draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-alarm-spec-05.txt   draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-alarm-spec-06.txt 
Internet Draft Lou Berger - Editor (LabN) Internet Draft Lou Berger - Editor (LabN)
Updates: 3473 Updates: 3473
Category: Standards Track Category: Standards Track
September 2006 September 2006
GMPLS - Communication of Alarm Information GMPLS - Communication of Alarm Information
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-alarm-spec-05.txt draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-alarm-spec-06.txt
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware 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 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. aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of 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
skipping to change at page 2, line 7 skipping to change at page 2, line 7
modification of the RSVP ERROR_SPEC object. modification of the RSVP ERROR_SPEC object.
This document updates RFC 3473 "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label This document updates RFC 3473 "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label
Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Resource ReserVation Protocol-Traffic Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Resource ReserVation Protocol-Traffic
Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions" through the addition of new, Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions" through the addition of new,
optional protocol elements. It does not change, and is fully backward optional protocol elements. It does not change, and is fully backward
compatible with the procedures specified in RFC 3473. compatible with the procedures specified in RFC 3473.
Contents Contents
1 Introduction ............................................. 3 1 Introduction .............................................. 3
1.1 Background ............................................... 3 1.1 Background ................................................ 3
2 Alarm Information Communication .......................... 4 2 Alarm Information Communication ........................... 4
3 GMPLS-RSVP Details ....................................... 5 3 GMPLS-RSVP Details ........................................ 5
3.1 ALARM_SPEC Objects ....................................... 5 3.1 ALARM_SPEC Objects ........................................ 5
3.1.1 IF_ID ALARM_SPEC (and ERROR_SPEC) TLVs ................... 6 3.1.1 IF_ID ALARM_SPEC (and ERROR_SPEC) TLVs .................... 6
3.1.2 Procedures ............................................... 9 3.1.2 Procedures ................................................ 9
3.1.3 Error Codes and Values .................................. 10 3.1.3 Error Codes and Values .................................... 11
3.1.4 Backwards Compatibility ................................. 11 3.1.4 Backwards Compatibility ................................... 11
3.2 Controlling Alarm Communication ......................... 11 3.2 Controlling Alarm Communication ........................... 11
3.2.1 Updated Admin Status Object ............................. 11 3.2.1 Updated Admin Status Object ............................... 12
3.2.2 Procedures .............................................. 11 3.2.2 Procedures ................................................ 12
3.3 Message Formats ......................................... 12 3.3 Message Formats ........................................... 13
3.4 Relationship to GMPLS UNI ............................... 13 3.4 Relationship to GMPLS UNI ................................. 14
3.5 Relationship to GMPLS E-NNI ............................. 14 3.5 Relationship to GMPLS E-NNI .............................. 14
4 Acknowledgements ........................................ 14 4 Acknowledgments ........................................... 15
5 Security Considerations ................................. 14 5 Security Considerations ................................... 15
6 IANA Considerations ..................................... 15 6 IANA Considerations ....................................... 16
6.1 New RSVP Object ......................................... 15 6.1 New RSVP Object ........................................... 16
6.2 New Interface ID Types .................................. 16 6.2 New Interface ID Types .................................... 16
6.3 New Registry for Admin-Status Object Bit Fields ......... 16 6.3 New Registry for Admin-Status Object Bit Fields ........... 17
6.4 New RSVP Error Code ..................................... 16 6.4 New RSVP Error Code ....................................... 17
7 References .............................................. 17 7 References ................................................ 18
7.1 Normative References .................................... 17 7.1 Normative References ...................................... 18
7.2 Informative References .................................. 17 7.2 Informative References .................................... 18
8 Contributors ............................................ 18 8 Contributors .............................................. 19
9 Contact Address ......................................... 18 9 Contact Address ........................................... 19
10 Full Copyright Statement ................................ 18 10 Full Copyright Statement .................................. 20
11 Intellectual Property ................................... 19 11 Intellectual Property ..................................... 20
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
GMPLS Signaling provides mechanisms that can be used to control the GMPLS Signaling provides mechanisms that can be used to control the
reporting of alarms associated with an LSP. This support is provided reporting of alarms associated with an LSP. This support is provided
via Administrative Status Information [RFC3471] and the Admin_Status via Administrative Status Information [RFC3471] and the Admin_Status
object [RFC3473]. These mechanisms only control if alarm reporting object [RFC3473]. These mechanisms only control if alarm reporting
is inhibited. No provision is made for communication of alarm is inhibited. No provision is made for communication of alarm
information within GMPLS. information within GMPLS.
skipping to change at page 6, line 39 skipping to change at page 6, line 39
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length | | Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Reference Count | | Reference Count |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Reference Count: 32 bits Reference Count: 32 bits
The number of times this alarm has been repeated as determined The number of times this alarm has been repeated as determined
a TLV is sent and a received TLV with this field set to zero by the reporting node. This field MUST NOT be set to zero and
MUST be ignored. TLVs received with this field set to zero MUST be ignored.
Only one Reference Count TLV may be included in an object. Only one Reference Count TLV may be included in an object.
The Severity TLV has the following format: The Severity TLV has the following 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length | | Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
skipping to change at page 7, line 27 skipping to change at page 7, line 38
Value Definition Value Definition
----- --------------------- ----- ---------------------
0 Unspecified impact 0 Unspecified impact
1 Non-Service Affecting (Data traffic not interrupted) 1 Non-Service Affecting (Data traffic not interrupted)
2 Service Affecting (Data traffic is interrupted) 2 Service Affecting (Data traffic is interrupted)
Severity: 8 bits Severity: 8 bits
Indicates the impact of the alarm indicated in the TLV. See Indicates the impact of the alarm indicated in the TLV. See
[RFC3877] and [M.3100] for more information on severity. The [RFC3877] and [M.3100] for more information on severity. The
The following values are defined in this document. The details following values are defined in this document. The details of
of the semantics may be found in [RFC3877] and [M.3100]. the semantics may be found in [RFC3877] and [M.3100]:
Value Definition Value Definition
----- ---------- ----- ----------
0 Cleared 0 Cleared
1 Indeterminate 1 Indeterminate
2 Critical 2 Critical
3 Major 3 Major
4 Minor 4 Minor
5 Warning 5 Warning
skipping to change at page 8, line 4 skipping to change at page 8, line 14
The Global Timestamp TLV has the following format: The Global Timestamp TLV has the following 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length | | Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Global Timestamp | | Global Timestamp |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Global Timestamp: 32 bits Global Timestamp: 32 bits
A positive integer where all 32 bits are valid that indicates An unsigned fixed-point integer that indicates the number of
the number of seconds since 0000 UT on 1 January 1970 according seconds since 00:00:00 UT on 1 January 1970 according to the
to the clock on the node that originates this TLV. This time clock on the node that originates this TLV. This time MAY
MAY include leap seconds if they are used by the local clock. include leap seconds if they are used by the local clock and
SHOULD contain the same time value as used by the node when the
alarm is reported through other systems (such as within the
Management Plane) if global time is used in those reports.
Only one Global Timestamp TLV may be included in an object. Only one Global Timestamp TLV may be included in an object.
The Local Timestamp TLV has the following format: The Local Timestamp TLV has the following 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length | | Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
skipping to change at page 11, line 9 skipping to change at page 11, line 23
the value TBA (by IANA) and is referred to as "Alarms". The values the value TBA (by IANA) and is referred to as "Alarms". The values
used in the Error Values field when the Error Code is "Alarms" are used in the Error Values field when the Error Code is "Alarms" are
the same as the values defined in the IANAItuProbableCause Textual the same as the values defined in the IANAItuProbableCause Textual
Convention of IANA-ITU-ALARM-TC-MIB in the Alarm MIB [RFC3877]. Note Convention of IANA-ITU-ALARM-TC-MIB in the Alarm MIB [RFC3877]. Note
these values are managed by IANA, see http://www.iana.org. these values are managed by IANA, see http://www.iana.org.
3.1.4. Backwards Compatibility 3.1.4. Backwards Compatibility
The support of ALARM_SPEC objects is OPTIONAL. Non-supporting nodes The support of ALARM_SPEC objects is OPTIONAL. Non-supporting nodes
will (according to the rules defined in [RFC2205]) pass the objects will (according to the rules defined in [RFC2205]) pass the objects
through the node unmodified, because the ALARM_SPEC object has a through the node unmodified, because the ALARM_SPEC object has a C-
C-Num of the form 11bbbbbb. Num of the form 11bbbbbb.
This allows alarm information to be collected and examined in a This allows alarm information to be collected and examined in a
network built from a collection of nodes some of which support the network built from a collection of nodes some of which support the
communication of alarm information, and some of which do not. communication of alarm information, and some of which do not.
3.2. Controlling Alarm Communication 3.2. Controlling Alarm Communication
Alarm information communication is controlled via Administrative Alarm information communication is controlled via Administrative
Status Information as carried in the Admin_Status object. A new bit Status Information as carried in the Admin_Status object. A new bit
is defined, called the I bit, that indicates when alarm communication is defined, called the I bit, that indicates when alarm communication
skipping to change at page 15, line 35 skipping to change at page 16, line 22
Upon approval of this document, the IANA will make the following Upon approval of this document, the IANA will make the following
assignments in the "Class Names, Class Numbers, and Class Types" assignments in the "Class Names, Class Numbers, and Class Types"
section of the "RSVP PARAMETERS" registry located at section of the "RSVP PARAMETERS" registry located at
http://www.iana.org/assignments/rsvp-parameters http://www.iana.org/assignments/rsvp-parameters
A new class named ALARM_SPEC will be created in the 11bbbbbb range A new class named ALARM_SPEC will be created in the 11bbbbbb range
(197 suggested) with following values (197 suggested) with following values
o Class = TBA, C-Type = 1 o Class = TBA, C-Type = 1
[RFC-ccamp-gmpls-alarm-spec] [RFC-ccamp-gmpls-alarm-spec]
Reserved. (C-Type value defined for ERROR_SPEC, but is not defined Reserved. (C-Type value defined for ERROR_SPEC, but is not
for use with ALARM_SPEC.) defined for use with ALARM_SPEC.)
o Class = TBA, C-Type = 2 o Class = TBA, C-Type = 2
[RFC-ccamp-gmpls-alarm-spec] [RFC-ccamp-gmpls-alarm-spec]
Reserved. (C-Type value defined for ERROR_SPEC, but is not defined Reserved. (C-Type value defined for ERROR_SPEC, but is not
for use with ALARM_SPEC.) defined for use with ALARM_SPEC.)
o IPv4 IF_ID ALARM_SPEC object: Class = TBA, C-Type = 3 o IPv4 IF_ID ALARM_SPEC object: Class = TBA, C-Type = 3
[RFC-ccamp-gmpls-alarm-spec] [RFC-ccamp-gmpls-alarm-spec]
Definition same as IPv4 IF_ID ERROR_SPEC [RFC3473]. Definition same as IPv4 IF_ID ERROR_SPEC [RFC3473].
o IPv6 IF_ID ALARM_SPEC object: Class = TBA, C-Type = 4 o IPv6 IF_ID ALARM_SPEC object: Class = TBA, C-Type = 4
[RFC-ccamp-gmpls-alarm-spec] [RFC-ccamp-gmpls-alarm-spec]
Definition same as IPv6 IF_ID ERROR_SPEC [RFC3473]. Definition same as IPv6 IF_ID ERROR_SPEC [RFC3473].
The ALARM_SPEC object uses the Error Code and Error Values from the The ALARM_SPEC object uses the Error Code and Error Values from the
skipping to change at page 16, line 41 skipping to change at page 17, line 29
0x00000010 Inhibit Alarm Communication (I) 0x00000010 Inhibit Alarm Communication (I)
[RFC-ccamp-gmpls-alarm-spec] [RFC-ccamp-gmpls-alarm-spec]
0x00000004 Testing (T) [RFC3473/RFC3471] 0x00000004 Testing (T) [RFC3473/RFC3471]
0x00000002 Administratively down (A) [RFC3473/RFC3471] 0x00000002 Administratively down (A) [RFC3473/RFC3471]
0x00000001 Deletion in progress (D) [RFC3473/RFC3471] 0x00000001 Deletion in progress (D) [RFC3473/RFC3471]
6.4. New RSVP Error Code 6.4. New RSVP Error Code
Upon approval of this document, the IANA will make the following Upon approval of this document, the IANA will make the following
assignments in the "Error Codes and Values" section of the "RSVP assignments in the "Error Codes and Values" section of the "RSVP
PARAMETERS" registry located at PARAMETERS" registry located at http://www.iana.org/assignments/rsvp-
http://www.iana.org/assignments/rsvp-parameters parameters
xx Alarms [RFC4124] xx Alarms [RFC-ccamp-gmpls-alarm-spec]
The Error Value sub-codes for this Error Code have values and The Error Value sub-codes for this Error Code have values and
meanings identical to the values and meanings defined in the meanings identical to the values and meanings defined in the
IANAItuProbableCause Textual Convention of IANA-ITU-ALARM-TC-MIB IANAItuProbableCause Textual Convention of IANA-ITU-ALARM-TC-MIB
in the Alarm MIB [RFC3877]. Note these values are already in the Alarm MIB [RFC3877]. Note these values are already
managed the IANA. managed the IANA.
(The value of 31 is suggested for xx.) (The value of 31 is suggested for xx.)
7. References 7. References
7.1. Normative References 7.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2205] Braden, R. Ed. et al, "Resource ReserVation Protocol
Requirement Levels," RFC 2119. -- Version 1 Functional Specification", RFC 2205,
September 1997.
[RFC3471] Berger, L., Editor, "Generalized Multi-Protocol [RFC3471] Berger, L., Editor, "Generalized Multi-Protocol
Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Functional Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Functional
Description", RFC 3471, January 2003. Description", RFC 3471, January 2003.
[RFC3473] Berger, L., Editor, "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label [RFC3473] Berger, L., Editor, "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label
Switching (GMPLS) Signaling - Resource ReserVation Switching (GMPLS) Signaling - Resource ReserVation
Protocol-Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions", Protocol-Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions",
RFC 3473, January 2003. RFC 3473, January 2003.
[RFC3877] Chisholm, S., Romascanu, D., "Alarm Management [RFC3877] Chisholm, S., Romascanu, D., "Alarm Management
Information Base (MIB)", RFC 3877, September 2004. Information Base (MIB)", RFC 3877, September 2004.
[M.3100] ITU Recommendation M.3100, "Generic Network Information [M.3100] ITU Recommendation M.3100, "Generic Network Information
Model", 1995 Model", 1995
7.2. Informative References 7.2. Informative References
[RFC4201] Kompella, K., Rekhter, Y., Berger, L., "Link Bundling [RFC4201] Kompella, K., Rekhter, Y., Berger, L., "Link Bundling
in MPLS Traffic Engineering (TE)", RFC 4201, October in MPLS Traffic Engineering (TE)", RFC 4201, October 2005.
2005.
[M.20] ITU-T, "MAINTENANCE PHILOSOPHY FOR TELECOMMUNICATION [M.20] ITU-T, "MAINTENANCE PHILOSOPHY FOR TELECOMMUNICATION
NETWORKS", Recommendation M.20, October 1992. NETWORKS", Recommendation M.20, October 1992.
[GR833] Bellcore, "Network Maintenance: Network Element and [GR833] Bellcore, "Network Maintenance: Network Element and
Transport Surveillance Messages" (GR-833-CORE), Issue 3, Transport Surveillance Messages" (GR-833-CORE), Issue 3,
February 1999. February 1999.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels," RFC 2119.
[RFC4208] Swallow, G., Drake, J., Ishimatsu, H., and Rekhter, Y. [RFC4208] Swallow, G., Drake, J., Ishimatsu, H., and Rekhter, Y.
"Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) "Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS)
User-Network Interface (UNI): Resource ReserVation User-Network Interface (UNI): Resource ReserVation
Protocol-Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) Support for the Protocol-Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) Support for the
Overlay Model", RFC 4208, October 2005. Overlay Model", RFC 4208, October 2005.
[ASON-APPL] D. Papadimitriou et. al., "Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) [ASON-APPL] D. Papadimitriou et. al., "Generalized MPLS (GMPLS)
RSVP-TE signaling usage in support of Automatically RSVP-TE signaling usage in support of Automatically
Switched Optical Network (ASON)," Switched Optical Network (ASON),"
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-rsvp-te-ason, work in progress. draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-rsvp-te-ason, work in progress.
8. Authors' Addresses 8. Contributors
Contributors are listed in alphabetical order: Contributors are listed in alphabetical order:
Lou Berger Deborah Brungard Lou Berger Deborah Brungard
LabN Consulting, L.L.C. AT&T Labs, Room MT D1-3C22 LabN Consulting, L.L.C. AT&T Labs, Room MT D1-3C22
200 Laurel Avenue 200 Laurel Avenue
Middletown, NJ 07748, USA Middletown, NJ 07748, USA
Phone: +1 301-468-9228 Phone: (732) 420-1573 Phone: +1 301-468-9228 Phone: (732) 420-1573
Email: lberger@labn.net Email: dbrungard@att.com Email: lberger@labn.net Email: dbrungard@att.com
skipping to change at line 841 skipping to change at line 849
attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
http://www.ietf.org/ipr. http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at ietf- this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-
ipr@ietf.org. ipr@ietf.org.
Generated on: Thu Sep 7 22:15:17 TST 2006
 End of changes. 16 change blocks. 
52 lines changed or deleted 59 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.32. The latest version is available from http://www.levkowetz.com/ietf/tools/rfcdiff/