draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ethernet-pbb-te-01.txt   draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ethernet-pbb-te-02.txt 
Internet Draft Don Fedyk, Nortel Internet Draft Don Fedyk, Nortel
Category: Standards Track Himanshu Shah, Ciena Category: Standards Track Himanshu Shah, Ciena
Expiration Date: January 14, 2009 Nabil Bitar, Verizon Expiration Date: August 25, 2009 Nabil Bitar, Verizon
Attila Takacs, Ericsson Attila Takacs, Ericsson
July 14, 2008 February 25, 2009
GMPLS control of Ethernet PBB-TE Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) control of
Ethernet PBB-TE
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ethernet-pbb-te-01.txt draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ethernet-pbb-te-02.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.
This memo provides information for the Internet community. It
does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution
of this memo is unlimited.
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
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." as reference 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 January 14, 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 specification is complementary to the GMPLS controlled Ethernet This specification is complementary to the GMPLS controlled Ethernet
architecture document [ARCH] and describes the technology specific architecture document [ARCH] and describes the technology specific
aspects of GMPLS control for Provider Backbone Bridging Traffic aspects of GMPLS control for Provider Backbone Bridge Traffic
Engineering (PBB-TE) [IEEE 802.1Qay]. The necessary GMPLS extensions Engineering (PBB-TE) [IEEE 802.1Qay]. The necessary GMPLS extensions
and mechanisms are described to establish Ethernet PBB-TE point to and mechanisms are described to establish Ethernet PBB-TE point to
point (P2P) and point to multipoint (P2MP) connections. This document point (P2P) and point to multipoint (P2MP) connections. This document
supports, but does not modify, the standard IEEE data plane. supports, but does not modify, the standard IEEE data plane.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1 Introduction .............................................. 3 1 Introduction .............................................. 4
1.1 Co-authors ................................................ 3 1.1 Co-authors ................................................ 4
2 Terminology ............................................... 4 2 Terminology ............................................... 5
2.1 PBB-TE Terminology ........................................ 5 2.1 PBB-TE and GMPLS Terminology .............................. 5
3 Creation and Maintenance of PBB-TE Service Instances ...... 6 3 Creation and Maintenance of PBB-TE paths using GMPLS ...... 6
3.1 Ethernet Service .......................................... 7 4 Specific Procedures ....................................... 9
3.2 Addresses, Interfaces, and Labels ......................... 7 4.1 P2P Ethernet LSPs ........................................ 9
4 Specific Procedures ....................................... 10 4.1.1 Shared Forwarding ......................................... 10
4.1 P2P connections ........................................... 10 4.1.2 P2P connections procedures for shared forwarding .......... 11
4.1.1 Shared Forwarding ......................................... 11 4.1.3 P2P Path Maintenance ...................................... 11
4.1.2 P2P connections with shared forwarding .................... 12 4.2 P2MP Ethernet-LSPs ........................................ 12
4.1.3 Dynamic P2P symmetry with shared forwarding ............... 13 4.2.1 Maintenance Procedures .................................... 12
4.1.4 Planned P2P symmetry ...................................... 13 4.3 PBB-TE Ethernet Label ..................................... 12
4.1.5 P2P Path Maintenance ...................................... 13 4.4 Protection Paths .......................................... 13
4.2 P2MP Signaling ............................................ 14 4.5 Service Instance Identification .......................... 13
4.3 P2MP ESP-MAC DA Connections ............................... 14 5 Error conditions .......................................... 15
4.3.1 Setup procedures .......................................... 14 5.1 Invalid ESP-VID value for PBB-TE ......................... 15
4.3.2 Maintenance Procedures .................................... 14 5.2 Invalid MAC Address ....................................... 15
4.4 Ethernet Label ............................................ 15 5.3 Switch is not ESP P2MP capable ............................ 15
4.5 OAM MEP ID and MA ID synchronization ...................... 16 6 Security Considerations ................................... 15
4.6 Protection Paths .......................................... 16 7 IANA Considerations ....................................... 16
5 Error conditions .......................................... 17 7.1 Error Codes ............................................... 16
5.1 Invalid ESP-VID value for PBB-TE MSTI range ............... 17 8 References ................................................ 16
5.2 Invalid MAC Address ....................................... 17 8.1 Normative References ...................................... 16
5.3 Invalid ERO for UPSTREAM_LABEL Object ..................... 17 8.2 Informative References .................................... 16
5.4 Invalid ERO for LABEL_SET Object .......................... 18 9 Acknowledgments ........................................... 17
5.5 Switch is not ESP P2MP capable ............................ 18 10 Author's Address .......................................... 17
5.6 Invalid ESP-VID in UPSTREAM_LABEL object .................. 18
6 Deployment Scenarios ...................................... 18
7 Security Considerations ................................... 18
8 IANA Considerations ....................................... 18
9 References ................................................ 19
9.1 Normative References ...................................... 19
9.2 Informative References .................................... 19
10 Acknowledgments ........................................... 21
11 Author's Address .......................................... 21
A. Rational and mechanism for PBB_TE Ethernet Forwarding ..... 22
A.1. Overview of configuration of VID/DMAC tuples .............. 25
A.2 Overview of configuration of VID port membership .......... 28
A.3 OAM Aspects ............................................... 28
A.4 QOS Aspects ............................................... 29
A.5 Resiliency Aspects ........................................ 29
A.5.1 E2E Path protection ....................................... 29
12 Full Copyright Statement .................................. 30
13 Intellectual Property ..................................... 30
Conventions used in this document 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].
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
IEEE 802.1 is specifying Traffic Engineered Ethernet paths in the The IEEE 802.1 Provider Backbone Bridge Traffic Engineering (PBB-TE)
Provider Backbone Bridged network (PBB-TE) [IEEE 802.1Qay] based on [IEEE 802.1Qay] standard supports the establishment of explicitly
managed objects that can be separated from the Spanning Tree Control routed traffic engineered paths within Provider Backbone Bridged
Plane and statically configured or managed by another control plane. (PBB) networks. PBB-TE allows disabling: the Spanning Tree Protocol,
These paths have minor changes to Ethernet data plane specified in unknown destination address forwarding and source address learning
the IEEE. IEEE 802 termed these paths "PBB-TE service instances". for administratively selected VLAN Identifiers. With PBB-TE an
external provisioning system or control plane can be used to
configure static entries in the managed objects of bridges and so
establish traffic engineered paths in the network.
Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) [RFC3945] is a family of control plane Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) [RFC3945] is a family of control plane
protocols designed to operate in connection oriented and traffic protocols designed to operate in connection oriented and traffic
engineering transport networks. GMPLS is applicable to a range of engineering transport networks. GMPLS is applicable to a range of
network technologies including Layer 2 Switching capable networks network technologies including Layer 2 Switching capable networks
(L2SC). The purpose of this document is to specify extensions for a (L2SC). The purpose of this document is to specify extensions for a
GMPLS based control plane to manage PBB-TE service instances. This GMPLS based control plane to manage PBB-TE explicitly routed traffic
draft is aligned with the GMPLS Ethernet Label Switching Architecture engineered paths. This draft is complementary to with the GMPLS
and Framework [ARCH]. Ethernet Label Switching Architecture and Framework [ARCH].
It should be noted that due to the changes in the separation of the
Spanning Tree Control plane and PBB-TE forwarding, the behavior of
PBB-TE for the specified VLAN range is a new behavior. (It does not
default to conventional Ethernet forwarding with learning at any
time). Note, currently PBB-TE is under specification in the
Interworking Task Group of the IEEE 802.1 Working Group (WG), the
actual draft has version 3.5. Appendix A summarizes the rational for
this data plane technology until the IEEE specification is released
for Working Group Ballot in the IEEE 802.1 WG.
1.1. Co-authors 1.1. Co-authors
This document is the result the a large team of authors and This document is the result the a large team of authors and
contributors. The following is a list of the co-authors: contributors. The following is a list of the co-authors:
Don Fedyk (Nortel) Don Fedyk (Nortel)
David Allan (Nortel) David Allan (Nortel)
Himanshu Shah (Ciena) Himanshu Shah (Ciena)
Nabil Bitar (Verizon) Nabil Bitar (Verizon)
Attila Takacs (Ericsson) Attila Takacs (Ericsson)
Diego Caviglia (Ericsson) Diego Caviglia (Ericsson)
Alan McGuire (BT) Alan McGuire (BT)
Nurit Sprecher (Nokia Siemens Networks) Nurit Sprecher (Nokia Siemens Networks)
Lou Berger (LabN) Lou Berger (LabN)
2. Terminology 2. Terminology
In addition to well understood GMPLS terms, this memo uses In addition to well understood GMPLS terms, this memo uses
terminology from IEEE 802.1 and introduces a few new terms: terminology from IEEE 802.1 [IEEE 802.1Qah] [IEEE 802.1Qay]:
- BCB Backbone Core Bridge
- BEB Backbone Edge Bridge - BEB Backbone Edge Bridge
- B-MAC Backbone MAC - B-MAC Backbone MAC
- B-VID Backbone VLAN ID - B-VID Backbone VLAN ID
- B-VLAN Backbone VLAN - B-VLAN Backbone VLAN
- CBP Customer Backbone Port - CBP Customer Backbone Port
- CCM Continuity Check Message - CCM Continuity Check Message
- COS Class of Service - CNP Customer Network Port
- CLI Command Line Interface
- CIP Customer Instance Port
- C-MAC Customer MAC - C-MAC Customer MAC
- C-VID Customer VLAN ID - C-VID Customer VLAN ID
- C-VLAN Customer VLAN - C-VLAN Customer VLAN
- DMAC Destination MAC Address - DMAC Destination MAC Address
- ESP Ethernet Switched Path - ESP Ethernet Switched Path
- ESP-MAC SA ESP Source MAC Address
- ESP-MAC DA ESP Destination MAC Address
- ESP-VID ESP VLAN ID
- Eth-LSP Ethernet Label Switched Path - Eth-LSP Ethernet Label Switched Path
- IB-BEB A BEB comprising of both I and B components
- I-SID Ethernet Service Instance Identifier - I-SID Ethernet Service Instance Identifier
- LBM Loopback Message
- LBR Loopback Reply
- LLDP Link Layer Discovery Protocol
- LMM Loss Measurement Message
- LMR Loss Measurement Reply
- MAC Media Access Control - MAC Media Access Control
- MMAC Multicast MAC - MMAC Multicast or Group MAC address
- MSTID Multiple Spanning Tree Identifier
- MP2MP Multipoint to multipoint
- PBB Provider Backbone Bridges - PBB Provider Backbone Bridges
- PBB-TE Provider Backbone Bridges Traffic Engineering - PBB-TE Provider Backbone Bridges Traffic Engineering
- PIP Provider Instance Port - PIP Provider Instance Port
- PCP Priority Code Points
- PNP Provider Network Port - PNP Provider Network Port
- P2P Point to Point - P2P Point to Point
- P2MP Point to Multipoint - P2MP Point to Multipoint
- QOS Quality of Service
- ESP-MAC SA Source MAC Address
- S-VID Service VLAN ID
- SVL Shared VLAN Learning - SVL Shared VLAN Learning
- TE-MSTID Traffic Engineering MSTID - TESI TE Service Instance
- VID VLAN ID - VID VLAN ID
- VLAN Virtual LAN - VLAN Virtual LAN
2.1. PBB-TE Terminology 2.1. PBB-TE and GMPLS Terminology
The PBB-TE specification has defined some additional terminology to The PBB-TE specification [IEEE 802.1Qay] defines some additional
clarify the PBB-TE functions. We repeat these here in expanded terminology to clarify the PBB-TE functions. We repeat these here in
context to translate from IEEE to GMPLS terminology. expanded context to translate from IEEE to GMPLS terminology.
- Ethernet Switched Path (ESP): - Ethernet Switched Path (ESP):
A provisioned traffic engineered unidirectional connectivity path A provisioned traffic engineered unidirectional connectivity path
between two or more Customer Backbone Ports (CBPs) which extends between two or more Customer Backbone Ports (CBPs) which extends
over a Provider Backbone Bridge Network (PBBN). The path is over a Provider Backbone Bridge Network (PBBN). The path is
identified by the 3-tuple <ESP-MAC DA, ESP-MAC SA, ESP-VID> where identified by the 3-tuple <ESP-MAC DA, ESP-MAC SA, ESP-VID>. An
the ESP-VID value is allocated to the PBB-TE Multiple Spanning ESP is point-to-point (P2P) or point-to-multipoint (P2MP). An ESP
Tree Identifier (MSTID). (A set of VIDs for PBB-TE is allocated is analogous to a (unidirectional) point-to-point or point-to-
to the new TE-MSTID.) An ESP is analogous to a GMPLS LSP. multipoint LSP. We use the term Ethernet-LSP (Eth-LSP) for GMPLS
established ESPs.
- Point-to-Point PBB-TE service instance:
An instance of the MAC service provided by two unidirectional co-
routed ESPs forming a bidirectional service. A GMPLS
bidirectional path is analogous to a P2P PBB-TE Service instance.
- Point-to-Multipoint PBB-TE service instance:
An instance of the MAC service provided by a set of ESPs which
comprises one point-to-multipoint ESP plus n unidirectional
point-to-point ESPs. The n P2P ESPs are co-routed but in the
opposite direction from the root-to-leaf sub-ESPs comprising the
P2MP ESP. Note that due to traditional Ethernet data plane
design this definition is different to the way P2MP connections
are generally defined. That is, while P2MP connections are
generally root-to-leaves unidirectional trees, P2MP PBB-TE
services can be regarded as bidirectional trees.
3. Creation and Maintenance of PBB-TE Service Instances
PBB-TE is an Ethernet connection oriented technology, being specified
in the IEEE, which can be controlled by configuration of static
filtering entries (see Appendix A for some details on the rational
for the data plane). PBB-TE ESPs are created switch by switch by
simple configuration of Ethernet logical ports and assignment of PBB-
TE labels or by a control plane. This document describes GMPLS as a
valid control plane for Eth-LSPs that are based on PBB-TE ESPs. A
Point-to-Point PBB-TE service instance is a form of Ethernet LSP
(Eth-LSP) which is more broadly defined in [ARCH]. This memo
describes GMPLS as a mechanism to automate set-up teardown,
protection and recovery of PBB-TE ESPs and specifies the specific
TLVs for control of PBB-TE service instances.
When configuring a PBB-TE ESP with GMPLS, the ESP-MAC DA and ESP-VID
are carried in a generalized label object and are assigned hop by hop
but are invariant within a domain. This invariance is similar to
GMPLS operation in transparent optical networks. As is typical with
other technologies controlled by GMPLS, the data plane receiver must
accept, and usually assigns, labels from its available label pool.
This, together with the label invariance requirement mentioned above,
result in each PBB-TE label being a domain wide unique label, with a
unique ESP-VID + ESP-MAC DA, for each direction.
The following illustrates the identifiers for Labels and ESPs.
GMPLS Upstream Label <ESP:MAC1(DA), VID1> (60 bits) - Point-to-point ESP:
GMPLS Downstream Label <ESP:MAC2(DA), VID2> (60 bits) An ESP between two CBPs. The ESP-DA and the ESP-SA in the ESP's
Upstream PBB-TE ESP 3-tuple <ESP:MAC1, MAC2, VID1> (108 bits) 3- tuple identifier are the individual MAC addresses of the two
Downstream PBB-TE ESP 3-tuple <ESP:MAC2, MAC1, VID2> (108 bits) CBPs.
Table 1 Labels and ESPs - Point-to-multipoint ESP:
The MAC is domain wide unique in the network. PBB-TE defines the An ESP among one root CBP and n leaf CBPs. The ESP-DA in the
tuple of <ESP-MAC DA, ESP-MAC SA, ESP-VID> as a unique connection ESP's 3-tuple identifier is a group MAC address identifying the n
identifier in the data plane but the forwarding operation only uses leaf CBPs, and the ESP-SA is the individual MAC address of the
the ESP-MAC DA (DMAC) and the ESP-VID in each direction. Note that root.
the MAC addresses for PBB-TE are part of the Backbone Component - Point-to-Point PBB-TE service instance (P2P TESI):
Relay (B-Component) and are associated with Provider addresses A service instance supported by two point-to-point ESPs where the
corresponding to the Customer Backbone ports (CBP) of the Backbone ESPs' endpoints have the same CBP MAC addresses. The two
Component (B-Component) as described in section 3.2. unidirectional ESP are forming a bidirectional service. The PBB-
The ESP-VID (VID) typically comes from a small number of VIDs TE standard [IEEE 802.1Qay] notes the following: for reasons
dedicated to PBB-TE MSTID. The ESP-VID (VID) can be reused across relating to TE service monitoring diagnostics, operational
ESPs. There is no requirement the ESP-VID for two ESPs that form a simplicity, etc. the IEEE PBB-TE standard assumes that the point-
PBB-TE Service instance be the same. to-point ESPs associated with a point-to-point TESI are co-
routed. Support for a point-to-point TE services which comprises
non co-routed ESPs is problematic, and is not defined in this
standard. Hence, a GMPLS bidirectional LSP is analogous to a P2P
TE Service instance. We use the term bidirectional Ethernet-LSP
(Eth-LSP) for GMPLS established P2P PBB-TE Service instances.
Several attributes may be associated with an Eth-LSP. These are 3. Creation and Maintenance of PBB-TE paths using GMPLS
reviewed in Section 3 of [ARCH]. Several other aspects of GMPLS
covered by [ARCH] also apply equally to PBB-TE. This includes the
GMPLS routing and addressing model, link management, path
computation and selection, and multiple domains.
3.1. Ethernet Service IEEE PBB-TE is a connection oriented Ethernet technology. PBB-TE ESPs
are created switch by switch by simple configuration of Ethernet
forwarding entries. This document describes the use of GMPLS as a
valid control plane for the set-up, teardown, protection and
recovery of ESPs and TESIs and specifies the required RSVP-TE
extensions for the control of PBB-TE service instances.
Ethernet Switched Paths that are setup either by configuration or PBB-TE ESP and services are always originated and terminated on IB-
signaling can be used to provide an Ethernet service to customers of Backbone Edge Bridges (IB-BEBs). IB-BEBs are constituted of I and B
the Ethernet network. The Metro Ethernet Forum has defined some components, this is illustrated in Figure 1.
services in [MEF.6] (e.g., Ethernet Private Line), and these are also
aligned with ITU-T G.8011-x Recommendations. Of particular interest
are the bandwidth profile parameters in [MEF.10] and whose associated
bandwidth profile algorithm are based on [RFC4115] [RFC3270].
Consideration should be given to supporting these in any signaling
extensions for Ethernet LSPs. This will be addressed in a future
version of this specification.
3.2. Addresses, Interfaces, and Labels An Ethernet service supported by a PBB-TE TESI is always attached to
a Customer Network Port (CNP) of the I-component. A Service Instance
Identifier (I-SID) is assigned for the service. The I and B
components have internal ports which are connected via an internal
LAN. These internal ports are the Provider Instance Ports (PIPs) and
Customer Backbone Ports (CBPs). PIPs and CBPs are not visible outside
the IB-BEB. ESPs are always originated and terminated on CBP ports
and use the MAC address of that port. The I-Component encapsulates
the service frames arriving from the CNP by adding an I-SID and a
complete Ethernet MAC header with an ESP-MAC DA and ESP-MAC SA. The
B-Component adds the ESP-VID.
This specification uses an addressing scheme and a label space for GMPLS is being defined here to establish ESPs and TESIs. As it can be
the ingress/egress connection; the hierarchical TE Router seen from the above this requires configuration of both the I and B
ID/Interface ID and the Ethernet ESP-VID/ESP-MAC DA tuple or ESP- components of the IB-BEBs connected by the ESPs.
VID/Multicast MAC as a label space. This draft is intended to be
consistent with GMPLS addressing and Routing [ARCH].
PBB-TE is defined for a PBB Network. As with PBB services, PBB-TE is In the GMPLS control plane TE Router IDs are used to identify the IB-
typically implemented in the Service and Backbone components of an BEBs and Backbone Core Bridges (BCBs), and TE Links that describes
IB-Backbone Edge Bridge (BEB). This is illustrated in Figure 1. The links connected to PNPs and CNPs. TE Links are not associated with
Ethernet service is attached to a Customer Instance Port (CIP) of the CBPs or PIPs.
Backbone Service Instance (I-component) Relay. The CIP is connected
via the I-Component Relay to a Virtual instance port (VIP) which is
identified with a configured service instance (I-SID) and attached to
a Provider Instance Port (PIP). The PIP is configured to be attached
to a customer Backbone port (CBP). (A point to point service instance
is illustrated. A point to multipoint service could allow more than
one CBP to be attached to a single PIP.) The CBP has a B-MAC that
defines the MAC for the PBB-TE Service Instance. That source B-MAC
address is the PIP MAC address which in the case of backbone service
instances that are supported by TE service instances is configured to
take the same value as the CBP B-MAC of the internally connected CBP
on the B-component. As a result, the backbone MAC addresses of
frames associated with traffic engineered services, the ESP-MACs, are
always equal to the CBP B-MAC. The I-Component PIP adds the ESP-MAC
DA and the ESP-MAC SA. The B-Component CBP adds the ESP-VID. GMPLS
is being defined here to connect CBP MACs to signal the PBB-TE
service Instance before the association of ESP-MAC DA and ESP-MAC SA
is defined.
The diagram also shows the addition of a TE Router ID to the PBB Note that since multiple internal CBPs may exit an IB-BEB receiving a
switch and the TE Link identifier to enable GMPLS. TE Links are not PATH message must be able to determine the appropriate CBP that is
associated with CBPs. TE Links are associated with PNPs. TE links are the termination point of the ESP. To this end, IB-BEBs SHOULD
associated with bridge identifiers of backbone edge bridges (BEB) and advertises the CNP TE Links in the GMPLS control plane and RSVP-TE
backbone core bridges (BCB). CBPs are also associated with these signaling SHOULD use the CNP TE Links to identify the termination
bridge ids. For GMPLS the bridge IDs are expressed as IP addresses point of Eth-LSPs. An IB-BEB receiving a PATH message specifying one
as TE- Router IDs. [RFC4990] of its CNPs can locally determine which CBPs have internal
connectivity to the I-component supporting the given CNP. In the case
there are more than one suitable CBPs, and no I-SID information is
provided in the PATH message or previously in the associated Call
setup, then the IB-BEB can decide freely which CBP to assign to the
requested connection. On the other hand, if there is information on
the service (I-SID) that the given ESP will support, then the IB-BEB
MUST first determine which PIP and CBP is configured with the I-SID
and MUST assign that CBP to the ESP.
Backbone Edge Bridge (BEB) Backbone Edge Bridge (BEB)
+------------------------------------------------------+ +------------------------------------------------------+
| <TE - Router ID > | | <TE - Router ID > |
| | | |
| I-Component Relay B-Component Relay | | I-Component Relay B-Component Relay |
| +-----------------------+ +---------------------+ | | +-----------------------+ +---------------------+ |
| | +---+ | | B-VID | | | | +---+ | | B-VID | |
| | |VIP| | | +---+ +---+ | | <TE Link> | | |VIP| | | +---+ +---+ | | <TE Link>
| | +---+ | +---|CBP| |PNP|------ | | +---+ | +---|CBP| |PNP|------
| | | | | +---+ +---+ | | | | | | | +---+ +---+ | |
| | +---+ +---+ | | | | | | | +---+ +---+ | | | | |
------|CIP| |PIP|----+ | | | ------|CNP| |PIP|----+ | | |
| | +---+ +---+ | | | | | | +---+ +---+ | | | |
| +-----------------------+ +---------------------+ | | +-----------------------+ +---------------------+ |
| | | |
| PBB Edge Bridge | | PBB Edge Bridge |
+------------------------------------------------------+ +------------------------------------------------------+
^--------Configured--------------^ ^--------Configured--------------^
^-GMPLS or Configured-^ ^-----------GMPLS or Configured------^
Figure 2 Ethernet/GMPLS Addressing & Label Space
TE Router ID TE Router ID
| (TE Link) |
V | V N=named port
+----+ | +-----+ <port index>
| | | label=ESP:VID/MAC DA | | <MAC>
| PB | V label=ESP:VID/MMAC | | <string>
-----N N----------------------------N PBB N----------
| | |(MAC)| \
| | / | Customer
+----+ /+-----+ Facing
BCB ESP:MAC BEB Ports
Figure 3 Ethernet/GMPLS Addressing & Label Space Figure 1 IB-BEBs and GMPLS identifiers
For a GMPLS based system, the TE Router ID/logical port is the Control TE Router ID TE Router ID
logical signaling identifier for the control plane via which Ethernet Plane | (TE Link) |
layer label bindings are solicited. In order to create a P2P path an V | V
association must be made between the ingress and egress switch. The +----+ | +-----+
actual label distributed via signaling and instantiated in the switch Data | | | label=ESP:VID/MAC DA | |
forwarding tables identifies the upstream and downstream egress ESP- Plane | | V label=ESP:VID/MMAC | |
VID/ESP-MAC DA of the PBB-TE ESP (see Figure 3). -----N N----------------------------N N----------
| | PBB-TE | | \ Network
| | / | Or
+----+ /+-----+ Customer
BCB ESP:MAC IB-BEB Facing
Ethernet
Ports
GMPLS uses identifiers in the form of 32 bit numbers which are in the Figure 2 Ethernet/GMPLS Addressing & Label Space
IP address notation which may or may not be IP addresses. The
provider MAC port addresses are exchanged by the LLDP [IEEE 802.1AB]
and by LMP [RFC4204] if supported. However these identifiers are
merely for link control and legacy Ethernet support and have local
link scope. Actual label assignment is performed by the ingress and
egress switches using CBP MAC addresses.
A particular PNP would have: PBB-TE defines the tuple of <ESP-MAC DA, ESP-MAC SA, ESP-VID> as a
unique connection identifier in the data plane but the forwarding
operation only uses the ESP-MAC DA and the ESP-VID in each direction.
The ESP-VID typically comes from a small number of VIDs dedicated to
PBB-TE. ESP-VIDs can be reused across ESPs. There is no requirement
that ESP-VIDs for two ESPs that form a P2P TESI be the same.
- A VID/MAC When configuring a ESP with GMPLS, the ESP-MAC DA and ESP-VID are
- An IP address, which is typically the TE router ID, plus a 32 bit carried in a generalized label object and are assigned hop by hop but
interface Identifier also call an unnumbered link. are invariant within a domain. This invariance is similar to GMPLS
- One (or more) Mnemonic String Identifiers operation in transparent optical networks. As is typical with other
technologies controlled by GMPLS, the data plane receiver must
accept, and usually assigns, labels from its available label pool.
This, together with the label invariance requirement mentioned above,
result in each PBB-TE Ethernet Label being a domain wide unique
label, with a unique ESP-VID + ESP-MAC DA, for each direction.
This multiple naming convention leaves the issue of resolving the set The following illustrates PBB-TE Ethernet Labels and ESPs for a P2P
given one of the port identifiers. On a particular switch, mapping is TESI.
relatively straightforward. Per [ARCH], standard GMPLS mechanisms
are used for signaling resolution. In so doing, the problem of
setting up a path is reduced to figuring out what switch supports an
egress CBP MAC address and then finding the corresponding egress IP
address and performing all signaling and routing with respect to the
egress.
There are several options to achieve this: GMPLS Upstream Label <ESP:MAC1(DA), VID1> (60 bits)
GMPLS Downstream Label <ESP:MAC2(DA), VID2> (60 bits)
Upstream PBB-TE ESP 3-tuple <ESP:MAC1, MAC2, VID1> (108 bits)
Downstream PBB-TE ESP 3-tuple <ESP:MAC2, MAC1, VID2> (108 bits)
- Provisioning - Auto discovery protocols that carry MAC address Table 1 Labels and ESPs
- Augmenting Routing TE with MAC Addresses
- Name Servers with identifier/address registration
The specific procedures will be clarified in a subsequent version
of this document.
4. Specific Procedures 4. Specific Procedures
4.1. P2P connections 4.1. P2P Ethernet LSPs
The PBB-TE Service Instance is defined by the ESP 3-tuples for each
of the unidirectional ESPs. From a GMPLS control plane point of view
an Ethernet LSP is also identified as any other LSP using the 5-
tuple [Ip_Source_Sddr, Ip_Dest_Addr, LSP_Id, Tunnel_ID,
Extended_Tunnel_ID]. The ESP-VID and ESP-MAC DA tuple identifies the
forwarding multiplex at transit switches and a simple degenerate form
of the multiplex is a single P2P connection.
This results in unique labels end to end. The data streams MAY merge,
the forwarding entries MAY be shared but the headers are still unique
allowing the connection to be de-multiplexed downstream. Note that
in addition to the ESP 3-tuples the I-SID in the I-TAG also provides
for unambiguous identification of frames belonging to a certain
service. This adds further protection against misconfiguration and
misconnectivity errors, by allowing simple detection and immediate
squelching of unintended traffic.
On the initiating and terminating switches, a function administers Note, PBB-TE is designed to be bidirectional and symmetrically routed
the ESP-VIDs associated with the ESP-MAC SA and ESP-MAC DA just like Ethernet. That is, complete and proper functionality of
respectively. PBB-TE is designed to be bidirectional and Ethernet protocols is only guaranteed for bidirectional Eth-LSPs.
symmetrically routed just like Ethernet. Therefore in PBB-TE, the
packet ESP-MAC SA and ESP- MAC DA pair is same in the forwarding path
and the associated reverse path except they are flipped in the
reverse direction.
To initiate a bidirectional ESP-VID/ESP-MAC DA P2P or P2MP path, the To initiate a bidirectional Eth-LSP, the initiator of the PATH
initiator of the PATH message uses procedures outlined in [RFC3473] message uses procedures outlined in [RFC3473], it:
possibly augmented with [RFC4875], it:
1) Sets the LSP encoding type to Ethernet. 1) Sets the LSP encoding type to Ethernet.
2) Sets the LSP switching type to 802_1 PBB-TE [IANA to define]. 2) Sets the LSP switching type to 802_1 PBB-TE suggested value 40
[IANA to define].
3) Sets the GPID to service type [IANA to define]. 3) Sets the GPID to service type.
4) Sets the UPSTREAM_LABEL to the ESP-VID/ESP-MAC SA tuple where the 4) Sets the UPSTREAM_LABEL to the ESP-VID1/ESP-MAC1 tuple where the
ESP-VID is administered from the configured ESP-VID/ESP-MAC DA range. ESP-VID1 is administered locally for the local MAC address: MAC1
5) Optionally sets the LABEL_SET or SUGGESTED_LABEL if it chooses to 5) Optionally sets the LABEL_SET or SUGGESTED_LABEL if it chooses to
influence the choice of ESP-VID/ESP-MAC DA. influence the choice of ESP-VID/ESP-MAC DA.
6) Optionally look at Call / Connection ID for Carrying I-SID. 6) Optionally look at Call / Connection ID for Carrying I-SID.
Intermediate and egress switch processing is not modified by this Intermediate and egress switch processing is not modified by this
document, i.e., is per [RFC3473] and, in the case of P2MP, as document, i.e., is per [RFC3473]. Note, as previously stated
extended in [RFC4875]. Note, as previously stated intermediate intermediate bridges supporting the 802_1 PBB-TE switching type MUST
bridges supporting the 802_1 switching type may not modify LABEL NOT modify LABEL values.
values.
The ESP-VID/ESP-MAC SA tuple contained in the UPSTREAM_LABEL is used The ESP-VID1/ESP-MAC1 tuple contained in the UPSTREAM_LABEL is used
to create a static forwarding entry in the Filtering Database of to create a static forwarding entry in the Filtering Database of
bridges at each hop for the upstream direction. This behavior is bridges at each hop for the upstream direction. This behavior is
inferred from the switching type which is 802_1 [IANA to define]. inferred from the switching type which is 802_1 PBB-TE. The port
The port derived from the RSVP_HOP object and the ESP-VID and ESP- derived from the RSVP_HOP object and the ESP-VID1 and ESP- MAC1
MAC DA included in the label constitute the static entry. included in the PBB-TE Ethernet Label constitute the static entry.
At the destination, a ESP-VID is allocated in the local MAC range for At the destination, an ESP-VID2 is allocated for the local MAC
the ESP-MAC DA and the ESP-VID/ESP-MAC DA tuple is passed in a LABEL address: MAC2, the ESP-VID2/ESP-MAC2 tuple is passed in the LABEL
object in the RESV message. As with the PATH message, intermediate object in the RESV message. As with the PATH message, intermediate
switch processing is per [RFC3473] and [RFC4875], and the LABEL switch processing is per [RFC3473], and the LABEL object is passed on
object is passed on unchanged, upstream. The ESP-VID/ESP-MAC DA unchanged, upstream. The ESP-VID2/ESP-MAC2 tuple contained in the
tuple contained in the LABEL Object is installed in the forwarding LABEL Object is installed in the forwarding table as a static
table as a static forwarding entry at each hop. This creates a forwarding entry at each hop. This creates a bidirectional path as
bidirectional path as the PATH and RESV messages follow the same the PATH and RESV messages follow the same path.
path.
4.1.1. Shared Forwarding 4.1.1. Shared Forwarding
One capability of a connectionless Ethernet data plane is to reuse One capability of a connectionless Ethernet data plane is to reuse
destination forwarding entries for packets from any source within a destination forwarding entries for packets from any source within a
VLAN to a destination. When setting up P2P PBB-TE connections for VLAN to a destination. When setting up P2P PBB-TE connections for
multiple sources sharing a common destination this capability MAY be multiple sources sharing a common destination this capability MAY be
preserved provided certain requirements are met. We refer to this preserved provided certain requirements are met. We refer to this
capability as Shared Forwarding. Shared forwarding is invoked based capability as Shared Forwarding. Shared forwarding is invoked based
on policy when conditions are met. It is a local decision by label on policy when conditions are met. It is a local decision by label
allocation at each end. Shared forwarding has no impact on the actual allocation at each end plus the path constraints. Shared forwarding
paths setup, but it allows the reduction of forwarding entries. has no impact on the actual paths setup, but it allows the reduction
Shared forwarding paths are identical to independently routed paths of forwarding entries. Shared forwarding paths are identical in
with the exception that they share the same labels and same path from function to independently routed paths that share a path from an
the merge point. intersecting switch or link except they share a single forwarding
entry.
To achieve shared forwarding, a Path computation engine [PATHCOMP] Share forwarding savings can be quite dramatic in some topologies
should ensure the ERO is consistent with an existing path for the where a high degree of meshing is required however it is typically
shared segments. If a path satisfies the consistency check, the easier to achieve when the connectivity is know in advance. Normally
upstream end of the signaling may chose to share an existing ESP- the originating GMPLS switch will not have knowledge of the set of
VID/ESP-MAC DA for the upstream traffic with an existing Eth-LSP. shared forwarding paths rooted on the source or destination switch.
The criteria for shared forwarding is the Eth-LSPs must share the
same destination port and the paths of the Eth-LSP share one or more
hops consecutively. Once the paths converge they must remain
converged. If no existing path has this behavior when a new path is
being created, the new path will be created without sharing either by
using another ESP-VID or another ESP-MAC DA or both.
In other words, shared forwarding is possible when paths share Use of a Path Computation Server [PATHCOMP] or other planning style
segments either from the source or the destination. There is no of tool with more complete knowledge of the network configuration is
requirement that the paths share reservations or other attributes. a way to impose pre-selection of shared forwarding multiplexes to use
For the source, the UPSTREAM_LABEL is chosen to be the same as an for both directions. In this scenario the originating switch uses
existing path that shares the ERO for some number of hops. Similarly the LABEL_SET and UPSTREAM_LABEL objects to indicate selection of the
for the destination, shared forwarding is possible when an existing shared forwarding multiplexes at both ends.
path that shares segments with the new paths ERO, viewed from the
destination switch. The downstream label in this case is chosen to
be the same as the existing path. In this manner shared forwarding is
a function that is controlled primarily by policy and in combination
with the local label allocation at the end points of the path.
4.1.2. P2P connections with shared forwarding 4.1.2. P2P connections procedures for shared forwarding
The ESP-VID/ESP-MAC DA MAY be considered to be a shared forwarding The ESP-VID/ESP-MAC DA MAY be considered to be a shared forwarding
identifier or label for a multiplex consisting of some number of P2P identifier or label for a multiplex consisting of some number of P2P
connections distinctly identified by the MAC ESP-VID/ESP-MAC DA/ESP- connections distinctly identified by the MAC ESP-VID/ESP-MAC DA/ESP-
MAC SA tuple. In some ways this is analogous to an LDP label merge MAC SA tuple. This is analogous to an LDP label merge but in the
but in the shared forwarding case only the forwarding entry is shared forwarding case the original ESP header still identifies the
reused. Resources can continue to be allocated per LSP. complete path. Resources can continue to be allocated per LSP with
Shared forwarding.
VLAN tagged Ethernet packets include priority marking. Priority bits VLAN tagged Ethernet packets include priority marking. Priority bits
MAY be used to indicate class of Service (COS) and drop priority. MAY be used to indicate class of Service (COS) and drop priority.
Thus, traffic from multiple COSs could be multiplexed on the same Thus, traffic from multiple COSs could be multiplexed on the same
Eth-LSP (i.e., similar to E-LSPs) and queuing and drop decisions are Eth-LSP (i.e., similar to E-LSPs) and queuing and drop decisions are
made based on the p-bits. This means that the queue selection can be made based on the p-bits. This means that the queue selection can be
done based on a per flow (i.e., Eth-LSP + priority) basis and is done based on a per flow (i.e., Eth-LSP + priority) basis and is
decoupled from the actual steering of the packet at any given switch. decoupled from the actual steering of the packet at any given switch.
A switch terminating an Eth-LSP will frequently have more than one A switch terminating an Eth-LSP will frequently have more than one
suitable candidate path and it may choose to share a forwarding entry suitable candidate for sharing a forwarding entry (common ESP-
(common ESP-VID/ESP-MAC DA, unique ESP-MAC SA). It is a local VID/ESP-MAC DA, unique ESP-MAC SA). It is a local decision of how
this is performed but the best choice is a path that maximizes the
decision of how this is performed but the best choice is a path that shared forwarding.
maximizes the shared forwarding.
The concept of bandwidth management still applies equally well with The concept of bandwidth management still applies equally well with
shared forwarding. As an example consider a PBB-TE edge switch that shared forwarding. As an example consider a PBB-TE edge switch that
terminates an Ethernet LSP with the following attributes: bandwidth terminates an Ethernet LSP with the following attributes: bandwidth
B1, ESP-MAC DA D, ESP-MAC SA S1, ESP-VID V. A request to establish an B1, ESP-MAC DA D, ESP-MAC SA S1, ESP-VID V. A request to establish an
additional Ethernet LSP with attributes (bandwidth B2, ESP-MAC DA D, additional Ethernet LSP with attributes (bandwidth B2, ESP-MAC DA D,
ESP-MAC SA S2, ESP-VID V) can be accepted provided there is ESP-MAC SA S2, ESP-VID V) can be accepted provided there is
sufficient link capacity remaining. sufficient link capacity remaining.
4.1.3. Dynamic P2P symmetry with shared forwarding 4.1.3. P2P Path Maintenance
Similar to how a destination switch MAY select a ESP-VID/ESP-MAC DA
from the set of existing shared forwarding multiplexes rooted at the
destination switch, the originating switch MAY also do so for the
reverse path. Once the initial ERO has been computed and the set of
existing Ethernet LSPs that include the target ESP-MAC DA have been
pruned, the originating switch may select the optimal (by whatever
criteria) existing shared forwarding multiplex for the new
destination to merge with and offer its own ESP-VID/ESP-MAC DA tuple
for itself as a destination.
4.1.4. Planned P2P symmetry
Normally the originating switch will not have knowledge of the set of
shared forwarding paths rooted on the destination switch.
Use of a Path Computation Server [PATHCOMP] or other planning style
of tool with more complete knowledge of the network configuration may
wish to impose pre-selection of shared forwarding multiplexes to use
for both directions. In this scenario the originating switch uses
the LABEL_SET and UPSTREAM_LABEL objects to indicate complete
selection of the shared forwarding multiplexes at both ends. This may
also result in the establishment of a new ESP-VID/ESP-MAC DA path as
the LABEL_SET object may legitimately refer to a path that does not
yet exist.
4.1.5. P2P Path Maintenance
Make before break procedures can be employed to modify the Make before break procedures can be employed to modify the
characteristics of a P2P Ethernet LSP. As described in [RFC3209], the characteristics of a P2P Eth LSP. As described in [RFC3209], the LSP
LSP ID in the sender template is updated as the new path is signaled. ID in the sender template is updated as the new path is signaled. The
The procedures (including those for shared forwarding) are identical procedures (including those for shared forwarding) are identical to
to those employed in establishing a new LSP, with the extended tunnel those employed in establishing a new LSP, with the extended tunnel ID
ID in the signaling exchange ensuring that double booking of the in the signaling exchange ensuring that double booking of the
associated resources does not occur. associated resources does not occur.
Where individual paths in a protection group are modified, signaling Where individual paths in a protection group are modified, signaling
procedures may be combined with Protection Switching (PS) procedures may be combined with Protection Switching (PS)
coordination to administratively force PS switching operations such coordination to administratively force PS switching operations such
that modifications are only ever performed on the protection path. that modifications are only ever performed on the protection path.
4.2. P2MP Signaling 4.2. P2MP Ethernet-LSPs
Note specifics for P2MP paths are being defined. This section will be
updated to align with the PBB-TE specification [IEEE 802.1Qay].
To initiate a P2MP VID/Multicast MAC (MMAC) path the initiator of the
PATH message uses procedures outlined in [RFC3473] and [RFC4875]. A
P2MP tree consists of a VID tree forward direction (from root to
leaves) and a set of P2P paths running on identical paths from Tree
leaves to root in the reverse direction. The result is a composite
path with a ESP- MMAC DA label with a single ESP-MMAC DA in the
forward direction and a symmetric set of unidirectional ESP-VID/ESP-
MAC DA labels in the reverse direction:
1-4) Same points as P2P paths previously specified.
5) Sets the downstream label as the ESP-MMAC DA.
4.3. P2MP ESP-MAC DA Connections
4.3.1. Setup procedures PBB-TE supports P2MP VID/Multicast MAC (MMAC) forwarding. In P2MP
the whole tree in the forward direction has the same destination MMAC
ESP-MAC-DA.
The group ESP-MMAC DA is administered from a central pool of The procedures outlined in [RFC3473] and [RFC4875]could be adapted to
multicast addresses and the VLAN selected from the PBB-TE VID range. signal P2MP LSPs for the source (point) to destination (multipoint)
The P2MP tree is constructed via incremental addition of leaves to direction. Each one of the branches of the P2MP Eth-LSP would be
the tree in signaling exchanges where the root is the originating associated with a reverse path symmetric and congruent P2P Eth-LSP.
switch (as per (RFC4875). The multicast VID/ESP-MMAC DA is encoded in
the LABEL_SET (as a member of one) object using the Ethernet label
encoding.
Where a return path is required the unicast MAC corresponding to the Complete procedures for signaling bidirectional P2MP are out of scope
originating interface and a VID selected from the configured VID/ESP- for this document.
MAC DA range is encoded as an Ethernet label in the UPSTREAM_LABEL
object.
4.3.2. Maintenance Procedures 4.2.1. Maintenance Procedures
Maintenance and modification to a P2MP tree can be achieved by a Maintenance and modification to a P2MP tree can be achieved by a
number of means. The preferred technique is to modify existing VLAN number of means. The preferred technique is to modify existing VLAN
configuration vs. assignment of a new label and completely configuration vs. assignment of a new label and completely
constructing a new tree. constructing a new tree.
Make before break on a live tree reusing existing label assignments Make before break on a live tree reusing existing label assignments
requires a 1:1 or 1+1 construct. The protection switch state of the requires a 1:1 or 1+1 construct. The protection switch state of the
traffic is forced on the working tree and locked (PS not allowed) traffic is forced on the working tree and locked (PS not allowed)
while the backup tree is modified. Explicit path tear of leaves to be while the backup tree is modified. Explicit path tear of leaves to be
modified is required to ensure no loops are left behind as artifacts modified is required to ensure no loops are left behind as artifacts
of tree modification. Once modifications are complete, a forced of tree modification. Once modifications are complete, a forced
switch to the backup tree occurs and the original tree may be switch to the backup tree occurs and the original tree may be
similarly modified. This also suggests that 1+1 or 1:1 resilience can similarly modified. This also suggests that 1+1 or 1:1 resilience can
be achieved for P2MP trees for any single failure (switch on any be achieved for P2MP trees for any single failure (switch on any
failure and use restoration techniques to repair the failed tree). failure and use restoration techniques to repair the failed tree).
4.4. Ethernet Label 4.3. PBB-TE Ethernet Label
The Ethernet label is a new generalized label with a suggested format The PBB-TE Ethernet Label is a new generalized label with the
of: 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0 0 0 0| ESP VID | ESP MAC (highest 2 bytes) | |0 0 0 0| ESP VID | ESP MAC (highest 2 bytes) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ESP MAC | | ESP MAC |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 3 PBB-TE Ethernet Label
This format can be used to carry P2P and P2MP labels. For P2P labels This format is used to carry for both P2P and P2MP Eth-LSPs. For P2P
the fields specify ESP <VID, MAC DA>. The semantics for a P2MP label Eth-LSPs labels the fields specify a VID and a unicast MAC address,
using a MMAC DA is that that the label is passed unchanged. This while for P2MP Eth-LSPs a VID and a group MAC address is carried in
label is also a domain wide label. This has similarity to the way in the label. The PBB-TE Ethernet Label is a domain wide unique label
which a wavelength label is handled at an intermediate switch that and MUST be passed unchanged at each hop. This has similarity to the
cannot perform wavelength conversion, and is described in [RFC3473]. way in which a wavelength label is handled at an intermediate switch
that cannot perform wavelength conversion, and is described in
[RFC3473].
Label Allocation for Domain wide labels is similar to other label 4.4. Protection Paths
switching technologies with the exception that the labels are owned
by the switch where the path is terminated. In Ethernet, unique MAC
based labels can be created using one of two methods. One option is
to allocate the ESP-MAC DAs from globally unique addresses assigned
to the either the switch manufacturer. The other option is to use
ESP-MAC DAs out of the local admin space and ensure these labels are
unique within the domain. Labels only have significance within the
domain.
In the case of local label allocation there is no need to use When protection is used for path recovery it is required to associate
globally assigned OUIs. However when using this configuration, some the working and protection paths into a protection group. This is
way of ensuring label consistency should be provided to make sure achieved as defined in [RFC4872] and [RFC4873] using the ASSOCIATION
that labels were unique. When using GMPLS signaling it is assumed a and PROTECTION objects.
unique pool of labels would be owned or assigned to each switch. The
ESP-MAC DA addresses are domain wide unique and so is the combination
of ESP <VID, MAC DA>. It is intended that the ESP <VID, MAC DA> be
only used by one destination. However, should an error occur and a
somehow a duplicate label be assigned to one or more destination
switches GMPLS signaling procedures would allow the first assignment
of the label and prevent any duplicate label from colliding. If a
collision occurs an alarm would be generated. In fact some of these
procedures have been defined in GMPLS control of photonic networks
where a lambda may exist as a form of domain wide label.
4.5. OAM MEP ID and MA ID synchronization 4.5. Service Instance Identification
This section is aligned with [IEEE 802.1Qay]. At present Ethernet OAM The I-SID is used to uniquely identify services within the network.
is signaled in Ethernet protocol data units. Extensions to GMPLS Unambiguous identification is achieved by ensuring global uniqueness
[OAM-EXT] are proposed to automatically setup OAM for Ethernet LSPs. of the I-SIDs within the network or at least between any pair of edge
switches. On IB-BEBs the Backbone Service Instance Table is used to
configure the mapping between I-SIDs and ESPs. This configuration can
be either manual or semi-automated by signaling described here.
The Maintenance association point IDs (MEP IDs) and maintenance RSVP-TE signaling can be used to automate I-SID to ESP mapping. By
association IDs for the switched path endpoints can be synchronized relying on signaling it is ensured that the same I-SID is assigned to
using the ETH-MCC (maintenance communication channel) transaction set the service and mapped to the same ESP. Note, by signaling the I-SID
once the switched path has been established. associated to the ESP one can ensure that IB-BEBs select the
appropriate CBP port.
MEPs are located at the endpoints of the Ethernet LSP. Typical The CALL signaling [RFC4974] can be used to create the I-SID
configuration associated with a MEP is Maintenance Domain Name, Short association between the endpoints prior to Eth-LSP establishment.
Maintenance Association Name, and MD Level, MEP ID, and CCM Alternatively, the PATH messages can carry the I-SID association at
transmission rate (when ETH-CC functionality is desired). As part of the time of Eth-LSP signaling. Therefore it is possible to create I-
the synchronization, it is verified that the Maintenance Domain Name, SID association either when the path is set up or at a later time.
Short Maintenance Association Name, MD Level, and CCM transmission
rate are the same. It is also determined that MEP IDs are unique for
each MEP.
Besides the unicast CCM functionality, the PBB-TE MEPs can also offer A new Service ID TLV is defined for the CALL_ATTRIBUTES object. The
the LBM/LBR and LMM/LMR functionalities for on-demand connectivity format is depicted below.
verification and loss measurement purposes.
4.6. Protection Paths 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type (TBA) | Length (variable) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Reserved | Flags |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| I-SID Set 1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
: : :
: : :
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| I-SID Set n |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 4 Service ID TLV
The IEEE is currently defining protection procedures for PBB-TE [IEEE - Flags: are used to control properties of service configuration.
802.1Qay]. This section will be updated when these procedures are This document does not define flags.
documented.
When protection is used for path recovery it is required to associate - I-SID Set TLV: is used to define a list or range of I-SIDs.
the working and protection paths into a protection group. This is Multiple I-SID Set TLVs can be present. At least one I-SID Set
achieved as defined in [RFC4872] and [RFC4873] using the ASSOCIATION TLV MUST be present. In most of the cases a single I-SID Set with
and PROTECTION objects. Protection may be used for P2P VID/ESP-MAC a single I-SID value is used. The I-SID Set TLV is used to define
DA, P2MP VID/ESP-MMAC DA and P2MP VID configured modes of operation. a list or range of I-SIDs. The format of the I-SID Set TLV is
The 'P' bit in the protection object indicates the role (working or based on the LABEL_SET Object:
protection) of the LSP currently being signaled. 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Action | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Reserved | I-SID 1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
: : :
: : :
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Reserved | I-SID n |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 5 I-SID Set TLV
- Action: 8 bits
If the initiating switch wishes to use G.8031 [G-8031] data plane The following actions are defined: list (0), range (1).
protection switching coordination (vs. control plane notifications),
it sets the N bit to 1 in the protection object. This must be
consistently applied for all paths associated as a protection group.
If the terminating switch does not support G.8031, the error - I-SID: 24 bits
"Admission Control Failure/Unsupported Notification Type" is used.
The I-SID value identifies a particular backbone service
instance.
5. Error conditions 5. Error conditions
The following errors have been identified as being unique to these The following errors are possible. They are extension of some base
procedures and in addition to those already defined. This will be error types that arise due to the constraints on the label.
addressed in a proper IANA considerations section in a future version
of the document:
5.1. Invalid ESP-VID value for PBB-TE MSTI range 5.1. Invalid ESP-VID value for PBB-TE
The originator of the error is not configured to use the ESP-VID The originator of the error is not configured to use the ESP-VID
value in conjunction with GMPLS signaling of <ESP: VID, MAC DA > value for PBB-TE in conjunction with GMPLS signaling of <ESP: VID,
tuples. This may be originated by any switch along the path. MAC DA > tuples. This may be originated by any switch along the path.
Note this is a refinement of the more general Unacceptable label
value Error code.
5.2. Invalid MAC Address 5.2. Invalid MAC Address
The MAC address is out of a reserved range that cannot be used by the The MAC address is out of a reserved range that cannot be used by the
switch which is processing the address. While almost all MAC switch which is processing the address. While almost all MAC
addresses are valid there are a small number of IEEE reserved MAC addresses are valid there are a small number of IEEE reserved MAC
addresses. addresses.
5.3. Invalid ERO for UPSTREAM_LABEL Object Note this is a refinement of the more general Unacceptable label
value Error code.
The ERO offered has discontinuities with the identified ESP-
VID/ESP-MAC DA path in the UPSTREAM_LABEL object.
5.4. Invalid ERO for LABEL_SET Object
The ERO offered has discontinuities with the identified ESP-VID/ESP-
MAC DA path in the LABEL_SET object.
5.5. Switch is not ESP P2MP capable 5.3. Switch is not ESP P2MP capable
This error may arise only in P2MP Tree allocation. This error may arise only in P2MP Tree allocation.
5.6. Invalid ESP-VID in UPSTREAM_LABEL object 6. Security Considerations
The ESP-VID in the UPSTREAM_LABEL object for the "asymmetrical ESP-
VID" P2MP tree did not correspond to the ESP-VID used in previous
transactions.
6. Deployment Scenarios
Deployment scenarios are covered in [ARCH]. This section will detail
more specific PBB-TE deployment scenarios in a later revision of this
document.
7. Security Considerations
The architecture assumes that the GMPLS controlled Ethernet subnet The architecture assumes that the GMPLS controlled Ethernet subnet
consists of trusted devices and that the UNI ports or in this case consists of trusted devices and that the UNI ports or in this case
BEB Ethernet UNI Ports to the domain are untrusted. Care is required BEB Ethernet UNI Ports to the domain are untrusted. Care is required
to ensure untrusted access to the trusted domain does not occur. to ensure untrusted access to the trusted domain does not occur.
Where GMPLS is applied to the control of VLAN only, the commonly Where GMPLS is applied to the control of VLAN only, the commonly
known techniques for mitigation of Ethernet DOS attacks may be known techniques for mitigation of Ethernet DOS attacks may be
required on UNI ports. required on UNI ports.
8. IANA Considerations 7. IANA Considerations
New values are required for signaling and error codes as indicated. New values are required for signaling and error codes as indicated
This section will be completed in a later version. IANA to define. Value are needed for:
9. References - Switching type: 802_1 PBB-TE suggested value 40.
9.1. Normative References 7.1. Error Codes
- Invalid ESP-VID value for PBB-TE
- Invalid MAC Address
- Switch is not ESP P2MP capable
8. References
8.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[ARCH] Fedyk, D. Berger, L., Andersson L., "GMPLS Ethernet Label [ARCH] Fedyk, D. Berger, L., Andersson L., "GMPLS Ethernet Label
Switching Architecture and Framework", work in progress. Switching Architecture and Framework", work in progress.
[RFC3473] Berger, L. et.al., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label [RFC3473] Berger, L. et.al., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label
Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Resource ReserVation Protocol-Traffic Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Resource ReserVation Protocol-Traffic
Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions", IETF RFC 3473, January 2003. Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions", IETF RFC 3473, January 2003.
[RFC3945] Mannie, E. et.al., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label [RFC3945] Mannie, E. et.al., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label
Switching (GMPLS) Architecture", IETF RFC 3945, October 2004. Switching (GMPLS) Architecture", IETF RFC 3945, October 2004.
9.2. Informative References 8.2. Informative References
[IEEE 802.1Qay] "IEEE standard for Provider Backbone Bridges Traffic [IEEE 802.1Qay] "IEEE standard for Provider Backbone Bridges Traffic
Engineering", work in progress. Engineering", work in progress.
[RFC4115] Aboul-Magd, O. et.al. "A Differentiated Service Two-Rate,
Three-Color Marker with Efficient Handling of in-Profile Traffic",
[G-8031] ITU-T Recommendation G.8031 (2006), Ethernet Protection
Switching.
[IEEE 802.1AB] "IEEE Standard for Local and Metropolitan Area
Networks, Station and Media Access Control Connectivity
Discovery".
[IEEE 802.1ag] "IEEE Standard for Connectivity Fault [IEEE 802.1ag] "IEEE Standard for Connectivity Fault
Management", (2007). Management", (2007).
[IEEE 802.1ah] "IEEE Standard for Local and Metropolitan Area [IEEE 802.1ah] "IEEE Standard for Local and Metropolitan Area
Networks - Virtual Bridged Local Area Networks Networks - Virtual Bridged Local Area Networks
- Amendment 6: Provider Backbone Bridges", (2008) - Amendment 6: Provider Backbone Bridges", (2008)
[RFC4204] Lang. J. Editor, "Link Management Protocol (LMP)" RFC4204,
October 2005
[MEF.6] The Metro Ethernet Forum MEF 6 (2004), "Ethernet Services
Definitions - Phase I".
[MEF.10] The Metro Ethernet Forum MEF 10 (2004), "Ethernet Services
Attributes Phase 1".
[RFC3270] Le Faucheur, F. et.al., "Multi-Protocol Label Switching
(MPLS) Support of Differentiated Services" IETF RFC 3270, May
2002.
[RFC4875] Aggarwal, R. Ed., "Extensions to RSVP-TE for Point to [RFC4875] Aggarwal, R. Ed., "Extensions to RSVP-TE for Point to
[PATHCOMP] Farrel, A. et.al., "Path Computation Element (PCE) [PATHCOMP] Farrel, A. et.al., "Path Computation Element (PCE)
Architecture", work in progress. Architecture", work in progress.
[RFC3985] Bryant, S., Pate, P. et al., "Pseudo Wire Emulation Edge- [RFC4872] Lang, J. et.al., "RSVP-TE Extensions in support of End-to-
to Edge (PWE3) Architecture", IETF RFC 3985, March 2005. End
[RFC4872] Lang et.al., "RSVP-TE Extensions in support of End-to-End
Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)-based Recovery Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)-based Recovery
", RFC 4872, May 2007. ", RFC 4872, May 2007.
[RFC4873] Berger, L. et.al.,"MPLS Segment Recovery", RFC 4873, May [RFC4873] Berger, L. et.al.,"MPLS Segment Recovery", RFC 4873, May
2007. 2007.
[RFC3209] Awduche et.al., "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP [RFC3209] Awduche, D. et.al., "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP
Tunnels, IETF RFC 3209, December 2001. Tunnels, IETF RFC 3209, December 2001.
[RFC4974] Papadimitriou, D. and Farrel, A. "Generalized MPLS (GMPLS)
RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions in Support of Calls", August 2007.
[Y.1731] ITU-T Draft Recommendation Y.1731(ethoam), " OAM Functions [Y.1731] ITU-T Draft Recommendation Y.1731(ethoam), " OAM Functions
and Mechanisms for Ethernet based Networks ", (2006). and Mechanisms for Ethernet based Networks ", (2006).
[RFC4990] Shimoto, K., Papneja, R., Rabbat, R., "Use of Addresses in 9. Acknowledgments
Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Networks",
IETF RFC4990, September 2007.
[OAM-EXT] Takacs, A., Gero, B., "GMPLS RSVP-TE Extensions to Control
Ethernet OAM", work in progress.
10. Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Dinesh Mohan, Nigel Bragg, Stephen The authors would like to thank Dinesh Mohan, Nigel Bragg, Stephen
Shew, Dave Martin and Sandra Ballarte for their contributions to this Shew, Dave Martin and Sandra Ballarte for their contributions to this
document. document.
11. Author's Address 10. Author's Address
Don Fedyk Don Fedyk
Nortel Networks Nortel Networks
600 Technology Park Drive 600 Technology Park Drive
Billerica, MA, 01821 Billerica, MA, 01821
Email: dwfedyk@nortel.com Email: dwfedyk@nortel.com
David Allan David Allan
Nortel Networks Nortel Networks
3500 Carling Ave. 3500 Carling Ave.
skipping to change at page 22, line 24 skipping to change at line 752
COO RTP IE Fixed COO RTP IE Fixed
3 Hanagar St. Neve Ne'eman B, 3 Hanagar St. Neve Ne'eman B,
45241 Hod Hasharon, Israel 45241 Hod Hasharon, Israel
Email: nurit.sprecher@nsn.com Email: nurit.sprecher@nsn.com
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
A. Rational and mechanism for PBB_TE Ethernet Forwarding Generated on: Wed Feb 25 13:53:58 EST 2009
This appendix describes work currently being undertaken in the 802.1
PBB-TE [IEEE 802.1Qay] project. This information is for reference
only and will be removed when 802.1Qay becomes mature. This text
captures some of the original rational for changing Ethernet
forwarding. The PBB-TE [IEEE 802.1Qay] document simply documents the
PBB-TE data plane.
Ethernet as specified today is a complete system consisting of a data
plane and a number of control plane functions. Spanning tree, data
plane flooding and MAC learning combine to populate forwarding tables
and produce resilient any-to-any behavior in a bridged network.
Ethernet consists of a very simple and reliable data plane that has
been optimized and mass produced. By simply disabling some Ethernet
control plane functionality, it is possible to employ alternative
control planes and obtain different forwarding behaviors.
Customer Provider Provider
Bridge/ Bridge Backbone
Bridge
C-MAC/C-VID------------------802.1Q -------------------C-MAC-CVID
S-VID-----------802.1ad------------S-VID
B-MAC---802.1ah---B-MAC
B-VID---802.1ah---B-VID
Figure A.1 802.1 MAC/VLAN Hierarchy
Recent works in IETF Pseudo Wire Emulation [RFC3985] and IEEE 802 are
defining a separation of Ethernet functions permitting an increasing
degree of provider control. The result is that the Ethernet service
to the customer appears the same, yet the provider components and
behaviors have become decoupled from the customer presentation and
the provider has gained control of all VID/B-MAC endpoints.
One example of this is the 802.1ah work in hierarchical bridging
whereby customer Ethernet frames are fully encapsulated into a
provider Ethernet frame, isolating the customer VID/C-MAC space from
the provider VID/B-MAC space. In this case, the forwarding behavior
of the of the Backbone MAC in the provider's network is as per
802.1Q.
The Ethernet data plane provides protocol multiplexing via the
Ethertype field which allows encapsulation of different protocols
supporting various applications. More recently, the Carrier Ethernet
effort has created provider and customer separation that enables
another level of multiplexing. This in effect creates provider MAC
endpoints in the Ethernet sub-network controlled by the provider. In
this appendix we concentrate on the provider solutions and therefore
subsequent references to VLAN, VID and MAC refer to those under
provider control, be it in the backbone layer of 802.1ah. The
Customer Ethernet service is the same native Ethernet service with
functions such as bridging, learning and spanning trees all
functioning over the provider infrastructure.
Bridging offers a simple solution for any-to-any connectivity within
a VLAN partition via the Spanning tree, flooding and MAC learning.
Spanning tree provides some unnecessary capabilities for P2P services
and since the Spanning tree must interconnect all MACs with the same
VLAN IDs (VIDs) it consumes a scarce resource (VIDs). In this
document we present that it is easier to modify Ethernet to scale
engineered P2P services and this is the approach we take with PBB-TE.
(The number of usable VLANs IDs in conventional Ethernet bridging is
constrained to 4094, therefore the use of VLAN only configuration for
all forwarding could be limited for some applications where large
number of P2P connections are required.) This is because in
Ethernet, each Spanning tree is associated with one or more VLAN IDs.
Also Port membership in a VLAN is configured which controls the
connectivity of all MAC interfaces participating in the VLAN.
The roots for PBB-TE capability exist in the Ethernet management
plane. The management of Ethernet switches provides for static
configuration of Ethernet forwarding. The Ethernet Control plane
allows for forwarding entries that are statically provisioned or
configured. In this document we are expanding the meaning of
"configured" from an Ethernet Control plane sense to mean either
provisioned, or controlled by GMPLS. The connectivity aspects of
Ethernet forwarding is based upon VLANs and MAC addresses. In other
words the VLAN + DMAC are an Ethernet Label that can be looked up at
each switch to determine the egress link (or links in the case of
link aggregation).
This is a finer granularity than traditional VLAN networks since each
P2P connection is independent. By provisioning MAC addresses
independently of Spanning tree in a domain, both the VLAN and the
VLAN/DMAC configured forwarding can be exploited. This greatly
extends the scalability of what can be achieved in a pure Ethernet
bridged sub network.
The global/domain wide uniqueness and semantics of MAC addresses as
interface names or multicast group addresses has been preserved. (In
Ethernet overlap of MAC addresses across VLANs is allowed. However
for PBB-TE MAC addresses should be unique for all VLANs assigned to
PBB-TE. With PBB-TE it is an operational choice if the operator uses
PBT-TE labels out of the global MAC address space or the local admin
space.) We then redefine the semantics associated with administration
and uses of VLAN values for the case of explicit forwarding such as
with statically configured Ethernet.
The PBB_TE is Ethernet Forwarding where configured VID + DMAC provide
a forwarding table that is consistent with existing PBB and Ethernet
switching. At the same time it provides domain wide labels that can
be controlled by a common GMPLS control plane. This makes GMPLS
control and resource management procedures ideal to create paths. The
outcome is that the GMPLS control plane can be utilized to set up the
following atomic modes of connectivity:
1) P2P connectivity and MP2P multiplexed connectivity based
on configuration of unicast MAC addresses in conjunction
with a VID from a set of pre-configured VIDs.
2) P2MP connectivity based on configuration of multicast MAC
address in conjunction with a VID from a set of pre-
configured VIDs. This corresponds to (Source, Group) or
(S,G) multicast.
3) P2MP connectivity based on configuration of VID port
membership. This corresponds to (S,*) or (*,*) multicast
(where * represents the extent of the VLAN Tree).
4) MP2MP connectivity based on configuration of VID port
membership (P2MP trees in which leaves are permitted to
communicate). Although, we caution that this approach
poses resilience issues (discussed in section 5) and hence
is not recommended.
The modes above are not completely distinct. Some modes involve
combinations of P2P connections in one direction and MP connectivity
in the other direction. Also, more than one mode may be combined in
a single GMPLS transaction. One example is the incremental addition
of a leaf to a P2MP tree with a corresponding MP2P return path
(analogous to a root initiated join).
In order to realize the above connectivity modes, a partition of the
VLAN IDs from traditional Ethernet needs to be established. The
partition allows for a pool of Ethernet labels for manual
configuration and/or for GMPLS control plane usage. The VID partition
actually consists of a "configured VID/DMAC range" and "configured
VID range" since in some instances the label is a VID/ DMAC and
sometimes the label is a VID/Multicast DMAC.
A.1. Overview of configuration of VID/DMAC tuples
Statically configured MAC and VID entries are a complete 60 bit
lookup. The basic operation of an Ethernet switch is filtering on VID
and forwarding on DMAC. The resulting operation is the same as
performing a full 60 bit lookup (VID (12) + DMAC(48)) for P2P
operations, only requiring uniqueness of the full 60 bits for
forwarding to resolve correctly. This is an Ethernet domain wide
label.
Complete route freedom is available for each domain wide label (60
bit VLAN/DMAC tuple) and the ability to define multiple connectivity
instances or paths per DMAC for each of the VIDs in the "configured
VID/DMAC range".
The semantics of MAC addresses are preserved, and simply broaden the
potential interpretations of VLAN ID from spanning tree identifier to
topology instance identifier. Therefore, operation of both standard
bridging and configured unicast/multicast operation is available side
by side. The VID space is partitioned and a range of VIDs is
allocated(say 'n' VIDs) as only significant when combined with a
configured DMAC address (the aforementioned "configured VID/DMAC
range" of VIDs). A VID in that range is considered as an individual
connectivity instance identifier for a configured P2P path
terminating at the associated DMAC address. Or in the case of P2MP, a
P2MP multicast tree corresponding to the destination multicast group
address. Note that this is destination based forwarding consistent
with how Ethernet works today. The only thing changed is the
mechanism of populating the forwarding tables.
Ethernet MAC addresses are typically globally unique since the 48
bits consists of 24 bit Organizational Unique Identifier and a 24 bit
serial number. There is also a bit set aside for Multicast and for
local addresses out of the OUI field. We define domain wide as within
a single organization, or more strictly within a single network
within an organization. For provider MAC addresses that will only be
used in a domain wide sense we can define MAC addresses out of a
either the local space or the global space since they both have the
domain wide unique property. When used in the context of GMPLS, it is
useful to think of a domain wide pool of labels where switches are
assigned a set of MAC addresses. These labels are assigned traffic
that terminates on the respective switches.
It is also worth noting that unique identification of source in the
form of the ESP-MAC SA is carried e2e in the MAC header. So although
we have a 60 bit domain wide unique label, it may be shared by
multiple sources and the full connection identifier for an individual
P2P instance is 108 bits (ESP-MAC SA, VID and DMAC). The ESP-MAC SA
is not referenced in forwarding operations but it would allow
additional context for tracing or other operations at the end of the
path.
For multicast group addresses, the VID/DMAC concatenated label can be
distributed by the source but label assignment (as it encodes global
multicast group information) requires coordination within the GMPLS
controlled domain.
As mentioned earlier, this technique results in a single unique and
invariant identifier, in our case a VID/DMAC label associated with
the path termination or the multicast group. There can be up to 4094
labels to any one MAC address. However, practically, from an
Ethernet network wide aspect; there would be only a handful of VLANs
allocated for PBB-TE. In addition, all 48 bits are not completely
available for the MAC addresses. One way to maximize the space is to
use the locally administered space. This is a large number for
P2P applications and even larger when shared or multiplexed
forwarding is leveraged. In practice, most network scaling
requirements may be met via allocation of only a small portion of the
VID space, to the configured VID/DMAC range. The result is minimal
impact on the number of remaining bridging VLANs that can be
concurrently supported.
In order to use this unique 60 bit label, we disable the normal
mechanisms by which Ethernet populates the forwarding table for the
allocated range of VIDs. When a path is setup, for a specific label
across a contiguous sequence of Ethernet switches, a unidirectional
connection is the functional building block for an Ethernet Label
Switched path (Eth-LSP).
In P2P mode a bidirectional path is composed of two unidirectional
paths that are created with a single RSVP-TE session. The technique
does not require the VID to be common in both directions. However,
keeping in line with regular Ethernet these paths are symmetrical
such that a single bidirectional connection is composed of two
unidirectional paths that have common routing (i.e. traverse the same
switches and links) in the network and hence share the same fate.
In P2MP mode a bidirectional path is composed of a unidirectional
multicast tree and a number of P2P paths from the leaves of the tree
to the root. Similarly these paths may have bandwidth and must have
common routing as in the P2P case.
There are a few modifications required to standard Ethernet to make
this approach robust:
1. In Standard Ethernet, discrepancies in forwarding table
configuration in the path of a connection will normally result in
packets being flooded as "unknown". For configured operation (e.g.
PBB-TE), unknown addresses are indicative of a fault or configuration
error and the flooding of these is undesirable in meshed topologies.
Therefore flooding of "unknown" unicast/multicast MAC addresses must
be disabled for the "configured VID/DMAC range".
2. MAC learning is not required, and although it will not interfere
with management/control population of the forwarding tables, since
static entries are not overridden, it appears prudent to explicitly
disable MAC learning for the configured VID/DMAC and VID range.
3. Spanning tree is disabled for the allocated VID/DMAC and VID range
and port blocking must be disabled to achieve complete configured
route freedom. As noted earlier, it is a control plane requirement to
ensure configured paths are loop free.
All three modifications described above are within the scope of
acceptable configuration options defined in IEEE 802.1Q
specification.
A.2 Overview of configuration of VID port membership
Procedures almost identical to that for configuration of P2P VID/DMAC
tuples can also be used for the incremental configuration of P2MP VID
trees. For the replication of forwarding in this case the label is
common for the multipoint destinations. The MAC field is set to
multicast address and is common to the multicast community. The VID
is a distinguisher common to the multicast community. The signaling
procedures are per that for [RFC4875].
Since VID translation is relatively new and is not a ubiquitously
deployed capability, we consider a VID to be a domain global value.
Therefore, the VID value to be used by the originating switch may be
assigned by management and nominally is required to be invariant
across the network. The ability to indicate permissibility of
translation will be addressed in a future version of the document.
A procedure known as "asymmetrical VID" may be employed to constrain
connectivity (root to leaves, and leaves to root only) when switches
also support shared VLAN learning (or SVL). This would be consistent
with the root as a point of failure.
A.3 OAM Aspects
Robustness is enhanced with the addition of data plane OAM to provide
both fault and performance management.
For the configured VID/DMAC unicast mode of behavior, the hardware
performs unicast packet forwarding of known MAC addresses exactly as
Ethernet currently operates. The OAM currently defined, [802.1ag and
Y.1731] can also be reused minor modification of the protocols.
An additional benefit of domain wide path identifiers, for data plane
forwarding, is the tight coupling of the 60 bit unique connection ID
(VID/DMAC) and the associated OAM packets. It is a simple matter to
determine a broken path or misdirected packet since the unique
connection ID cannot be altered on the Eth-LSP. This is in fact one
of the most powerful and unique aspects of the domain wide label for
any type of rapid diagnosis of the data plane faults. It is also
independent of the control plane so it works equally well for
provisioned or GMPLS controlled paths.
Bidirectional transactions (e.g. ETH-LB) and reverse direction
transactions MAY have a different VID for each direction. PBB-TE is
specifying this aspect of CFM.
For configured multicast VID/DMAC mode, the current versions of
802.1ag and Y.1731] make no representation as to how PDUs which are
not using unicast addresses or which use OAM reserved multicast
addresses are handled. Therefore this specification makes no
representation as to whether such trees can be instrumented.
When configured VID mode of operation is used PBB-TE can be forced to
use the same VID in both directions, emulating the current Ethernet
data plane and the OAM functions as defined in the current versions
of 802.1ag and Y.1731 can be used with no restriction.
A.4 QOS Aspects
Ethernet VLAN tags include priority tagging in the form of the PCP
priority bits. When combined with configuration of the paths via
management or control plane, priority tagging produces the Ethernet
equivalent of an MPLS-TE E-LSPs [RFC3270]. Priority tagged Ethernet
PDUs self-identify the required queuing discipline independent of the
configured connectivity.
It should be noted that the consequence of this is that there is a
common COS model across the different modes of configured operation
specified in this document.
The actual QOS objects required for signaling will be in a future
version of this memo.
A.5 Resiliency Aspects
A.5.1 E2E Path protection
One plus One(1+1) protection is a primary LSP with a disjoint
dedicated back up LSP. One for one (1:1) protection is a primary LSP
with a disjoint backup LSP that may share resources with other LSPs.
One plus One and One for One Automatic Protection Switching
strategies are supported. Such schemes offer:
1) Engineered disjoint protection paths that can protect both
directions of traffic.
2) Fast switchover due to tunable OAM mechanisms.
3) Revertive path capability when primary paths are restored.
4) Option for redialing paths under failure.
Specific procedures for establishment of protection paths and
associating paths into "protection groups" are TBD.
Note that E2E path protection is able to respond to failures with a
number of configurable intervals. The loss of CCM OAM frames in the
data plane can trigger paths to switch. In the case of CCM OAM
frames, the detection time is typically 3.5 times the CCM interval
plus the propagation delay from the fault.
12. Full Copyright Statement
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.
13. 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: Mon Jul 14 00:52:55 EDT 2008
 End of changes. 106 change blocks. 
552 lines changed or deleted 371 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/