[Docs] [txt|pdf] [Tracker] [Email] [Nits]

Versions: 00 01

Interdomain Routing Working Group                                X. Geng
Internet-Draft                                                   M. Chen
Intended status: Experimental                                     Huawei
Expires: September 14, 2017                               March 13, 2017


         IGP-TE Extensions for DetNet Information Distribution
                 draft-geng-detnet-info-distribution-00

Abstract

   There are requirements in diverse industries to establish multi-hop
   paths for characterized flows with bounded end-to-end latency and
   extremely low packet loss rate.  Deterministic Networking (DetNet)
   can provide service satisfying the requirements.

   This document describes extensions to IGP-TE, including OSPF-TE and
   ISIS-TE to distribute information of DetNet, which can be used for
   DetNet path computation/selection.

   This document only covers the mechanisms by which DetNet information
   is distributed.  The mechanisms for measuring, calculating or
   configuring DetNet capabilities, resources and other relevant
   parameters are out of the scope.

Requirements Language

   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].

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 September 14, 2017.




Geng & Chen            Expires September 14, 2017               [Page 1]


Internet-Draft          DetNet Info Distribution              March 2017


Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2017 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
   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.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  DetNet Extensions to OSPF TE  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     3.1.  Congestion Protection Method sub-TLV  . . . . . . . . . .   4
     3.2.  Maximum DetNet Reservable Bandwidth sub-TLV . . . . . . .   5
     3.3.  Available DetNet Bandwidth sub-TLV  . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     3.4.  Min/Max Queuing Delay sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   4.  DetNet Extensions to ISIS TE  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     4.1.  Congestion Protection Method  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     4.2.  Maximum DetNet Reservable Bandwidth . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     4.3.  Available DetNet Bandwidth  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     4.4.  Min/Max Queuing Delay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   5.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     5.1.  Sub-TLVs for Link TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     5.2.  Sub-TLVs for TLVs 22, 23, 141, 222, and 223 . . . . . . .  10
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   7.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   8.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     8.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
     8.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12

1.  Introduction

   There are many use cases from diverse industries which have the need
   in common for deterministic service, for example: audio video
   production, industrial process control and mobile access networks.
   The requirements can be summarized as:

      Deterministic minimum and maximum end-to-end latency from source
      to destination



Geng & Chen            Expires September 14, 2017               [Page 2]


Internet-Draft          DetNet Info Distribution              March 2017


      Extremely low packet loss rate

   Deterministic Networking (DetNet) can satisfy the requirements by the
   following techniques:

   o  Congestion Protection by reserving data plane resources for DetNet
      flows in intermediate nodes along the path

   o  Explicit Route that do not rapidly change with the network
      topology

   o  Seamless Redundant which can distribute DetNet flow packets over
      multi paths to ensure delivery of each packet spite of the loss of
      a path

   To make the above techniques work, it's necessary to know the
   capabilities (e.g., DetNet capable or not, which congestion
   protection algorithms are supported, etc.), resources (e.g, dedicated
   bandwidth for DetNet, buffers, etc.), performance (e.g.,
   device/queue/link delay etc.) and other relevant information of each
   DetNet capable node.  Then, a DetNet path computation element (e.g.,
   PCE or ingress of a DetNet flow) can use these information to compute
   a path that satisfies the requirement of a specific DetNet flow.
   Specifically, according to the requirements stated in DetNet
   architecture, the information should include:

   o  Whether a node is DetNet capable

   o  Congestion protection methods supported by a DetNet capable node;

   o  Dedicated bandwidth for DetNet flows;

   o  Device and link delay;

   Some of information (e.g., Link delay/loss ) can be distributed and
   collected through the Traffic Engineering (TE) metric extensions
   [RFC7471], [RFC7810].

   This document defines extensions to OSPF and ISIS to distribute the
   above DetNet information that can not distributed by the existing
   protocols.

2.  Terminology

   All the DetNet related terminologies used in this document conform to
   the DetNet architecture [I-D.ietf-detnet-architecture].





Geng & Chen            Expires September 14, 2017               [Page 3]


Internet-Draft          DetNet Info Distribution              March 2017


3.  DetNet Extensions to OSPF TE

   This document defines new OSPF TE sub-TLVs for Link TLV to distribute
   the DetNet required information as stated in Section 1.  These sub-
   TLVs includes:

         ______________________________________________________________
         |   Type |    Length     |               Value               |
         --------------------------------------------------------------
         |  TBD1  |       4       |  Congestion Control Method        |
         |  TBD2  |       4       |  Max DetNet Reservable Bandwidth  |
         |  TBD3  |       4       |  Available DetNet Bandwidth       |
         |  TBD4  |       8       |  Min/Max Queuing Delay            |
         |________|_______________|___________________________________|

3.1.  Congestion Protection Method sub-TLV

   This Congestion Protection (CP) Method sub-TLV is used to advertise
   the DetNet flow congestion protection methods used in transit nodes.
   It may be required by some DetNet flows that all the transit nodes
   along the path SHOULD use the same congestion protection method.
   Some typical congestion protection methods are listed as below:

      Time Aware Shaping [IIEEE802.1Qbv]

      Credit Based Shaper [IEEE802.1Q-2014]

      Cyclic Queuing and Forwarding [IEEE802.1Qch]

      Asynchronous Traffic Shaping [IEEE802.1Qcr]

   The format of this sub-TLV is shown in the following diagram:

     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
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |            Type (TBD1)        |           Length(4)           |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |           RESERVED                            | CP Methods    |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   The Type field is 2 octets in length, and the value is TBD1.

   The Length field is 2 octets in length and its value is 4.

   The RESERVED field is reserved for future use.  It MUST be set to 0
   when sent and MUST be ignored when received.




Geng & Chen            Expires September 14, 2017               [Page 4]


Internet-Draft          DetNet Info Distribution              March 2017


   This Congestion Control Method field presents the congestion
   protection method used in the transit node.

   Five congestion protection methods are introduced in this document:

     _______________________________________________________________
     |  Value    |     Congestion Control Mechanisms               |
     ---------------------------------------------------------------
     |    0      |     Reserved                                    |
     |    1      |     Time Aware Shaper                           |
     |    2      |     Credit Based Shaper                         |
     |    3      |     Time Aware Shaper and Credit Based Shaper   |
     |    4      |     Cyclic Queuing and Forwarding               |
     |    5      |     Asynchronous Traffic Shaping                |
     |    6-254  |     Unassigned                                  |
     |    255    |     Reserved                                    |
     |___________|_________________________________________________|

3.2.  Maximum DetNet Reservable Bandwidth sub-TLV

   This sub-TLV specifies the maximum amount of bandwidth that is
   reserved for DetNet on this link.  Note that this value SHOULD be
   smaller than the value of Maximum Reservable Bandwidth sub-TLV
   [RFC3630].  The value normally depends on the Congestion Protection
   Method and is user-configurable.  In some particular Congestion
   Protection Method (e.g.  Credit Based shaper in AVB), this value will
   affect the calculation of maximum queuing delay of the DetNet flow.
   The units are bytes per second.

   The format of this sub-TLV is shown in the following diagram:

     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
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |            Type(TBD2)         |           Length(4)           |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |   RESERVED    |      Maximum DetNet Reservable Bandwidth      |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   The Type field is 2 octets in length, and the value is TBD2.

   The Length field is 2 octets in length and its value is 4.

   The RESERVED field is reserved for future use.  It MUST be set to 0
   when sent and MUST be ignored when received.

   This Maximum DetNet Reservable Bandwidth presents the maximum
   bandwidth that may be reserved for DetNet.



Geng & Chen            Expires September 14, 2017               [Page 5]


Internet-Draft          DetNet Info Distribution              March 2017


3.3.  Available DetNet Bandwidth sub-TLV

   This sub-TLV specifies the available bandwidth that can be reserved
   for DetNet flow on this link for now.  Considering that there is no
   generally accepted DetNet traffic classification, this value contains
   all the available DetNet Bandwidth from different DetNet traffic
   classes (if there is any), which differs from the Unreserved
   Bandwidth defined in [RFC3630].

   The format of this sub-TLV is shown in the following diagram:

     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
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |        (Type)TBD3             |       (Length)4               |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |   RESERVED    |          Available DetNet Bandwidth           |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   The Type field is 2 octets in length, and the value is TBD3.

   The Length field is 2 octets in length and its value is 4.

   The RESERVED field is reserved for future use.  It MUST be set to 0
   when sent and MUST be ignored when received.

   This Available DetNet Bandwidth field presents the available
   bandwidth for DetNet in this link.

3.4.  Min/Max Queuing Delay sub-TLV

   [Editor Notes: more consideration and inputs are needed for these
   queue delays]

   This sub-TLV advertises the minimum and maximum queuing delay values
   of specific DetNet flow in the link.  Max/Min Unidirectional Link
   Delay Sub-TLV [RFC7471] excludes the queuing delay because of its
   instability.  With the techniques used in DetNet, the queuing delay
   can be limited to a reasonable range, which means that the queuing
   delay bound is stable enough to be defined as a sub-TLV and
   advertised over the network.

   The format of this sub-TLV is shown in the following diagram:








Geng & Chen            Expires September 14, 2017               [Page 6]


Internet-Draft          DetNet Info Distribution              March 2017


     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
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |        (Type)TBD4             |        (Length)8              |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |   RESERVED    |      Minimum DetNet Queuing Delay             |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |   RESERVED    |      Maximum DetNet Queuing Delay             |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   The Type field is 2 octets in length, and the value is TBD4.

   The Length field is 2 octets in length and its value is 4.

   The RESERVED field is reserved for future use.  It MUST be set to 0
   when sent and MUST be ignored when received.

   Minimum DetNet Queuing Delay is 24-bit field carrying minimum queuing
   delay value (in microseconds) encoded as an integer value.
   Implementations may also add this to the value of Min Delay
   Unidirectional Link Delay Sub-TLV [RFC7471] in order to advertise the
   minimum delay of this link.  Min Queuing Delay can be the same with
   the Max Queuing Delay.

   The RESERVED field is reserved for future use.  It MUST be set to 0
   when sent and MUST be ignored when received.

   Maximum DetNet Queuing Delay is 24-bit field carrying the maximum
   queuing delay value (in microseconds) encoded as an integer value.
   Implementations may also add this to the value of Max Delay
   Unidirectional Link Delay Sub-TLV [RFC7471]to order to advertise the
   maximum delay of this link.

4.  DetNet Extensions to ISIS TE

   This document defines new IS-IS TE sub-TLVs that can be announced in
   the TLVs 22, 23, 141, 222, and 223 in order to distribute DetNet
   information.  The sub-TLV extensions below build on the ones provided
   in [RFC5305], [RFC5316]and [RFC7310].

4.1.  Congestion Protection Method

   This Congestion Protection (CP) Method sub-TLV is used to advertise
   the DetNet flow congestion protection methods used in transit nodes.
   The reader can know more about this sub-TLV referring to section 3.1.

   The format of this sub-TLV is shown in the following diagram:




Geng & Chen            Expires September 14, 2017               [Page 7]


Internet-Draft          DetNet Info Distribution              March 2017


     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
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |  Type(TBD5)   |   Length(4)   |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |           RESERVED            | Congestion Control Method     |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   The Type field is 1 octet in length, and the value is TBD5.

   The Length field is 1 octet in length and its value is 4.

   The RESERVED field is reserved for future use.  It MUST be set to 0
   when sent and MUST be ignored when received.

   This Congestion Control Method field presents the congestion
   protection method used in the transit node.

   Five congestion protection methods are introduced in this document:

4.2.  Maximum DetNet Reservable Bandwidth

   This sub-TLV specifies the maximum amount of bandwidth that is
   reserved for DetNet on this link.  Note that this value SHOULD be
   smaller than the value of Maximum Reservable Link Bandwidth
   [RFC5305].  The reader can know more about this sub-TLV referring to
   section 3.2.

   The format of this sub-TLV is shown in the following diagram:

     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
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |  Type(TBD6)   |   Length(4)   |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |   RESERVED    |      Maximum DetNet Reservable Bandwidth      |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   The Type field is 1 octet in length, and the value is TBD6.

   The Length field is 1 octet in length and its value is 4.

   The RESERVED field is reserved for future use.  It MUST be set to 0
   when sent and MUST be ignored when received.

   This Maximum DetNet Reservable Bandwidth presents the maximum
   bandwidth that may be reserved for DetNet.




Geng & Chen            Expires September 14, 2017               [Page 8]


Internet-Draft          DetNet Info Distribution              March 2017


4.3.  Available DetNet Bandwidth

   This sub-TLV specifies the available bandwidth that can be reserved
   for DetNet flow on this link for now.  It is different from the
   Unreserved Bandwidth sub-TLV defined in [RFC5305] referring to
   section 3.3.

   The format of this sub-TLV is shown in the following diagram:

     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
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |  Type(TBD7)   |   Length(4)   |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |   RESERVED    |          Available DetNet Bandwidth           |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   The Type field is 1 octet in length, and the value is TBD7.

   The Length field is 1 octet in length and its value is 4.

   The RESERVED field is reserved for future use.  It MUST be set to 0
   when sent and MUST be ignored when received.

   This Available DetNet Bandwidth field presents the available
   bandwidth for DetNet in this link.

4.4.  Min/Max Queuing Delay

   The reader can know more about this sub-TLV referring to section 3.4.

   The format of this sub-TLV is shown in the following diagram:

     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
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |  Type(TBD8)   |   Length(4)   |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |   RESERVED    |      Minimum DetNet Queuing Delay             |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
     |   RESERVED    |      Maximum DetNet Queuing Delay             |
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   The Type field is 1 octet in length, and the value is TBD4.

   The Length field is 1 octet in length and it's value is 4.





Geng & Chen            Expires September 14, 2017               [Page 9]


Internet-Draft          DetNet Info Distribution              March 2017


   The RESERVED field is reserved for future use.  It MUST be set to 0
   when sent and MUST be ignored when received.

   Minimum DetNet Queuing Delay is 24-bit field carrying minimum queuing
   delay value (in microseconds) encoded as an integer value.
   Implementations may also add this to the value of Min Unidirectional
   Link Delay [RFC7810] in order to advertise the minimum delay of this
   link.  Min Queuing Delay can be the same with the Max Queuing Delay.

   The RESERVED field is reserved for future use.  It MUST be set to 0
   when sent and MUST be ignored when received.

   Maximum DetNet Queuing Delay is 24-bit field carrying the maximum
   queuing delay value (in microseconds) encoded as an integer value.
   Implementations may also add this to the value of Max Delay
   Unidirectional Link Delay Sub-TLV [RFC7810] to order to advertise the
   maximum delay of this link.

5.  IANA Considerations

5.1.  Sub-TLVs for Link TLV

   IANA is requested to register the OSPF sub-TLVs defined in this
   document in the sub-TLVs for Link TLV registry.

         Type        Description
         ----        ------------------------------
         TBD1        Congestion Protection Method
         TBD2        Maximum DetNet Reservable Bandwidth
         TBD3        Available DetNet Bandwidth
         TBD4        Min/Max Queuing Delay

5.2.  Sub-TLVs for TLVs 22, 23, 141, 222, and 223

   IANA is requested to register the ISIS sub-TLVs defined in this
   document in the Sub-TLVs for TLVs 22, 23, 141, 222, and 223 registry.

         Type        Description
         ----        ------------------------------
         TBD5        Congestion Protection Method
         TBD6        Maximum DetNet Reservable Bandwidth
         TBD7        Available DetNet Bandwidth
         TBD8        Min/Max Queuing Delay








Geng & Chen            Expires September 14, 2017              [Page 10]


Internet-Draft          DetNet Info Distribution              March 2017


6.  Security Considerations

   This document does not introduce security issues beyond those
   discussed in [RFC7471] and [RFC7810].

7.  Acknowledgements

8.  References

8.1.  Normative References

   [I-D.ietf-detnet-architecture]
              Finn, N. and P. Thubert, "Deterministic Networking
              Architecture", draft-ietf-detnet-architecture-00 (work in
              progress), September 2016.

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

   [RFC7471]  Giacalone, S., Ward, D., Drake, J., Atlas, A., and S.
              Previdi, "OSPF Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric
              Extensions", RFC 7471, DOI 10.17487/RFC7471, March 2015,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7471>.

   [RFC7810]  Previdi, S., Ed., Giacalone, S., Ward, D., Drake, J., and
              Q. Wu, "IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions",
              RFC 7810, DOI 10.17487/RFC7810, May 2016,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7810>.

8.2.  Informative References

   [IEEE802.1Q-2014]
              "MAC Bridges and VLANs (IEEE 802.1Q-2014)", 2014.

   [IEEE802.1Qch]
              "Cyclic Queuing and Forwarding", 2016.

   [IEEE802.1Qcr]
              "Asynchronous Traffic Shaping", 2016.

   [IIEEE802.1Qbv]
              "Enhancements for Scheduled Traffic", 2016.







Geng & Chen            Expires September 14, 2017              [Page 11]


Internet-Draft          DetNet Info Distribution              March 2017


   [RFC3630]  Katz, D., Kompella, K., and D. Yeung, "Traffic Engineering
              (TE) Extensions to OSPF Version 2", RFC 3630,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC3630, September 2003,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3630>.

   [RFC5305]  Li, T. and H. Smit, "IS-IS Extensions for Traffic
              Engineering", RFC 5305, DOI 10.17487/RFC5305, October
              2008, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5305>.

   [RFC5316]  Chen, M., Zhang, R., and X. Duan, "ISIS Extensions in
              Support of Inter-Autonomous System (AS) MPLS and GMPLS
              Traffic Engineering", RFC 5316, DOI 10.17487/RFC5316,
              December 2008, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5316>.

   [RFC7310]  Lindsay, J. and H. Foerster, "RTP Payload Format for
              Standard apt-X and Enhanced apt-X Codecs", RFC 7310,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC7310, July 2014,
              <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7310>.

Authors' Addresses

   Xuesong Geng
   Huawei

   Email: gengxuesong@huawei.com


   Mach(Guoyi) Chen
   Huawei

   Email: mach.chen@huawei.com




















Geng & Chen            Expires September 14, 2017              [Page 12]


Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.124, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/