draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-general-constraints-ospf-te-09.txt   draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-general-constraints-ospf-te-10.txt 
Network work group Fatai Zhang Network work group Fatai Zhang
Internet Draft Young Lee Internet Draft Young Lee
Intended status: Standards Track Jianrui Han Intended status: Standards Track Jianrui Han
Huawei Huawei
G. Bernstein G. Bernstein
Grotto Networking Grotto Networking
Yunbin Xu Yunbin Xu
CATR CATR
Expires: August 11, 2015 February 11, 2015 Expires: September 5, 2015 March 6, 2015
OSPF-TE Extensions for General Network Element Constraints OSPF-TE Extensions for General Network Element Constraints
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-general-constraints-ospf-te-09.txt draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-general-constraints-ospf-te-10.txt
Abstract
Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) can be used to
control a wide variety of technologies including packet switching
(e.g., MPLS), time-division (e.g., SONET/SDH, Optical Transport
Network (OTN)), wavelength (lambdas), and spatial switching (e.g.,
incoming port or fiber to outgoing port or fiber). In some of these
technologies, network elements and links may impose additional
routing constraints such as asymmetric switch connectivity, non-
local label assignment, and label range limitations on links. This
document describes Open Shortest Path First (OSPF) routing protocol
extensions to support these kinds of constraints under the control
of GMPLS.
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with
the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. the provisions of 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.
skipping to change at page 1, line 38 skipping to change at page 2, line 13
months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents
at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as
reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 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/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
This Internet-Draft will expire on August 11, 2015. This Internet-Draft will expire on September 5, 2015.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with
respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this
document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in
Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without
warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.
Abstract
Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) can be used to
control a wide variety of technologies including packet switching
(e.g., MPLS), time-division (e.g., SONET/SDH, Optical Transport
Network (OTN)), wavelength (lambdas), and spatial switching (e.g.,
incoming port or fiber to outgoing port or fiber). In some of these
technologies, network elements and links may impose additional
routing constraints such as asymmetric switch connectivity, non-
local label assignment, and label range limitations on links. This
document describes Open Shortest Path First (OSPF) routing protocol
extensions to support these kinds of constraints under the control
of GMPLS.
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 RFC-2119 [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in RFC-2119 [RFC2119].
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction...................................................3 1. Introduction...................................................3
2. Node Information...............................................4 2. Node Information...............................................4
skipping to change at page 3, line 9 skipping to change at page 3, line 11
5.1. Different Sub-TLVs into Multiple LSAs.....................6 5.1. Different Sub-TLVs into Multiple LSAs.....................6
5.2. Decomposing a Connectivity Matrix into Multiple Matrices..7 5.2. Decomposing a Connectivity Matrix into Multiple Matrices..7
6. Security Considerations........................................7 6. Security Considerations........................................7
7. Manageability..................................................8 7. Manageability..................................................8
8. IANA Considerations............................................8 8. IANA Considerations............................................8
8.1. Node Information..........................................8 8.1. Node Information..........................................8
8.2. Link Information..........................................9 8.2. Link Information..........................................9
9. References.....................................................9 9. References.....................................................9
9.1. Normative References......................................9 9.1. Normative References......................................9
9.2. Informative References...................................10 9.2. Informative References...................................10
10. Authors' Addresses ...........................................10 10. Authors' Addresses ..........................................10
Acknowledgment...................................................12 Acknowledgment...................................................12
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
Some data plane technologies that require the use of a GMPLS control Some data plane technologies that require the use of a GMPLS control
plane impose additional constraints on switching capability and plane impose additional constraints on switching capability and
label assignment. In addition, some of these technologies should be label assignment. In addition, some of these technologies should be
capable of performing non-local label assignment based on the nature capable of performing non-local label assignment based on the nature
of the technology, e.g., wavelength continuity constraint in of the technology, e.g., wavelength continuity constraint in
Wavelength Switched Optical Network (WSON) [RFC6163]. Such Wavelength Switched Optical Network (WSON) [RFC6163]. Such
skipping to change at page 4, line 34 skipping to change at page 4, line 34
2.1. Connectivity Matrix 2.1. Connectivity Matrix
If the switching devices supporting certain data plane technology is If the switching devices supporting certain data plane technology is
asymmetric, it is necessary to identify which input ports and labels asymmetric, it is necessary to identify which input ports and labels
can be switched to some specific labels on a specific output port. can be switched to some specific labels on a specific output port.
The Connectivity Matrix is used to identify these restrictions, The Connectivity Matrix is used to identify these restrictions,
which can represent either the potential connectivity matrix for which can represent either the potential connectivity matrix for
asymmetric switches (e.g., ROADMs and such) or fixed connectivity asymmetric switches (e.g., ROADMs and such) or fixed connectivity
for an asymmetric device such as a multiplexer as defined in [WSON- for an asymmetric device such as a multiplexer as defined in
Info]. [RFC7446].
The Connectivity Matrix is a sub-TLV of the Node Attribute TLV. The The Connectivity Matrix is a sub-TLV of the Node Attribute TLV. The
length is the length of value field in octets. The meaning and length is the length of value field in octets. The meaning and
format of this sub-TLV value field are defined in Section 2.1 of format of this sub-TLV value field are defined in Section 2.1 of
[GEN-Encode]. One sub-TLV contains one matrix. The Connectivity [GEN-Encode]. One sub-TLV contains one matrix. The Connectivity
Matrix sub-TLV may occur more than once to contain multiple matrices Matrix sub-TLV may occur more than once to contain multiple matrices
within the Node Attribute TLV. In addition a large connectivity within the Node Attribute TLV. In addition a large connectivity
matrix can be decomposed into smaller sub-matrices for transmission matrix can be decomposed into smaller sub-matrices for transmission
in multiple LSAs as described in Section 5. in multiple LSAs as described in Section 5.
skipping to change at page 5, line 30 skipping to change at page 5, line 30
restrictions represent what labels may or may not be used on a link restrictions represent what labels may or may not be used on a link
and are intended to be relatively static. For increased modeling and are intended to be relatively static. For increased modeling
flexibility, port label restrictions may be specified relative to flexibility, port label restrictions may be specified relative to
the port in general or to a specific connectivity matrix. the port in general or to a specific connectivity matrix.
For example, the Port Label Restrictions describes the wavelength For example, the Port Label Restrictions describes the wavelength
restrictions that the link and various optical devices such as OXCs, restrictions that the link and various optical devices such as OXCs,
ROADMs, and waveband multiplexers may impose on a port in WSON. ROADMs, and waveband multiplexers may impose on a port in WSON.
These restrictions represent what wavelength may or may not be used These restrictions represent what wavelength may or may not be used
on a link and are relatively static. The detailed information about on a link and are relatively static. The detailed information about
port label restrictions is described in [WSON-Info]. port label restrictions is described in [RFC7446].
The Port Label Restrictions sub-TLV is a sub-TLV of the Link TLV. The Port Label Restrictions sub-TLV is a sub-TLV of the Link TLV.
The length is the length of value field in octets. The meaning and The length is the length of value field in octets. The meaning and
format of this sub-TLV value field are defined in Section 2.2 of format of this sub-TLV value field are defined in Section 2.2 of
[GEN-Encode]. The Port Label Restrictions sub-TLV may occur more [GEN-Encode]. The Port Label Restrictions sub-TLV may occur more
than once to specify a complex port constraint within the link TLV. than once to specify a complex port constraint within the link TLV.
4. Routing Procedures 4. Routing Procedures
All the sub-TLVs are nested in top-level TLV(s) and contained in All the sub-TLVs are nested in top-level TLV(s) and contained in
skipping to change at page 8, line 47 skipping to change at page 8, line 47
8.1. Node Information 8.1. Node Information
IANA maintains the "Open Shortest Path First (OSPF) Traffic IANA maintains the "Open Shortest Path First (OSPF) Traffic
Engineering TLVs" registry with a sub-registry called "Types for Engineering TLVs" registry with a sub-registry called "Types for
sub-TLVs of TE Node Attribute TLV". IANA is requested to assign a sub-TLVs of TE Node Attribute TLV". IANA is requested to assign a
new code point as follows: new code point as follows:
Type | Sub-TLV | Reference Type | Sub-TLV | Reference
-------+-------------------------------+------------ -------+-------------------------------+------------
TBD1 | Connectivity Matrix sub-TLV | [This.I-D] TBD1 | Connectivity Matrix | [This.I-D]
8.2. Link Information 8.2. Link Information
IANA maintains the "Open Shortest Path First (OSPF) Traffic IANA maintains the "Open Shortest Path First (OSPF) Traffic
Engineering TLVs" registry with a sub-registry called "Types for Engineering TLVs" registry with a sub-registry called "Types for
sub-LVs of TE Link TLV". IANA is requested to assign a new code sub-LVs of TE Link TLV". IANA is requested to assign a new code
point as follows: point as follows:
Type | Sub-TLV | Reference Type | Sub-TLV | Reference
-------+-----------------------------------+------------ -------+-----------------------------------+------------
TBD2 | Port Label Restrictions sub-TLV | [This.I-D] TBD2 | Port Label Restrictions | [This.I-D]
9. References 9. References
9.1. Normative References 9.1. 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.
[RFC2328] Moy, J., "OSPF Version 2", STD 54, RFC 2328, April 1998. [RFC2328] Moy, J., "OSPF Version 2", STD 54, RFC 2328, April 1998.
skipping to change at page 10, line 23 skipping to change at page 10, line 23
(WSON)", RFC 6163, February 2011. (WSON)", RFC 6163, February 2011.
[RFC6241] R. Enns, Ed., M. Bjorklund, Ed., Schoenwaelder, Ed., A. [RFC6241] R. Enns, Ed., M. Bjorklund, Ed., Schoenwaelder, Ed., A.
Bierman, Ed., "Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)", Bierman, Ed., "Network Configuration Protocol (NETCONF)",
RFC 6241, June 2011. RFC 6241, June 2011.
[RFC6825] M. Miyazawa, T. Otani, K. Kumaki, T. Nadeau, "Traffic [RFC6825] M. Miyazawa, T. Otani, K. Kumaki, T. Nadeau, "Traffic
Engineering Database Management Information Base in Engineering Database Management Information Base in
Support of MPLS-TE/GMPLS", RFC 6825, January 2013. Support of MPLS-TE/GMPLS", RFC 6825, January 2013.
[WSON-Info] Y. Lee, G. Bernstein, D. Li, W. Imajuku, "Routing and [RFC7446] Y. Lee, G. Bernstein, D. Li, W. Imajuku, "Routing and
Wavelength Assignment Information Model for Wavelength Wavelength Assignment Information Model for Wavelength
Switched Optical Networks", work in progress: draft-ietf- Switched Optical Networks", RFC 7446, February 2015.
ccamp-rwa-info.
[RFC5920] L. Fang, Ed., "Security Framework for MPLS and GMPLS [RFC5920] L. Fang, Ed., "Security Framework for MPLS and GMPLS
Networks", RFC 5920, July 2010. Networks", RFC 5920, July 2010.
[BGP-LS] H. Gredler, J. Medved, S. Previdi, A. Farrel, S. Ray, [BGP-LS] H. Gredler, J. Medved, S. Previdi, A. Farrel, S. Ray,
"North-Bound Distribution of Link-State and TE Information "North-Bound Distribution of Link-State and TE Information
using BGP", work in progress: draft-ietf-idr-ls- using BGP", work in progress: draft-ietf-idr-ls-
distribution. distribution.
10. Contributors 10. Contributors
skipping to change at page 12, line 33 skipping to change at line 502
Yunbin Xu Yunbin Xu
China Academy of Telecommunication Research of MII China Academy of Telecommunication Research of MII
11 Yue Tan Nan Jie Beijing, P.R.China 11 Yue Tan Nan Jie Beijing, P.R.China
Phone: +86-10-68094134 Phone: +86-10-68094134
Email: xuyunbin@mail.ritt.com.cn Email: xuyunbin@mail.ritt.com.cn
Acknowledgment Acknowledgment
We thank Ming Chen and Yabin Ye from DICONNET Project who provided We thank Ming Chen and Yabin Ye from DICONNET Project who provided
valuable information for this document. valuable information for this document.
Intellectual Property
The IETF Trust 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 any IETF 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.
Copies of Intellectual Property 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
any standard or specification contained in an IETF Document. Please
address the information to the IETF at ietf-ipr@ietf.org.
The definitive version of an IETF Document is that published by, or
under the auspices of, the IETF. Versions of IETF Documents that are
published by third parties, including those that are translated into
other languages, should not be considered to be definitive versions
of IETF Documents. The definitive version of these Legal Provisions
is that published by, or under the auspices of, the IETF. Versions
of these Legal Provisions that are published by third parties,
including those that are translated into other languages, should not
be considered to be definitive versions of these Legal Provisions.
For the avoidance of doubt, each Contributor to the IETF Standards
Process licenses each Contribution that he or she makes as part of
the IETF Standards Process to the IETF Trust pursuant to the
provisions of RFC 5378. No language to the contrary, or terms,
conditions or rights that differ from or are inconsistent with the
rights and licenses granted under RFC 5378, shall have any effect
and shall be null and void, whether published or posted by such
Contributor, or included with or in such Contribution.
Disclaimer of Validity
All IETF Documents and the information contained therein 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 THEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE
ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS
FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (c) 2014 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. Code Components extracted from this
document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in
Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without
warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.
 End of changes. 12 change blocks. 
26 lines changed or deleted 25 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.42. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/