[Docs] [txt|pdf|xml|html] [Tracker] [WG] [Email] [Nits]

Versions: 00 01 02 03 draft-ietf-pce-pcep-exp-codepoints

PCE Working Group                                               D. Dhody
Internet-Draft                                       Huawei Technologies
Intended status: Standards Track                                 D. King
Expires: December 11, 2016                          Lancaster University
                                                            June 9, 2016


     Experimental Codepoint Allocation for Path Computation Element
                     communication Protocol (PCEP)
                 draft-dhody-pce-pcep-exp-codepoints-00

Abstract

   IANA assigns values to the Path Computation Element (PCE)
   communication Protocol (PCEP) parameters (messages, objects, TLVs).
   IANA established a new top-level registry to contain all PCEP
   codepoints and sub-registries.  The allocation policy for each new
   registry is by IETF Consensus.

   This document seeks to mark some codepoints for experimental usage of
   PCEP.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   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."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on December 11, 2016.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents



Dhody & King            Expires December 11, 2016               [Page 1]


Internet-Draft                EXP-CODEPOINT                    June 2016


   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  PCEP Messages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  PCEP Objects  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   4.  PCEP TLVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   5.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     5.1.  New PCEP Messages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     5.2.  New PCEP Objects  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     5.3.  New PCEP TLVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   6.  Allocation Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   7.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   8.  Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   9.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     9.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     9.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5

1.  Introduction

   The Path Computation Element communication Protocol (PCEP) provides
   mechanisms for Path Computation Elements (PCEs) to perform path
   computations in response to Path Computation Clients (PCCs) requests.

   In section 9 of [RFC5440], IANA assigns values to the PCEP protocol
   parameters (messages, objects, TLVs).  IANA established a new top-
   level registry to contain all PCEP codepoints and sub-registries.
   The allocation policy for each new registry is by IETF Consensus as
   described in [RFC5226].  Specifically, new assignments are made via
   RFCs approved by the IESG.  Typically, the IESG will seek input on
   prospective assignments from appropriate persons (e.g., a relevant
   Working Group if one exists).

   With some recent advancement, there is an enhanced need to experiment
   with PCEP.  It is often necessary to use some sort of number or
   constant in order to actually test or experiment with the new
   function, even when testing in a closed environment.  In order to run
   experiment, it is important that the value won't collide not only
   with existing codepoints but any future allocation.

   This document thus set apart some codepoints in PCEP registry and
   subregistries for experimental usage.



Dhody & King            Expires December 11, 2016               [Page 2]


Internet-Draft                EXP-CODEPOINT                    June 2016


2.  PCEP Messages

   Some codepoints are requested to be set aside for experimentation
   with new PCEP messages.  The suggested range is 224-255.

3.  PCEP Objects

   Some codepoints are requested to be set aside for experimentation
   with new PCEP objects.  The suggested range is 224-255.

4.  PCEP TLVs

   Some codepoints are requested to be set aside for experimentation
   with new PCEP TLVs.  The suggested range is 65280-65535.

5.  IANA Considerations

   IANA maintains the "Path Computation Element Protocol (PCEP) Numbers"
   at <http://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep>.

5.1.  New PCEP Messages

   Within this registry IANA maintains a sub-registry for PCEP Messages
   (see PCEP Messages at <http://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep>).

   Upon approval of this document, IANA is requested to make the
   following allocations:

               +---------+-------------+-------------------+
               |   Type  | Description | Allocation Policy |
               +---------+-------------+-------------------+
               | 224-255 | Unassigned  | Experimental Use  |
               +---------+-------------+-------------------+

5.2.  New PCEP Objects

   Within this registry IANA maintains a sub-registry for PCEP Objects
   (see PCEP Objects at <http://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep>).

   Upon approval of this document, IANA is requested to make the
   following allocations:

               +---------+-------------+-------------------+
               |   Type  | Description | Allocation Policy |
               +---------+-------------+-------------------+
               | 224-255 | Unassigned  | Experimental Use  |
               +---------+-------------+-------------------+




Dhody & King            Expires December 11, 2016               [Page 3]


Internet-Draft                EXP-CODEPOINT                    June 2016


5.3.  New PCEP TLVs

   Within this registry IANA maintains a sub-registry for PCEP TLVs (see
   PCEP TLV Type Indicators at <http://www.iana.org/assignments/pcep>).

   Upon approval of this document, IANA is requested to make the
   following allocations:

             +------------+-------------+-------------------+
             |      Type  | Description | Allocation Policy |
             +------------+-------------+-------------------+
             |65280-65535 | Unassigned  | Experimental Use  |
             +------------+-------------+-------------------+

6.  Allocation Policy

   The allocation policy for the IANA request in Section 5 is
   "Experimental".  As per [RFC5226], IANA does not record specific
   assignments for any particular use for this policy.  The ongoing
   experiment code point can be maintained at the PCE WG wiki at
   <https://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/pce/trac/wiki>.

   As the experiment/standard progress and an early IANA allocation or
   RFC publication happens, the IANA defined codepoints are used and
   experimental code points are freed up.

7.  Security Considerations

8.  Acknowledgments

9.  References

9.1.  Normative References

   [RFC5440]  Vasseur, JP., Ed. and JL. Le Roux, Ed., "Path Computation
              Element (PCE) Communication Protocol (PCEP)", RFC 5440,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC5440, March 2009,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5440>.

9.2.  Informative References

   [RFC5226]  Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
              IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC5226, May 2008,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5226>.






Dhody & King            Expires December 11, 2016               [Page 4]


Internet-Draft                EXP-CODEPOINT                    June 2016


Authors' Addresses

   Dhruv Dhody
   Huawei Technologies
   Divyashree Techno Park, Whitefield
   Bangalore, Karnataka  560066
   India

   EMail: dhruv.ietf@gmail.com


   Daniel King
   Lancaster University
   UK

   EMail: d.king@lancaster.ac.uk



































Dhody & King            Expires December 11, 2016               [Page 5]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.127, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/