draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode-12.txt   draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode-13.txt 
skipping to change at page 1, line 15 skipping to change at page 1, line 15
Expires: May 2014 D. Li Expires: May 2014 D. Li
Huawei Huawei
W. Imajuku W. Imajuku
NTT NTT
November 13, 2013 November 13, 2013
General Network Element Constraint Encoding for GMPLS Controlled General Network Element Constraint Encoding for GMPLS Controlled
Networks Networks
draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode-12.txt draft-ietf-ccamp-general-constraint-encode-13.txt
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with
the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts. Drafts.
skipping to change at page 3, line 22 skipping to change at page 3, line 22
2.6. Label Set Field..........................................14 2.6. Label Set Field..........................................14
2.6.1. Inclusive/Exclusive Label Lists.....................15 2.6.1. Inclusive/Exclusive Label Lists.....................15
2.6.2. Inclusive/Exclusive Label Ranges....................15 2.6.2. Inclusive/Exclusive Label Ranges....................15
2.6.3. Bitmap Label Set....................................16 2.6.3. Bitmap Label Set....................................16
3. Security Considerations.......................................17 3. Security Considerations.......................................17
4. IANA Considerations...........................................17 4. IANA Considerations...........................................17
5. Acknowledgments...............................................17 5. Acknowledgments...............................................17
APPENDIX A: Encoding Examples....................................18 APPENDIX A: Encoding Examples....................................18
A.1. Link Set Field...........................................18 A.1. Link Set Field...........................................18
A.2. Label Set Field..........................................18 A.2. Label Set Field..........................................18
A.3. Connectivity Matrix Sub-TLV..............................19 A.3. Connectivity Matrix......................................19
A.4. Connectivity Matrix with Bi-directional Symmetry.........22 A.4. Connectivity Matrix with Bi-directional Symmetry.........22
A.5. Priority Flags in Available/Shared Backup Labels sub-TLV.24 A.5. Priority Flags in Available/Shared Backup Labels.........24
6. References....................................................26 6. References....................................................26
6.1. Normative References.....................................26 6.1. Normative References.....................................26
6.2. Informative References...................................26 6.2. Informative References...................................26
7. Contributors..................................................28 7. Contributors..................................................28
Authors' Addresses...............................................29 Authors' Addresses...............................................29
Intellectual Property Statement..................................30 Intellectual Property Statement..................................30
Disclaimer of Validity...........................................30 Disclaimer of Validity...........................................30
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
skipping to change at page 5, line 22 skipping to change at page 5, line 22
dynamic information is contained in the information on available dynamic information is contained in the information on available
labels. Port label restrictions are specified relative to the port labels. Port label restrictions are specified relative to the port
in general or to a specific connectivity matrix for increased in general or to a specific connectivity matrix for increased
modeling flexibility. Reference [Switch] gives an example where both modeling flexibility. Reference [Switch] gives an example where both
switch and fixed connectivity matrices are used and both types of switch and fixed connectivity matrices are used and both types of
constraints occur on the same port. constraints occur on the same port.
2. Encoding 2. Encoding
This section provides encodings for the information elements defined This section provides encodings for the information elements defined
in [RWA-INFO] that have general applicability. The encodings are
designed to be suitable for use in the GMPLS routing protocols OSPF
[RFC4203] and IS-IS [RFC5307] and in the PCE protocol (PCEP)
[RFC5440]. Note that the information distributed in [RFC4203] and
[RFC5307] is arranged via the nesting of sub-TLVs within TLVs and
this document defines elements to be used within such constructs.
This section provides encodings for the information elements defined
in [RWA-INFO] that have applicability to WSON. The encodings are in [RWA-INFO] that have applicability to WSON. The encodings are
designed to be suitable for use in the GMPLS routing protocols OSPF designed to be suitable for use in the GMPLS routing protocols OSPF
[RFC4203] and IS-IS [RFC5307] and in the PCE protocol (PCEP) [RFC4203] and IS-IS [RFC5307] and in the PCE protocol (PCEP)
[RFC5440]. Note that the information distributed in [RFC4203] and [RFC5440]. Note that the information distributed in [RFC4203] and
[RFC5307] is arranged via the nesting of sub-TLVs within TLVs and [RFC5307] is arranged via the nesting of sub-TLVs within TLVs and
this document defines elements to be used within such constructs. this document defines elements to be used within such constructs.
Specific constructs of sub-TLVs and the nesting of sub-TLVs of the Specific constructs of sub-TLVs and the nesting of sub-TLVs of the
information element defined by this document will be defined in the information element defined by this document will be defined in the
respective protocol enhancement documents. respective protocol enhancement documents.
skipping to change at page 6, line 5 skipping to change at page 5, line 43
The Connectivity Matrix Field represents how input ports are The Connectivity Matrix Field represents how input ports are
connected to output ports for network elements. The switch and fixed connected to output ports for network elements. The switch and fixed
connectivity matrices can be compactly represented in terms of a connectivity matrices can be compactly represented in terms of a
minimal list of input and output port set pairs that have mutual minimal list of input and output port set pairs that have mutual
connectivity. As described in [Switch] such a minimal list connectivity. As described in [Switch] such a minimal list
representation leads naturally to a graph representation for path representation leads naturally to a graph representation for path
computation purposes that involves the fewest additional nodes and computation purposes that involves the fewest additional nodes and
links. links.
A TLV encoding of this list of link set pairs is:
Internet-Draft General Network Element Constraint Encoding November Internet-Draft General Network Element Constraint Encoding November
2013 2013
A TLV encoding of this list of link set pairs is:
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Connectivity | MatrixID | Reserved | | Connectivity | MatrixID | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Link Set A #1 | | Link Set A #1 |
: : : : : :
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Link Set B #1 : | Link Set B #1 :
: : : : : :
skipping to change at page 14, line 26 skipping to change at page 14, line 26
A.5. for illustrative examples. A.5. for illustrative examples.
2.6. Label Set Field 2.6. Label Set Field
Label Set Field is used within the <AvailableLabels> or the Label Set Field is used within the <AvailableLabels> or the
<SharedBackupLabels>, which is defined in Section 2.4. and 2.5., <SharedBackupLabels>, which is defined in Section 2.4. and 2.5.,
respectively. respectively.
The general format for a label set is given below. This format uses The general format for a label set is given below. This format uses
the Action concept from [RFC3471] with an additional Action to the Action concept from [RFC3471] with an additional Action to
define a "bit map" type of label set. Labels are variable in length define a "bit map" type of label set. Labels are variable in length.
The second 32 bit field is a part of the base label used as a The second 32 bit field is a part of the base label used as a
starting point in many of the specific formats. starting point in many of the specific formats.
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Action| Num Labels | Length | | Action| Num Labels | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Base Label | | Base Label |
| . . . | | . . . |
 End of changes. 7 change blocks. 
14 lines changed or deleted 6 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/