

       0                   1                   2                   3
       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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      | Switching Cap |   Encoding    |           Reserved            |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 0              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 1              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 2              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 3              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 4              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 5              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 6              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 7              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+



Kompella & Rekhter            Informational                     [Page 4]

Internet Draft         IS-IS Extensions for GMPLS           October 2003


      |        Switching Capability-specific information              |
      |                  (variable)                                   |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   The Switching Capability (Switching Cap) field contains one of the
   following values:


           1     Packet-Switch Capable-1 (PSC-1)
           2     Packet-Switch Capable-2 (PSC-2)
           3     Packet-Switch Capable-3 (PSC-3)
           4     Packet-Switch Capable-4 (PSC-4)
           51    Layer-2 Switch Capable  (L2SC)
           100   Time-Division-Multiplex Capable (TDM)
           150   Lambda-Switch Capable   (LSC)
           200   Fiber-Switch Capable    (FSC)


   The Encoding field contains one of the values specified in Section
   3.1.1 of [GMPLS-SIG].

   Maximum LSP Bandwidth is encoded as a list of eight 4 octet fields in
   the IEEE floating point format [IEEE], with priority 0 first and
   priority 7 last.  The units are bytes (not bits!) per second.

   The content of the Switching Capability specific information field
   depends on the value of the Switching Capability field.

   When the Switching Capability field is PSC-1, PSC-2, PSC-3, or PSC-4,
   the Switching Capability specific information field includes Minimum
   LSP Bandwidth and Interface MTU.

       0                   1                   2                   3
       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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                  Minimum LSP Bandwidth                        |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |           Interface MTU       |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   The Minimum LSP Bandwidth is is encoded in a 4 octets field in the
   IEEE floating point format.  The units are bytes (not bits!) per
   second.  The Interface MTU is encoded as a 2 octets integer, and
   carries the MTU value in the units of bytes.

   When the Switching Capability field is L2SC, there is no Switching
   Capability specific information field present.




Kompella & Rekhter            Informational                     [Page 5]

Internet Draft         IS-IS Extensions for GMPLS           October 2003


   When the Switching Capability field is TDM, the Switching Capability
   specific information field includes Minimum LSP Bandwidth and an
   indication whether the interface supports Standard or Arbitrary
   SONET/SDH.

       0                   1                   2                   3
       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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                  Minimum LSP Bandwidth                        |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |   Indication  |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   The Minimum LSP Bandwidth is encoded in a 4 octets field in the IEEE
   floating point format.  The units are bytes (not bits!) per second.
   The indication whether the interface supports Standard or Arbitrary
   SONET/SDH is encoded as 1 octet.  The value of this octet is 0 if the
   interface supports Standard SONET/SDH, and 1 if the interface
   supports Arbitrary SONET/SDH.

   When the Switching Capability field is LSC, there is no Switching
   Capability specific information field present.

   To support interfaces that have more than one Interface Switching
   Capability Descriptor (see Section "Interface Switching Capability
   Descriptor" of [GMPLS-ROUTING]) the Interface Switching Capability
   Descriptor sub-TLV MAY occur more than once within the extended IS
   reachability TLV.

1.4. Shared Risk Link Group TLV

   The SRLG TLV (of type 138 TBD) contains a data structure consisting
   of:

       6 octets of System ID
       1 octet of Pseudonode Number
       1 octet Flag
       4 octets of IPv4 interface address or 4 octets of a Link Local
         Identifier
       4 octets of IPv4 neighbor address or 4 octets of a Link Remote
         Identifier
       (variable) list of SRLG values, where each element in the list
         has 4 octets.

   The following illustrates encoding of the Value field of the SRLG
   TLV.

       0                   1                   2                   3



Kompella & Rekhter            Informational                     [Page 6]

Internet Draft         IS-IS Extensions for GMPLS           October 2003


       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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                          System ID                            |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |            System ID (cont.)  | Pseudonode num|    Flags      |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |        IPv4 interface address/Link Local Identifier           |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |        IPv4 neighbors address/Link Remote Identifier          |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                  Shared Risk Link Group Value                 |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                        ............                           |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                  Shared Risk Link Group Value                 |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   The neighbor is identified by its System Id (6-octets), plus one
   octet to indicate the pseudonode number if the neighbor is on a LAN
   interface.

   The Least Significant Bit of the Flag octet indicates whether the
   interface is numbered (set to 1), or unnumbered (set to 0).  All
   other bits are reserved and should be set to 0.

   The length of this TLV is 16 + 4 * (number of SRLG values).

   This TLV carries the Shared Risk Link Group information (see Section
   "Shared Risk Link Group Information" of [GMPLS-ROUTING]).

   The SRLG TLV MAY occur more than once within the IS-IS Link State
   Protocol Data Units.

1.5. Link Identifier for Unnumbered Interfaces

   Link Identifiers are exchanged in the Extended Local Circuit ID field
   of the "Point-to-Point Three-Way Adjacency" IS-IS Option type
   [ISIS-3way].













Kompella & Rekhter            Informational                     [Page 7]

Internet Draft         IS-IS Extensions for GMPLS           October 2003


2. Implications on Graceful Restart

   The restarting node SHOULD follow the ISIS restart procedures
   [ISIS-RESTART], and the RSVP-TE restart procedures [GMPLS-RSVP].

   When the restarting node is going to originate its IS-IS Link State
   Protocol data units for TE links, these Link State Protocol data
   units SHOULD be originated with 0 unreserved bandwidth, Traffic
   Engineering Default metric set to 0xffffff, and if the link has LSC
   or FSC as its Switching Capability then also with 0 as Max LSP
   Bandwidth, until the node is able to determine the amount of
   unreserved resources taking into account the resources reserved by
   the already established LSPs that have been preserved across the
   restart.  Once the restarting node determines the amount of
   unreserved resources, taking into account the resources reserved by
   the already established LSPs that have been preserved across the
   restart, the node SHOULD advertise these resources in its Link State
   Protocol data units.

   In addition in the case of a planned restart prior to restarting, the
   restarting node SHOULD originate the IS-IS Link State Protocol data
   units for TE links with 0 as unreserved bandwidth, and if the link
   has LSC or FSC as its Switching Capability then also with 0 as Max
   LSP Bandwidth.  This would discourage new LSP establishment through
   the restarting router.

   Neighbors of the restarting node SHOULD continue advertise the actual
   unreserved bandwidth on the TE links from the neighbors to that node.


3. Contributors

Ayan Banerjee
Calient Networks
5853 Rue Ferrari
San Jose, CA 95138
Phone: +1 408 972 3645
EMail: abanerjee@calient.net

John Drake
Calient Networks
5853 Rue Ferrari
San Jose, CA 95138
Phone: +1 408 972 3720
EMail: jdrake@calient.net






Kompella & Rekhter            Informational                     [Page 8]

Internet Draft         IS-IS Extensions for GMPLS           October 2003


Greg Bernstein
Grotto Networking
EMail: gregb@grotto-networking.com

Don Fedyk
Nortel Networks Corp.
600 Technology Park Drive
Billerica, MA 01821
Phone: +1 978 288 4506
EMail: dwfedyk@nortelnetworks.com

Eric Mannie
Independent Consultant
E-mail: eric_mannie@hotmail.com
Debanjan Saha
Tellium Optical Systems
2 Crescent Place
P.O. Box 901
Ocean Port, NJ 07757
Phone: +1 732 923 4264
EMail: dsaha@tellium.com

Vishal Sharma
EMail: v.sharma@ieee.org

4. Acknowledgements

   The authors would like to thank Jim Gibson, Suresh Katukam, Jonathan
   Lang and Quaizar Vohra for their comments on the draft.


5. Security Considerations

   This document specifies the contents of GMPLS TE TLVs in ISIS.  As
   these TLVs are not used for SPF computation or normal routing, the
   extensions specified here have no direct effect on IP routing.
   Tampering with GMPLS TE TLVs may have an effect on the underlying
   transport (optical and/or SONET-SDH) network.  Mechanisms to secure
   ISIS Link State PDUs and/or the TE TLVs can be used to secure the
   GMPLS TE TLVs as well.











Kompella & Rekhter            Informational                     [Page 9]

Internet Draft         IS-IS Extensions for GMPLS           October 2003


6. IANA Considerations

   This document defines the following new ISIS TLV type that needs to
   be reflected in the ISIS TLV code-point registry:
          Type        Description              IIH   LSP   SNP
          ----        ----------------------   ---   ---   ---
           138        Shared Risk Link Group    n     y     n


   This document also defines the following new sub-TLV types of
   top-level TLV 22 that need to be reflected in the ISIS sub-TLV
   registry for TLV 22:
          Type        Description                        Length
          ----        ------------------------------   --------
             4        Link Local/Remote Identifiers           8
            20        Link Protection Type                    2
            21        Interface Switching Capability   variable
                          Descriptor


Normative References

   [GMPLS-ROUTING] Kompella, K., and Rekhter, Y. (Editors), "Routing
       Extensions in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label
       Switching", (work in progress) [draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-
       routing-08.txt]

   [GMPLS-RSVP] Berger, L., (Editor), "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label
       Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Resource ReserVation Protocol-Traffic
       Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions", RFC 3473, January 2003

   [GMPLS-SIG] Berger, L. (Editor), "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label
       Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Functional Description", RFC 3471,
       January 2003

   [IEEE] IEEE, "IEEE Standard for Binary Floating-Point Arithmetic",
       Standard 754-1985, 1985 (ISBN 1-5593-7653-8)

   [ISIS-3way] Katz, D., and Saluja, R., "Three-Way Handshake for
       Intermediate System to Intermediate System (IS-IS) Point-to-Point
       Adjacencies", RFC 3373, September 2002

   [ISIS-RESTART] Shand, M. and L. Ginsburg, "Restart signaling for
       ISIS", (work in progress) [draft-ietf-isis-restart-04.txt]

   [ISIS-TE] Smit, H., Li, T., "IS-IS Extensions for Traffic
       Engineering", (work in progress) [draft-ietf-isis-traffic-05.txt]




Kompella & Rekhter            Informational                    [Page 10]

Internet Draft         IS-IS Extensions for GMPLS           October 2003


   [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
       Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.


Authors' Information


Kireeti Kompella
Juniper Networks, Inc.
1194 N. Mathilda Ave
Sunnyvale, CA 94089
EMail: kireeti@juniper.net


Yakov Rekhter
Juniper Networks, Inc.
1194 N. Mathilda Ave
Sunnyvale, CA 94089
EMail: yakov@juniper.net



Intellectual Property Rights Notices

   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
   intellectual property or other rights that might be claimed to
   pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
   this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
   might or might not be available; neither does it represent that it
   has made any effort to identify any such rights.  Information on the
   IETF's procedures with respect to rights in standards-track and
   standards-related documentation can be found in BCP-11.  Copies of
   claims of rights made available for publication and any assurances of
   licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to
   obtain a general license or permission for the use of such
   proprietary rights by implementors or users of this specification can
   be obtained from the IETF Secretariat.

   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
   rights which may cover technology that may be required to practice
   this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF Executive
   Director.








Kompella & Rekhter            Informational                    [Page 11]

Internet Draft         IS-IS Extensions for GMPLS           October 2003


Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2003).  All Rights Reserved.

   This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
   others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
   or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
   and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
   kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
   included on all such copies and derivative works.  However, this
   document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
   the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
   Internet organizations, except as needed for the  purpose of
   developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
   copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
   followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
   English.

   The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
   revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assignees.

   This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
   "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
   TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
   BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
   HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
   MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.


Acknowledgement

   Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
   Internet Society.


















Kompella & Rekhter            Informational                    [Page 12]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.108, available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/