draft-ietf-ccamp-assoc-ext-06.txt   rfc6780.txt 
Internet Draft Lou Berger (LabN)
Updates: 2205, 3209, 3473, 4872 Francois Le Faucheur (Cisco)
Category: Standards Track Ashok Narayanan (Cisco)
Expiration Date: March 21, 2013
September 21, 2012 Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) L. Berger
Request for Comments: 6780 LabN
RSVP Association Object Extensions Updates: 2205, 3209, 3473, 4872 F. Le Faucheur
Category: Standards Track A. Narayanan
ISSN: 2070-1721 Cisco
October 2012
draft-ietf-ccamp-assoc-ext-06.txt RSVP ASSOCIATION Object Extensions
Abstract Abstract
The RSVP ASSOCIATION object was defined in the context of GMPLS The RSVP ASSOCIATION object was defined in the context of GMPLS-
(Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching) controlled label controlled Label Switched Paths (LSPs). In this context, the object
switched paths (LSPs). In this context, the object is used to is used to associate recovery LSPs with the LSP they are protecting.
associate recovery LSPs with the LSP they are protecting. This This object also has broader applicability as a mechanism to
object also has broader applicability as a mechanism to associate associate RSVP state. This document defines how the ASSOCIATION
RSVP state, and this document defines how the ASSOCIATION object object can be more generally applied. This document also defines
can be more generally applied. This document also defines Extended ASSOCIATION objects that, in particular, can be used in the
Extended ASSOCIATION objects which, in particular, can be used in context of the MPLS Transport Profile (MPLS-TP). This document
the context of the Transport Profile of Multiprotocol Label updates RFC 2205, RFC 3209, and RFC 3473. It also generalizes the
Switching (MPLS-TP). This document updates RFC 2205, RFC 3209, definition of the Association ID field defined in RFC 4872.
and RFC 3473. It also generalizes the definition of the Association
ID field defined in RFC 4872.
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), 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 Status of This Memo
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 This is an Internet Standards Track document.
http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has
received public review and has been approved for publication by the
Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on
Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 5741.
This Internet-Draft will expire on March 21, 2013 Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6780.
Copyright and License Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1 Introduction ........................................... 3 1. Introduction ....................................................2
1.1 Conventions Used In This Document ...................... 4 1.1. Conventions Used in This Document ..........................4
2 Generalized Association ID Field Definition ............ 4 2. Generalized Association ID Field Definition .....................4
3 Non-GMPLS and Non-Recovery Usage ....................... 5 3. Non-GMPLS and Non-Recovery Usage ................................4
3.1 Upstream Initiated Association ......................... 5 3.1. Upstream Initiated Association .............................5
3.1.1 Path Message Format .................................... 6 3.1.1. Path Message Format .................................5
3.1.2 Path Message Processing ................................ 6 3.1.2. Path Message Processing .............................6
3.2 Downstream Initiated Association ....................... 7 3.2. Downstream Initiated Association ...........................7
3.2.1 Resv Message Format .................................... 8 3.2.1. Resv Message Format .................................8
3.2.2 Resv Message Processing ................................ 8 3.2.2. Resv Message Processing .............................8
3.3 Association Types ...................................... 9 3.3. Association Types ..........................................9
3.3.1 Resource Sharing Association Type ...................... 9 3.3.1. Resource Sharing Association Type ...................9
3.3.2 Unknown Association Types .............................. 10 3.3.2. Unknown Association Types ..........................10
4 IPv4 and IPv6 Extended ASSOCIATION Objects ............. 10 4. IPv4 and IPv6 Extended ASSOCIATION Objects .....................10
4.1 IPv4 and IPv6 Extended ASSOCIATION Object Format ....... 11 4.1. IPv4 and IPv6 Extended ASSOCIATION Object Format ..........11
4.2 Processing ............................................. 13 4.2. Processing ................................................13
5 Compatibility .......................................... 14 5. Compatibility ..................................................14
6 Security Considerations ................................ 14 6. Security Considerations ........................................14
7 IANA Considerations .................................... 15 7. IANA Considerations ............................................15
7.1 IPv4 and IPv6 Extended ASSOCIATION Objects ............. 15 7.1. IPv4 and IPv6 Extended ASSOCIATION Objects ................15
7.2 Resource Sharing Association Type ...................... 15 7.2. Resource Sharing Association Type .........................15
8 Acknowledgments ........................................ 16 8. Acknowledgments ................................................16
9 References ............................................. 16 9. References .....................................................16
9.1 Normative References ................................... 16 9.1. Normative References ......................................16
9.2 Informative References ................................. 16 9.2. Informative References ....................................16
10 Authors' Addresses ..................................... 17
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
End-to-end and segment recovery are defined for GMPLS (Generalized End-to-end and segment recovery are defined for GMPLS-controlled
Multi-Protocol Label Switching) controlled label switched paths Label Switched Paths (LSPs) in [RFC4872] and [RFC4873], respectively.
(LSPs) in [RFC4872] and [RFC4873] respectively. Both definitions use Both definitions use the ASSOCIATION object to associate recovery
the ASSOCIATION object to associate recovery LSPs with the LSP they LSPs with the LSP they are protecting. Additional narrative on how
are protecting. Additional narrative on how such associations are to such associations are to be identified is provided in [RFC6689].
be identified is also provided in [RFC6689].
This document expands the possible usage of the ASSOCIATION object to This document expands the possible usage of the ASSOCIATION object to
non-GMPLS and non-recovery contexts. The expanded usage applies non-GMPLS and non-recovery contexts. The expanded usage applies
equally to GMPLS LSPs [RFC3473], MPLS LSPs [RFC3209] and non-LSP RSVP equally to GMPLS LSPs [RFC3473], MPLS LSPs [RFC3209], and non-LSP
sessions [RFC2205], [RFC2207], [RFC3175] and [RFC4860]. This RSVP sessions [RFC2205] [RFC2207] [RFC3175] [RFC4860]. This document
document also reviews how association should be made in the case also reviews how associations should be made in the case in which the
where the object is carried in a Path message and defines usage with object is carried in a Path message; additionally, it defines usage
Resv messages. This section also discusses usage of the ASSOCIATION with Resv messages. This section also discusses usage of the
object outside the context of GMPLS LSPs. ASSOCIATION object outside the context of GMPLS LSPs.
Some examples of non-LSP association in order to enable resource Some examples of non-LSP association being used to enable resource
sharing are: sharing are:
o Voice Call-Waiting: o Voice Call-Waiting:
A bidirectional voice call between two endpoints A and B is
signaled using two separate unidirectional RSVP reservations for
the flows A->B and B->A. If endpoint A wishes to put the A-B call
on hold and join a separate A-C call, it is desirable that
network resources on common links be shared between the A-B and
A-C calls. The B->A and C->A subflows of the call can share
resources using existing RSVP sharing mechanisms, but only if
they use the same destination IP addresses and ports. Since, by
definition, the RSVP reservations for the subflows A->B and A->C
of the call must have different IP addresses in the SESSION
objects, this document defines a new mechanism to associate the
subflows and allow them to share resources.
o Voice Shared Line: A bidirectional voice call between two endpoints, A and B, is
A voice shared line is a single number that rings multiple signaled using two separate unidirectional RSVP reservations for
endpoints (which may be geographically diverse), such as phone the flows A->B and B->A. If endpoint A wishes to put the A-B call
lines to a manager's desk and to their assistant. A VoIP system on hold and join a separate A-C call, it is desirable that network
that models these calls as multiple P2P unicast pre-ring resources on common links be shared between the A-B and A-C calls.
reservations would result in significantly over-counting The B->A and C->A subflows of the call can share resources using
bandwidth on shared links, since RSVP unicast reservations to existing RSVP sharing mechanisms, but only if they use the same
different endpoints cannot share bandwidth. So a new mechanism destination IP addresses and ports. Since by definition, the RSVP
is defined in this document allowing separate unicast reservations for the subflows A->B and A->C of the call must have
reservations to be associated and share resources. different IP addresses in the SESSION objects, this document
defines a new mechanism to associate the subflows and allow them
to share resources.
o Symmetric NAT: o Voice Shared Line:
RSVP permits sharing of resources between multiple flows
addressed to the same destination D, even from different senders A voice shared line is a single number that rings multiple
S1 and S2. However, if D is behind a NAT operating in symmetric endpoints (which may be geographically diverse), such as phone
mode [RFC5389], it is possible that the destination port of the lines to a manager's desk and to their assistant. A Voice over IP
flows S1->D and S2->D may be different outside the NAT. In this (VoIP) system that models these calls as multiple point-to-point
case, these flows cannot share resources using RSVP, since the unicast pre-ring reservations would result in significantly over-
SESSION objects for these two flows outside the NAT have counting bandwidth on shared links, since RSVP unicast
different destination ports. This document defines a new reservations to different endpoints cannot share bandwidth. So, a
mechanism to associate these flows and allow them to share new mechanism is defined in this document to allow separate
resources. unicast reservations to be associated and to share resources.
o Symmetric NAT:
RSVP permits sharing of resources between multiple flows addressed
to the same destination D, even from different senders S1 and S2.
However, if D is behind a NAT operating in symmetric mode
[RFC5389], it is possible that the destination port of the flows
S1->D and S2->D may be different outside the NAT. In this case,
these flows cannot share resources using RSVP, since the SESSION
objects for these two flows outside the NAT have different
destination ports. This document defines a new mechanism to
associate these flows and allow them to share resources.
In order to support the wider usage of the ASSOCIATION object, this In order to support the wider usage of the ASSOCIATION object, this
document generalizes the definition of the Association ID field document generalizes the definition of the Association ID field
defined in RFC 4872. This generalization has no impact on existing defined in RFC 4872. This generalization has no impact on existing
implementations. When using the procedures defined below, implementations. When using the procedures defined below,
association is identified based on exact ASSOCIATION object matching. association is identified based on exact ASSOCIATION object matching.
Some of the other matching mechanisms defined in RFC 4872, e.g., Some of the other matching mechanisms defined in RFC 4872, e.g.,
matching based on Session IDs, are not generalized. This document matching based on Session IDs, are not generalized. This document
allows for, but does not specify, association type-specific allows for, but does not specify, association type-specific
processing. processing.
This document also defines the Extended ASSOCIATION objects which can This document also defines the Extended ASSOCIATION objects that can
be used in the context of the Transport Profile of Multiprotocol be used in the context of MPLS-TP. The scope of the Extended
Label Switching (MPLS-TP). The scope of the Extended ASSOCIATION ASSOCIATION objects is not limited to MPLS-TP.
objects is not limited to MPLS-TP.
1.1. Conventions Used In This Document 1.1. Conventions Used in This Document
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
2. Generalized Association ID Field Definition 2. Generalized Association ID Field Definition
The Association ID field is carried in the IPv4 and IPv6 ASSOCIATION The Association ID field is carried in the IPv4 and IPv6 ASSOCIATION
objects defined in [RFC4872]. The [RFC4872] definition of the field objects defined in [RFC4872]. The [RFC4872] definition of the field
reads: reads:
A value assigned by the LSP head-end. When combined with the A value assigned by the LSP head-end. When combined with the
Association Type and Association Source, this value uniquely Association Type and Association Source, this value uniquely
identifies an association. identifies an association.
This document allows for the origination of ASSOCIATION objects by This document allows for the origination of ASSOCIATION objects by
nodes other than "the LSP head-end". As such, the definition of the nodes other than "the LSP head-end". As such, the definition of the
Association ID field needs to be generalized to accommodate such Association ID field needs to be generalized to accommodate such
usage. This document defines the Association ID field of the IPv4 usage. This document defines the Association ID field of the IPv4
and IPv6 ASSOCIATION objects as: and IPv6 ASSOCIATION objects as:
A value assigned by the node that originated the association. A value assigned by the node that originated the association.
When combined with the other fields carried in the object, this When combined with the other fields carried in the object, this
value uniquely identifies an association. value uniquely identifies an association.
This change in definition does not impact [RFC4872] or [RFC4873] This change in definition does not impact the procedures or
defined procedures or mechanisms, nor does it impact existing mechanisms defined in [RFC4872] or [RFC4873], nor does it impact the
implementations of [RFC4872] or [RFC4873]. existing implementations of [RFC4872] or [RFC4873].
3. Non-GMPLS and Non-Recovery Usage 3. Non-GMPLS and Non-Recovery Usage
While the ASSOCIATION object, [RFC4872], is defined in the context of While the ASSOCIATION object [RFC4872] is defined in the context of
GMPLS Recovery, the object can have wider application. [RFC4872] GMPLS recovery, the object can have wider application. [RFC4872]
defines the object to be used to "associate LSPs with each other", defines the object to be used to "associate LSPs with each other",
and then defines an Association Type field to identify the type of and then defines an Association Type field to identify the type of
association being identified. It also specifies that the Association association being identified. It also specifies that the Association
Type field is to be considered when determining association, i.e., Type field is to be considered when determining association, i.e.,
there may be type-specific association rules. As defined by there may be type-specific association rules. As defined by
[RFC4872] and reviewed in [RFC6689], this is the case for Recovery [RFC4872] and reviewed in [RFC6689], this is the case for recovery
type association objects. [RFC6689], notably the text related to type ASSOCIATION objects. [RFC6689], notably the text related to
resource sharing types, can also be used as the foundation for a resource sharing types, can also be used as the foundation for a
generic method for associating LSPs when there is no type-specific generic method for associating LSPs when there is no type-specific
association defined. association defined.
The remainder of this section defines the general rules to be The remainder of this section defines the general rules to be
followed when processing ASSOCIATION objects. Object usage in both followed when processing ASSOCIATION objects. Object usage in both
Path and Resv messages is discussed. The usage applies equally to Path and Resv messages is discussed. The usage applies equally to
GMPLS LSPs [RFC3473], MPLS LSPs [RFC3209] and non-LSP RSVP sessions GMPLS LSPs [RFC3473], MPLS LSPs [RFC3209], and non-LSP RSVP sessions
[RFC2205], [RFC2207], [RFC3175] and [RFC4860]. As described below, [RFC2205] [RFC2207] [RFC3175] [RFC4860]. As described below,
association is always done based on matching either Path state to association is always done based on matching either Path state to
Path state, or Resv state to Resv state, but not Path state to Resv Path state, or Resv state to Resv state, but not Path state to Resv
State. This section applies to the ASSOCIATION objects defined in State. This section applies to the ASSOCIATION objects defined in
[RFC4872]. [RFC4872].
3.1. Upstream Initiated Association 3.1. Upstream-Initiated Association
Upstream initiated association is represented in ASSOCIATION objects Upstream-initiated association is represented in ASSOCIATION objects
carried in Path messages and can be used to associate RSVP Path state carried in Path messages and can be used to associate RSVP Path state
across MPLS Tunnels / RSVP sessions. (Note, per [RFC3209], an MPLS across MPLS Tunnels / RSVP sessions. (Note, per [RFC3209], an MPLS
tunnel is represented by a RSVP SESSION object, and multiple LSPs may tunnel is represented by an RSVP SESSION object, and multiple LSPs
be represented within a single tunnel.) Cross-LSP association based may be represented within a single tunnel.) Cross-LSP association
on Path state is defined in [RFC4872]. This section extends that based on Path state is defined in [RFC4872]. This section extends
definition by specifying generic association rules and usage for non- that definition by specifying generic association rules and usage for
LSP uses. This section does not modify processing required to non-LSP uses. This section does not modify processing required to
support [RFC4872] and [RFC4873], and which is reviewed in Section 3 support [RFC4872] and [RFC4873], which is reviewed in Section 3 of
of [RFC6689]. The use of an ASSOCIATION object in a single session [RFC6689]. The use of an ASSOCIATION object in a single session is
is not precluded. not precluded.
3.1.1. Path Message Format 3.1.1. Path Message Format
This section provides the Backus-Naur Form (BNF), see [RFC5511], for This section provides the Backus-Naur Form (BNF), see [RFC5511], for
Path messages containing ASSOCIATION objects. BNF is provided for Path messages containing ASSOCIATION objects. BNF is provided for
both MPLS and for non-LSP session usage. Unmodified RSVP message both MPLS and for non-LSP session usage. Unmodified RSVP message
formats and some optional objects are not listed. formats and some optional objects are not listed.
The formats for MPLS and GMPLS sessions are unmodified from The formats for MPLS and GMPLS sessions are unmodified from [RFC4872]
[RFC4872], and can be represented based on the BNF in [RFC3209] as: and can be represented based on the BNF in [RFC3209] as:
<Path Message> ::= <Common Header> [ <INTEGRITY> ] <Path Message> ::= <Common Header> [ <INTEGRITY> ]
<SESSION> <RSVP_HOP> <SESSION> <RSVP_HOP>
<TIME_VALUES> <TIME_VALUES>
[ <EXPLICIT_ROUTE> ] [ <EXPLICIT_ROUTE> ]
<LABEL_REQUEST> <LABEL_REQUEST>
[ <SESSION_ATTRIBUTE> ] [ <SESSION_ATTRIBUTE> ]
[ <ASSOCIATION> ... ] [ <ASSOCIATION> ... ]
[ <POLICY_DATA> ... ] [ <POLICY_DATA> ... ]
<sender descriptor> <sender descriptor>
The format for non-LSP sessions as based on the BNF in [RFC2205] is: The format for non-LSP sessions as based on the BNF in [RFC2205] is:
<Path Message> ::= <Common Header> [ <INTEGRITY> ] <Path Message> ::= <Common Header> [ <INTEGRITY> ]
<SESSION> <RSVP_HOP> <SESSION> <RSVP_HOP>
<TIME_VALUES> <TIME_VALUES>
[ <ASSOCIATION> ... ] [ <ASSOCIATION> ... ]
[ <POLICY_DATA> ... ] [ <POLICY_DATA> ... ]
[ <sender descriptor> ] [ <sender descriptor> ]
In general, relative ordering of ASSOCIATION objects with respect to In general, relative ordering of ASSOCIATION objects with respect to
each other as well as with respect to other objects is not each other, as well as with respect to other objects, is not
significant. Relative ordering of ASSOCIATION objects of the same significant. Relative ordering of ASSOCIATION objects of the same
type SHOULD be preserved by transit nodes. type SHOULD be preserved by transit nodes.
3.1.2. Path Message Processing 3.1.2. Path Message Processing
This section is based on, and extends, the processing rules described This section is based on, and extends, the processing rules described
in [RFC4872] and [RFC4873], and which is reviewed in [RFC6689]. This in [RFC4872] and [RFC4873], which is reviewed in [RFC6689]. This
section applies equally to GMPLS LSPs, MPLS LSPs and non-LSP session section applies equally to GMPLS LSPs, MPLS LSPs, and non-LSP session
state. Note, as previously stated, this section does not modify state. Note, as previously stated, this section does not modify
processing required to support [RFC4872] and [RFC4873]. processing required to support [RFC4872] and [RFC4873].
A node sending a Path message chooses when an ASSOCIATION object is A node sending a Path message chooses when an ASSOCIATION object is
to be included in the outgoing Path message. To indicate association to be included in the outgoing Path message. To indicate association
between multiple sessions, an appropriate ASSOCIATION object MUST be between multiple sessions, an appropriate ASSOCIATION object MUST be
included in the outgoing Path messages corresponding to each of the included in the outgoing Path messages corresponding to each of the
associated sessions. In the absence of Association Type-specific associated sessions. In the absence of Association-Type-specific
rules for identifying association, the included ASSOCIATION object rules for identifying association, the included ASSOCIATION object
MUST be identical. When there is an Association Type-specific MUST be identical. When there is an Association-Type-specific
definition of association rules, the definition SHOULD allow for definition of association rules, the definition SHOULD allow for
association based on identical ASSOCIATION objects. This document association based on identical ASSOCIATION objects. This document
does not define any Association Type-specific rules. (See Section 3 does not define any Association-Type-specific rules. (See Section 3
of [RFC6689] for a review of Association Type-specific rules derived of [RFC6689] for a review of Association-Type-specific rules derived
from [RFC4872].) from [RFC4872].)
When creating an ASSOCIATION object, the originator MUST format the When creating an ASSOCIATION object, the originator MUST format the
object as defined in Section 16.1 of [RFC4872]. The originator MUST object as defined in Section 16.1 of [RFC4872]. The originator MUST
set the Association Type field based on the type of association being set the Association Type field based on the type of association being
identified. The Association ID field MUST be set to a value that identified. The Association ID field MUST be set to a value that
uniquely identifies the association being identified within the uniquely identifies the specific association within the context of
context of the Association Source field. The Association Source the Association Source field. The Association Source field MUST be
field MUST be set to a unique address assigned to the node set to a unique address assigned to the node originating the
originating the association. association.
A downstream node can identify an upstream initiated association by A downstream node can identify an upstream-initiated association by
performing the following checks. When a node receives a Path message performing the following checks. When a node receives a Path
it MUST check each ASSOCIATION object received in the Path message to message, it MUST check each ASSOCIATION object received in the Path
see if it contains an Association Type field value supported by the message to determine if the object contains an Association Type field
node. For each ASSOCIATION object containing a supported association value supported by the node. For each ASSOCIATION object containing
type, the node MUST then check to see if the object matches an a supported association type, the node MUST then check to see if the
ASSOCIATION object received in any other Path message. To perform object matches an ASSOCIATION object received in any other Path
this matching, a node MUST examine the Path state of all other message. To perform this matching, a node MUST examine the Path
sessions and compare the fields contained in the newly received state of all other sessions and compare the fields contained in the
ASSOCIATION object with the fields contained in the Path state's newly received ASSOCIATION object with the fields contained in the
ASSOCIATION objects. An association is deemed to exist when the same Path state's ASSOCIATION objects. An association is deemed to exist
values are carried in all fields of the ASSOCIATION objects being when the same values are carried in all fields of the ASSOCIATION
compared. Type-specific processing of ASSOCIATION objects is outside objects being compared. Type-specific processing of ASSOCIATION
the scope of this document. objects is outside the scope of this document.
Note that as more than one association may exist, the described Note that as more than one association may exist, the described
matching MUST continue after a match is identified, and MUST be matching MUST continue after a match is identified and MUST be
performed against all local Path state. It is also possible for performed against all local Path state. It is also possible for
there to be no match identified. there to be no match identified.
Unless there are type-specific processing rules, downstream nodes Unless there are type-specific processing rules, downstream nodes
MUST forward all ASSOCIATION objects received in a Path message, MUST forward all ASSOCIATION objects received in a Path message in
without modification, in any corresponding outgoing Path messages. any corresponding outgoing Path messages without modification. This
This processing MUST be followed for unknown Association Type field processing MUST be followed for unknown Association Type field
values. values.
3.2. Downstream Initiated Association 3.2. Downstream-Initiated Association
Downstream initiated association is represented in ASSOCIATION Downstream-initiated association is represented in ASSOCIATION
objects carried in Resv messages and can be used to associate RSVP objects carried in Resv messages and can be used to associate RSVP
Resv state across MPLS Tunnels / RSVP sessions. Cross-LSP Resv state across MPLS Tunnels/RSVP sessions. Cross-LSP association,
association based on Path state is defined in [RFC4872]. This section based on Path state, is defined in [RFC4872]. This section defines
defines cross-session association based on Resv state. This section cross-session association based on Resv state. This section places
places no additional requirements on implementations supporting no additional requirements on implementations supporting [RFC4872]
[RFC4872] and [RFC4873]. Note, the use of an ASSOCIATION object in a and [RFC4873]. Note, the use of an ASSOCIATION object in a single
single session is not precluded. session is not precluded.
3.2.1. Resv Message Format 3.2.1. Resv Message Format
This section provides the Backus-Naur Form (BNF), see [RFC5511], for This section provides the Backus-Naur Form (BNF), see [RFC5511], for
Resv messages containing ASSOCIATION objects. BNF is provided for Resv messages containing ASSOCIATION objects. BNF is provided for
both MPLS and for non-LSP session usage. Unmodified RSVP message both MPLS and for non-LSP session usage. Unmodified RSVP message
formats and some optional objects are not listed. formats and some optional objects are not listed.
The formats for MPLS, GMPLS and non-LSP sessions are identical, and The formats for MPLS, GMPLS, and non-LSP sessions are identical and
is represented based on the BNF in [RFC2205] and [RFC3209]: are represented based on the BNF in [RFC2205] and [RFC3209]:
<Resv Message> ::= <Common Header> [ <INTEGRITY> ] <Resv Message> ::= <Common Header> [ <INTEGRITY> ]
<SESSION> <RSVP_HOP> <SESSION> <RSVP_HOP>
<TIME_VALUES> <TIME_VALUES>
[ <RESV_CONFIRM> ] [ <SCOPE> ] [ <RESV_CONFIRM> ] [ <SCOPE> ]
[ <ASSOCIATION> ... ] [ <ASSOCIATION> ... ]
[ <POLICY_DATA> ... ] [ <POLICY_DATA> ... ]
<STYLE> <flow descriptor list> <STYLE> <flow descriptor list>
Relative ordering of ASSOCIATION objects with respect to each other Relative ordering of ASSOCIATION objects with respect to each other,
as well as with respect to other objects is not currently as well as with respect to other objects, is not currently
significant. Relative ordering of ASSOCIATION objects of the same significant. Relative ordering of ASSOCIATION objects of the same
type SHOULD be preserved by transit nodes. type SHOULD be preserved by transit nodes.
3.2.2. Resv Message Processing 3.2.2. Resv Message Processing
This section applies equally to GMPLS LSPs, MPLS LSPs and non-LSP This section applies equally to GMPLS LSPs, MPLS LSPs, and non-LSP
session state. session state.
A node sending a Resv message chooses when an ASSOCIATION object is A node sending a Resv message chooses when an ASSOCIATION object is
to be included in the outgoing Resv message. A node that wishes to to be included in the outgoing Resv message. A node that wishes to
allow upstream nodes to associate Resv state across RSVP sessions allow upstream nodes to associate Resv state across RSVP sessions
MUST include an ASSOCIATION object in the outgoing Resv messages MUST include an ASSOCIATION object in the outgoing Resv messages
corresponding to the RSVP sessions to be associated. In the absence corresponding to the RSVP sessions to be associated. In the absence
of Association Type-specific rules for identifying association, the of Association-Type-specific rules for identifying association, the
included ASSOCIATION objects MUST be identical. When there is an included ASSOCIATION objects MUST be identical. When there is an
Association Type-specific definition of association rules, the Association-Type-specific definition of association rules, the
definition SHOULD allow for association based on identical definition SHOULD allow for association based on identical
ASSOCIATION objects. This document does not define any Association ASSOCIATION objects. This document does not define any Association-
Type-specific rules. Type-specific rules.
When creating an ASSOCIATION object, the originator MUST format the When creating an ASSOCIATION object, the originator MUST format the
object as defined in Section 16.1 of [RFC4872]. The originator MUST object as defined in Section 16.1 of [RFC4872]. The originator MUST
set the Association Type field based on the type of association being set the Association Type field based on the type of association being
identified. The Association ID field MUST be set to a value that identified. The Association ID field MUST be set to a value that
uniquely identifies the association being identified within the uniquely identifies the specific association within the context of
context of the Association Source field. The Association Source the Association Source field. The Association Source field MUST be
field MUST be set to a unique address assigned to the node set to a unique address assigned to the node originating the
originating the association. association.
An upstream node can identify a downstream initiated association by An upstream node can identify a downstream-initiated association by
performing the following checks. When a node receives a Resv message performing the following checks. When a node receives a Resv
it MUST check each ASSOCIATION object received in the Resv message to message, it MUST check each ASSOCIATION object received in the Resv
see if it contains an Association Type field value supported by the message to determine if the object contains an Association Type field
node. For each ASSOCIATION object containing a supported association value supported by the node. For each ASSOCIATION object containing
type, the node MUST then check to see if the object matches an a supported association type, the node MUST then check to see if the
ASSOCIATION object received in any other Resv message. To perform object matches an ASSOCIATION object received in any other Resv
this matching, a node MUST examine the Resv state of all other message. To perform this matching, a node MUST examine the Resv
sessions and compare the fields contained in the newly received state of all other sessions and compare the fields contained in the
ASSOCIATION object with the fields contained in the Resv state's newly received ASSOCIATION object with the fields contained in the
ASSOCIATION objects. An association is deemed to exist when the same Resv state's ASSOCIATION objects. An association is deemed to exist
values are carried in all fields of the ASSOCIATION objects being when the same values are carried in all fields of the ASSOCIATION
compared. Type-specific processing of ASSOCIATION objects is outside objects being compared. Type-specific processing of ASSOCIATION
the scope of this document. objects is outside the scope of this document.
Note that as more than one association may exist, the described Note that as more than one association may exist, the described
matching MUST continue after a match is identified, and MUST be matching MUST continue after a match is identified and MUST be
performed against all local Resv state. It is also possible for there performed against all local Resv state. It is also possible for
to be no match identified. there to be no match identified.
Unless there are type-specific processing rules, upstream nodes MUST Unless there are type-specific processing rules, upstream nodes MUST
forward all ASSOCIATION objects received in a Resv message, without forward all ASSOCIATION objects received in a Resv message in any
modification, in any corresponding outgoing Resv messages. This corresponding outgoing Resv messages without modification. This
processing MUST be followed for unknown Association Type field processing MUST be followed for unknown Association Type field
values. values.
3.3. Association Types 3.3. Association Types
Two association types are currently defined: recovery and resource Two association types are currently defined: recovery and resource
sharing. Recovery type association is only applicable within the sharing. Recovery type association is only applicable within the
context of recovery, [RFC4872] and [RFC4873]. Resource sharing is context of recovery [RFC4872] [RFC4873]. Resource sharing is
applicable to any context and its general use is defined in this applicable to any context and its general use is defined in this
section. section.
3.3.1. Resource Sharing Association Type 3.3.1. Resource Sharing Association Type
The resource sharing association type was defined in [RFC4873] and The Resource Sharing Association Type was defined in [RFC4873] and
was defined within the context of GMPLS and upstream initiated was defined within the context of GMPLS and upstream-initiated
association. This section presents a definition of the resource association. This section presents a definition of the resource
sharing association that allows for its use with any RSVP session sharing association that allows for its use with any RSVP session
type and in both Path and Resv messages. This definition is type and in both Path and Resv messages. This definition is
consistent with the definition of the resource sharing association consistent with the definition of the resource sharing association
type in [RFC4873] and no changes are required by this section in type in [RFC4873] and no changes are required by this section in
order to support [RFC4873]. The Resource Sharing Association Type order to support [RFC4873]. The Resource Sharing Association Type
MUST be supported by any implementation compliant with this document. MUST be supported by any implementation compliant with this document.
The Resource Sharing Association Type is used to enable resource The Resource Sharing Association Type is used to enable resource
sharing across RSVP sessions. Per [RFC4873], Resource Sharing uses sharing across RSVP sessions. Per [RFC4873], resource sharing uses
the Association Type field value of 2. ASSOCIATION objects with an the Association Type field value of 2. ASSOCIATION objects with an
Association Type with the value Resource Sharing MAY be carried in Association Type with the value Resource Sharing MAY be carried in
Path and Resv messages. Association for the Resource Sharing type Path and Resv messages. Association for the Resource Sharing type
MUST follow the procedures defined in Section 4.1.2 for upstream MUST follow the procedures defined in Section 3.1.2 for upstream-
(Path message) initiated association and Section 4.2.1 for downstream initiated (Path message) association and Section 3.2.1 for
(Resv message) initiated association. There are no type-specific downstream-initiated (Resv message) association. There are no type-
association rules, processing rules, or ordering requirements. Note specific association rules, processing rules, or ordering
that as is always the case with association as enabled by this requirements. Note that, as is always the case with association as
document, no associations are made across Path and Resv state. enabled by this document, no associations are made across Path and
Resv state.
Once an association is identified, resources MUST be considered as Once an association is identified, resources MUST be considered as
shared across the identified sessions by the admission control shared across the identified sessions by the admission-control
function. Since the implementation specifics of the admission control function. Since the implementation specifics of the admission-
function is outside the scope of RSVP, we observe that how resource control function is outside the scope of RSVP, we observe that how
sharing is actually reflected may vary according to specific resource sharing is actually reflected may vary according to specific
implementations (e.g. depending on the specific admission control and implementations (e.g., depending on the specific admission-control
resource management algorithm, or on how local policy is taken into and resource-management algorithm, or on how local policy is taken
account). into account).
3.3.2. Unknown Association Types 3.3.2. Unknown Association Types
As required by Sections 3.1.2 and 3.2.2 above, a node that receives As required by Sections 3.1.2 and 3.2.2 above, a node that receives
an ASSOCIATION object containing an unknown ASSOCIATION type forwards an ASSOCIATION object containing an unknown ASSOCIATION type forwards
all received ASSOCIATION objects as defined above. The node MAY also all received ASSOCIATION objects as defined above. The node MAY also
identify associations per the defined processing, e.g., to make this identify associations per the defined processing, e.g., to make this
information available via a management interface. information available via a management interface.
4. IPv4 and IPv6 Extended ASSOCIATION Objects 4. IPv4 and IPv6 Extended ASSOCIATION Objects
[RFC4872] defines the IPv4 ASSOCIATION object and the IPv6 [RFC4872] defines the IPv4 ASSOCIATION object and the IPv6
ASSOCIATION object. As defined, these objects each contain an ASSOCIATION object. As defined, these objects each contain an
Association Source field and a 16-bit Association ID field. As Association Source field and a 16-bit Association ID field. As
described above, the contents of the object uniquely identify an previously described, the contents of the object uniquely identify an
association. Because the Association ID field is a 16-bit field, an association. Because the Association ID field is a 16-bit field, an
association source can allocate up to 65536 different associations association source can allocate up to 65536 different associations
and no more. There are scenarios where this number is insufficient. and no more. There are scenarios where this number is insufficient
(For example where the association identification is best known and (for example, where the association identification is best known and
identified by a fairly centralized entity, which therefore may be identified by a fairly centralized entity, and therefore may be
involved in a large number of associations.) involved in a large number of associations).
An additional case that cannot be supported using the existing An additional case that cannot be supported using the existing
ASSOCIATION objects is presented by MPLS-TP LSPs. Per [RFC6370], ASSOCIATION objects is presented by MPLS-TP LSPs. Per [RFC6370],
MPLS-TP LSPs can be identified based on an operator unique global MPLS-TP LSPs can be identified based on an operator-unique global
identifier. The [RFC6370] defined "global identifier", or Global_ID, identifier. As defined in [RFC6370], "global identifier", or
is based on [RFC5003] and includes the operator's Autonomous System Global_ID, is based on [RFC5003] and includes the operator's
Number (ASN). Autonomous System Number (ASN).
This sections defines new ASSOCIATION objects to support extended This section defines new ASSOCIATION objects to support extended
identification in order to address the limitations described above. identification in order to address the previously described
Specifically, the IPv4 Extended ASSOCIATION object and IPv6 Extended limitations. Specifically, the IPv4 Extended ASSOCIATION object and
ASSOCIATION object are defined below. Both new objects include the IPv6 Extended ASSOCIATION object are defined below. Both new objects
fields necessary to enable identification of a larger number of include the fields necessary to enable identification of a larger
associations, as well as MPLS-TP required identification. number of associations as well as MPLS-TP-required identification.
The IPv4 Extended ASSOCIATION object and IPv6 Extended ASSOCIATION The IPv4 Extended ASSOCIATION object and IPv6 Extended ASSOCIATION
object SHOULD be supported by an implementation compliant with this object SHOULD be supported by an implementation compliant with this
document. The processing rules for the IPv4 and IPv6 Extended document. The processing rules for the IPv4 and IPv6 Extended
ASSOCIATION object are described below, and are based on the rules ASSOCIATION object are described below and are based on the rules for
for the IPv4 and IPv6 ASSOCIATION objects as described above. the IPv4 and IPv6 ASSOCIATION objects as previously described.
4.1. IPv4 and IPv6 Extended ASSOCIATION Object Format 4.1. IPv4 and IPv6 Extended ASSOCIATION Object Format
The IPv4 Extended ASSOCIATION object (Class-Num of the form 11bbbbbb The IPv4 Extended ASSOCIATION object (Class-Num of the form 11bbbbbb
with value = 199, C-Type = TBA) has the format: with value = 199, C-Type = 3) has the format:
0 1 2 3 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 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Length | Class-Num(199)| C-Type (TBA) | | Length | Class-Num(199)| C-Type (3) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Association Type | Association ID | | Association Type | Association ID |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| IPv4 Association Source | | IPv4 Association Source |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Global Association Source | | Global Association Source |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
: . : : . :
: Extended Association ID : : Extended Association ID :
: . : : . :
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
The IPv6 Extended ASSOCIATION object (Class-Num of the form 11bbbbbb The IPv6 Extended ASSOCIATION object (Class-Num of the form 11bbbbbb
with value = 199, C-Type = TBA) has the format: with value = 199, C-Type = 4) has the format:
0 1 2 3 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 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Length | Class-Num(199)| C-Type (TBA) | | Length | Class-Num(199)| C-Type (4) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Association Type | Association ID | | Association Type | Association ID |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| | | |
| IPv6 Association Source | | IPv6 Association Source |
| | | |
| | | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Global Association Source | | Global Association Source |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
skipping to change at page 12, line 41 skipping to change at page 12, line 44
Association Source: 4 or 16 bytes Association Source: 4 or 16 bytes
Same as for IPv4 and IPv6 ASSOCIATION objects, see [RFC4872]. Same as for IPv4 and IPv6 ASSOCIATION objects, see [RFC4872].
Global Association Source: 4 bytes Global Association Source: 4 bytes
This field contains a value that is a unique global identifier or This field contains a value that is a unique global identifier or
the special value zero (0). When non-zero and not overridden by the special value zero (0). When non-zero and not overridden by
local policy, the Global_ID as defined in [RFC6370] SHALL be used. local policy, the Global_ID as defined in [RFC6370] SHALL be used.
The special value of zero indicates that no global identifier is The special value zero indicates that no global identifier is
present. Use of the special value of zero SHOULD be limited to present. Use of the special value zero SHOULD be limited to
entities contained within a single operator. entities contained within a single operator.
If the Global Association Source field value is derived from a If the Global Association Source field value is derived from a
2-octet AS number, then the two high-order octets of this 4-octet 2-octet ASN, then the two high-order octets of this 4-octet field
field MUST be set to zero. MUST be set to zero.
Extended Association ID: variable, 4-byte aligned Extended Association ID: variable, 4-byte aligned
This field contains data that is additional information to support This field contains data that is additional information to support
unique identification. The length and contents of this field is unique identification. The length and contents of this field is
scoped by the Association Source. The length of this field is scoped by the Association Source. The length of this field is
derived from the object Length field and as such MUST have a zero derived from the object Length field and as such MUST have a
length or be 4-byte aligned. A zero length indicates that this length of zero or be 4-byte aligned. A length of zero indicates
field is omitted. that this field is omitted.
4.2. Processing 4.2. Processing
The processing of an IPv4 or IPv6 Extended ASSOCIATION object MUST be The processing of an IPv4 or IPv6 Extended ASSOCIATION object MUST be
identical to the processing of an IPv4 or IPv6 ASSOCIATION object as identical to the processing of an IPv4 or IPv6 ASSOCIATION object as
described above except as extended by this section. This section previously described, except as extended by this section. This
applies to ASSOCIATION objects included in both Path and Resv section applies to ASSOCIATION objects included in both Path and Resv
messages. messages.
The following are the modified procedures for Extended ASSOCIATION The following are the modified procedures for Extended ASSOCIATION
object processing: object processing:
o When creating an Extended ASSOCIATION object, the originator MUST o When creating an Extended ASSOCIATION object, the originator MUST
format the object as defined in this document. format the object as defined in this document.
o The originator MUST set the Association Type, Association ID and o The originator MUST set the Association Type, Association ID, and
Association Source fields as described in Section 4. Association Source fields as described in Section 4.
o When ASN-based global identification of the Association Source is o When ASN-based global identification of the Association Source is
desired, the originator MUST set the Global Association Source desired, the originator MUST set the Global Association Source
field. When ASN-based global identification is not desired, the field. When ASN-based global identification is not desired, the
originator MUST set the Global Association Source field to zero originator MUST set the Global Association Source field to zero
(0). (0).
o The Extended ASSOCIATION object originator MAY include the o The Extended ASSOCIATION object originator MAY include the
Extended Association ID field. The field is included based on Extended Association ID field. The field is included based on
local policy. The field MUST be included when the Association ID local policy. The field MUST be included when the Association ID
field is insufficient to uniquely identify association within the field is insufficient to uniquely identify association within the
scope of the source of the association. When included, this scope of the source of the association. When included, this field
field MUST be set to a value that, when taken together with the MUST be set to a value that, when taken together with the other
other fields in the object, uniquely identifies the association fields in the object, uniquely identifies the association being
being identified. identified.
o The object Length field is set based on the length of the o The object Length field is set based on the length of the Extended
Extended Association ID field. When the Extended Association ID Association ID field. When the Extended Association ID field is
field is omitted, the object Length field MUST be set to 16 or 28 omitted, the object Length field MUST be set to 16 or 28 for the
for the IPv4 and IPv6 ASSOCIATION objects, respectively. When the IPv4 and IPv6 ASSOCIATION objects, respectively. When the
Extended Association ID field is present, the object Length field Extended Association ID field is present, the object Length field
MUST be set to indicate the additional bytes carried in the MUST be set to indicate the additional bytes carried in the
Extended Association ID field, including pad bytes. Extended Association ID field, including pad bytes.
Note: per [RFC2205], the object Length field is set to the total Note: Per [RFC2205], the object Length field is set to the total
object length in bytes, and is always a multiple of 4, and at object length in bytes, is always a multiple of 4, and is at least
least 4. 4.
The procedures related to association identification are not modified The procedures related to association identification are not modified
by this section. It is important to note that Section 4 defines the by this section. It is important to note that Section 4 defines the
identification of associations based on ASSOCIATION object matching identification of associations based on ASSOCIATION object matching
and that such matching, in the absence of type-specific comparison and that such matching, in the absence of type-specific comparison
rules, is based on the comparison of all fields in an ASSOCIATION rules, is based on the comparison of all fields in an ASSOCIATION
object. This applies equally to ASSOCIATION objects and Extended object. This applies equally to ASSOCIATION objects and Extended
ASSOCIATION objects. ASSOCIATION objects.
5. Compatibility 5. Compatibility
Per [RFC4872], the ASSOCIATION object uses an object class number Per [RFC4872], the ASSOCIATION object uses an object class number of
of the form 11bbbbbb to ensure compatibility with non-supporting the form 11bbbbbb to ensure compatibility with non-supporting nodes.
nodes. Per [RFC2205], such nodes will ignore the object but Per [RFC2205], such nodes will ignore the object but forward it
forward it without modification. This is also the action taken without modification. This is also the action taken for unknown
for unknown association types as discussed above in Section association types as discussed above in Section 3.1.2, 3.2.2, and
3.1.2, 3.3.2.
3.2.2, and 3.3.2.
Per [RFC4872], transit nodes that support the ASSOCIATION object, Per [RFC4872], transit nodes that support the ASSOCIATION object but
but not the Extended Association C-Types, will "transmit, without not the Extended Association C-Types will "transmit, without
modification, any received ASSOCIATION object in the modification, any received ASSOCIATION object in the corresponding
corresponding outgoing Path message". Per [RFC2205], an egress node that supports
outgoing Path message." Per [RFC2205], an egress node that the ASSOCIATION object but not the Extended Association C-Types, may
supports generate an "Unknown object C-Type" error. This error will propagate
the ASSOCIATION object, but not the Extended Association C-Types to the ingress node for standard error processing.
may generate an "Unknown object C-Type" error. This error will
propagate to the ingress node for standard error processing.
Operators wishing to use a function supported by particular Operators wishing to use a function supported by a particular
association type should ensure that the type is supported on any association type should ensure that the type is supported on any node
node which is expected to act on the association. that is expected to act on the association.
6. Security Considerations 6. Security Considerations
A portion of this document reviews procedures defined in [RFC4872] A portion of this document reviews procedures defined in [RFC4872]
and [RFC4873] and does not define any new procedures. As such, no and [RFC4873] and does not define new procedures. As such, no new
new security considerations are introduced in this portion. security considerations are introduced in this portion of the
document.
Section 2 defines broader usage of the ASSOCIATION object, but does Section 3 defines broader usage of the ASSOCIATION object, but does
not fundamentally expand on the association function that was not fundamentally expand on the association function that was
previously defined in [RFC4872] and [RFC4873]. Section 3 increases previously defined in [RFC4872] and [RFC4873]. Section 4 increases
the number of bits that are carried in an ASSOCIATION object (by 32), the number of bits that are carried in an ASSOCIATION object (by 32),
and similarly does not expand on the association function that was and similarly does not expand on the association function that was
previously defined. This broader definition does allow for previously defined. This broader definition does allow for
additional information to be conveyed, but this information is not additional information to be conveyed, but this information is not
fundamentally different from the information that is already carried fundamentally different from the information that is already carried
in RSVP. Therefore there are no new risks or security considerations in RSVP. Therefore, there are no new risks or security
introduced by this document. considerations introduced by this document.
For a general discussion on MPLS and GMPLS related security issues, For a general discussion on MPLS- and GMPLS-related security issues,
including RSVP's chain of trust security model, see the MPLS/GMPLS including RSVP's chain of trust security model, see the MPLS/GMPLS
security framework [RFC5920]. security framework [RFC5920].
7. IANA Considerations 7. IANA Considerations
IANA is requested to administer assignment of new values for IANA has assigned new values for namespaces defined in this document
namespaces defined in this document and summarized in this section. and they are summarized in this section.
7.1. IPv4 and IPv6 Extended ASSOCIATION Objects 7.1. IPv4 and IPv6 Extended ASSOCIATION Objects
Upon approval of this document, IANA will make the assignment of two Per this document, IANA has assigned two new C-Types (which are
new C-Types (which are defined in section 3.1) for the existing defined in Section 3.1) for the existing ASSOCIATION object in the
ASSOCIATION object in the "Class Names, Class Numbers, and Class "Class Names, Class Numbers, and Class Types" section of the
Types" section of the "Resource Reservation Protocol (RSVP) "Resource Reservation Protocol (RSVP) Parameters" registry located at
Parameters" registry located at http://www.iana.org/assignments/rsvp- http://www.iana.org/assignments/rsvp-parameters:
parameters:
199 ASSOCIATION [RFC4872] 199 ASSOCIATION [RFC4872]
Class Types or C-Types Class Types or C-Types
3 Type 3 IPv4 Extended Association [this document] 3 Type 3 IPv4 Extended Association [RFC6780]
4 Type 4 IPv6 Extended Association [this document] 4 Type 4 IPv6 Extended Association [RFC6780]
7.2. Resource Sharing Association Type 7.2. Resource Sharing Association Type
This document also broadens the potential usage of the Resource This document also broadens the potential usage of the Resource
Sharing Association Type defined in [RFC4873]. As such, IANA is Sharing Association Type defined in [RFC4873]. As such, IANA has
requested to change the Reference of the Resource Sharing Association updated the reference of the Resource Sharing Association Type
Type included in the associate registry. This document also directs included in the associated registry. Per this document, IANA has
IANA to correct the duplicate usage of '(R)' in this Registry. In also corrected the duplicate usage of '(R)' in this registry. In
particular, the Association Type registry found at particular, the "Association Type" registry found at
http://www.iana.org/assignments/gmpls-sig-parameters/ should be http://www.iana.org/assignments/gmpls-sig-parameters/ has been
updated as follows: updated as follows:
OLD: OLD:
2 Resource Sharing (R) [RFC4873] 2 Resource Sharing (R) [RFC4873]
NEW
2 Resource Sharing (S) [RFC4873][this-document] NEW:
2 Resource Sharing (S) [RFC4873][RFC6780]
There are no other IANA considerations introduced by this document. There are no other IANA considerations introduced by this document.
8. Acknowledgments 8. Acknowledgments
Valuable comments and input was received from Dimitri Papadimitriou, Valuable comments and input were received from Dimitri Papadimitriou,
Fei Zhang and Adrian Farrel. We thank Subha Dhesikan for her Fei Zhang, and Adrian Farrel. We thank Subha Dhesikan for her
contribution to the early work on sharing of resources across RSVP contribution to the early work on sharing of resources across RSVP
reservations. reservations.
9. References 9. References
9.1. Normative References 9.1. Normative References
[RFC2205] Braden, R., Zhang, L., Berson, S., Herzog, S. and [RFC2205] Braden, R., Ed., Zhang, L., Berson, S., Herzog, S., and S.
S. Jamin, "Resource ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP) -- Jamin, "Resource ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP) -- Version 1
Version 1, Functional Specification", RFC 2205, Functional Specification", RFC 2205, September 1997.
September 1997.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC3209] Awduche, D., Berger, L., Gan, D., Li, T., Srinivasan, [RFC3209] Awduche, D., Berger, L., Gan, D., Li, T., Srinivasan, V.,
V., and G. Swallow, "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP and G. Swallow, "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP
Tunnels", RFC 3209, December 2001. Tunnels", RFC 3209, December 2001.
[RFC3473] Berger, L., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching [RFC3473] Berger, L., Ed., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label
(GMPLS) Signaling Resource ReserVation Protocol-Traffic Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Resource ReserVation
Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions", RFC 3473, January Protocol-Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions", RFC
2003. 3473, January 2003.
[RFC4872] Lang, J., Rekhter, Y., and Papadimitriou, D., "RSVP-TE [RFC4872] Lang, J., Ed., Rekhter, Y., Ed., and D. Papadimitriou,
Extensions in Support of End-to-End Generalized Multi- Ed., "RSVP-TE Extensions in Support of End-to-End
Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Recovery", RFC 4872, Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)
May 2007. Recovery", RFC 4872, May 2007.
[RFC4873] Berger, L., Bryskin, I., Papadimitriou, D., Farrel, A., [RFC4873] Berger, L., Bryskin, I., Papadimitriou, D., and A. Farrel,
"GMPLS Segment Recovery", RFC 4873, May 2007. "GMPLS Segment Recovery", RFC 4873, May 2007.
[RFC5511] Farrel, A., "Routing Backus-Naur Form (RBNF): A Syntax [RFC5511] Farrel, A., "Routing Backus-Naur Form (RBNF): A Syntax
Used to Form Encoding Rules in Various Routing Protocol Used to Form Encoding Rules in Various Routing Protocol
Specifications", RFC 5511, April 2009 Specifications", RFC 5511, April 2009.
9.2. Informative References 9.2. Informative References
[RFC2207] Berger., L., O'Malley., T., "RSVP Extensions for IPSEC [RFC2207] Berger, L. and T. O'Malley, "RSVP Extensions for IPSEC
RSVP Extensions for IPSEC Data Flows", RFC 2207, September Data Flows", RFC 2207, September 1997.
1997.
[RFC3175] Baker, F., Iturralde, C., Le, F., Davie, B., "Aggregation [RFC3175] Baker, F., Iturralde, C., Le Faucheur, F., and B. Davie,
of RSVP for IPv4 and IPv6 Reservations", RFC 3175, "Aggregation of RSVP for IPv4 and IPv6 Reservations", RFC
September 2001. 3175, September 2001.
[RFC4860] Le, F., Davie, B., Bose, P., Christou, C., Davenport, M., [RFC4860] Le Faucheur, F., Davie, B., Bose, P., Christou, C., and M.
"Generic Aggregate Resource ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP) Davenport, "Generic Aggregate Resource ReSerVation
Reservations", RFC 4860, May 2007. Protocol (RSVP) Reservations", RFC 4860, May 2007.
[RFC5003] Metz, C., Martini, L., Balus, F., Sugimoto, J., [RFC5003] Metz, C., Martini, L., Balus, F., and J. Sugimoto,
"Attachment Individual Identifier (AII) Types for "Attachment Individual Identifier (AII) Types for
Aggregation", RFC 5003, September 2007. Aggregation", RFC 5003, September 2007.
[RFC5389] Rosenberg, J., Mahy, R., Matthews, P., Wing, D., "Session [RFC5389] Rosenberg, J., Mahy, R., Matthews, P., and D. Wing,
Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN)", RFC 5389, October "Session Traversal Utilities for NAT (STUN)", RFC 5389,
2008. October 2008.
[RFC5920] Fang, L., et al, "Security Framework for MPLS and [RFC5920] Fang, L., Ed., "Security Framework for MPLS and GMPLS
GMPLS Networks", RFC 5920, July 2010. Networks", RFC 5920, July 2010.
[RFC6370] Bocci, M., Swallow, G., Gray, E., "MPLS-TP Identifiers", [RFC6370] Bocci, M., Swallow, G., and E. Gray, "MPLS Transport
RFC 6370, June 2011. Profile (MPLS-TP) Identifiers", RFC 6370, September 2011.
[RFC6689] Berger, L., "Usage of the RSVP ASSOCIATION Object", RFC [RFC6689] Berger, L., "Usage of the RSVP ASSOCIATION Object", RFC
6689, July 2012. 6689, July 2012.
10. Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Lou Berger Lou Berger
LabN Consulting, L.L.C. LabN Consulting, L.L.C.
Phone: +1-301-468-9228 Phone: +1-301-468-9228
Email: lberger@labn.net EMail: lberger@labn.net
Francois Le Faucheur Francois Le Faucheur
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
Greenside, 400 Avenue de Roumanille Greenside, 400 Avenue de Roumanille
Sophia Antipolis 06410 Sophia Antipolis 06410
France France
Email: flefauch@cisco.com EMail: flefauch@cisco.com
Ashok Narayanan Ashok Narayanan
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
300 Beaver Brook Road 300 Beaver Brook Road
Boxborough, MA 01719 Boxborough, MA 01719
United States United States
Email: ashokn@cisco.com EMail: ashokn@cisco.com
Generated on: Fri, Sep 21, 2012 9:36:09 AM
 End of changes. 133 change blocks. 
415 lines changed or deleted 399 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.41. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/