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

Versions: 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 RFC 6320

     Working Group Name                                     Sanjay Wadhwa
     Internet Draft                                         Juniper Networks
     Expires: August 25, 2007
                                                            Jerome Moisand
                                                            Juniper Networks
  
                                                            Swami Subramanian
                                                            Juniper Networks
  
                                                            Thomas Haag
                                                            T-Systems
  
                                                            Norbert Voigt
                                                            Siemens
  
                                                            February 25, 2007
  
          Protocol for Access Node Control Mechanism in Broadband Networks
  
  
  
                           draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00.txt
  
  
  
  
     Status of this Memo
  
  
  
        By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
        applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
        have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
        aware will be disclosed, in accordance with section 6 of BCP 79.
  
        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
  
        This Internet-Draft will expire on August 22, 2007.
  
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 26, 2007                 [Page 1]


     Internet-Draft       draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00        August 2007
  
  
     Copyright Notice
  
        Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2007).  All Rights Reserved.
  
     Abstract
  
        This document describes proposed extensions to the GSMPv3 protocol to
        allow its use in a broadband environment, as a control plane between
        Access Nodes (e.g. DSLAM) and Broadband Network Gateways (e.g. NAS).
        These proposed extensions are required to realize a protocol for
        “Access Node Control” mechanism as described in [9]. The resulting
        protocol with the proposed extensions to GSMPv3 [4] is referred to as
        “Access Node Control Protocol” (ANCP).  This document focuses on
        specific use cases of access node control mechanism for topology
        discovery, line configuration, and OAM. It is intended to be
        augmented by additional protocol specification for future use cases
        considered in scope by the ANCP charter.
  
        Conventions used in this document
  
        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 [1].
  
        Table of Contents
  
        1  Specification Requirements 4
  
        2  Introduction4
  
        3  Broadband Access Aggregation  4
  
           3.1   ATM-based broadband aggregation..........................4
           3.2   Ethernet-based broadband aggregation.....................6
  
  
        4  Access Node Control Protocol  7
  
           4.1   Overview.................................................7
           4.2   ANCP based Access Topology Discovery.....................8
              4.2.1    Goals..............................................8
              4.2.2    Message Flow.......................................8
           4.3   ANCP based Line Configuration............................9
              4.3.1    Goals..............................................9
              4.3.2    Message Flow......................................10
           4.4   ANCP based Transactional Multicast......................12
           4.5   ANCP based OAM..........................................13
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 25, 2007                 [Page 2]


     Internet-Draft       draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00        August 2007
  
  
              4.5.1    Message Flow......................................13
  
  
        5  Access Node Control Protocol (ANCP) 14
  
           5.1   ANCP/TCP connection establishment.......................14
           5.2   ANCP Connection keep-alive..............................15
           5.3   Capability negotiation..................................16
           5.4   GSMP Message Extensions for Access Node Control.........18
              5.4.1    General Extensions................................18
              5.4.2    Topology Discovery Extensions.....................21
              5.4.3    Line Configuration Extensions.....................30
              5.4.4    OAM Extensions....................................32
           5.5   ATM-specific considerations.............................35
           5.6   Ethernet-specific considerations........................36
        6  IANA Considerations  36
  
        7  Security Considerations 36
  
        8  References  37
  
        Author's Addresses38
  
        Intellectual Property Statement  38
  
        Disclaimer of Validity  39
  
        Copyright Statement  39
  
        Acknowledgment 39
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 25, 2007                 [Page 3]


     Internet-Draft       draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00        August 2007
  
  
     1  Specification 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.
  
  
  
     2  Introduction
  
        DSL is a widely deployed access technology for Broadband Access for
        Next Generation Networks. Several specifications like [1-3] describe
        possible architectures for these access networks. In the scope of
        these specifications are the delivery of voice, video and data
        services.
  
        When deploying value-added services across DSL access networks,
        special attention regarding quality of service and service control is
        required, which implies a tighter coordination between network
        elements in the broadband access network without burdening the OSS
        layer.
  
        This draft defines extensions and modifications to GSMPv3 (specified
        in [4]) and certain new mechanisms to realize a control plane between
        a service-oriented layer 3 edge device (the NAS) and a layer2 Access
        Node (e.g. DSLAM) in order to perform QoS-related, service-related
        and subscriber-related operations. The control protocol as a result
        of these extensions and mechanisms is referred to as “Access Node
        Control Protocol” (ANCP).
  
        In addition to specifying extensions and modifications to relevant
        GSMP messages applicable to access node control mechanism, this draft
        also defines values that ANCP should set for relevant fields in these
        GSMP messages. However, to understand the basic semantics of various
        fields in GSMP messages, the reader is referred to [4].
  
  
     3  Broadband Access Aggregation
  
  
     3.1 ATM-based broadband aggregation
  
        End to end DSL network consists of network and application service
        provider networks (NSP and ASP networks), regional/access network,
        and customer premises network. Fig1. shows ATM broadband access
        network components.
  
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 25, 2007                 [Page 4]


     Internet-Draft       draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00        August 2007
  
  
        The Regional/Access Network consists of the Regional Network, Network
        Access Server, and the Access Network as show in Fig 1. Its primary
        function is to provide end-to-end transport between the customer
        premises and the NSP or ASP. The Access Node terminates the DSL
        signal. It could consist of DSLAM in the central office, or remote
        DSLAM, or a Remote Access Multiplexer (RAM). Access node is the first
        point in the network where traffic on multiple DSL lines will be
        aggregated onto a single network.
  
        The NAS performs multiple functions in the network. The NAS is the
        aggregation point for the subscriber traffic. It provides aggregation
        capabilities (e.g. IP, PPP, ATM) between the Regional/Access Network
        and the NSP or ASP. These include traditional ATM-based offerings and
        newer, more native IP-based services. This includes support for
        Point-to-Point Protocol over ATM (PPPoA) and PPP over Ethernet
        (PPPoE), as well as direct IP services encapsulated over an
        appropriate layer 2 transport.
  
        Beyond aggregation, NAS is also the injection point for policy
        management and IP QoS in the Regional/Access Networks. In order to
        allow IP QoS support over an existing non-IP-aware layer 2 access
        network without using multiple layer 2 QoS classes, a mechanism based
        on hierarchical scheduling is used. This mechanism defined in [1],
        preserves IP QoS over the ATM network between the NAS and the RGs by
        carefully controlling downstream traffic in the NAS, so that
        significant queuing and congestion does not occur further down the
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 25, 2007                 [Page 5]


     Internet-Draft       draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00        August 2007
  
  
        ATM network. This is achieved by using a diffserv-aware hierarchical
        scheduler in the NAS that will account for downstream trunk
        bandwidths and DSL synch rates.
        [9] provides detailed definition and functions of each network
        element in the broadband reference architecture.
  
  
                                            Access                     Customer
                                      <--- Aggregation --->   <------- Premises ------->
                                            Network                     Network
  
                                       +-------------------+  +--------------------------+
              +----------+   +-----+   | +-----+  +------+ |--|+-----+ +--+ +----------+ |
              |          | +-|NAS  |---| |ATM  |--|Access| |  ||DSL  |-|RG|-|Subscriber| |
        NSP---+Regional  | | +-----+   | +-----+  | Node | |  ||Modem| +--+ |Devices   | |
              |Broadband | | +-----+   |          +------+ |  |+-----+      +----------+ |
              |Network   |-+-|NAS  |   +---------------|---+  +--------------------------+
        ASP---+          | | +-----+                   |      +--------------------------+
              |          | | +-----+                   |      | +-----+ +--+ +----------+|
              +----------+ +-|NAS  |                   +------| | DSL |-|RG|-|Subscriber||
                             +-----+                          | |Modem| +--+ |Devices   ||
                                                              | +-----+      +----------+|
                                                              +--------------------------+
         RG   : Routing Gateway
         NAS  : Network Access Server
  
                       Fig.1  ATM Broadband Aggregation Topology
  
  
  
     3.2 Ethernet-based broadband aggregation
  
     The Ethernet aggregation network architecture builds on the Ethernet
     bridging/switching concepts defined in IEEE 802. The Ethernet
     aggregation network provides traffic aggregation, class of service
     distinction, and customer separation and traceability. VLAN tagging
     defined in IEEE 802.1Q and being enhanced by IEEE 802.1ad is used as
     standard virtualization mechanism in the Ethernet aggregation network.
     The aggregation devices are “provider edge bridges” defined in IEEE
     802.ad.
     Stacked VLAN tags provide one possible way to create equivalent of
     “virtual paths” and “virtual circuits” in the aggregation network. The
     “outer” vlan could be used to create a form of “virtual path” between a
     given DSLAM and a given NAS. And “inner” VLAN tags to create a form of
     “virtual circuit” on a per DSL line basis. This is 1:1 VLAN allocation
     model. An alternative model is to bridge sessions from multiple
     subscribers behind a DSLAM into a single VLAN in the aggregation
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 25, 2007                 [Page 6]


     Internet-Draft       draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00        August 2007
  
  
     network. This is N:1 VLAN allocation model. Architectural and
     topological models of an Ethernet aggregation network in context of DSL
     aggregation are defined in [8].
  
  
     4  Access Node Control Protocol
  
     4.1 Overview
  
        A dedicated control protocol between NAS and access nodes can
        facilitate "NAS managed" tight QOS control in the access network,
        simplified OSS infrastructure for service management, optimized
        multicast replication to enable video services over DSL, subscriber
        statistics retrieval on the NAS for accounting purposes, and fault
        isolation capability on the NAS for the underlying access technology.
        This dedicated control plane is referred to as “Access Node Control
        Protocol” (ANCP). This document specifies relevant extensions to
        GSMPv3 as defined [4] to realize ANCP.
  
        Following sections discuss the use of ANCP for implementing:
  
          . Dynamic discovery of access topology by the NAS to provide tight
             QOS control in the access network.
  
          . Pushing to the access-nodes, subscriber and service data
             retrieved by the NAS from an OSS system (e.g. radius server), to
             simplify OSS infrastructure for service management.
  
          . Optimized, "NAS controlled and managed" multicast replication by
             access-nodes at L2 layer.
  
          . NAS controlled, on-demand access-line test capability
             (rudimentary end-to-end OAM).
  
        In addition to DSL, alternate broadband access technologies (e.g.
        Metro-Ethernet, Passive Optical Networking, WiMax) will have similar
        challenges to address, and could benefit from the same approach of a
        control plane between a NAS and an Access Node (e.g. OLT), providing
        a unified control and management architecture for multiple access
        technologies, hence facilitating migration from one to the other
        and/or parallel deployments.
  
        GSMPv3 is an ideal fit for implementing ANCP. It is extensible and
        can be run over TCP/IP, which makes it possible to run over different
        access technologies.
  
  
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 25, 2007                 [Page 7]


     Internet-Draft       draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00        August 2007
  
  
     4.2 ANCP based Access Topology Discovery
  
     4.2.1 Goals
  
        [1] discusses various queuing/scheduling mechanisms to avoid
        congestion in the access network while dealing with multiple flows
        with distinct QoS requirements. Such mechanisms require that the NAS
        gains knowledge about the topology of the access network, the various
        links being used and their respective rates. Some of the information
        required is somewhat dynamic in nature (e.g. DSL sync rate), hence
        cannot come from a provisioning and/or inventory management OSS
        system. Some of the information varies less frequently (e.g. capacity
        of a DSLAM uplink), but nevertheless needs to be kept strictly in
        sync between the actual capacity of the uplink and the image the NAS
        has of it.
  
        Following section describes ANCP messages that allow the Access Node
        (e.g. DSLAM) to communicate to the NAS, access network topology
        information and any corresponding updates.
  
        Some of the parameters that can be communicated from the DSLAM to the
        NAS include DSL line state, actual upstream and downstream data rates
        of a synchronized DSL link, maximum attainable upstream and
        downstream data rates, interleaving delay etc. Topology discovery is
        specifically important in case the net data rate of the DSL line
        changes over time. The DSL net data rate may be different every time
        the DSL modem is turned on. Additionally, during the time the DSL
        modem is active, data rate changes can occur due to environmental
        conditions (the DSL line can get "out of sync" and can retrain to a
        lower value.
  
     4.2.2 Message Flow
  
     When a DSL line initially comes up or resynchronizes to a different
     rate, the DSLAM generates and transmits a GSMP PORT UP EVENT message to
     the NAS. The extension field in the message carries the TLVs containing
     DSL line specific parameters. On a loss of signal on the DSL line, a
     GSMP PORT DOWN message is generated by the DSLAM to the NAS. In order to
     provide expected service level, NAS needs to learn the initial
     attributes of the DSL line before the subscriber can log in and access
     the provisioned services for the subscriber.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 25, 2007                 [Page 8]


     Internet-Draft       draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00        August 2007
  
  
                 <----- Port UP(EVENT Message)  <----- DSL
                      (default line parameters)       Signal
  
        1.  NAS ----------------------- DSLAM ----------- Routing ----- Subscriber
                                                            Gateway
  
  
                 <----- Port UP (EVENT Message)  <----- DSL
                       (updated line parameters)       Resynch
         2.  NAS ----------------------- DSLAM ----------- Routing ------ Subscriber
                                                   Gateway
  
  
  
                <--- Port DOWN (EVENT Message) <---- DSL
                                                   Loss of Signal
  
        3.  NAS ---------------------- DSLAM ------------- Routing ----- Subscriber
                                                              Gateway
  
                Fig 2. Message flow (ANCP mapping) for topology discovery
  
  
  
  
        The Event message with PORT UP message type (80) is used for
        conveying DSL line attributes to the NAS. This message with relevant
        extensions is defined in section 5.4.2.
  
  
  
     4.3 ANCP based Line Configuration
  
     4.3.1 Goals
  
        Following dynamic discovery of access topology (identification of DSL
        line and its attributes) as assisted by the mechanism described    in
        the previous section (topology discovery), the NAS could then query a
        subscriber management OSS system (e.g. RADIUS server) to     retrieve
        subscriber authorization data (service profiles, aka user
        entitlement). Most of such service mechanisms are typically enforced
        by the NAS itself, but there are a few cases where it might be useful
        to push such service parameter to the DSLAM for local enforcement of
        a mechanism (e.g. DSL-related) on the corresponding subscriber line.
        One such example of a service parameter that can be pushed to the
        DSLAM for local enforcement is DSL "interleaving delay". Longer
        interleaving delay (and hence stringent error correction) is required
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 25, 2007                 [Page 9]


     Internet-Draft       draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00        August 2007
  
  
        for a video service to ensure better video "quality of experience",
        whereas for a VoIP service or for "shoot first" gaming service, a
        very short interleaving delay is more appropriate. Another relevant
        application is downloading per subscriber multicast channel
        entitlement information in IPTV applications where the DSLAM is
        performing IGMP snooping or IGMP proxy function. Using ANCP, the NAS
        could achieve the goal of pushing line configuration to the DSLAM by
        an interoperable and standardized protocol.
  
        If a subscriber wants to choose a different service, it can require
        an OPEX intensive reconfiguration of the line via a network operator,
        possibly implying a business-to-business transaction between an ISP
        and an access provider. Using ANCP for line configuration from the
        NAS dramatically simplifies the OSS infrastructure for service
        management, allowing fully centralized subscriber-related service
        data (e.g. RADIUS server back-end) and avoiding complex cross-
        organization B2B interactions.
  
        The best way to change line parameters would be by using profiles.
        These profiles (DSL profiles for different services) are pre-
        configured on the DSLAMs. The NAS can then indicate a reference to
        the right DSL profile via ANCP. Alternatively, discrete DSL
        parameters can also be conveyed by the NAS in ANCP.
  
  
  
     4.3.2 Message Flow
  
     Triggered by topology information reporting a new DSL line or triggered
     by a subsequent user session establishment (PPP or DHCP), the NAS may
     send line configuration information (e.g. reference to a DSL profile) to
     the DSLAM using GSMP Port Management messages. The NAS may get such line
     configuration data from a policy server (e.g. RADIUS). Figure 3
     summarizes the interaction.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 25, 2007                [Page 10]


     Internet-Draft       draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00        August 2007
  
  
  
  
  
                                       1.DSL Signal
                                              <-----------
                      2. Port UP (EVENT Message)
                         (Access Topology Discovery)
                       <--------------------------
                                         3. PPP/DHCP Session
                         <-----------------------------------------------------
       4. Authorization
         & Authentication
       <-------------------
                         Port Management Message
                         (Line Configuration)
                       5. ---------------->
     +-------------+      +-----+         +-------+       +----------+       +-----------+
     |Radius/AAA    |------|NAS  |---------| DSLAM |------ | Routing  |------ |Subscriber |
     |Policy Server|      +-----+         +-------+       | Gateway  |       +-----------+
     +-------------+                                      +----------+
  
  
        Fig 3. Message flow - ANCP mapping for Initial Line Configuration
  
  
     The NAS may update the line configuration due to a subscriber service
     change (e.g. triggered by the policy server). Figure 4 summarizes the
     interaction
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 25, 2007                [Page 11]


     Internet-Draft       draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00        August 2007
  
  
  
                                                            1. PPP/DHCP Session
                                          <------------------------------------------
  
                     +-------------+                        2. Service On Demand
                     |             |<------------------------------------------------
                     | Web portal  |
                     |  OSS etc    | 3.Change of   4.Port Management
                     |             | Authorization   Message
                     | Radius AAA  | -------->     (Updated Line
                     |  Policy     |                Config - New Profile)
                     |             |          -------------.
                     |             |    +------+     +-------+   +---------+  +----------+
                     |             |----| NAS  |-----| DSLAM |---| Routing |--|Subscriber|
                     |             |    +------+     +-------+   | Gateway |  +----------+
                     +-------------+                             +---------+
  
                    Fig 4. Message flow - ANCP mapping for Updated Line Configuration
  
  
  
        The format of relevant extensions to port management message is
        defined in section 5.4.3. The line configuration models could be
        viewed as a form of delegation of authorization from the NAS to the
        DSLAM.
  
  
  
     4.4 ANCP based Transactional Multicast
  
        Typical IP multicast in access networks involves the NAS terminating
        user requests for receiving multicast channels via IGMP. The NAS
        authorizes the subscriber, and dynamically determines the multicast
        subscription rights for the subscriber. Based on the user's
        subscription, the NAS can replicate the same multicast stream to
        multiple subscribers. This leads to a waste of access bandwidth if
        multiple subscribers access network services via the same access-node
        (e.g. DSLAM). The amount of multicast replication is of the order of
        number of subscribers rather than the number of access-nodes.
  
        It is ideal for NAS to send a single copy of the multicast stream to
        a given access-node, and let the access-node perform multicast
        replication   by layer2 means (e.g. ATM point-to-multipoint cell
        replication or ethernet data-link bridging) for subscribers behind
        the access-node. However, operationally, NAS is the ideal choice to
        handle subscriber management functions (authentication,
        authorization, accounting and address management), multicast policies
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 25, 2007                [Page 12]


     Internet-Draft       draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00        August 2007
  
  
        such as per-channel authorization, and complex multicast routing
        protocols. Therefore, some means is needed for the NAS to setup
        multicast replication state in the access-nodes. In ATM access
        networks, ANCP can be used by the NAS to setup P2MP cross-connects in
        the DSLAMs. Protocol support for this use-case will be provided in
        future.
  
  
  
     4.5 ANCP based OAM
  
        In a mixed Ethernet and ATM access network (including the local
        loop), it is desirable to provide similar mechanisms for connectivity
        checks and fault isolation, as those used in an ATM based
        architecture. This can be achieved using an ANCP based mechanism
        until end-to-end Ethernet OAM mechanisms are more widely implemented
        in various network elements.
  
        A simple solution based on ANCP can provide NAS with an access-line
        test capability and to some extent fault isolation. Controlled by a
        local management interface the NAS can use an ANCP operation to
        trigger the access-node to perform a loopback test on the local-loop
        (between the access-node and the CPE). The access-node can respond
        via another ANCP operation the result of the triggered loopback test.
        In case of ATM based local-loop the ANCP operation can trigger the
        access-node to generate ATM (F4/F5) loopback cells on the local loop.
        In case of Ethernet, the access-node can trigger an ethernet loopback
        message(per EFM OAM) on the local-loop.
  
     4.5.1 Message Flow
  
        “Port Management” message can be used by the NAS to request access
        node to trigger a “remote loopback” test on the local loop. The
        result of the loopback test can be asynchronously conveyed by the
        access node to the NAS in a “Port Management” response message. The
        format of relevant extensions to port management message is defined
        in section 5.4.4.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 25, 2007                [Page 13]


     Internet-Draft       draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00        August 2007
  
  
  
  
                         Port Management Message
                         (Remote Loopback          ATM loopback
                          Trigger Request)         OR EFM Loopback
                       1.  ---------------->     2. ---------->
                                                    <---------+
     +-------------+      +-----+         +-------+             +-----------------+
     |Radius/AAA    |------|NAS  |---------| DSLAM |-------------|     CPE         |
     |Policy Server|      +-----+         +-------+             |  (DSL Modem +   |
     +-------------+                                            | Routing Gateway)|
                                                                +-----------------+
                         3. <---------------
                     Port Management Message
                       (Remote Loopback Test Response)
  
  
  
  
  
  
     5  Access Node Control Protocol (ANCP)
  
     5.1 ANCP/TCP connection establishment
  
        ANCP will use TCP for exchanging protocol messages. [5] defines the
        GSMP message encapsulation for TCP. The TCP   session is initiated
        from the DSLAM (access node) to the NAS (controller). This is
        necessary to avoid static provisioning on the NAS for all the DSLAMs
        that are being served by the NAS. It is easier to configure a given
        DSLAM with the single IP address of the NAS that serves the DSLAM.
        This is a deviation from [5] which indicates that the controller
        initiates the TCP connection to the switch.
  
        NAS listens for incoming connections from the access nodes. Port 6068
        is used for TCP connection. Adjacency protocol messages, which are
        used to synchronize the NAS and access-nodes and maintain handshakes,
        are sent after the TCP connection is established. ANCP messages other
        than adjacency protocol messages may be sent only after the adjacency
        protocol has achieved synchronization.
  
        In the case of ATM access, a separate PVC (control channel) capable
        of transporting IP would be configured between NAS and the DSLAM for
        ANCP messages.
  
  
  
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 25, 2007                [Page 14]


     Internet-Draft       draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00        August 2007
  
  
     5.2 ANCP Connection keep-alive
  
        GSMPv3 defines an adjacency protocol.  The adjacency protocol is used
        to synchronize states across the link, to negotiate which version of
        the GSMP protocol to use, to discover the identity of the entity at
        the other end of a link, and to detect when it changes. GSMP is a
        hard     state protocol.  It is therefore important to detect loss of
        contact between switch and controller, and to detect any change of
        identity    of switch or controller. No protocol messages other than
        those of the adjacency protocol may be sent across the link until the
        adjacency protocol has achieved synchronization. There are no changes
        to the base GSMP adjacency protocol for implementing ANCP.
  
        The NAS will set the M-flag in the SYN message (signifying it is the
        master). Once the adjacency is established, periodic adjacency
        messages     (type ACK) are exchanged. The default ACK interval as
        advertised in the adjacency messages is 10 sec for ANCP. It SHOULD be
        configurable and is an implementation choice. It is recommended that
        both ends specify the same timer value. However, it is not necessary
        for the timer values to match.
  
        The GSMP adjacency message defined in [4] is extended for ANCP and is
        shown in section 5.3 immediately following this section. The 8-bit
        “version” field in the adjacency protocol messages is modified to
        carry the version and sub-version of the GSMP protocol for version
        negotiation. ANCP uses version 3 and sub-version 1 of GSMP protocol.
        The semantics and suggested values for Code, “Sender Name”, “Receiver
        Name”, “Sender Instance”, and “Receiver Instance” fields are as
        defined in [4]. The “Sender Port”, and “Receiver Port” should be set
        to 0 by both ends. The pType field should be set to 0. The pFlag
        should be set to 1.
  
        If the adjacency times out on either end, due to not receiving an
        adjacency message for a duration of (3 * Timer value), where the
        timer value is specified in the adjacency message, all the state
        received from the ANCP neighbor should be cleaned up, and the TCP
        connection should be closed. The NAS would continue to listen for new
        connection requests. The DSLAM will try to re-establish the TCP
        connection and both sides will attempt to re-establish the adjacency.
  
        The handling defined above will need some modifications when ANCP
        graceful restart procedures are defined. These procedures will be
        defined in a separate draft.
  
  
  
  
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 25, 2007                [Page 15]


     Internet-Draft       draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00        August 2007
  
  
     5.3 Capability negotiation
  
        The adjacency message as defined in [4] is extended to carry
        technology specific "Capability TLVs". Both the NAS and the access
        node will advertise supported capabilities in the originated
        adjacency messages. If a received adjacency message indicates absence
        of support for a capability that is supported by the receiving
        device, it will turn off the capability locally and will send an
        updated adjacency message with the capability turned off to match the
        received capability set. This process will eventually result in both
        sides agreeing on the minimal set of supported capabilities. The
        adjacency will not come up unless the capabilities advertised by the
        controller and the controlled device match.
  
        After initial synchronization, if at anytime a capability mismatch is
        detected, the adjacency will be brought down (RSTACK will be
        generated by the device detecting the mismatch), and synchronization
        will be re-attempted.
  
  
  
            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
           +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
           |   Ver |  Sub  | Message Type  |     Timer     |M|     Code    |
           +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
           |                          Sender Name                          |
           +                               +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
           |                               |                               |
           +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+                               +
           |                         Receiver Name                         |
           +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
           |                          Sender Port                          |
           +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
           |                         Receiver Port                         |
           +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
           | PType | PFlag |               Sender Instance                 |
           +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
           | Partition ID  |              Receiver Instance                |
           +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
           | Tech Type     | # of TLVs     | Total Length                  |
           +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
           |                                                               |
           ~                   Capability TLVs                             ~
           |                                                               |
           +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 25, 2007                [Page 16]


     Internet-Draft       draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00        August 2007
  
  
  
  
  
  
         The format of capability TLV is:
  
           +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
           |     Capability Type         |   Capability Length             |
           +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
           |                                                               |
           ~                                                               ~
           ~                   Capability Data                             ~
           +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  
  
        The Tech Type field type indicates the technology to which the
        capability extension applies. For access node control in case of DSL
        networks, new type "DSL" is proposed. The value for this field is
        0x05. This is the first available value in the range that is not
        currently allocated. It will need to be reserved with IANA.
  
        Capability length is the number of actual bytes contained in the
        value portion of the TLV. The TLV is padded to a 4-octet alignment.
        Therefore, a TLV with no data will contain a zero in the length field
        (if capability data is three octets, the length field will contain a
        three, but the size of the actual TLV is eight octets).
  
        Capability data field can be empty if the capability is just a
        boolean. In case the capability is a boolean, it is inferred from the
        presence of the TLV (with no data). Capability data provides the
        flexibility to advertise more than mere presence or absence of a
        capability. Capability types can be registered with IANA. Following
        capabilities are defined for ANCP as applied to DSL access:
  
          1. Capability Type : Dynamic-Topology-Discovery = 0x01
  
             Length (in bytes) : 0
  
             Capability Data : NULL
  
  
  
          2. Capability Type : Line-Configuration = 0x02
  
             Length (in bytes) : 0
  
             Capability Data : NULL
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 25, 2007                [Page 17]


     Internet-Draft       draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00        August 2007
  
  
  
  
          3. Capability Type : Transactional-Multicast = 0x03 (controller
             i.e. NAS terminates IGMP messages from subscribers, and via l2
             control protocol, signals state to the access-nodes (e.g.
             DSLAMs) to enable layer2 replication of multicast streams. In
             ATM access network this implies that NAS instructs the access-
             node to setup a P2MP cross-connect. The details of this will be
             covered in a separate ID [6].
  
             Length (in bytes) : 0
  
             Capability Data : NULL
  
  
  
          4. Capability Type : OAM = 0x04
  
             Length (in bytes) : 0
  
             Capability Data : NULL
  
          5. Capability Type : Bulk Transaction = 0x05 (defined in section
             5.4.1.2).
  
             Length (in bytes) : 0
  
             Capability Data : NULL
  
  
  
     5.4 GSMP Message Extensions for Access Node Control
  
     5.4.1 General Extensions
  
        Extensions to GSMP messages for various use-cases of “Acess Node
        Control” mechanism are defined in sections 5.4.2 to 5.4.4. However,
        sub-sections 5.4.1.1 and 5.4.1.2 below define extensions to GSMP that
        have general applicability.
  
     5.4.1.1  Extension TLV
  
        In order to provide flexibility and extensibility certain GSMP
        messages such as “PORT MANAGEMENT” and “EVENT” messages defined in
        [4] have been modified to include an extension block that follows a
        TLV structure. Individual messages in the following sections describe
        the usage and format of the extension block.
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 25, 2007                [Page 18]


     Internet-Draft       draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00        August 2007
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
           All Extension TLV's will be designated as follow:
  
  
            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
           +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
           |x|x|x|x|x|x|x|x| Message Type  |   Tech Type   | Block Length  |
           +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
           |                                                               |
           ~                         Extension Value                       ~
           |                                                               |
           +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  
  
  
           x: Reserved Flags
  
              These are generally used by specific messages and will be
              defined in those messages.
  
           Message Type
  
              An 8-bit field corresponding to the message type where the
              extension block is used.
  
           Tech Type
  
              An 8-bit field indicating the applicable technology type value.
              The Message Type plus the Tech Value uniquely define a single
              Extension Type and can be treated as a single 16 bit extension
              type. “Tech Type” value of 0x05 SHOULD be used by ANCP for DSL
              technology.
  
              0x00          Extension block not it use.
  
              0x01 – 0x04   Already in use by various technologies
  
              0x05          DSL
  
              0x06 - 0xFE   Reserved
  
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 25, 2007                [Page 19]


     Internet-Draft       draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00        August 2007
  
  
              0xFF          Base Specification Use
  
           Block Length
  
              A 8-bit field indicating the length of the Extension Value
              field in bytes.  When the Tech Type = 0x00, the length value
              MUST be set to 0.
  
           Extension Value
  
              A variable length field that is an integer number of 32 bit
              words long.  The Extension Value field is interpreted according
              to the specific definitions provided by the messages in the
              following sections.
  
     5.4.1.2  Bulk Transaction Message
  
        ANCP elements MAY support a bulk transaction capability.  This
        capability is negotiated during adjacency synchronization and follows
        general ANCP capability negotiation rules.
  
        In a bulk transaction, several messages can be bundled together in a
        single transaction. Bulk transaction uses message type 13. Reception
        of “Bulk Transaction Message” by a node that has not advertised bulk
        transaction capability MUST silently discard the received message.
  
        The Bulk Transaction message has the following format:
  
  
            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
           +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
           | Vers  |  Sub  | Message Type  | Result|        Code           |
           +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
           | Partition ID  |            Transaction Identifier             |
           +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
           |I|      SubMessage Number      |           Length              |
           +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
           |              Reserved         |           Count               |
           +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
           |                                                               |
           ~                          Message Payload                      ~
           |                                                               |
           +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  
  
  
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 25, 2007                [Page 20]


     Internet-Draft       draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00        August 2007
  
  
        In a Bulk Transaction Message, each of the message in the payload is
        framed with a complete header and is acted on individually.  The
        response to the Bulk Transaction message contains the response
        message that would have been generated by each of the messages had it
        been sent individually. Each response message will have the
        appropriate result and code field filled. Any message can be included
        in the bulk Transaction message except for adjacency message and
        another bulk transaction message. If a prohibited message is included
        in a bulk Transaction message, it MUST be included in the Bulk
        response with a failure response. The response code for that failure
        is 0x81 (“Message type prohibited in bulk Transaction”). While the
        individual message would fail, this would not   constitute a failure
        for the Bulk Transaction message
  
     5.4.2 Topology Discovery Extensions
  
     The GSMP Event message with PORT UP message type (80) is used for
     conveying DSL line attributes to the NAS. The version field should be
     set to 3, and the sub field should be set to 1. The I and subMessage
     fields SHOULD be set to 1 to signify no fragmentation. The Port and
     Label fields should be set to 0. The “Port Session Number” should be set
     to 0, and the “Event Sequence Number” should be 0. The Tech Type field
     is extended with new type "DSL". The value for this field is 0x05. The
     message SHOULD be generated when a line first comes UP, or any of the
     attributes of the line change e.g. the line re-trains to a different
     rate or one or more of the configured line attributes are
     administratively modified. Also, when the ANCP session first comes up,
     the DSLSM SHOULD transmit a PORT UP message to the NAS for each line
     that is up. A DSLAM MAY use a Bulk Transaction message as defined in
     5.4.1.2 to aggregate the transmission of PORT UP messages.
  
     When a DSL line goes down (idle or silent), the DSLAM SHOULD transmit an
     Event message with PORT DOWN message type (81) to the NAS. It is
     recommended that the DSLAMs use a dampening mechanism per DSL line to
     control the rate of state changes per DSL line, communicated to the NAS.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 25, 2007                [Page 21]


     Internet-Draft       draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00        August 2007
  
  
         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
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
        | Vers  |  Sub  | Message Type  | Result|        Code           |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
        | Partition ID  |            Transaction Identifier             |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
        |I|      SubMessage Number      |           Length              |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
        |                             Port                              |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
        |                      Port Session Number                      |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
        |                     Event Sequence Number                     |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
        |x|S|x|x|                                                       |
        +-+-+-+-+                     Label                             |
        ~                                                               ~
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
        |x|x|x|x|x|x|x|x| Message Type  |   Tech Type   | Block Length  |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
        |                                                               |
        ~                         Extension Value                       ~
        |                                                               |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  
  
        The format of the "Extension Value" field for Tech Type “DSL” is
        as follows :
  
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
        |             # of TLVs         | Extension block length (bytes)|
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
        |                                                               |
        ~                                                               ~
        ~                           TLVs                                ~
        |                                                               |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  
  
     The “Extension Value” contains one or more TLVs to identify a DSL line
     and define it’s characteristics. A TLV can consist of multiple sub-TLVs.
     First 2 byte of the “Extension Value” contains the number of TLVs that
     follow. The next 2 bytes contain the total length of the TLVs carried in
     the extension block in bytes (existing “Block Length” field in the GSMP
     message is limited to 255 bytes and is not sufficient).
  
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 25, 2007                [Page 22]


     Internet-Draft       draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00        August 2007
  
  
  
  
        General format of a TLV is :
  
         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               |             Length            |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
        |                                                               |
        ~                                                               ~
        ~                           Value                               ~
        |                                                               |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  
  
     The value field in each TLV is padded to a 4-octet alignment. The Length
     field in each TLV contains the actual number of bytes in the TLV (not
     including the padding if present). If a TLV is not understood by the
     NAS, it is silently ignored. Currently defined types start from 0x01.
  
     Following TLVs are currently defined:
  
       1. Type (Access-Loop-Circuit-ID = 0x01): This is a mandatory TLV and
          contains an identifier of the subscriber’s connection to the access
          node (i.e.  “local loop”). The “local loop” can be ATM based or
          Ethernet based. The “Access Loop Circuit ID” has local significance
          at the access node. The exact usage on the NAS is beyond the scope
          of this document. The format used for “local loop” identification
          in ANCP messages MUST be identical to what is used by the access
          nodes in subscriber signaling messages when the access nodes act as
          “signaling relay agents” as outlined in [7] and [8].
  
          Length : (upto 63 bytes)
  
          Value : ASCII string.
  
          For an ATM based local loop the string consists of slot/port and
          VPI/VCI information corresponding to the subscriber’s DSL
          connection. Default syntax for the string inserted by the access
          node as per [8] is:
  
           “Access-Node-Identifier atm slot/port:vpi.vci”
  
          The Access-Node-Identifier uniquely identifies the access node in
          the access network. The slot/port and VPI/VCI uniquely identifies
          the DSL line on the access node. Also, there is one to one
  
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 25, 2007                [Page 23]


     Internet-Draft       draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00        August 2007
  
  
          correspondence between DSL line and the VC between the access node
          and the NAS.
  
           For local loop which is Ethernet based (and tagged), the string
           consists of slot/port and VLAN tag corresponding to the
           subscriber. Default syntax for the string inserted by the access
           node as per [8] is:
  
            "Access-Node-Identifier eth slot/port[:vlan-id]"
  
  
       2. Type (Access-Loop-Remote-Id = 0x02): This is an optional TLV and
          contains an identifier to uniquely identify a user on a local loop
          on the access node. The exact usage on the NAS is out of scope of
          this document. It is desirable that the format used for the field
          is similar to what is used by the access nodes in subscriber
          signaling messages when the access nodes act as “signaling relay
          agents” as outlined in [7] and [8].
  
          Length : (upto 63 bytes)
  
          Value  :  ASCII string
  
  
  
       3. Type (Access-Aggregation-Circuit-ID-Binary = 0x06)
  
          Length : (8 bytes)
  
          Value : two 32 bit integers.
  
          For ethernet access aggregation, where a per-subscriber (stacked)
          VLAN can be applied (1:1 model defined in [8]), the VLAN stack
          provides a convenient way to uniquely identify the DSL line. The
          outer VLAN is equivalent to virtual path between a DSLAM and the
          NAS and inner VLAN is equivalent to a virtual circuit on a per DSL
          line basis. In this scenario, any subscriber data received by the
          access node and transmitted out the uplink to the aggregation
          network will be tagged with the VLAN stack assigned by the access
          node
  
          This TLV can carry the VLAN tags assigned by the access node in the
          ANCP messages. The VLAN tags can uniquely identify the DSL line
          being referred to in the ANCP messages, assuming the VLAN tags are
          not in any way translated in the aggregation network and are unique
          across physical ports. Each 32 bit integer (least significant bits)
  
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 25, 2007                [Page 24]


     Internet-Draft       draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00        August 2007
  
  
          contains a 12 bit VLAN identifier (which is part of the VLAN tag
          defined by IEEE 802.1Q).
  
          Also, in case of an ATM aggregation network, where the DSLAM is
          directly connected to the NAS (without an intermediate ATM switch),
          the two values can contain VPI and VCI on the DSLAM uplink (and can
          uniquely identify the DSL line on the DSLAM).
  
          This TLV is optional.
  
  
  
       4. Type (Access-Aggregation-Circuit-ID-ASCII = 0x03)
  
          Length : (upto 63 bytes)
  
          Value : ASCII string.
  
          This field contains information pertaining to an uplink on the
          access node. For Ethernet access aggregation, assuming the access
          node assigns VLAN tags (1:1 model), typical format for the string
          is:
  
          “Access-Node-Identifier eth slot/port [:inner-vlan-id][:outer-vlan-id]”
  
          The slot/port corresponds to the ethernet uplink on the access node
          towards the NAS.
  
          For an ATM aggregation network, typical format for the string is:
  
          “Access-Node-Identifier atm slot/port:vpi.vci”
  
          This TLV allows the NAS to associate the information contained in
          the ANCP messages to the DSL line on the access node.
  
          If the access node inserts this string in the ANCP messages, when
          referring to local loop characteristics (e.g. DSL line in case of a
          DSLAM), then it should be able to map the information contained in
          the string uniquely to the local loop (e.g. DSL line).
  
          On the NAS, the information contained in this string can be used to
          derive an “aggregation network” facing construct (e.g. an IP
          interface) corresponding to the local loop (e.g. DSL line). The
          association could be based on “local configuration” on the NAS.
  
          The access node can also convey to the NAS, the characteristics
          (e.g. bandwidth) of the uplink on the access node. This TLV then
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 25, 2007                [Page 25]


     Internet-Draft       draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00        August 2007
  
  
          serves the purpose of uniquely identifying the uplink whose
          characteristics are being defined. A separate set of sub-TLVs will
          be defined for the uplink characteristics (TBD).
  
          This TLV is optional.
  
  
  
       5. Type (DSL Line Attributes = 0x04):
  
          Length : variable (up to 1024 bytes)
  
          Value : This consists of one or more Sub-TLVs corresponding to DSL
          line attributes. No sub-TLVs other than the “DSL type” and “DSL
          line state” SHOULD be included in a PORT DOWN message.
  
          The general format of the sub-TLVs is identical to the general TLV
          format. The value field in each sub-TLV is padded to a 4-octet
          alignment. The Length field in each sub-TLV contains the actual
          number of bytes in the TLV (not including the padding if present).
          Current defined sub-TLV types are start from 0x81.
  
          Following sub-TLVs are currently defined :
  
          . Type (DSL-Type = 0x91) : Defines the type of transmission system
             in use. This is a mandatory TLV.
  
             Length :  (4 bytes)
  
             Value  : (Transmission system : ADSL1 = 0x01, ADSL2 = 0x02,
             ADSL2+ = 0x03, VDSL1 = 0x04, VDSL2 = 0x05, SDSL = 0x06, UNKNOWN
             = 0x07).
  
          . Type (Actual-Data-Rate-Upstream = 0x81) : Actual data rate
             upstream of a synchronized DSL line. This is a mandatory TLV.
             This rate value and all the subsequent ones account for the DSL
             overhead (i.e. signify the net rate).
  
            Length  :  (4 bytes)
  
            Value   : (Rate in Kb/sec)
  
          . Type (Actual-Data-Rate-Downstream = 0x82) : Actual data rate
             downstream of a synchronized DSL line. This is a mandatory TLV.
  
             Length :  (4 bytes)
  
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 25, 2007                [Page 26]


     Internet-Draft       draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00        August 2007
  
  
             Value  :  (Rate in Kb/sec)
  
          . Type (Minimum-Data-Rate-Upstream = 0x83) : Minimum data rate
             desired by the operator. This is optional.
  
            Length  :  (4 bytes)
  
            Value   : (Rate in Kb/sec)
  
          . Type (Minimum-Data-Rate-Downstream = 0x84) : Minimum data rate
             desired by the operator. This is optional.
  
            Length  :  (4 bytes)
  
            Value   : (Rate in Kb/sec)
  
          . Type (Attainable-Data-Rate-Upstream = 0x85) : Maximum upstream
             rate that can be attained on the DSL line. This is an optional
             TLV.
  
            Length  :  (4 bytes)
  
             Value   : (Rate in Kb/sec)
  
          . Type (Attainable-Data-Rate-Downstream = 0x86) : Maximum
             downstream rate that can be attained on the DSL line. This is
             an optional TLV.
  
            Length  :  (4 bytes)
  
            Value   : (Rate in Kb/sec)
  
          . Type (Maximum-Data-Rate-Upstream = 0x87) : Maximum data rate
             desired by the  operator. This is optional.
  
            Length  :  (4 bytes)
  
            Value   : (Rate in Kb/sec)
  
  
  
          . Type (Maximum-Data-Rate-Downstream = 0x88) : Maximum data rate
             desired by the operator. This is optional.
  
            Length  :  (4 bytes)
  
            Value   : (Rate in Kb/sec)
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 25, 2007                [Page 27]


     Internet-Draft       draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00        August 2007
  
  
          . Type (Minimum-Low-Power-Data-Rate-Upstream = 0x89) : Minimum
             data rate desired by the operator in low power state. This is
             optional.
  
            Length  :  (4 bytes)
  
            Value   : (Rate in Kb/sec)
  
          . Type (Minimum-Low-Power-Data-Rate-Downstream = 0x8A) : Minimum
             data rate desired by the operator in low power state. This is
             optional.
  
            Length  :  (4 bytes)
  
            Value   : (Rate in Kb/sec)
  
          . Type (Maximum-Interleaving-Delay-Upstream = 0x8B) : maximum one
             way interleaving delay. This is optional.
  
            Length  :  (4 bytes)
  
            Value   : (Time in msec)
  
          . Type (Actual-Interleaving-Delay-Upstream = 0x8C) : Value
             corresponding to the interleaver setting. This is optional.
  
            Length  :  (4 bytes)
  
            Value   : (Time in msec)
  
          . Type (Maximum-Interleaving-Delay-Downstream = 0x8D) : maximum
             one way interleaving delay. This is optional.
  
            Length  :  (4 bytes)
  
            Value   : (Time in msec)
  
  
  
          . Type (Actual-Interleaving-Delay-Downstream = 0x8E) : Value
             corresponding to the interleaver setting. This is optional.
  
            Length  :  (4 bytes)
  
            Value   : (Time in msec)
  
  
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 25, 2007                [Page 28]


     Internet-Draft       draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00        August 2007
  
  
          . Type (DSL line state = 0x8F) : The state of the DSL line. For
             PORT UP message, at this time, the TLV is optional (since the
             message type implicitly conveys the state of the line). For PORT
             DOWN, the TLV is mandatory, since it further communicates the
             state of the line as IDLE or SILENT.
  
            Length  :  (4 bytes)
  
             Value   :  { SHOWTIME = 0x01, IDLE = 0x02, SILENT = 0x03 }
  
          . Type (Access Loop Encapsulation = 0x90) : The data link protocol
             and, optionally the encapsulation overhead on the access loop.
             This is an optional TLV. However, when this TLV is present, the
             data link protocol MUST minimally be indicated. The
             encapsulation overhead can be optionally indicated.
  
              Length  :  (3 bytes)
  
              Value : The three bytes (most to least significant) and valid
              set of values for each byte are defined below.
  
                   Data Link (1 byte): {ATM AAL5 = 0,
  
                                         ETHERNET = 1}
  
                    Encaps 1 (1 byte): {NA = 0,
  
                                        Untagged Ethernet = 1,
  
                                        Single-tagged Ethernet = 2}
  
                    Encaps 2 (1 byte):{ NA = 0,
  
                                     PPPoA LLC = 1,
  
                                     PPPoA NULL = 2,
  
                                     IPoA LLC = 3,
  
                                     IPoA NuLL = 4,
  
                                     Ethernet over AAL5 LLC with FCS = 5,
  
                                     Ethernet over AAL5 LLC without FCS = 6,
  
                                     Ethernet over AAL5 NULL with FCS = 7,
  
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 25, 2007                [Page 29]


     Internet-Draft       draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00        August 2007
  
  
                                     Ethernet over AAL5 NULL without FCS = 8}
  
     If this TLV is present, the Data Link protocol MUST be indicated as
     defined above. However, the Access Node can choose to not convey the
     encapsulation on the access loop by specifying a value of 0 (NA) for the
     two encapsulation fields.
  
     5.4.3 Line Configuration Extensions
  
     The NAS uses extension block in the Port Management messages to convey
     service attributes of the DSL lines to the DSLAM. TLVs are defined for
     DSL line identification and service data for the DSL lines. Port number
     is set to 0 in the message. A new action type "Configure Connection
     Service Data" (value 0x8) is defined. The "Function" field is set to the
     action type. This action type indicates to the device being controlled
     (access-node i.e. DSLAM) to apply service configuration data contained
     in the extension value (TLVs), to the DSL line (identified by one of the
     TLVs in the extension value). The Tech Type field is extended with new
     type "DSL". The value for this field is 0x05.
  
         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
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
        | Vers  |  Sub  | Message Type  | Result|        Code           |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
        | Partition ID  |            Transaction Identifier             |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
        |I|      SubMessage Number      |           Length              |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
        |                             Port                              |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
        |                      Port Session Number                      |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
        |                     Event Sequence Number                     |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
        |R|x|x|x|x|x|x|x|   Duration    |    Function   | X-Function    |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
        |           Event Flags         |        Flow Control Flags     |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
        |x|x|x|x|x|x|x|x| Message Type  |   Tech Type   | Block Length  |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
        |                                                               |
        ~                         Extension Value                       ~
        |                                                               |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  
  
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 25, 2007                [Page 30]


     Internet-Draft       draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00        August 2007
  
  
  
  
  
  
        The format of the "Extension Value" field is as follows:
  
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
        |             # of TLVs         | Extension Block length (bytes)|
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
        |                                                               |
        ~                                                               ~
        ~                            TLVs                               ~
        |                                                               |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  
  
        The “Extension Value” field contains one or more TLVs containing DSL
        line identifier and desired service attributes of the the DSL line.
        First 2 byte of the “Extension Value” contains the number of TLVs
        that follow. The next 2 bytes contain the total length of the
        extension block in bytes (existing “Block Length” field in the GSMP
        message is limited to 255 bytes and is not sufficient).
  
        General format of a TLV is:
  
         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               |             Length            |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
        |                                                               |
        ~                                                               ~
        ~                           Value                               ~
        |                                                               |
        +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
  
  
        The value field is padded to a 4-octet alignment. The Length field in
        each TLV contains the actual number of bytes in the TLV (not
        including the padding if present). If a TLV is not understood by the
        access-node, it is silently ignored. Depending upon the deployment
        scenario, the NAS may specify “Access Loop Circuit-ID” or the “Access
        Aggregation Circuit-ID) as defined in section 5.4.1. Following TLVs
        can appear in this message:
  
        o  Type (Access-Loop-Circuit-ID = 0x01) : defined in section 5.4.1
  
  
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 25, 2007                [Page 31]


     Internet-Draft       draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00        August 2007
  
  
        o  Type (Access-Aggregation-Circuit-ID-Binary = 0x06): defined in
           section 5.4.1.
  
        o  Type (Access-Aggregation-Circuit-ID-ASCII = 0x03): defined in
           section 5.4.1.
  
        o  Type (Service-Profile-Name = 0x05): Reference to a pre-configured
           profile on the DSLAM that contains service specific data for the
           subscriber.
  
           Length : (upto 64 bytes)
  
           Value  : ASCII string containing the profile name (NAS learns
           from a policy server after a subscriber is authorized).
  
        In future, more TLVs MAY be defined for individual service attributes
        of a DSL line (e.g. rates, interleaving delay,  multicast channel
        entitlement access-list etc).
  
  
  
     5.4.4 OAM Extensions
  
        GSMP “Port Management” message (type 32) SHOULD be used by the NAS to
        trigger access node to run a loopback test on the local loop. The
        message format is defined in section 5.4.2. The version field SHOULD
        be set to 3 and sub-version field SHOULD be set to 1. The remaining
        fields in the GSMP header have standard semantics. The function type
        used in the request message SHOULD be set to “remote loopback” (type
        = 0x09). The port, “port session number”, “event sequence number”,
        duration, “event flags”, “flow control flags” and code fields SHOULD
        all be set to 0. The result field SHOULD be set to “AckAll” to
        indicate requirement for the access node to send a success for
        failure response. The transaction ID SHOULD contain a sequence number
        inserted by the NAS in each request that it generates. The extension
        field format is also defined above in section 5.4.2. The extension
        value field can contain one or more TLVs including the access-line
        identifier on the DSLAM and OAM test characteristics desired by the
        NAS.
  
        The TLV format is defined above in section 5.4.2. The value field is
        padded to a 4-octet alignment. The Length field in each TLV contains
        the actual number of bytes in the TLV (not including the padding if
        present). If a TLV is not understood by the NAS, it is silently
        ignored. Depending upon the deployment scenario, the NAS may specify
        “Access Loop Circuit-ID” or the “Access Aggregation Circuit-ID) as
        defined in section 5.4.1. Following TLVs can appear in this message:
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 25, 2007                [Page 32]


     Internet-Draft       draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00        August 2007
  
  
        o  Type (Access-Loop-Circuit-ID = 0x01) : defined in section 5.4.1
  
        o  Type (Access-Aggregation-Circuit-ID-Binary = 0x06): defined in
           section 5.4.1.
  
        o  Type (Access-Aggregation-Circuit-ID-ASCII = 0x03): defined in
           section 5.4.1.
  
        o  Type (OAM-Loopback-Test-Parameters = 0x07): Parameters related to
           loopback test. This is an optional TLV. If this TLV is not present
           in the request message, the DSLAM SHOULD use locally determined
           default values for the test parameters.
  
           Length: 4 bytes
  
           Value  : two 1 byte numbers described below (listed in order of
           most to least  significant). Thus, the 4 bytes consist of 1 byte
           of Count, followed by 1 byte of Timeout, followed by two pad bytes
           of zero.
  
            o  Count (1 byte) : Number of loopback cells/messages that should
               be generated on the local loop as part of the loopback test.
               The NAS SHOULD restrict the “count” to be greater than 0 and
               less than or equal to 32. The DSLAM SHOULD discard the request
               for a loopback test, if the received test parameters contain
               an out of range value for the “count” field. The DSLAM MAY
               optionally send a failure response to the NAS with the code
               “invalid test parameter”.
  
            o  Timeout (1 byte) : Upper bound on the time in seconds that the
               NAS would wait for a response from the DSLAM. If the total
               time taken by the DSLAM to complete a test with requested
               parameters, exceeds the specified “timeout” value, it can
               choose to omit the generation of a response to the NAS. DSLAM
               SHOULD use a locally determined value for the “timeout”, if
               the received value of the “timeout” parameter is 0.
  
  
  
        o  Type (Opaque-Data = 0x08) : This is an optional TLV. If present in
           the request message, the DSLAM SHOULD reflect it back in the
           response unmodified.
  
           Length : 8 bytes
  
  
  
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 25, 2007                [Page 33]


     Internet-Draft       draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00        August 2007
  
  
           Value : Two 32 bit integers inserted by the NAS (not to be
           interpreted by the DSLAM, but just reflected back in the
           response).
  
        The access node generates a success or failure response when it deems
        the loopback test to be complete. “Port Management” message (type 32)
        is used. The result field SHOULD be set to success or failure. The
        function type SHOULD be set to 0x09. The transaction ID SHOULD be
        copied from the sequence number contained in the corresponding
        request. The other parameters not explicitly defined here SHOULD be
        set as specified in the request message above. The code field SHOULD
        be set to a value in the range 0x500 to 0x5ff (to be reserved with
        IANA) to indicate the status of the executed test. The valid values
        defined are (can be extended in future):
  
              0x500 : Specified access line does not exist.
  
              0x501 : Loopback test timed out.
  
              0x502 : Reserved
  
              0x503 : DSL line status showtime.
  
              0x504 : DSL line status idle.
  
              0x505 : DSL line status silent.
  
              0x506 : DSL line status training.
  
              0x507 : DSL line integrity error.
  
              0x508 : DSLAM resource not available.
  
              0x509 : Invalid test parameter.
  
     The Extension value can contain one or more TLVs including the TLV to
     identify the access line on which the test was performed, and details
     from executing the test. The access line identifier SHOULD be identical
     to what was contained in the request. The relevant TLVs are:
  
        o  Type (Access-Loop-Circuit-ID = 0x01) : defined in section 5.4.1
  
        o  Type (Access-Aggregation-Circuit-ID-Binary = 0x06): defined in
           section 5.4.1.
  
        o  Type (Access-Aggregation-Circuit-ID-ASCII = 0x03): defined in
           section 5.4.1.
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 25, 2007                [Page 34]


     Internet-Draft       draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00        August 2007
  
  
        o  Type (Opaque-Data = 0x08) : Data inserted by the NAS in the
           request reflected back by the DSLAM.
  
           Length : 8 bytes
  
           Value : Two 32 bit integers as received in the request (opaque to
           the DSLAM).
  
        o  Type (OAM-Loopback-Test-Response-String = 0x09)
  
           Length (upto 128 bytes)
  
           Value : Suitably formatted ASCII string containing useful details
           about the test that the NAS will display for the operator, exactly
           as received from the DSLAM (no manipulation/interpretation by the
           NAS). This is an optional TLV, but it is strongly recommended,
           that in case of ATM based local loop, the DSLAM at the very least
           indicates via this TLV, the total loopback cells generated and the
           total loopback cells successfully received as part of executing
           the requested loopback test.
  
  
  
     5.5 ATM-specific considerations
  
        The topology discovery and line configuration involve the DSL line
        attributes. For ATM based access networks, the DSL line on the DSLAM
        is identified by the port and PVP/PVC corresponding to the
        subscriber. The DSLAMs are connected to the NAS via an ATM access
        aggregation network. Since, the   DSLAM (access-node) is not directly
        connected to the NAS, the NAS needs a mechanism to learn the DSL line
        identifier (more generally referred to as "Access Loop Circuit-ID")
        corresponding to a subscriber. The "Access loop circuit-ID" has no
        local significance on the NAS. The ANCP messages for topology
        discovery and line configuration carry opaque "Access loop Circuit-
        ID" which has only local significance on the DSLAMs.
  
        The access loop circuit identifier can be carried as an ASCII string
        in the ANCP messages. This allows ANCP to be decoupled from the
        specifics of the underlying access technology being controlled. On
        the other hand, this requires a NAS mechanism by which such
        identifier can be correlated to the context of an “aggregation
        network” facing IP interface (corresponding to the subscriber) on the
        NAS. This would typically require local configuration of such IP
        interfaces, or of the underlying ATM interfaces.
  
  
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 25, 2007                [Page 35]


     Internet-Draft       draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00        August 2007
  
  
     5.6 Ethernet-specific considerations
  
     One possible way of approaching the use of Ethernet technology in the
     access aggregation network is to recreate the equivalent of Virtual
     Paths (VPs) and Virtual Circuits (VCs) by using stacked Virtual LAN
     tags. As an example, one could use an “outer” VLAN to create a form of
     “virtual path” between a given DSLAM and a given NAS. And then use
     “inner” VLAN tags to create a form of “virtual circuit” on a per DSL
     line basis. In this case, VLAN tags conveyed in topology discovery and
     line configuration messages will allow to uniquely identify the DSL line
     in a straightforward manner, assuming the VLAN tags are not translated
     in some way by the aggregation network, and are unique across physical
     ports.
  
     However, some carriers do not wish to use this “connection oriented”
     approach. Therefore, an alternative model is to bridge sessions from
     multiple subscribers behind a DSLAM to a single VLAN in the aggregation
     network. This is the N:1 model. In this model, or in the case where user
     traffic is sent untagged, the access node needs to insert the exact
     identity of the DSL line in the topology discovery and line
     configuration messages, and then have a mechanism by which this can be
     correlated to the context of an “aggregation network” facing IP
     interface (for the subscriber) on the NAS. This can either be based on
     local configuration on the NAS, or on the fact that such DSLAM (access
     node) typically inserts the “Access Loop Circuit ID” in subscriber
     signaling messages relayed to the NAS (i.e. DHCP or PPPoE discovery
     messages).
  
     Section 5.4.1 defines “Access Loop Circuit ID”.
  
  
     6  IANA Considerations
  
        New Tech-Type, capability types, sub-TLV types related to topology
        discovery and line configuration will need to be reserved.
  
     7  Security Considerations
  
        The NAS and DSLAMs are implicitly in a trusted domain, so security
        for ANCP is not a strong requirement. However, if needed security can
        be provided using IP security as indicated in [RFC3293].
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 25, 2007                [Page 36]


     Internet-Draft       draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00        August 2007
  
  
     8  References
  
        [1]   DSLForum TR-059, DSL Evolution - Architecture Requirements for
              the Support of QoS-Enabled IP Services, Tom Anschutz (BellSouth
              Telecommunications), 09/2003.
  
        [2]   DSLForum TR-058, Multi-Service Architecture & Framework
              Requirements, Mark Elias (SBC) and Sven Ooghe (Alcatel),
              09/2003.
  
        [3]   DSLForum TR-092, Broadband Remote access server requirements
              document.
  
        [4]   Doria, A. et al, "General Switch Management Protocol- V3" (GSMP
              v3), RFC 3292, June 2002.
  
        [5]   Worster, T., Doria, A. and J. Buerkle, "General Switch
              Management Protocol (GSMP) Packet Encapsulations for
              Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM), Ethernet and Transmission
              Control Protocol (TCP)", RFC 3293, June 2002.
  
        [6]   GSMP extensions for ANCP - Transactional Multicast, draft-
              moisand-gsmp-ancp-multicast-00 (work in progress).
  
        [7]   “DHCP Relay Agent Information Option”, RFC 3046, January 2001.
  
        [8]   Architecture & Transport: Migration to Ethernet Based DSL
              Aggregation, DSL Forum WT-101, Cohen et al.
  
        [9]   Framework for Access Node Control Mechanism in Broadband
              Networks, draft-ietf-ancp-framework-00.txt.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 25, 2007                [Page 37]


     Internet-Draft       draft-ietf-ancp-protocol-00        August 2007
  
  
     Author's Addresses
  
        Sanjay Wadhwa
        Juniper Networks
        10 Technology Park Drive
        Westford, MA 01886
  
        Email: swadhwa@juniper.net
  
        Jerome Moisand
        Juniper Networks
        10 Technology Park Drive
        Westford, MA 01886
  
  
        Email: jmoisand@juniper.net
  
        Swami Subramanian
        Juniper Networks
        10 Technology Park Drive
        Westford, MA 01886
  
  
        Email: ssubramanian@juniper.net
  
        Thomas Haag
        T-systems
  
        Email: thomas.haag@t-systems.com
  
        Norber Voigt
        Siemens
  
        Email: norbert.voigt@siemens.com
  
  
  Full Copyright Statement
  
   Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2007).
  
   This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
   contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
   retain all their rights.
  
   This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
   "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
   OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND
   THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM 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.
  
  
  Intellectual Property
  
   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
   Intellectual Property Rights 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; nor does it represent that it has
   made any independent effort to identify any such rights.  Information
   on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
   found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
  
   Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat 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 implementers or users of this
   specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
   http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
  
   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
   rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
   this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF at
   ietf-ipr@ietf.org.
  
  
  Acknowledgment
  
    Thanks to Peter Arberg, Josef Froehler, Derek Harkness, Kim
    Hyldgaard, Sandy Ng, Robert Peschi, and Michel Platnic for their
    input to this document.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
     Wadhwa et.al           Expires August 25, 2007                [Page 39]
  

Html markup produced by rfcmarkup 1.129d, available from https://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcmarkup/