--- 1/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-dcsc-channel-ext-01.txt 2009-10-15 00:12:31.000000000 +0200 +++ 2/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-dcsc-channel-ext-02.txt 2009-10-15 00:12:31.000000000 +0200 @@ -1,21 +1,21 @@ 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 -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 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 This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes aware will be disclosed, in accordance with BCP 78 and BCP 79. @@ -29,33 +29,32 @@ and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at 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 (c) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal - Provisions Relating to IETF Documents - (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of - publication of this document. Please review these documents - carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect - to this document. + Provisions Relating to IETF Documents in effect on the date of + publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info). + Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights + and restrictions with respect to this document. Abstract This document describes two technology-independent extensions to Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching. The first extension defines the new switching type Data Channel Switching Capable. Data Channel Switching Capable interfaces are able to support switching of the whole digital channel presented on single channel interfaces. The second extension defines a new type of generalized label and updates related objects. The new label is called the Generalized @@ -87,103 +86,101 @@ 1. Introduction This document describes two technology independent extensions to Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS). Both of these extensions were initially defined to in the context of Ethernet services, see [GMPLS-ESVCS] and [GMPLS-MEF-UNI], but are generic in nature and may be useful to any switching technology controlled via GMPLS. 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 channel interfaces. The second extension defines a new type of generalized label and updates related objects. The new label is called the Generalized Channel_Set Label and allows more than one data plane label to be controlled as part of an LSP. 1.1. Conventions used in this document The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. 2. Data Channel Switching Current GMPLS switching types are defined in [RFC3945] and [RFC3471] and support switching at the packet (PSC), frame (L2SC), time-slot (TDM), frequency (LSC) and fiber (FSC) granularities. One type of switching that is not well represented in this current set is - switching that occurs of the when all data received on an ingress - port is switched through a network to an egress port. While there - are similarities between this level of switching and the "opaque - single wavelength" case described in Section 3.5 of [RFC4202], such - port-to-port switching is not limited to the optical switching - technology implied by the LSC type. FSC is also similar, but it is - restricted to fiber ports and also supports multiple data channels - with in the fiber port. + switching that occurs when all data received on an ingress port is + switched through a network to an egress port. While there are + similarities between this level of switching and the "opaque single + wavelength" case described in Section 3.5 of [RFC4202], such port-to- + port switching is not limited to the optical switching technology + implied by the LSC type. FSC is also similar, but it is restricted to + fiber ports and also supports multiple data channels with-in the + fiber port. This document defines the new switching type called Data Channel - Switching Capable (DCSC). (Port switching seems a more intuitive - name, but it collides with PSC so isn't used.) DCSC interfaces are - able to support switching of the whole digital channel presented on - single channel interfaces. Interfaces that inherently support + Switching Capable (DCSC). Port switching seems a more intuitive name, + but this naming collides with PSC so it isn't used. DCSC interfaces + are able to support switching of the whole digital channel presented + on single channel interfaces. Interfaces that inherently support multiple channels, e.g., WDM and channelized TDM interfaces, are specifically excluded from this type. Any interface that can be represented as a single digital channel are included. Examples include concatenated TDM and line encoded interfaces. Framed interfaces may also be included when they support switching on an interface granularity. DCSC is represented in GMPLS, see [RFC3471] and [RFC4202], using the value TBA (by IANA). Port labels, as defined in [RFC3471], SHOULD be used for LSPs signaled using the DCSC Switching Type. The DCSC Switching Type may - be used with wither the in the Generalized Label Request object, - [RFC3473], or the Generalized Channel_Set LABEL_REQUEST Object - defined below. + be used with the Generalized Label Request object, [RFC3473], or the + Generalized Channel_Set LABEL_REQUEST Object defined below. 2.1. Compatibility 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 handle the case of an unsupported Switching Type. Specifically, per [RFC3473], such nodes are required to generate a PathErr message, with a "Routing problem/Unsupported Encoding" indication. Ingress nodes initiating a Path message containing a Label Request - containing the DCSC Switching Type should receive such PathErr - messages, and can then notify the requesting application user as - appropriate. + containing the DCSC Switching Type, receiving such a PathErr + messages, then notify the requesting application user as appropriate. 3. Generalized Channel_Set Label Related Formats This section defines a new type of generalized label and updates related objects. This section updates the label related definitions 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 one or more VLAN IDs. Simple concatenation of labels as is done in [RFC4606] was deemed impractical given the large number of VLAN IDs (up to 4096) that may need to be communicated. The formats defined in this section are not technology specific and may be useful for other switching technologies. The LABEL_SET object defined in [RFC3473] serves as the foundation for the defined formats. 3.1. Generalized Channel_Set LABEL_REQUEST Object The Generalized Channel_Set LABEL_REQUEST object is used to indicate that the Generalized Channel_Set LABEL Object is to be used with the associated LSP. The format of the Generalized Channel_Set 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 The Generalized Channel_Set LABEL Object communicates one or more labels, all of which can be used equivalently in the data path associated with a single LSP. The format of the Generalized 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 set may be represented in a single object rather than the multiple objects required by the [RFC3473] LABEL_SET object. The object MUST @@ -280,88 +277,87 @@ Generalized Channel_Set Sub-Object result in the Sub-Object not being 32 bit aligned. When present, the Padding field MUST have a length that results in the Sub-Object being 32 bit aligned. When present, the Padding field MUST be set to a zero (0) value on transmission and MUST be ignored on receipt. These bits SHOULD be passed through unmodified by transit nodes. 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. - 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 defined in [RFC3473] and include: - SUGGESTED_LABEL object - LABEL_SET object - ACCEPTABLE_LABEL_SET object - UPSTREAM_LABEL object - RECOVERY_LABEL object 3.4. Compatibility Transit and egress nodes that do not support the Generalized Channel_Set Label related formats will first receive a Path message - containing Generalized Channel_Set LABEL_REQUEST object. When a such - a node receives the Path message, per [RFC3209], it will sends a - PathErr with the error code "Unknown object C_Type" . + containing Generalized Channel_Set LABEL_REQUEST object. When such a + node receives the Path message, per [RFC3209], it will send a PathErr + with the error code "Unknown object C_Type". Ingress nodes initiating a Path message containing a Generalized - Channel_Set LABEL_REQUEST object should receive such PathErr - messages, and can then notify the requesting application user as - appropriate. + Channel_Set LABEL_REQUEST object on receiving such a PathErr + messages, then notify the requesting application user as appropriate. 4. IANA Considerations 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 - Upon approval of this document, the IANA will make the assignment in - the "Switching Types" section of the "GMPLS Signaling Parameters" + Upon approval of this document, IANA will make the assignment in the + "Switching Types" section of the "GMPLS Signaling Parameters" registry located at http://www.iana.org/assignments/gmpls-sig- parameters: Value Type Reference ----- --------------------------- --------- 125* Data Channel Switching Capable (DCSC) [This document] (*) Suggested value. It should be noted that the assigned value should be reflected in IANAGmplsSwitchingTypeTC at http://www.iana.org/assignments/ianagmplstc-mib. 4.2. Generalized Channel_Set LABEL_REQUEST Object - Upon approval of this document, the IANA will make the assignment in - the "Class Names, Class Numbers, and Class Types" section of the - "RSVP PARAMETERS" registry located at - http://www.iana.org/assignments/rsvp-parameters. + Upon approval of this document, IANA will make the assignment in the + "Class Names, Class Numbers, and Class Types" section of the "RSVP + PARAMETERS" registry located at http://www.iana.org/assignments/rsvp- + parameters. A new class type for the existing LABEL_REQUEST Object class number (19) with the following definition: Class Types or C-Types: 5* Generalized Channel_Set [This document] (*) Suggested value. 4.3. Generalized Channel_Set LABEL Object - Upon approval of this document, the IANA will make the assignment in - the "Class Names, Class Numbers, and Class Types" section of the - "RSVP PARAMETERS" registry located at - http://www.iana.org/assignments/rsvp-parameters. + Upon approval of this document, IANA will make the assignment in the + "Class Names, Class Numbers, and Class Types" section of the "RSVP + PARAMETERS" registry located at http://www.iana.org/assignments/rsvp- + parameters. A new class type for the existing RSVP_LABEL Object class number (16) with the following definition: Class Types or C-Types: 4* Generalized Channel_Set [This document] (*) Suggested value. @@ -398,37 +394,33 @@ [RFC3945] Mannie, E., Editor, "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Architecture", RFC 3945, October 2004. [RFC4202] Kompella, K., Ed., and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "Routing Extensions in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)", RFC 4202, October 2005. 6.2. Informative References - [GMPLS-ESVCS] Berger, L., Papadimitriou, P., Fedyk, D., - "Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Support For Metro Ethernet - Forum and G.8011 Ethernet Service Switching", Work in - Progress, draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ether-svcs-02.txt, - August 2008. + [GMPLS-ESVCS] Berger, L., Fedyk, D., "Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) + Support For Metro Ethernet Forum and G.8011 Ethernet + Service Switching", Work in Progress, + draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ether-svcs. - [GMPLS-MEF-UNI] Berger, L., Papadimitriou, P., Fedyk, D., - "Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Support For Metro - Ethernet Forum and G.8011 User-Network Interface - (UNI)", Work in Progress, - draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-mef-uni-01.txt, - August 2008. + [GMPLS-MEF-UNI] Berger, L., Fedyk, D., "Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) + Support For Metro Ethernet Forum and G.8011 + User-Network Interface (UNI)", Work in Progress, + draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-mef-uni. [MPLS-SEC] Fang, L., et al, "Security Framework for MPLS and GMPLS Networks", Work in Progress, - draft-ietf-mpls-mpls-and-gmpls-security-framework-04.txt, - November 2008. + draft-ietf-mpls-mpls-and-gmpls-security-framework. [RFC4606] Mannie, E., et al "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Extensions for Synchronous Optical Network (SONET) and Synchronous Digital Hierarchy (SDH) Control", RFC 4606, August 2006. 7. Acknowledgments Dimitri Papadimitriou provided substantial textual contributions to this document and coauthored earlier versions of this document. @@ -437,17 +429,16 @@ Adrian Farrel for their valuable comments. 8. Author's Addresses Lou Berger LabN Consulting, L.L.C. Phone: +1-301-468-9228 Email: lberger@labn.net Don Fedyk - Nortel Networks - 600 Technology Park Drive - Billerica, MA, 01821 - Phone: +1-978-288-3041 - Email: dwfedyk@nortel.com + Alcatel-Lucent + Groton, MA, 01450 + Phone: +1-978-467-5645 + Email: donald.fedyk@alcatel-lucent.com -Generated on: Wed Feb 25 20:00:22 EST 2009 +Generated on: Wed Oct 14 14:46:36 EDT 2009