draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-dcsc-channel-ext-01.txt   draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-dcsc-channel-ext-02.txt 
Internet Draft Lou Berger (LabN) Internet Draft Lou Berger (LabN)
Updates: 3471, 3473, 3945, 4202 Don Fedyk (Nortel) Updates: 3471, 3473, 3945, 4202 Don Fedyk (Alcatel-Lucent)
Category: Standards Track Category: Standards Track
Expiration Date: August 25, 2009 Expiration Date: April 14, 2010
February 25, 2009 October 14, 2009
Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Data Channel Switching Capable (DCSC) and Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Data Channel Switching Capable (DCSC) and
Channel Set Label Extensions Channel Set Label Extensions
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-dcsc-channel-ext-01.txt draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-dcsc-channel-ext-02.txt
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
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 BCP 78 and BCP 79. aware will be disclosed, in accordance with BCP 78 and BCP 79.
skipping to change at page 1, line 40 skipping to change at page 1, line 40
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
This Internet-Draft will expire on August 25, 2009. This Internet-Draft will expire on April 14, 2010.
Copyright and License Notice Copyright and License Notice
Copyright (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2009 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 in effect on the date of
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
publication of this document. Please review these documents Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect and restrictions with respect to this document.
to this document.
Abstract Abstract
This document describes two technology-independent extensions to This document describes two technology-independent extensions to
Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching. The first extension Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching. The first extension
defines the new switching type Data Channel Switching Capable. Data defines the new switching type Data Channel Switching Capable. Data
Channel Switching Capable interfaces are able to support switching of Channel Switching Capable interfaces are able to support switching of
the whole digital channel presented on single channel interfaces. the whole digital channel presented on single channel interfaces.
The second extension defines a new type of generalized label and The second extension defines a new type of generalized label and
updates related objects. The new label is called the Generalized updates related objects. The new label is called the Generalized
skipping to change at page 3, line 15 skipping to change at page 3, line 15
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
This document describes two technology independent extensions to This document describes two technology independent extensions to
Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS). Both of these Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS). Both of these
extensions were initially defined to in the context of Ethernet extensions were initially defined to in the context of Ethernet
services, see [GMPLS-ESVCS] and [GMPLS-MEF-UNI], but are generic in services, see [GMPLS-ESVCS] and [GMPLS-MEF-UNI], but are generic in
nature and may be useful to any switching technology controlled via nature and may be useful to any switching technology controlled via
GMPLS. GMPLS.
The first extension defines a new switching type, which is called The first extension defines a new switching type, which is called
Data Channel Switching Capable, or DCSC. DCSC interfaces are able to Data Channel Switching Capable (DCSC). DCSC interfaces are able to
support switching of the whole digital channel presented on single support switching of the whole digital channel presented on single
channel interfaces. The second extension defines a new type of channel interfaces. The second extension defines a new type of
generalized label and updates related objects. The new label is generalized label and updates related objects. The new label is
called the Generalized Channel_Set Label and allows more than one called the Generalized Channel_Set Label and allows more than one
data plane label to be controlled as part of an LSP. data plane label to be controlled as part of an LSP.
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. Data Channel Switching 2. Data Channel Switching
Current GMPLS switching types are defined in [RFC3945] and [RFC3471] Current GMPLS switching types are defined in [RFC3945] and [RFC3471]
and support switching at the packet (PSC), frame (L2SC), time-slot and support switching at the packet (PSC), frame (L2SC), time-slot
(TDM), frequency (LSC) and fiber (FSC) granularities. One type of (TDM), frequency (LSC) and fiber (FSC) granularities. One type of
switching that is not well represented in this current set is switching that is not well represented in this current set is
switching that occurs of the when all data received on an ingress switching that occurs when all data received on an ingress port is
port is switched through a network to an egress port. While there switched through a network to an egress port. While there are
are similarities between this level of switching and the "opaque similarities between this level of switching and the "opaque single
single wavelength" case described in Section 3.5 of [RFC4202], such wavelength" case described in Section 3.5 of [RFC4202], such port-to-
port-to-port switching is not limited to the optical switching port switching is not limited to the optical switching technology
technology implied by the LSC type. FSC is also similar, but it is implied by the LSC type. FSC is also similar, but it is restricted to
restricted to fiber ports and also supports multiple data channels fiber ports and also supports multiple data channels with-in the
with in the fiber port. fiber port.
This document defines the new switching type called Data Channel This document defines the new switching type called Data Channel
Switching Capable (DCSC). (Port switching seems a more intuitive Switching Capable (DCSC). Port switching seems a more intuitive name,
name, but it collides with PSC so isn't used.) DCSC interfaces are but this naming collides with PSC so it isn't used. DCSC interfaces
able to support switching of the whole digital channel presented on are able to support switching of the whole digital channel presented
single channel interfaces. Interfaces that inherently support on single channel interfaces. Interfaces that inherently support
multiple channels, e.g., WDM and channelized TDM interfaces, are multiple channels, e.g., WDM and channelized TDM interfaces, are
specifically excluded from this type. Any interface that can be specifically excluded from this type. Any interface that can be
represented as a single digital channel are included. Examples represented as a single digital channel are included. Examples
include concatenated TDM and line encoded interfaces. Framed include concatenated TDM and line encoded interfaces. Framed
interfaces may also be included when they support switching on an interfaces may also be included when they support switching on an
interface granularity. interface granularity.
DCSC is represented in GMPLS, see [RFC3471] and [RFC4202], using the DCSC is represented in GMPLS, see [RFC3471] and [RFC4202], using the
value TBA (by IANA). value TBA (by IANA).
Port labels, as defined in [RFC3471], SHOULD be used for LSPs Port labels, as defined in [RFC3471], SHOULD be used for LSPs
signaled using the DCSC Switching Type. The DCSC Switching Type may signaled using the DCSC Switching Type. The DCSC Switching Type may
be used with wither the in the Generalized Label Request object, be used with the Generalized Label Request object, [RFC3473], or the
[RFC3473], or the Generalized Channel_Set LABEL_REQUEST Object Generalized Channel_Set LABEL_REQUEST Object defined below.
defined below.
2.1. Compatibility 2.1. Compatibility
Transit and egress nodes that do not support the DCSC Switching Type Transit and egress nodes that do not support the DCSC Switching Type
which received a Path message with a Label Request containing the when receiving a Path message with a Label Request containing the
DCSC Switching Type will behave in the same way nodes generally DCSC Switching Type will behave in the same way nodes generally
handle the case of an unsupported Switching Type. Specifically, per handle the case of an unsupported Switching Type. Specifically, per
[RFC3473], such nodes are required to generate a PathErr message, [RFC3473], such nodes are required to generate a PathErr message,
with a "Routing problem/Unsupported Encoding" indication. with a "Routing problem/Unsupported Encoding" indication.
Ingress nodes initiating a Path message containing a Label Request Ingress nodes initiating a Path message containing a Label Request
containing the DCSC Switching Type should receive such PathErr containing the DCSC Switching Type, receiving such a PathErr
messages, and can then notify the requesting application user as messages, then notify the requesting application user as appropriate.
appropriate.
3. Generalized Channel_Set Label Related Formats 3. Generalized Channel_Set Label Related Formats
This section defines a new type of generalized label and updates This section defines a new type of generalized label and updates
related objects. This section updates the label related definitions related objects. This section updates the label related definitions
of [RFC3473]. The ability to communicate more than one label as part of [RFC3473]. The ability to communicate more than one label as part
of the same LSP was motivated by the support for the communication of of the same LSP was motivated by the support for the communication of
one or more VLAN IDs. Simple concatenation of labels as is done in one or more VLAN IDs. Simple concatenation of labels as is done in
[RFC4606] was deemed impractical given the large number of VLAN IDs [RFC4606] was deemed impractical given the large number of VLAN IDs
(up to 4096) that may need to be communicated. The formats defined (up to 4096) that may need to be communicated. The formats defined
in this section are not technology specific and may be useful for in this section are not technology specific and may be useful for
other switching technologies. The LABEL_SET object defined in other switching technologies. The LABEL_SET object defined in
[RFC3473] serves as the foundation for the defined formats. [RFC3473] serves as the foundation for the defined formats.
3.1. Generalized Channel_Set LABEL_REQUEST Object 3.1. Generalized Channel_Set LABEL_REQUEST Object
The Generalized Channel_Set LABEL_REQUEST object is used to indicate The Generalized Channel_Set LABEL_REQUEST object is used to indicate
that the Generalized Channel_Set LABEL Object is to be used with the that the Generalized Channel_Set LABEL Object is to be used with the
associated LSP. The format of the Generalized Channel_Set associated LSP. The format of the Generalized Channel_Set
LABEL_REQUEST object is the same as the Generalized LABEL_REQUEST LABEL_REQUEST object is the same as the Generalized LABEL_REQUEST
object and uses of C-Type of TBA. object and uses a C-Type of TBA.
3.2. Generalized Channel_Set LABEL Object 3.2. Generalized Channel_Set LABEL Object
The Generalized Channel_Set LABEL Object communicates one or more The Generalized Channel_Set LABEL Object communicates one or more
labels, all of which can be used equivalently in the data path labels, all of which can be used equivalently in the data path
associated with a single LSP. The format of the Generalized associated with a single LSP. The format of the Generalized
Channel_Set LABEL Object is based on the LABEL_SET object defined in Channel_Set LABEL Object is based on the LABEL_SET object defined in
[RFC3473]. It differs from the the LABEL_SET object in that the full [RFC3473]. It differs from the the LABEL_SET object in that the full
set may be represented in a single object rather than the multiple set may be represented in a single object rather than the multiple
objects required by the [RFC3473] LABEL_SET object. The object MUST objects required by the [RFC3473] LABEL_SET object. The object MUST
skipping to change at page 7, line 34 skipping to change at page 7, line 34
Generalized Channel_Set Sub-Object result in the Sub-Object not Generalized Channel_Set Sub-Object result in the Sub-Object not
being 32 bit aligned. When present, the Padding field MUST being 32 bit aligned. When present, the Padding field MUST
have a length that results in the Sub-Object being 32 bit have a length that results in the Sub-Object being 32 bit
aligned. When present, the Padding field MUST be set to a zero aligned. When present, the Padding field MUST be set to a zero
(0) value on transmission and MUST be ignored on receipt. (0) value on transmission and MUST be ignored on receipt.
These bits SHOULD be passed through unmodified by transit These bits SHOULD be passed through unmodified by transit
nodes. nodes.
3.3. Other Label related Objects 3.3. Other Label related Objects
The previous section introduces a new LABEL object. As such the The previous section introduced a new LABEL object. As such the
formats of the other label related objects are also impacted. formats of the other label related objects are also impacted.
Processing of these objects is not modified and remain per their Processing of these objects is not modified and remains per their
respective specifications. The other label related objects are respective specifications. The other label related objects are
defined in [RFC3473] and include: defined in [RFC3473] and include:
- SUGGESTED_LABEL object - SUGGESTED_LABEL object
- LABEL_SET object - LABEL_SET object
- ACCEPTABLE_LABEL_SET object - ACCEPTABLE_LABEL_SET object
- UPSTREAM_LABEL object - UPSTREAM_LABEL object
- RECOVERY_LABEL object - RECOVERY_LABEL object
3.4. Compatibility 3.4. Compatibility
Transit and egress nodes that do not support the Generalized Transit and egress nodes that do not support the Generalized
Channel_Set Label related formats will first receive a Path message Channel_Set Label related formats will first receive a Path message
containing Generalized Channel_Set LABEL_REQUEST object. When a such containing Generalized Channel_Set LABEL_REQUEST object. When such a
a node receives the Path message, per [RFC3209], it will sends a node receives the Path message, per [RFC3209], it will send a PathErr
PathErr with the error code "Unknown object C_Type" . with the error code "Unknown object C_Type".
Ingress nodes initiating a Path message containing a Generalized Ingress nodes initiating a Path message containing a Generalized
Channel_Set LABEL_REQUEST object should receive such PathErr Channel_Set LABEL_REQUEST object on receiving such a PathErr
messages, and can then notify the requesting application user as messages, then notify the requesting application user as appropriate.
appropriate.
4. IANA Considerations 4. IANA Considerations
IANA is requested to administer assignment of new values for IANA is requested to administer assignment of new values for
namespaces defined in this document and reviewed in this section. namespaces defined in this document and summarized in this section.
4.1. Data Channel Switching Type 4.1. Data Channel Switching Type
Upon approval of this document, the IANA will make the assignment in Upon approval of this document, IANA will make the assignment in the
the "Switching Types" section of the "GMPLS Signaling Parameters" "Switching Types" section of the "GMPLS Signaling Parameters"
registry located at http://www.iana.org/assignments/gmpls-sig- registry located at http://www.iana.org/assignments/gmpls-sig-
parameters: parameters:
Value Type Reference Value Type Reference
----- --------------------------- --------- ----- --------------------------- ---------
125* Data Channel Switching Capable (DCSC) [This document] 125* Data Channel Switching Capable (DCSC) [This document]
(*) Suggested value. (*) Suggested value.
It should be noted that the assigned value should be reflected in It should be noted that the assigned value should be reflected in
IANAGmplsSwitchingTypeTC at IANAGmplsSwitchingTypeTC at
http://www.iana.org/assignments/ianagmplstc-mib. http://www.iana.org/assignments/ianagmplstc-mib.
4.2. Generalized Channel_Set LABEL_REQUEST Object 4.2. Generalized Channel_Set LABEL_REQUEST Object
Upon approval of this document, the IANA will make the assignment in Upon approval of this document, IANA will make the assignment in the
the "Class Names, Class Numbers, and Class Types" section of the "Class Names, Class Numbers, and Class Types" section of the "RSVP
"RSVP PARAMETERS" registry located at PARAMETERS" registry located at http://www.iana.org/assignments/rsvp-
http://www.iana.org/assignments/rsvp-parameters. parameters.
A new class type for the existing LABEL_REQUEST Object class number A new class type for the existing LABEL_REQUEST Object class number
(19) with the following definition: (19) with the following definition:
Class Types or C-Types: Class Types or C-Types:
5* Generalized Channel_Set [This document] 5* Generalized Channel_Set [This document]
(*) Suggested value. (*) Suggested value.
4.3. Generalized Channel_Set LABEL Object 4.3. Generalized Channel_Set LABEL Object
Upon approval of this document, the IANA will make the assignment in Upon approval of this document, IANA will make the assignment in the
the "Class Names, Class Numbers, and Class Types" section of the "Class Names, Class Numbers, and Class Types" section of the "RSVP
"RSVP PARAMETERS" registry located at PARAMETERS" registry located at http://www.iana.org/assignments/rsvp-
http://www.iana.org/assignments/rsvp-parameters. parameters.
A new class type for the existing RSVP_LABEL Object class number (16) A new class type for the existing RSVP_LABEL Object class number (16)
with the following definition: with the following definition:
Class Types or C-Types: Class Types or C-Types:
4* Generalized Channel_Set [This document] 4* Generalized Channel_Set [This document]
(*) Suggested value. (*) Suggested value.
skipping to change at page 10, line 28 skipping to change at page 10, line 28
[RFC3945] Mannie, E., Editor, "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label [RFC3945] Mannie, E., Editor, "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label
Switching (GMPLS) Architecture", RFC 3945, October Switching (GMPLS) Architecture", RFC 3945, October
2004. 2004.
[RFC4202] Kompella, K., Ed., and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "Routing [RFC4202] Kompella, K., Ed., and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "Routing
Extensions in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Extensions in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol
Label Switching (GMPLS)", RFC 4202, October 2005. Label Switching (GMPLS)", RFC 4202, October 2005.
6.2. Informative References 6.2. Informative References
[GMPLS-ESVCS] Berger, L., Papadimitriou, P., Fedyk, D., [GMPLS-ESVCS] Berger, L., Fedyk, D., "Generalized MPLS (GMPLS)
"Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Support For Metro Ethernet Support For Metro Ethernet Forum and G.8011 Ethernet
Forum and G.8011 Ethernet Service Switching", Work in Service Switching", Work in Progress,
Progress, draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ether-svcs-02.txt, draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ether-svcs.
August 2008.
[GMPLS-MEF-UNI] Berger, L., Papadimitriou, P., Fedyk, D., [GMPLS-MEF-UNI] Berger, L., Fedyk, D., "Generalized MPLS (GMPLS)
"Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Support For Metro Support For Metro Ethernet Forum and G.8011
Ethernet Forum and G.8011 User-Network Interface User-Network Interface (UNI)", Work in Progress,
(UNI)", Work in Progress, draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-mef-uni.
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-mef-uni-01.txt,
August 2008.
[MPLS-SEC] Fang, L., et al, "Security Framework for MPLS and [MPLS-SEC] Fang, L., et al, "Security Framework for MPLS and
GMPLS Networks", Work in Progress, GMPLS Networks", Work in Progress,
draft-ietf-mpls-mpls-and-gmpls-security-framework-04.txt, draft-ietf-mpls-mpls-and-gmpls-security-framework.
November 2008.
[RFC4606] Mannie, E., et al "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label [RFC4606] Mannie, E., et al "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label
Switching (GMPLS) Extensions for Synchronous Optical Switching (GMPLS) Extensions for Synchronous Optical
Network (SONET) and Synchronous Digital Hierarchy (SDH) Network (SONET) and Synchronous Digital Hierarchy (SDH)
Control", RFC 4606, August 2006. Control", RFC 4606, August 2006.
7. Acknowledgments 7. Acknowledgments
Dimitri Papadimitriou provided substantial textual contributions to Dimitri Papadimitriou provided substantial textual contributions to
this document and coauthored earlier versions of this document. this document and coauthored earlier versions of this document.
skipping to change at page 11, line 21 skipping to change at page 11, line 21
Adrian Farrel for their valuable comments. Adrian Farrel for their valuable comments.
8. Author's Addresses 8. Author's 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
Don Fedyk Don Fedyk
Nortel Networks Alcatel-Lucent
600 Technology Park Drive Groton, MA, 01450
Billerica, MA, 01821 Phone: +1-978-467-5645
Phone: +1-978-288-3041 Email: donald.fedyk@alcatel-lucent.com
Email: dwfedyk@nortel.com
Generated on: Wed Feb 25 20:00:22 EST 2009 Generated on: Wed Oct 14 14:46:36 EDT 2009
 End of changes. 26 change blocks. 
68 lines changed or deleted 59 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.37a. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/