draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ether-svcs-02.txt		draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ether-svcs-03.txt
	Internet Draft Lou Berger (LabN)		Internet Draft Lou Berger (LabN)
	Category: Standards Track Don Fedyk (Nortel)		Category: Standards Track Don Fedyk (Nortel)
	Expiration Date: February 8, 2009		Expiration Date: August 25, 2009
	August 8, 2008		February 25, 2009
	Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Support For Metro Ethernet Forum		Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Support For Metro Ethernet Forum
	and G.8011 Ethernet Service Switching		and G.8011 Ethernet Service Switching
	draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ether-svcs-02.txt		draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ether-svcs-03.txt
	Status of this Memo		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		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 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.
	Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months		Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
	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 February 8, 2009.		This Internet-Draft will expire on August 25, 2009.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright and License Notice
	Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008).		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.
	Abstract		Abstract
	This document describes a method for controlling two specific types		This document describes a method for controlling two specific types
	of Ethernet switching via Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching		of Ethernet switching via Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
	(GMPLS). This document supports the types of switching implied by		(GMPLS). This document supports the types of switching implied by
	the Ethernet services that have been defined in the context of the		the Ethernet services that have been defined in the context of the
	Metro Ethernet Forum (MEF) and International Telecommunication Union		Metro Ethernet Forum (MEF) and International Telecommunication Union
	(ITU) G.8011. Specifically, switching in support of Ethernet private		(ITU) G.8011. Specifically, switching in support of Ethernet private
	line service and Ethernet virtual private line service. Support for		line and Ethernet virtual private line services. Support for MEF and
	MEF and ITU defined parameters are also covered. Some of the		ITU defined parameters are also covered.
	extensions defined in this document are generic in nature and not
	specific to Ethernet.
	Table of Contents		Table of Contents
	1 Introduction .............................................. 3		1 Introduction ........................................... 3
	1.1 Overview .................................................. 3		1.1 Overview ............................................... 3
	1.2 Conventions used in this document ......................... 5		1.2 Conventions used in this document ...................... 5
	2 Common Signaling Support .................................. 5		2 Common Signaling Support ............................... 5
	2.1 Ethernet Endpoint Identification .......................... 5		2.1 Ethernet Endpoint Identification ....................... 5
	2.1.1 Endpoint ID TLV ........................................... 6		2.1.1 Endpoint ID TLV ........................................ 6
	2.2 Connection Identification ................................. 7		2.2 Connection Identification .............................. 6
	2.2.1 Procedures ................................................ 7		2.2.1 Procedures ............................................. 7
	2.3 Traffic Parameters ........................................ 7		2.3 Traffic Parameters ..................................... 7
	2.3.1 L2 Control Protocol TLV ................................... 8		2.3.1 L2 Control Protocol TLV ................................ 7
	2.4 Bundling and VLAN Identification .......................... 9		2.4 Bundling and VLAN Identification ....................... 9
	3 EPL Service ............................................... 9		3 EPL Service ............................................ 9
	3.1 EPL Service Parameters .................................... 10		3.1 EPL Service Parameters ................................. 9
	4 EVPL Service .............................................. 10		4 EVPL Service ........................................... 10
	4.1 EVPL Generalized Label Format ............................. 11		4.1 EVPL Generalized Label Format .......................... 11
	4.2 Egress VLAN ID Control and VLAN ID preservation ........... 11		4.2 Egress VLAN ID Control and VLAN ID preservation ........ 11
	4.3 Single Call - Single LSP .................................. 12		4.3 Single Call - Single LSP ............................... 12
	4.4 Single Call - Multiple LSPs ............................... 12		4.4 Single Call - Multiple LSPs ............................ 12
	5 IANA Considerations ....................................... 12		5 IANA Considerations .................................... 12
	5.1 Endpoint ID Attributes TLV ................................ 13		5.1 Endpoint ID Attributes TLV ............................. 12
	5.2 Line LSP Encoding ......................................... 13		5.2 Line LSP Encoding ...................................... 13
	6 Security Considerations ................................... 13		5.3 Ethernet Virtual Private Line (EVPL) Switching Type .... 13
	7 References ................................................ 13		6 Security Considerations ................................ 13
	7.1 Normative References ...................................... 13		7 References ............................................. 14
	7.2 Informative References .................................... 14		7.1 Normative References ................................... 14
	8 Acknowledgments ........................................... 15		7.2 Informative References ................................. 15
	9 Author's Addresses ........................................ 15		8 Acknowledgments ........................................ 15
	10 Full Copyright Statement .................................. 16		9 Author's Addresses ..................................... 16
	11 Intellectual Property ..................................... 16
	1. Introduction		1. Introduction
	[MEF6] and [G.8011] provide parallel frameworks for defining network-		[MEF6] and [G.8011] provide parallel frameworks for defining network-
	oriented characteristics of Ethernet services in transport networks.		oriented characteristics of Ethernet services in transport networks.
	The framework discusses general Ethernet connection characteristics,		The framework discusses general Ethernet connection characteristics,
	Ethernet User-Network Interfaces (UNIs) and Ethernet Network-Network		Ethernet User-Network Interfaces (UNIs) and Ethernet Network-Network
	Interfaces (NNIs). Within this framework, [G.8011.1] defines the		Interfaces (NNIs). Within this framework, [G.8011.1] defines the
	Ethernet Private Line (EPL) service and [G.8011.2] defines the		Ethernet Private Line (EPL) service and [G.8011.2] defines the
	Ethernet Virtual Private Line (EVPL) service. [MEF6] covers both		Ethernet Virtual Private Line (EVPL) service. [MEF6] covers both
	skipping to change at page 3, line 50		skipping to change at page 3, line 50
	[MEF6] and [G.8011]: point-to-point (P2P) and multipoint-to-		[MEF6] and [G.8011]: point-to-point (P2P) and multipoint-to-
	multipoint (MP2MP). [MEF6] uses the term Ethernet Line (E-line) to		multipoint (MP2MP). [MEF6] uses the term Ethernet Line (E-line) to
	refer to point-to-point virtual connections, and Ethernet LAN (E-LAN)		refer to point-to-point virtual connections, and Ethernet LAN (E-LAN)
	to refer to multipoint-to-multipoint virtual connections. [G.8011]		to refer to multipoint-to-multipoint virtual connections. [G.8011]
	also identifies point-to-multipoint (P2MP) as an area for "further		also identifies point-to-multipoint (P2MP) as an area for "further
	study." Within the context of GMPLS, support is defined for point-		study." Within the context of GMPLS, support is defined for point-
	to-point unidirectional and bidirectional TE Label Switched Paths		to-point unidirectional and bidirectional TE Label Switched Paths
	(LSPs), see [RFC3473], and unidirectional point-to-multipoint TE		(LSPs), see [RFC3473], and unidirectional point-to-multipoint TE
	LSPs, see [RFC4875].		LSPs, see [RFC4875].
	Support for P2P and MP2MP service is required by [G.8011] and		Support for P2P and MP2MP services is required by [G.8011] and
	[MEF11]. Note that while [MEF11] requires MP2MP, [G.8011.1] and		[MEF11]. Note that while [MEF11] requires MP2MP, [G.8011.1] and
	[G.8011.2] only require P2P. There is a clear correspondence between		[G.8011.2] only require P2P. There is a clear correspondence between
	E-Line/P2P service and GMPLS P2P TE LSPs, and support for such LSPs		E-Line/P2P service and GMPLS P2P TE LSPs, and support for such LSPs
	are included in the scope of this document. There is no such clear		are included in the scope of this document. There is no such clear
	correspondence between E-LAN/MP2MP service and GMPLS TE LSPs.		correspondence between E-LAN/MP2MP service and GMPLS TE LSPs.
	Although it is possible to emulate the service using multiple P2P or		Although it is possible to emulate the service using multiple P2P or
	P2MP TE LSPs. The definition of support for MP2MP service is left		P2MP TE LSPs. The definition of support for MP2MP service is left
	for future study and is not addressed in this document.		for future study and is not addressed in this document.
	[MEF11] defines multiple types of control for UNI Ethernet services.		[MEF11] defines multiple types of control for UNI Ethernet services.
	skipping to change at page 5, line 18		skipping to change at page 5, line 18
	"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. Common Signaling Support		2. Common Signaling Support
	This section describes the common mechanisms for supporting GMPLS		This section describes the common mechanisms for supporting GMPLS
	signaled control of LSPs that provide Ethernet connections as defined		signaled control of LSPs that provide Ethernet connections as defined
	in [MEF11], [G.8011.1] and [G.8011.2].		in [MEF11], [G.8011.1] and [G.8011.2].
	Except as specifically modified in this document, the procedures		Except as specifically modified in this document, the procedures
	related to the processing of RSVP objects is not modified by this		related to the processing of RSVP objects are not modified by this
	document. The relevant procedures in existing documents, such as		document. The relevant procedures in existing documents, such as
	[RFC3473], MUST be followed in all cases not explicitly described in		[RFC3473], MUST be followed in all cases not explicitly described in
	this document.		this document.
	2.1. Ethernet Endpoint Identification		2.1. Ethernet Endpoint Identification
	Ethernet endpoint identifiers, as they are defined in [G.8011] and		Ethernet endpoint identifiers, as they are defined in [G.8011] and
	[MEF10.1], differ significantly from the identifiers used by GMPLS.		[MEF10.1], differ significantly from the identifiers used by GMPLS.
	Specifically, the Ethernet endpoint identifiers are character based		Specifically, the Ethernet endpoint identifiers are character based
	as apposed to the GMPLS norm of being IP address based.		as apposed to the GMPLS norm of being IP address based.
	The approach taken by this document to address this disparity		The approach taken by this document to address this disparity
	leverages the solution used for connection identification, see		leverages the solution used for connection identification, see
	Section 2.2 and [RFC4974], and a new CALL_ATTRIBUTES TLV defined in		Section 2.2 and [RFC4974], and a new CALL_ATTRIBUTES TLV defined in
	this document. The solution makes use of the [RFC4974] short call		this document. The solution makes use of the [RFC4974] short call
	ID, and supports the Ethernet endpoint identifier much like [RFC4974]		ID, and supports the Ethernet endpoint identifier much like [RFC4974]
	supports the long call ID. That is, the SENDER_TEMPLATE and SESSION		supports the long call ID. That is, the SENDER_TEMPLATE and SESSION
	objects carry IP addresses and a short call ID, and long identifiers		objects carry IP addresses and a short call ID, and long identifiers
	are carried in the attributes object. As with the long call ID, the		are carried in the CALL_ATTRIBUTES object. As with the long call ID,
	Ethernet endpoint identifier is typically only relevant at the		the Ethernet endpoint identifier is typically only relevant at the
	ingress and egress nodes.		ingress and egress nodes.
	As defined below, the Ethernet endpoint identifier is carried in the		As defined below, the Ethernet endpoint identifier is carried in the
	CALL_ATTRIBUTES object in a new TLV. The new TLV is referred to as		CALL_ATTRIBUTES object in a new TLV. The new TLV is referred to as
	the Endpoint ID TLV. The processing of the Endpoint ID TLV parallels		the Endpoint ID TLV. The processing of the Endpoint ID TLV parallels
	the processing of the long call ID in [RFC4974]. This processing		the processing of the long call ID in [RFC4974]. This processing
	requires the inclusion of the CALL_ATTRIBUTES object in a Notify		requires the inclusion of the CALL_ATTRIBUTES object in a Notify
	message.		message.
	2.1.1. Endpoint ID TLV		2.1.1. Endpoint ID TLV
	skipping to change at page 6, line 40		skipping to change at page 6, line 40
	The use of the Endpoint ID TLV is required during call management.		The use of the Endpoint ID TLV is required during call management.
	When a call is established or torn down per [RFC4974], a		When a call is established or torn down per [RFC4974], a
	CALL_ATTRIBUTES object containing an Endpoint ID TLV MUST be included		CALL_ATTRIBUTES object containing an Endpoint ID TLV MUST be included
	in the Notify message along with the Long Call ID.		in the Notify message along with the Long Call ID.
	Short Call ID processing, including those procedures related to call		Short Call ID processing, including those procedures related to call
	and connection processing, is not modified by this document and MUST		and connection processing, is not modified by this document and MUST
	proceed according to [RFC4974].		proceed according to [RFC4974].
	A CALL_ATTRIBUTES object containing an Endpoint ID TLV MAY be
	included in the signaling messages of an LSP (connection) associated
	with an established call. Such objects are processed according to
	[4420BIS].
	Transit nodes supporting this document MUST propagate the Endpoint ID
	TLV without modification.
	2.2. Connection Identification		2.2. Connection Identification
	Signaling for Ethernet connections follows the procedures defined in		Signaling for Ethernet connections follows the procedures defined in
	[RFC4974]. In particular the Call related mechanisms are reused to		[RFC4974]. In particular the Call related mechanisms are reused to
	support endpoint identification. In the context of Ethernet		support endpoint identification. In the context of Ethernet
	connections, a call only exists when one or more LSPs (connections in		connections, a call only is only established when one or more LSPs
	[RFC4974] terms) are present. An LSP will always be established		(connections in [RFC4974] terms) are needed. An LSP will always be
	within the context of a call and, typically, only one LSP will be		established within the context of a call and, typically, only one LSP
	used per call. See Section 4.4 for the case where more than one LSP		will be used per call. See Section 4.4 for the case where more than
	may exist within a call.		one LSP may exist within a call.
	2.2.1. Procedures		2.2.1. Procedures
	Any node that supports Ethernet connections MUST be able to accept		Any node that supports Ethernet connections MUST be able to accept
	and process call setups per [RFC4974]. Ethernet connections		and process call setups per [RFC4974]. Ethernet connections
	established according to this document MUST treat the Ethernet		established according to this document MUST treat the Ethernet
	(virtual) connection identifier as the long "Call identifier (ID)",		(virtual) connection identifier as the long "Call identifier (ID)",
	described in [RFC4974]. The short Call ID MUST be used as described		described in [RFC4974]. The short Call ID MUST be used as described
	in [RFC4974]. Use of the LINK_CAPABILITY object is OPTIONAL. Both		in [RFC4974]. Use of the LINK_CAPABILITY object is OPTIONAL. Both
	network-initiated and user-initiated Calls MUST be supported.		network-initiated and user-initiated Calls MUST be supported.
	skipping to change at page 8, line 25		skipping to change at page 8, line 16
	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=3 | Length=8 |		| Type=3 | Length=8 |
	+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+		+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
	| IL2CP | EL2CP | Reserved |		| IL2CP | EL2CP | Reserved |
	+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+		+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
	See [ETH-TRAFFIC] for a description of the Type and Length fields.		See [ETH-TRAFFIC] for a description of the Type and Length fields.
	Per [ETH-TRAFFIC], the Type field MUST be set to two (2), and the		Per [ETH-TRAFFIC], the Type field MUST be set to three (3), and
	Length field MUST be set to eight (8) for the L2CP TLV.		the Length field MUST be set to eight (8) for the L2CP TLV.
	Ingress Layer 2 Control Processing (IL2CP): 4 bits		Ingress Layer 2 Control Processing (IL2CP): 4 bits
	This field controls processing of Layer 2 Control Protocols		This field controls processing of Layer 2 Control Protocols
	on a receiving interface. Valid usage is service specific,		on a receiving interface. Valid usage is service specific,
	see [MEF10.1], [8011.1] and [8011.2].		see [MEF10.1], [8011.1] and [8011.2].
	Permitted values are:		Permitted values are:
	Value Description Reference		Value Description Reference
	skipping to change at page 9, line 34		skipping to change at page 9, line 23
	2.4. Bundling and VLAN Identification		2.4. Bundling and VLAN Identification
	The control of bundling and listing of VLAN identifiers is only		The control of bundling and listing of VLAN identifiers is only
	supported for EVPL services. EVPL service specific details are		supported for EVPL services. EVPL service specific details are
	provided in Section 4.		provided in Section 4.
	3. EPL Service		3. EPL Service
	Both [MEF6] and [G.8011.1] define an Ethernet Private Line (EPL)		Both [MEF6] and [G.8011.1] define an Ethernet Private Line (EPL)
	services. In the words of [G.8011.1], EPL services carry "Ethernet		service. In the words of [G.8011.1], EPL services carry "Ethernet
	characteristic information over dedicated bandwidth, point-to-point		characteristic information over dedicated bandwidth, point-to-point
	connections, provided by SDH, ATM, MPLS, PDH, ETY or OTH server layer		connections, provided by SDH, ATM, MPLS, PDH, ETY or OTH server layer
	networks." [G.8011.1] defines two types of Ethernet Private Line		networks." [G.8011.1] defines two types of Ethernet Private Line
	(EPL) services. Both types present a service where all data		(EPL) services. Both types present a service where all data
	presented on a port is transported to the corresponding connect port.		presented on a port is transported to the corresponding connect port.
	The types differ in that EPL type 1 service operates at the MAC frame		The types differ in that EPL type 1 service operates at the MAC frame
	layer, while EPL type 2 service operates at the line (e.g., 8B/10B)		layer, while EPL type 2 service operates at the line (e.g., 8B/10B)
	encoding layer. [MEF6] only defines one type of EPL service, and it		encoding layer. [MEF6] only defines one type of EPL service, and it
	matches [G.8011.1] EPL type 1 service. Signaling for LSPs that		matches [G.8011.1] EPL type 1 service. Signaling for LSPs that
	support both types of EPL services are detailed below.		support both types of EPL services are detailed below.
	3.1. EPL Service Parameters		3.1. EPL Service Parameters
	Signaling for the EPL service types only differ in the LSP Encoding		Signaling for the EPL service types only differ in the LSP Encoding
	Type used. The LSP Encoding Type used for each are:		Type used. The LSP Encoding Type used for each are:
	EPL Service LSP Encoding Type		EPL Service LSP Encoding Type
	----------- -----------------		----------- -----------------
	Type 1/MEF Ethernet (2) [RFC3471]		Type 1/MEF Ethernet (2) [RFC3471]
	Type 2 Line (e.g., 8B/10B) (TBA by IANA)		Type 2 Line (e.g., 8B/10B) [This document] (TBA by IANA)
	The other LSP parameters specific to EPL Service are:		The other LSP parameters specific to EPL Service are:
	Parameter Value		Parameter Value
	-------------- -----		-------------- -----
	Switching Type DCSC [GMPLS-EXT]		Switching Type DCSC [GMPLS-EXT]
	G-PID Ethernet (33) [RFC3471]		G-PID Ethernet (33) [RFC3471]
	The parameters defined in this section MUST be used when establishing		The parameters defined in this section MUST be used when establishing
	and controlling LSPs that provide EPL service type Ethernet		and controlling LSPs that provide EPL service type Ethernet
	switching. The procedures defined in Section 2 and the other		switching. The procedures defined in Section 2 and the other
	skipping to change at page 10, line 45		skipping to change at page 10, line 34
	or unbundled. Independent of the different forms, LSPs supporting		or unbundled. Independent of the different forms, LSPs supporting
	EVPL Ethernet type switching are signaled using the same mechanisms		EVPL Ethernet type switching are signaled using the same mechanisms
	to communicate the one or more VLAN IDs associated with a particular		to communicate the one or more VLAN IDs associated with a particular
	LSP (Ethernet connection).		LSP (Ethernet connection).
	The relevant [RFC3471] parameter values that MUST be used for EVPL		The relevant [RFC3471] parameter values that MUST be used for EVPL
	connections are:		connections are:
	Parameter Value		Parameter Value
	-------------- -----		-------------- -----
	Switching Type TBD [NOTE: under discussion]		Switching Type EVPL [This document] (TBA by IANA)
	LSP Encoding Type Ethernet (2)		LSP Encoding Type Ethernet (2)
	G-PID Ethernet (33)		G-PID Ethernet (33)
	As with EPL, the procedures defined in Section 2 and the other		As with EPL, the procedures defined in Section 2 and the other
	procedures defined in [RFC3473] for the establishment and management		procedures defined in [RFC3473] for the establishment and management
	of bidirectional LSPs MUST be followed when establishing and		of bidirectional LSPs MUST be followed when establishing and
	controlling LSPs that provide EVPL service type Ethernet switching.		controlling LSPs that provide EVPL service type Ethernet switching.
	LSPs that provide EVPL service type Ethernet switching MUST use the		LSPs that provide EVPL service type Ethernet switching MUST use the
	EVPL Generalized Label Format per Section 4.1, and the Generalized		EVPL Generalized Label Format per Section 4.1, and the Generalized
	Channel_Set Label Objects per [GMPLS-EXT]. A notable implication of		Channel_Set Label Objects per [GMPLS-EXT]. A notable implication of
	bundled EVPL services and carrying multiple VLAN IDs is that a Path		bundled EVPL services and carrying multiple VLAN IDs is that a Path
	message may grow to be larger than a single (fragmented or non-		message may grow to be larger than a single (fragmented or non-
	fragmented) IP packet. The basic approach to solving this is to		fragmented) IP packet. The basic approach to solving this is to
	allow for multiple LSPs which are associated with a single call, see		allow for multiple LSPs which are associated with a single call, see
	Section 2.2. The specifics of this approach are describe below in		Section 2.2. The specifics of this approach are describe below in
	Section 4.4.		Section 4.4.
	4.1. EVPL Generalized Label Format		4.1. EVPL Generalized Label Format
	Bundled EVPL services requires the use of a service specific label,		Bundled EVPL services require the use of a service specific label,
	called the EVPL Generalized Label. For consistency, Non-bundled EVPL		called the EVPL Generalized Label. For consistency, Non-bundled EVPL
	services also use the same label.		services also use the same label.
	The format for the Generalized Label (Label Type value 2) used with		The format for the Generalized Label (Label Type value 2) used with
	EVPL services is:		EVPL services is:
	0 1		0 1
	0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5		0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
	+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+		+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
	| Rsvd | VLAN ID |		| Rsvd | VLAN ID |
	skipping to change at page 11, line 44		skipping to change at page 11, line 33
	This field is reserved. It MUST be set to zero on transmission		This field is reserved. It MUST be set to zero on transmission
	and MUST be ignored on receipt. This field SHOULD be passed		and MUST be ignored on receipt. This field SHOULD be passed
	unmodified by transit nodes.		unmodified by transit nodes.
	VLAN ID: 12 bits		VLAN ID: 12 bits
	A VLAN identifier.		A VLAN identifier.
	4.2. Egress VLAN ID Control and VLAN ID preservation		4.2. Egress VLAN ID Control and VLAN ID preservation
	Per [MEF6], the mapping of the single VLAN ID used at the incoming		When an EVPL service does not support both bundling and VLAN ID
	interface of the ingress to a different VLAN ID at the outgoing		preservation, [MEF6] allows VLAN ID mapping. In particular, the
	interface at the egress UNI is allowed for EVPL services that do not		single VLAN ID used at the incoming interface of the ingress may be
	support either bundling and VLAN ID preservation. Such a mapping		mapped to a different VLAN ID at the outgoing interface at the egress
	MUST be requested and signaled based on the explicit label control		UNI. Such mapping MUST be requested and signaled based on the
	mechanism defined in [RFC3473] and clarified in [RFC4003].		explicit label control mechanism defined in [RFC3473] and clarified
			in [RFC4003].
	When the explicit label control mechanism is not used, VLAN IDs MUST		When the explicit label control mechanism is not used, VLAN IDs MUST
	be preserved, i.e., not modified, across an LSP.		be preserved, i.e., not modified, across an LSP.
	4.3. Single Call - Single LSP		4.3. Single Call - Single LSP
	For simplicity in management, a single LSP SHOULD be used for each		For simplicity in management, a single LSP SHOULD be used for each
	EVPL type LSP whose Path and Resv messages fit within a single		EVPL type LSP whose Path and Resv messages fit within a single
	unfragmented IP packet. This allows the reuse of all standard LSP		unfragmented IP packet. This allows the reuse of all standard LSP
	modification procedures. Of particular note is the modification of		modification procedures. Of particular note is the modification of
	skipping to change at page 13, line 31		skipping to change at page 13, line 24
	the "LSP Encoding Types" section of the "GMPLS Signaling Parameters"		the "LSP Encoding 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
	----- --------------------------- ---------		----- --------------------------- ---------
	14* Line (e.g., 8B/10B) [This document]		14* Line (e.g., 8B/10B) [This document]
	(*) Suggested value.		(*) Suggested value.
			5.3. Ethernet Virtual Private Line (EVPL) Switching Type
			Upon approval of this document, the 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
			----- --------------------------- ---------
			30* Ethernet Virtual Private Line (EVPL) [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.
	6. Security Considerations		6. Security Considerations
	This document introduces new message object formats for use in GMPLS		This document introduces new message object formats for use in GMPLS
	signaling [RFC3473]. It does not introduce any new signaling		signaling [RFC3473]. It does not introduce any new signaling
	messages, nor change the relationship between LSRs that are adjacent		messages, nor change the relationship between LSRs that are adjacent
	in the control plane. As such, this document introduces no additional		in the control plane. As such, this document introduces no additional
	security considerations. See [RFC3473] for relevant security		security considerations. See [RFC3473] for relevant security
	considerations.		considerations.
	7. References		7. References
	7.1. Normative References		7.1. Normative References
	[ETH-TRAFFIC] Papadimitriou, D., "Ethernet Traffic Parameters,"		[ETH-TRAFFIC] Papadimitriou, D., "Ethernet Traffic Parameters,"
	draft-ietf-ccamp-ethernet-traffic-parameters-05.txt,		draft-ietf-ccamp-ethernet-traffic-parameters-06.txt,
	Work in progress, July 12, 2008.		Work in progress, October 31, 2008.
	[GMPLS-EXT] Berger, L., Papadimitriou, P., Fedyk, D.,		[GMPLS-EXT] Berger, L., Papadimitriou, P., Fedyk, D.,
	"Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Data Channel Switching		"Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Data Channel Switching
	Capable (DCSC) and Channel Set Label Extensions",		Capable (DCSC) and Channel Set Label Extensions",
	draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-dcsc-channel-ext-00.txt,		draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-dcsc-channel-ext-00.txt,
	Work in Progress, August 2008.		Work in Progress, August 2008.
	[GMPLS-MRN] Papadimitriou, D. et al, "Generalized Multi-Protocol		[GMPLS-MRN] Papadimitriou, D. et al, "Generalized Multi-Protocol
	Label Switching (GMPLS) Protocol Extensions for		Label Switching (GMPLS) Protocol Extensions for
	Multi-Layer and Multi-Region Networks (MLN/MRN)",		Multi-Layer and Multi-Region Networks (MLN/MRN)",
	draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-mln-extensions-02.txt,		draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-mln-extensions-03.txt,
	Work in progress, July 2008.		Work in progress, October 2008.
	[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate		[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
	Requirement Levels," RFC 2119.		Requirement Levels," RFC 2119.
	[RFC3209] Awduche, D., Berger, L., Gan, D., Li, T.,		[RFC3209] Awduche, D., Berger, L., Gan, D., Li, T.,
	Srinivasan, V. and G. Swallow, "RSVP-TE: Extensions		Srinivasan, V. and G. Swallow, "RSVP-TE: Extensions
	to RSVP for LSP Tunnels", RFC 3209, December 2001.		to RSVP for LSP Tunnels", RFC 3209, December 2001.
	[RFC3471] Berger, L., Editor, "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label		[RFC3471] Berger, L., Editor, "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label
	Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Functional Description",		Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Functional Description",
	RFC 3471, January 2003.		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.
	[RFC4003] Berger, L., "GMPLS Signaling Procedure for Egress		[RFC4003] Berger, L., "GMPLS Signaling Procedure for Egress
	Control", RFC 4003, February 2005.		Control", RFC 4003, February 2005.
	[4420BIS] Farrel, A., et al. "Encoding of Attributes for
	Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Label Switched
	Path (LSP) Establishment Using Resource ReserVation
	Protocol-Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE)",
	draft-ietf-ccamp-rfc4420bis-03.txt,
	Work in progress, May 27, 2008,
	[RFC4974] Papadimitriou, D., Farrel, A. "Generalized MPLS		[RFC4974] Papadimitriou, D., Farrel, A. "Generalized MPLS
	(GMPLS) RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions in support of Calls",		(GMPLS) RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions in support of Calls",
	RFC 4974, August 2007.		RFC 4974, August 2007.
	7.2. Informative References		7.2. Informative References
	[G.8011] ITU-T G.8011/Y.1307, "Ethernet over Transport		[G.8011] ITU-T G.8011/Y.1307, "Ethernet over Transport
	Ethernet services framework", August 2004.		Ethernet services framework", August 2004.
	[G.8011.1] ITU-T G.G.8011.1/Y.1307.1, "Ethernet private		[G.8011.1] ITU-T G.G.8011.1/Y.1307.1, "Ethernet private
	skipping to change at page 16, line 4		skipping to change at page 16, line 11
	The authors would like to thank Evelyne Roch, Stephen Shew, and Yoav		The authors would like to thank Evelyne Roch, Stephen Shew, and Yoav
	Cohen for their valuable comments.		Cohen for their valuable comments.
	9. Author's Addresses		9. 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		Nortel Networks
	600 Technology Park Drive		600 Technology Park Drive
	Billerica, MA, 01821		Billerica, MA, 01821
	Phone: +1-978-288-3041		Phone: +1-978-288-3041
	Email: dwfedyk@nortel.com		Email: dwfedyk@nortel.com
	10. Full Copyright Statement		Generated on: Wed Feb 25 20:00:02 EST 2009
	Copyright (C) The IETF Trust (2008).
	This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
	contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
	retain all their rights.
	This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
	"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
	OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY, THE IETF TRUST AND
	THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS
	OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF
	THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
	WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
	11. Intellectual Property
	The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
	Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed
	to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology
	described in this document or the extent to which any license
	under such rights might or might not be available; nor does it
	represent that it has made any independent effort to identify any
	such rights. Information on the procedures with respect to rights
	in RFC documents can be found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
	Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
	assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
	attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use
	of such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
	specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository
	at http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
	The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention
	any copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other
	proprietary rights that may cover technology that may be required
	to implement this standard. Please address the information to the
	IETF at ietf-ipr@ietf.org.
	Acknowledgement
	Funding for the RFC Editor function is provided by the IETF
	Administrative Support Activity (IASA).
	Generated on: Fri Aug 8 09:53:58 EDT 2008
End of changes. 27 change blocks.
	81 lines changed or deleted		92 lines changed or added
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.35. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/