draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-rsvp-te-call-00.txt   draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-rsvp-te-call-01.txt 
CCAMP Working Group Editors CCAMP Working Group Editors
Internet Draft D. Papadimitriou (Alcatel) Internet Draft D. Papadimitriou (Alcatel)
Updates RFC 3473 A. Farrel (Old Dog Consulting) Updates RFC 3473 A. Farrel (Old Dog Consulting)
Proposed Category: Standard Track Proposed Category: Standard Track
Expiration Date: February 2007 August 2006
Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions
in support of Calls in support of Calls
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-rsvp-te-call-00.txt draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-rsvp-te-call-01.txt
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
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 Section 6 of 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 other Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other
skipping to change at page 1, line 35 skipping to change at page 1, line 37
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/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.
Abstract Abstract
In certain networking topologies it may be advantageous to maintain In certain networking topologies, it may be advantageous to maintain
associations between endpoints and key transit points to support an associations between endpoints and key transit points to support an
instance of a service. Such associations are known as Calls. instance of a service. Such associations are known as Calls.
A Call does not provide the actual connectivity for transmitting user A Call does not provide the actual connectivity for transmitting user
traffic, but only builds a relationship by which subsequent traffic, but only builds a relationship by which subsequent
connections may be made. In Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) such connections Connections may be made. In Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) such Connections
are known as Label Switched Paths (LSPs). are known as Label Switched Paths (LSPs).
This document specifies how GMPLS RSVP-TE signaling may be used and This document specifies how GMPLS RSVP-TE signaling may be used and
extended to support Calls. These mechanisms provide full and logical extended to support Calls. These mechanisms provide full and logical
Call/Connection separation. Call/Connection separation.
The mechanisms proposed in this document are applicable to any The mechanisms proposed in this document are applicable to any
environment (including multi-area), and for any type of interface: environment (including multi-area), and for any type of interface:
packet, layer-2, time-division multiplexed, lambda or fiber packet, layer-2, time-division multiplexed, lambda or fiber
switching. switching.
Papadimitriou and Farrel - Expires February 2007 August 2006
Table of Content Table of Content
1. Conventions used in this document ............................. 3 1. Conventions used in this document ............................. 3
2. Introduction .................................................. 3 2. Introduction .................................................. 3
2.1 Applicability to ASON ........................................ 4 2.1 Applicability to ASON ........................................ 4
3. Requirements .................................................. 4 3. Requirements .................................................. 4
3.1 Basic Call Function .......................................... 4 3.1 Basic Call Function .......................................... 4
3.2 Call/Connection Separation ................................... 4 3.2 Call/Connection Separation ................................... 4
3.3 Call Segments ................................................ 5 3.3 Call Segments ................................................ 5
4. Concepts and Terms ............................................ 5 4. Concepts and Terms ............................................ 5
4.1 What is a Call? .............................................. 5 4.1 What is a Call? .............................................. 5
4.2 A Hierarchy of Calls, Connections, Tunnels and LSPs .......... 5 4.2 A Hierarchy of Calls, Connections, Tunnels and LSPs .......... 5
4.3 Exchanging Access Link Capabilities .......................... 6 4.3 Exchanging Access Link Capabilities .......................... 6
4.3.1 Network-initiated Calls .................................... 6 4.3.1 Network-initiated Calls .................................... 7
4.3.2 User-initiated Calls ....................................... 7 4.3.2 User-initiated Calls ....................................... 7
4.3.3 Utilizing Call Setup ....................................... 7 4.3.3 Utilizing Call Setup ....................................... 7
5. Protocol Extensions for Calls and Connections ................. 7 5. Protocol Extensions for Calls and Connections ................. 8
5.1 Call Setup and Teardown ...................................... 7 5.1 Call Setup and Teardown ...................................... 8
5.2 Call Identification .......................................... 8 5.2 Call Identification .......................................... 8
5.2.1 Long Form Call Identification .............................. 8 5.2.1 Long Form Call Identification .............................. 9
5.2.2 Short Form Call Identification ............................. 8 5.2.2 Short Form Call Identification ............................. 9
5.2.3 Short Form Call ID Encoding ................................ 9 5.2.3 Short Form Call ID Encoding ................................ 9
5.3 LINK_CAPABILITY object ...................................... 10 5.3 LINK_CAPABILITY object ...................................... 10
5.4 Revised Message Formats ..................................... 11 5.4 Revised Message Formats ..................................... 11
5.4.1 Notify Message ............................................ 11 5.4.1 Notify Message ............................................ 21
5.5 ADMIN_STATUS Object ......................................... 11 5.5 ADMIN_STATUS Object ......................................... 21
6. Procedures in Support of Calls and Connections ............... 12 6. Procedures in Support of Calls and Connections ............... 32
6.1 Call/Connection Setup Procedures ............................ 12 6.1 Call/Connection Setup Procedures ............................ 32
6.2 Call Setup .................................................. 12 6.2 Call Setup .................................................. 32
6.2.1 Accepting Call Setup ...................................... 14 6.2.1 Accepting Call Setup ...................................... 54
6.2.2 Call Setup Failure and Rejection .......................... 15 6.2.2 Call Setup Failure and Rejection .......................... 65
6.3 Adding a Connections to a Call .............................. 15 6.3 Adding a Connections to a Call .............................. 65
6.3.1 Adding a Reverse Direction LSP to a Call .................. 16 6.3.1 Adding a Reverse Direction LSP to a Call .................. 76
6.4 Call-Free Connection Setup .................................. 16 6.4 Call-Free Connection Setup .................................. 76
6.5 Call Collision .............................................. 16 6.5 Call Collision .............................................. 76
6.6 Call/Connection Teardown .................................... 17 6.6 Call/Connection Teardown .................................... 87
6.6.1 Removal of a Connection from a Call ....................... 18 6.6.1 Removal of a Connection from a Call ....................... 98
6.6.2 Removal of the Last Connection from a Call ................ 18 6.6.2 Removal of the Last Connection from a Call ................ 98
6.6.3 Teardown of an "Empty" Call ............................... 18 6.6.3 Teardown of an "Empty" Call ............................... 98
6.6.4 Attempted Teardown of a Call with Existing Connections .... 18 6.6.4 Attempted Teardown of a Call with Existing Connections .... 98
6.6.5 Teardown of a Call from the Egress ........................ 19 6.6.5 Teardown of a Call from the Egress ........................ 20
6.7 Control Plane Survivability ................................. 19 6.7 Control Plane Survivability ................................. 20
7. Applicability of Call and Connection Procedures .............. 20 7. Applicability of Call and Connection Procedures .............. 21
7.1 Network-initiated Calls ..................................... 20 7.1 Network-initiated Calls ..................................... 21
7.2 User-initiated Calls ........................................ 20 7.2 User-initiated Calls ........................................ 21
7.3 External Call Managers ...................................... 21 7.3 External Call Managers ...................................... 22
7.3.1 Call Segments ............................................. 21 7.3.1 Call Segments ............................................. 22
8. Non-support of Call ID ....................................... 21 8. Non-support of Call ID ....................................... 22
8.1 Non-Support by External Call Managers ....................... 22 8.1 Non-Support by External Call Managers ....................... 23
8.2 Non-Support by Transit Node ................................. 22 8.2 Non-Support by Transit Node ................................. 23
8.3 Non-Support by Egress Node .................................. 23
9. Security Considerations ...................................... 23 Papadimitriou and Farrel - Expires February 2007 August 2006
9.1 Call and Connection Security Considerations ................. 23
10. IANA Considerations ......................................... 23 8.3 Non-Support by Egress Node .................................. 24
10.1 RSVP Objects ............................................... 23 9. Security Considerations ...................................... 24
10.2 RSVP Error Codes and Error Values .......................... 24 9.1 Call and Connection Security Considerations ................. 24
10.3 RSVP ADMIN_STATUS object Bits .............................. 24 10. IANA Considerations ......................................... 25
11. Acknowledgements ............................................ 24 10.1 RSVP Objects ............................................... 25
12. References .................................................. 24 10.2 RSVP Error Codes and Error Values .......................... 25
12.1 Normative References ....................................... 24 10.3 RSVP ADMIN_STATUS object Bits .............................. 25
12.2 Informative References ..................................... 26 11. Acknowledgements ............................................ 26
13. Authors' Addresses .......................................... 26 12. References .................................................. 26
12.1 Normative References ....................................... 26
12.2 Informative References ..................................... 27
13. Authors' Addresses .......................................... 28
1. Conventions used in this document 1. Conventions used in this document
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
In addition, the reader is assumed to be familiar with the In addition, the reader is assumed to be familiar with the
terminology used in [RFC3471], [RFC3473], [RFC3477] and [RFC3945]. terminology used in [RFC3471], [RFC3473], [RFC3477] and [RFC3945].
skipping to change at page 3, line 40 skipping to change at page 3, line 43
A Call is an association between endpoints and possibly between key A Call is an association between endpoints and possibly between key
transit points (such as network boundaries) in support of an instance transit points (such as network boundaries) in support of an instance
of a service. The end-to-end association is termed a "Call," and the of a service. The end-to-end association is termed a "Call," and the
association between two transit points or between an endpoint and a association between two transit points or between an endpoint and a
transit point is termed a "Call Segment." An entity that processes a transit point is termed a "Call Segment." An entity that processes a
Call or Call Segment is called a "Call Manager." Call or Call Segment is called a "Call Manager."
A Call does not provide the actual connectivity for transmitting user A Call does not provide the actual connectivity for transmitting user
traffic, but only builds a relationship by which subsequent traffic, but only builds a relationship by which subsequent
connections may be made. In GMPLS such connections are known as Label Connections may be made. In GMPLS such Connections are known as Label
Switched Paths (LSPs). Switched Paths (LSPs).
A Call may be associated with zero, one or more connections, and a A Call may be associated with zero, one, or more than one Connection,
connection may be associated with zero or one Call. Thus full and and a Connection may be associated with zero or one Call. Thus full
logical Call/Connection separation is needed. and logical Call/Connection separation is needed.
An example of the requirement for Calls can be found in the ITU-T's An example of the requirement for Calls can be found in the ITU-T's
Automatically Switched Optical Network (ASON) architecture [G.8080] Automatically Switched Optical Network (ASON) architecture [G.8080]
and specific requirements for support of Calls in this context can be and specific requirements for support of Calls in this context can be
found in [RFC4139]. Note, however, that while the mechanisms found in [RFC4139]. Note, however, that while the mechanisms
described in this document meet the requirements stated in [RFC4139] described in this document meet the requirements stated in [RFC4139],
they have wider applicability. they have wider applicability.
Papadimitriou and Farrel - Expires February 2007 August 2006
The mechanisms defined in this document are equally applicable to any The mechanisms defined in this document are equally applicable to any
packet (PSC) interface, layer-2 interfaces (L2SC), TDM capable packet (PSC) interface, layer-2 interfaces (L2SC), TDM capable
interfaces, LSC interfaces or FSC interfaces. The mechanisms and interfaces, LSC interfaces, or FSC interfaces. The mechanisms and
protocol extensions are backward compatible, and can be used for Call protocol extensions are backward compatible, and can be used for Call
management where only the Call Managers need to be aware of the management where only the Call Managers need to be aware of the
protocol extensions. protocol extensions.
2.1 Applicability to ASON 2.1 Applicability to ASON
[RFC4139] details the requirements on GMPLS signaling to satisfy the [RFC4139] details the requirements on GMPLS signaling to satisfy the
ASON architecture described in [G.8080]. The mechanisms described in ASON architecture described in [G.8080]. The mechanisms described in
this document meet the requirements for Calls as described in this document meet the requirements for Calls as described in
Sections 4.2 and 4.3 of [RFC4139] and the additional Call-related Sections 4.2 and 4.3 of [RFC4139] and the additional Call-related
skipping to change at page 5, line 5 skipping to change at page 5, line 5
3.2 Call/Connection Separation 3.2 Call/Connection Separation
Full and logical Call and Connection separation is required. That is: Full and logical Call and Connection separation is required. That is:
- It MUST be possible to establish a Connection without dependence - It MUST be possible to establish a Connection without dependence
on a Call. on a Call.
- It MUST be possible to establish a Call without any associated - It MUST be possible to establish a Call without any associated
Connections. Connections.
Papadimitriou and Farrel - Expires February 2007 August 2006
- It MUST be possible to associate more than one Connection with a - It MUST be possible to associate more than one Connection with a
Call. Call.
- Removal of the last Connection associated with a Call SHOULD NOT - Removal of the last Connection associated with a Call SHOULD NOT
result in the automatic removal of the Call except as a matter of result in the automatic removal of the Call except as a matter of
local policy at the ingress of the Call. local policy at the ingress of the Call.
- Signaling of a Connection associated with a Call MUST NOT require - Signaling of a Connection associated with a Call MUST NOT require
the distribution or retention of Call-related information (state) the distribution or retention of Call-related information (state)
within the network. within the network.
3.3 Call Segments 3.3 Call Segments
Call Segments capabilities MUST be supported. Call Segment capabilities MUST be supported.
Procedures and (GMPLS) RSVP-TE signaling protocol extensions to Procedures and (GMPLS) RSVP-TE signaling protocol extensions to
support Call Segments are described in Section 7.3.1 of this support Call Segments are described in Section 7.3.1 of this
document. document.
4. Concepts and Terms 4. Concepts and Terms
The concept of a Call and a Connection are also discussed in the ASON The concept of a Call and a Connection are also discussed in the ASON
architecture [G.8080] and [RFC4139]. This section is not intended as architecture [G.8080] and [RFC4139]. This section is not intended as
a substitute for those documents, but is a brief summary of the key a substitute for those documents, but is a brief summary of the key
skipping to change at page 6, line 4 skipping to change at page 6, line 4
4.2 A Hierarchy of Calls, Connections, Tunnels and LSPs 4.2 A Hierarchy of Calls, Connections, Tunnels and LSPs
Clearly there is a hierarchical relationship between Calls and Clearly there is a hierarchical relationship between Calls and
Connections. One or more Connections may be associated with a Call. A Connections. One or more Connections may be associated with a Call. A
Connection may not be part of more than one Call. A Connection may, Connection may not be part of more than one Call. A Connection may,
however, exist without a Call. however, exist without a Call.
In GMPLS RSVP-TE [RFC3473], a Connection is identified with a GMPLS In GMPLS RSVP-TE [RFC3473], a Connection is identified with a GMPLS
TE Tunnel. Commonly a Tunnel is identified with a single LSP, but it TE Tunnel. Commonly a Tunnel is identified with a single LSP, but it
Papadimitriou and Farrel - Expires February 2007 August 2006
should be noted that for protection, load balancing and many other should be noted that for protection, load balancing and many other
functions, a Tunnel may be supported by multiple parallel LSPs. The functions, a Tunnel may be supported by multiple parallel LSPs. The
following identification reproduces this hierarchy: following identification reproduces this hierarchy.
- Call IDs are unique within the context of the pair of addresses - Call IDs are unique within the context of the pair of addresses
that are the source and destination of the Call. that are the source and destination of the Call.
- Tunnel IDs are unique within the context of the Session (that is - Tunnel IDs are unique within the context of the Session (that is
the destination of the Tunnel). Applications may also find it the destination of the Tunnel). Applications may also find it
convenient to keep the Tunnel ID unique within the context of a convenient to keep the Tunnel ID unique within the context of a
Call. Call.
- LSP IDs are unique within the context of a Tunnel. - LSP IDs are unique within the context of a Tunnel.
Note that the Call_ID value of zero is reserved and MUST NOT be used Note that the Call_ID value of zero is reserved and MUST NOT be used
during LSP-independent Call establishment. during LSP-independent Call establishment.
Throughout the remainder of this document, the terms LSP and Tunnel Throughout the remainder of this document, the terms LSP and Tunnel
are used interchangeably with the term Connection. The case of a are used interchangeably with the term Connection. The case of a
Tunnel that is supported by more than one LSP is covered implicitly. Tunnel that is supported by more than one LSP is covered implicitly.
4.3 Exchanging Access Link Capabilities 4.3 Exchanging Access Link Capabilities
It is useful for the ingress node of an LSP to know the link In an overlay model, it is useful for the ingress node of an LSP to
capabilities of the link between the network and the egress node. know the link capabilities of the link between the network and the
This information may allow the ingress node to tailor its LSP request remote overlay network. In the language of [RFC4208], the ingress
to fit those capabilities and to better utilize network resources node can make use of information about the link between the egress
with regard to those capabilities. network node (NN) and the remote edge node (EN). We call this link
the egress network link. This information may allow the ingress node
to tailor its LSP request to fit those capabilities and to better
utilize network resources with regard to those capabilities.
In particular, this may be used to achieve end-to-end spectral For example, this might be used in transparent optical networks to
routing attribute negotiation for signal quality negotiation (such as supply information on lambda availability on egress network links,
BER) in photonic environments where network edges are signal or, where the egress NN is capable of signal regeneration, it might
regeneration capable. Similarly, it may be used to provide end-to-end provide a mechanism for negotiating signal quality attributes (such
spatial routing attribute negotiation in multi-area routing as bit error rate). Similarly, in multi-domain routing environments
environments, in particular, when TE links have been bundled based on it could be used to provide end-to-end selection of component links
technology specific attributes. (i.e., spatial attribute negotiation) where TE links have been
bundled based on technology specific attributes.
Call setup may provide a suitable mechanism to exchange information In some circumstances, the Traffic Engineering Database (TED) may
for this purpose, although several other possibilities exist. contain sufficient information for decisions to be made about which
egress network link to use. In other circumstances, the TED might not
contain this information and Call setup may provide a suitable
mechanism to exchange information for this purpose. The
Call-responder may use the Call parameters to select a subset of the
available egress network links between the egress NN and the remote
EN, and may report these links and their capabilities on the Call
response so that the Call-initiator may select a suitable link.
Papadimitriou and Farrel - Expires February 2007 August 2006
The sections that follow indicate the cases where the TED may be
used, and those where Call parameter exchange may be appropriate.
4.3.1 Network-initiated Calls 4.3.1 Network-initiated Calls
In this case, there may be no need to distribute additional link In this case the ingress (and correspondingly the egress) lie within
the network and there may be no need to distribute additional link
capability information over and above the information distributed by capability information over and above the information distributed by
the TE and GMPLS extensions to the IGP. Further, it is possible that the TE and GMPLS extensions to the IGP. Further, it is possible that
future extensions to these IGPs will allow the distribution of more future extensions to these IGPs will allow the distribution of more
detailed information including optical impairments. detailed information including optical impairments.
4.3.2 User-initiated Calls 4.3.2 User-initiated Calls
In this case, edge link information may not be visible within the In this case the ingress (and correspondingly the egress) lie outside
the network. Edge link information may not be visible within the
core network, nor (and specifically) at other edge nodes. This may core network, nor (and specifically) at other edge nodes. This may
prevent an ingress from requesting suitable LSP characteristics to prevent an ingress from requesting suitable LSP characteristics to
ensure successful LSP setup. ensure successful LSP setup.
Various solutions to this problem exist including the definition of Various solutions to this problem exist, including the definition of
static TE links (that is, not advertised by a routing protocol) static TE links (that is, not advertised by a routing protocol)
between the core network and the edge nodes. Nevertheless, special between the NNs and ENs. Nevertheless, special procedures may be
procedures may be necessary to advertise edge TE link information to necessary to advertise to the edge nodes outside of the network
the edge nodes outside of the network without advertising the information about egress network links without also advertising the
information specific to the contents of the network. information specific to the contents of the network.
In the future, when the requirements are understood on the In the future, when the requirements on the information that needs to
information that needs to be supported, TE extensions to EGPs may be be supported are better understood, TE extensions to EGPs may be
defined that provide this function. defined that provide this function, and new rules for leaking TE
information between routing instances may be used.
4.3.3 Utilizing Call Setup 4.3.3 Utilizing Call Setup
When IGP and EGP solutions are not available at the UNI, there is When IGP and EGP solutions are not available at the User-to-Network
still a requirement to have, at the local edge nodes, the knowledge Interface (UNI), there is still a requirement to have, at the local
of the remote edge link capabilities. edge nodes, the knowledge of the remote edge link capabilities.
The Call setup procedure provides an opportunity to discover edge The Call setup procedure provides an opportunity to discover edge
link capabilities of remote edge nodes before LSP setup is attempted. link capabilities of remote edge nodes before LSP setup is attempted.
The LINK CAPABILITY object is defined to allow this information to be
- The Call-responder can return information on one or more egress
network links. The Call-reponder could return a full list of the
available links with information about the link capabilities, or it
could filter the list to return information about only those links
which might be appropriate to support the Connections needed by the
Call. To do this second option, the Call-responder must determine
such appropriate links from information carried in the Call request
including destination of the Call, and the level of service
(bandwidth, protection, etc.) required.
Papadimitriou and Farrel - Expires February 2007 August 2006
- On receiving a Call response, the Call-initiator must determine
paths for the Connections (LSPs) that it will set up. The way that
it does this is out of scope for this document since it is an
implementation-specific, algorithmic process. However, it can take
as input the information about the available egress network links
as supplied in the Call response.
The LINK_CAPABILITY object is defined to allow this information to be
exchanged. The information that is included in this object is similar exchanged. The information that is included in this object is similar
to that distributed by GMPLS-capable IGPs (see [RFC4202]). to that distributed by GMPLS-capable IGPs (see [RFC4202]).
5. Protocol Extensions for Calls and Connections 5. Protocol Extensions for Calls and Connections
This section describes the protocol extensions needed in support of This section describes the protocol extensions needed in support of
Call identification and management of Calls and Connections. Call identification and management of Calls and Connections.
Procedures for the use of these protocol extensions are described in Procedures for the use of these protocol extensions are described in
Section 6. Section 6.
5.1 Call Setup and Teardown 5.1 Call Setup and Teardown
Calls are established independently of connections through the use of Calls are established independently of Connections through the use of
the Notify message. The Notify message is a targeted message and does the Notify message. The Notify message is a targeted message and does
not follow the path of LSPs through the network. not follow the path of LSPs through the network.
Simultaneous Call and connection establishment (sometimes referred to Simultaneous Call and Connection establishment (sometimes referred to
as piggybacking) is not supported. as piggybacking) is not supported.
5.2 Call Identification 5.2 Call Identification
As soon as the concept of a Call is introduced, it is necessary to As soon as the concept of a Call is introduced, it is necessary to
support some means of identifying the Call. This becomes particularly support some means of identifying the Call. This becomes particularly
important when Calls and connections are separated and connections important when Calls and Connections are separated and Connections
must contain some reference to the Call. must contain some reference to the Call.
A Call may be identified by a sequence of bytes that may have A Call may be identified by a sequence of bytes that may have
considerable (but not arbitrary) length. A Call ID of 40 bytes would considerable (but not arbitrary) length. A Call ID of 40 bytes would
not be unreasonable. It is not the place of this document to supply not be unreasonable. It is not the place of this document to supply
rules for encoding or parsing Call IDs, but it must provide a rules for encoding or parsing Call IDs, but it must provide a
suitable means to communicate Call IDs within the protocol. The full suitable means to communicate Call IDs within the protocol. The full
Call identification is referred to as the long Call ID. Call identification is referred to as the long Call ID.
The Call_ID is only relevant at the sender and receiver nodes. The Call_ID is only relevant at the sender and receiver nodes.
Maintenance of this information in the signaling state is not Maintenance of this information in the signaling state is not
mandated at any intermediate node. Thus no change in [RFC3473] mandated at any intermediate node. Thus no change in [RFC3473]
transit implementations is required and there are no backward transit implementations is required and there are no backward
compatibility issues. Forward compatibility is maintained by using compatibility issues. Forward compatibility is maintained by using
the existing default values to indicate that no Call processing is the existing default values to indicate that no Call processing is
required. required.
Further, the long Call ID is not required as part of the connection Papadimitriou and Farrel - Expires February 2007 August 2006
Further, the long Call ID is not required as part of the Connection
(LSP) state even at the sender and receiver nodes so long as some (LSP) state even at the sender and receiver nodes so long as some
form of correlation is available. This correlation is provided form of correlation is available. This correlation is provided
through the short Call ID. through the short Call ID.
5.2.1 Long Form Call Identification 5.2.1 Long Form Call Identification
The long Call ID is only required on the Notify message used to The long Call ID is only required on the Notify message used to
establish the Call. It is carried in the "Session Name" field of the establish the Call. It is carried in the "Session Name" field of the
SESSION_ATTRIBUTE Object on the Notify message. SESSION_ATTRIBUTE Object on the Notify message.
skipping to change at page 8, line 49 skipping to change at page 9, line 29
the initiator of the Call. Subsequent network nodes MAY inspect this the initiator of the Call. Subsequent network nodes MAY inspect this
object and MUST forward this object transparently across network object and MUST forward this object transparently across network
interfaces until reaching the egress node. Note that the structure of interfaces until reaching the egress node. Note that the structure of
this field MAY be the object of further formatting depending on the this field MAY be the object of further formatting depending on the
naming convention(s). However, [RFC3209] defines the "Session Name" naming convention(s). However, [RFC3209] defines the "Session Name"
field as a Null padded display string, and that any formatting field as a Null padded display string, and that any formatting
conventions for the Call ID must be limited to this scope. conventions for the Call ID must be limited to this scope.
5.2.2 Short Form Call Identification 5.2.2 Short Form Call Identification
The connections (LSPs) associated with a Call need to carry a The Connections (LSPs) associated with a Call need to carry a
reference to the Call - the short Call ID. A new field is added to reference to the Call - the short Call ID. A new field is added to
the signaling protocol to identify an individual LSP with the Call to the signaling protocol to identify an individual LSP with the Call to
which it belongs. which it belongs.
The new field is a 16-bit identifier (unique within the context of The new field is a 16-bit identifier (unique within the context of
the address pairing provided by the Tunnel_End_Point_Address and the the address pairing provided by the Tunnel_End_Point_Address and the
Sender_Address of the SENDER TEMPLATE object) that MUST be exchanged Sender_Address of the SENDER TEMPLATE object) that MUST be exchanged
on the Notify message during Call initialization and is used on all on the Notify message during Call initialization and is used on all
subsequent LSP messages that are associated with the Call. This subsequent LSP messages that are associated with the Call. This
identifier is known as the short Call ID and is encoded as described identifier is known as the short Call ID and is encoded as described
in Section 5.2.3. The Call ID MUST NOT be used as part of the in Section 5.2.3. The Call ID MUST NOT be used as part of the
processing to determine the session to which an RSVP signaling processing to determine the session to which an RSVP signaling
message applies. This does not generate any backward compatibility message applies. This does not generate any backward compatibility
issue since the reserved field of the SESSION object defined in issue since the reserved field of the SESSION object defined in
[RFC3209] MUST NOT be examined on receipt. [RFC3209] MUST NOT be examined on receipt.
In the unlikely case of short Call_ID exhaustion, local node policy In the unlikely case of short Call_ID exhaustion, local node policy
decides upon specific actions to be taken, but might include the use decides upon specific actions to be taken, but might include the use
of second Sender Address. Local policy details are outside of the of second Sender_Address. Local policy details are outside of the
scope of this document. scope of this document.
5.2.3 Short Form Call ID Encoding 5.2.3 Short Form Call ID Encoding
The short Call ID is carried in a 16-bit field in the SESSION object The short Call ID is carried in a 16-bit field in the SESSION object
carried on the Notify message used during Call setup, and on all carried on the Notify message used during Call setup, and on all
messages during LSP setup and management. The field used was messages during LSP setup and management. The field used was
previously reserved (MUST be set to zero on transmission and ignored previously reserved (MUST be set to zero on transmission and ignored
Papadimitriou and Farrel - Expires February 2007 August 2006
on receipt). This ensures backward compatibility with nodes that do on receipt). This ensures backward compatibility with nodes that do
not utilize Calls. not utilize Calls.
The figure below shows the new version of the object. The figure below shows the new version of the object.
Class = SESSION, Class-Num = 1, C-Type = 7(IPv4)/8(IPv6) Class = SESSION, Class-Num = 1, C-Type = 7(IPv4)/8(IPv6)
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
skipping to change at page 10, line 7 skipping to change at page 10, line 38
A 16-bit identifier used in the SESSION object that remains A 16-bit identifier used in the SESSION object that remains
constant over the life of the Call. The Call_ID value MUST be constant over the life of the Call. The Call_ID value MUST be
set to zero when there is no corresponding Call. set to zero when there is no corresponding Call.
Tunnel ID: 16 bits (see [RFC3209]) Tunnel ID: 16 bits (see [RFC3209])
Extended Tunnel ID: 32 bits/128 bits (see [RFC3209]) Extended Tunnel ID: 32 bits/128 bits (see [RFC3209])
5.3 LINK_CAPABILITY object 5.3 LINK_CAPABILITY object
The LINK CAPABILITY object is introduced to support link capability The LINK_CAPABILITY object is introduced to support link capability
exchange during Call setup and MAY be included in a Notify message exchange during Call setup and MAY be included in a Notify message
used for Call setup. This optional object includes the bundled link used for Call setup. This optional object includes the link local
local capabilities of the Call initiating node (or terminating node) capabilities of a link joining the Call-initiating node (or
indicated by the source address of the Notify message. Call-terminating node) to the network. The specific node is indicated
by the source address of the Notify message.
The link reported can be a single link or can be a bundled link
[RFC4201].
The Class Number is selected so that the nodes that do not recognize The Class Number is selected so that the nodes that do not recognize
this object drop it silently. That is, the top bit is set and the this object drop it silently. That is, the top bit is set and the
next bit is clear. next bit is clear.
Papadimitriou and Farrel - Expires February 2007 August 2006
This object has the following format: This object has the following format:
Class-Num = TBA (form 10bbbbbb), C_Type = 1 Class-Num = TBA (form 10bbbbbb), C_Type = 1
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| | | |
// (Subobjects) // // (Subobjects) //
| | | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
The contents of the LINK_CAPABILITY object is defined as series of The contents of the LINK_CAPABILITY object is defined as series of
variable-length data items called subobjects. The subobject format is variable-length data items called subobjects. The subobject format is
defined in [RFC3209]. defined in [RFC3209].
The following subobjects are currently defined: The following subobjects are currently defined.
- Type 1: the link local IPv4 address (numbered bundle) using the - Type 1: the link local IPv4 address of a link or a numbered bundle
format defined in [RFC3209] using the format defined in [RFC3209]
- Type 2: the link local IPv6 address (numbered bundle) using the - Type 2: the link local IPv6 address of a link or a numbered bundle
format defined in [RFC3209] using the format defined in [RFC3209]
- Type 4: the link local identifier (unnumbered links and bundles) - Type 4: the link local identifier of an unnumbered link or bundle
using the format defined in [RFC3477] using the format defined in [RFC3477]
- Type 64: the Maximum Reservable Bandwidth corresponding to this - Type 64: the Maximum Reservable Bandwidth corresponding to this
bundle (see [RFC4201]) link or bundle (see [RFC4201])
- Type 65: the interface switching capability descriptor (see - Type 65: the interface switching capability descriptor (see
[RFC4202]) corresponding to this bundle (see also [RFC4201]). [RFC4202]) corresponding to this link or bundle (see also
[RFC4201]).
Note: future revisions of this document may extend the above list. Note: future revisions of this document may extend the above list.
This object MAY also be used to exchange more than one bundled link A single instance of this object MAY be used to exchange capablity
capability. In this case, the following ordering MUST be followed: information relating to more than one link or bundled link. In this
one identifier subobject (Type 1, 2 or 4) MUST be inserted before any case, the following ordering MUST be used:
capability subobject (Type 64 or 65) to which it refers. - each link MUST be identified by an identifier subobject (Type 1, 2
or 4)
- capability subobjects (Type 64 or 65, and future subobjects) MUST
be placed after the identifier subobject for the link or bundle to
which they refer.
Mulitple instances of the LINK_CAPABILITY object within the same
Notify message are not supported by this specification. In the event
that a Notify message contains multiple LINK_CAPABILITY objects, the
receiver SHOULD process the first one as normal and SHOULD ignore
subsequent instances of the object.
5.4 Revised Message Formats 5.4 Revised Message Formats
The Notify message is enhanced to support Call establishment and The Notify message is enhanced to support Call establishment and
teardown of Calls. See Section 6 for a description of the procedures. teardown of Calls. See Section 6 for a description of the procedures.
Papadimitriou and Farrel - Expires February 2007 August 2006
5.4.1 Notify Message 5.4.1 Notify Message
The Notify message is modified in support of Call establishment by The Notify message is modified in support of Call establishment by
the optional addition of the LINK CAPABILTY object. Further, the the optional addition of the LINK CAPABILTY object. Further, the
SESSION ATTRIBUTE object is added to the <notify session> sequence to SESSION ATTRIBUTE object is added to the <notify session> sequence to
carry the long Call ID. The presence of the SESSION ATTIBUTE object carry the long Call ID. The presence of the SESSION ATTRIBUTE object
MAY be used to distinguish a Notify message used for Call management, MAY be used to distinguish a Notify message used for Call management,
but see Section 5.5 for another mechanism. The <notify session list> but see Section 5.5 for another mechanism. The <notify session list>
MAY be used to simultaneously set up multiple Calls. MAY be used to simultaneously set up multiple Calls.
The format of the Notify Message is as follows: The format of the Notify Message is as follows:
<Notify message> ::= <Common Header> [ <INTEGRITY> ] <Notify message> ::= <Common Header> [ <INTEGRITY> ]
[[ <MESSAGE_ID_ACK> | <MESSAGE_ID_NACK>]...] [[ <MESSAGE_ID_ACK> | <MESSAGE_ID_NACK>]...]
[ <MESSAGE_ID> ] [ <MESSAGE_ID> ]
<ERROR_SPEC> <ERROR_SPEC>
skipping to change at page 11, line 46 skipping to change at page 12, line 43
<sender descriptor> ::= see [RFC3473] <sender descriptor> ::= see [RFC3473]
<flow descriptor> ::= see [RFC3473] <flow descriptor> ::= see [RFC3473]
5.5 ADMIN_STATUS Object 5.5 ADMIN_STATUS Object
Notify messages exchanged for Call control and management purposes Notify messages exchanged for Call control and management purposes
carry a specific new bit (the Call Management or C bit) in the ADMIN carry a specific new bit (the Call Management or C bit) in the ADMIN
STATUS object. STATUS object.
The format and the contents of the ADMIN_STATUS object are both [RFC3473] indicates that the format and contents of the ADMIN_STATUS
dictated by [RFC3473] in favor of [RFC3471]. The new "C" bit is added object are as defined in [RFC3471]. The new "C" bit is added for Call
as shown below. control as shown below.
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|R| Reserved |C|T|A|D| |R| Reserved |C|T|A|D|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Reflect (R): 1 bit - see [RFC3471] Reflect (R): 1 bit - see [RFC3471]
Testing (T): 1 bit - see [RFC3471] Testing (T): 1 bit - see [RFC3471]
Administratively down (A): 1 bit - see [RFC3471] Administratively down (A): 1 bit - see [RFC3471]
Deletion in progress (D): 1 bit - see [RFC3471] Deletion in progress (D): 1 bit - see [RFC3471]
Papadimitriou and Farrel - Expires February 2007 August 2006
Call Management (C): 1 bit Call Management (C): 1 bit
This bit is set when the message is being used to control This bit is set when the message is being used to control
and manage a Call. and manage a Call.
The procedures for the use of the C bit are described in Section 6. The procedures for the use of the C bit are described in Section 6.
6. Procedures in Support of Calls and Connections 6. Procedures in Support of Calls and Connections
6.1 Call/Connection Setup Procedures 6.1 Call/Connection Setup Procedures
This section describes the processing steps for Call and connection This section describes the processing steps for Call and Connection
setup. setup.
There are three cases considered: There are three cases considered:
- A Call is set up without any associated - A Call is set up without any associated
Connection. It is assumed that Connections will be added to the Connection. It is assumed that Connections will be added to the
Call at a later time, but this is neither a requirement nor Call at a later time, but this is neither a requirement nor
a constraint. a constraint.
- A Connection may be added to an existing Call. This may happen if - A Connection may be added to an existing Call. This may happen if
the Call was set up without any associated Connections, or if a the Call was set up without any associated Connections, or if
further Connection is added to a Call that already has one or more another Connection is added to a Call that already has one or more
associated Connections. associated Connections.
- A Connection may be established without any reference to a Call - A Connection may be established without any reference to a Call
(see Section 6.4). This encompasses the previous LSP setup (see Section 6.4). This encompasses the previous LSP setup
procedure. procedure.
Note that a Call MAY NOT be imposed upon a Connection that is already Note that a Call MAY NOT be imposed upon a Connection that is already
established. To do so would require changing the short Call ID in the established. To do so would require changing the short Call ID in the
SESSION OBJECT of the existing LSPs and this would constitute a SESSION OBJECT of the existing LSPs and this would constitute a
change in the Session Identifier. This is not allowed by existing change in the Session Identifier. This is not allowed by existing
skipping to change at page 13, line 8 skipping to change at page 14, line 5
6.2 Call Setup 6.2 Call Setup
A Call is set up before, and independent of, LSP (i.e. Connection) A Call is set up before, and independent of, LSP (i.e. Connection)
setup. setup.
Call setup MAY necessitate verification of the link status and link Call setup MAY necessitate verification of the link status and link
capability negotiation between the Call ingress node and the Call capability negotiation between the Call ingress node and the Call
egress node. The procedure described below is applied only once for a egress node. The procedure described below is applied only once for a
Call and hence only once for the set of LSPs associated with a Call. Call and hence only once for the set of LSPs associated with a Call.
Papadimitriou and Farrel - Expires February 2007 August 2006
The Notify message (see [RFC3473]) is used to signal the Call setup The Notify message (see [RFC3473]) is used to signal the Call setup
request and response. The new Call Management (C) bit in the request and response. The new Call Management (C) bit in the
ADMIN_STATUS object is used to indicate that this Notify is managing ADMIN_STATUS object is used to indicate that this Notify is managing
a Call. The Notify message is sent with source and destination a Call. The Notify message is sent with source and destination
IPv4/IPv6 addresses set to any of the routable ingress/egress node IPv4/IPv6 addresses set to any of the routable ingress/egress node
addresses respectively. addresses respectively.
At least one session MUST be listed in the <notify session list> of At least one session MUST be listed in the <notify session list> of
the Notify message. In order to allow for long identification of the the Notify message. In order to allow for long identification of the
Call the SESSION_ATTRIBUTE object is added as part of the <notify Call, the SESSION_ATTRIBUTE object is added as part of the <notify
session list>. Note that the ERROR SPEC object is not relevant in session list>. Note that the ERROR SPEC object is not relevant in
Call setup and MUST carry the Error Code zero ("Confirmation") to Call setup and MUST carry the Error Code zero ("Confirmation") to
indicate that there is no error. indicate that there is no error.
During Call setup, the ADMIN STATUS object is sent with the following During Call setup, the ADMIN STATUS object is sent with the following
bits set. Bits not listed MUST be set to zero. bits set. Bits not listed MUST be set to zero.
R - to cause the egress to respond R - to cause the egress to respond
C - to indicate that the Notify message is managing a Call. C - to indicate that the Notify message is managing a Call.
The SESSION, SESSION ATTRIBUTE, SENDER_TEMPLATE, SENDER_TSPEC objects The SESSION, SESSION ATTRIBUTE, SENDER_TEMPLATE, SENDER_TSPEC objects
included in the <notify session> of the Notify message are built as included in the <notify session> of the Notify message are built as
follows: follows.
- The SESSION object includes as Tunnel_End_Point_Address any of the - The SESSION object includes as Tunnel_End_Point_Address any of the
call terminating (egress) node's IPv4/IPv6 routable addresses. The Call-terminating (egress) node's IPv4/IPv6 routable addresses. The
Call_ID is set to a non-zero value unique within the context of Call_ID is set to a non-zero value unique within the context of
the address pairing provided by the Tunnel_End_Point_Address and the address pairing provided by the Tunnel_End_Point_Address and
the Sender_Address from the SENDER TEMPLATE object (see below). the Sender_Address from the SENDER TEMPLATE object (see below).
This value will be used as the short Call ID carried on all This value will be used as the short Call ID carried on all
messages for LSPs associated with this Call. messages for LSPs associated with this Call.
Note that the Call_ID value of zero is reserved and MUST NOT be Note that the Call_ID value of zero is reserved and MUST NOT be
used since it will be present in SESSION objects of LSPs used since it will be present in SESSION objects of LSPs
that are not associated with Calls. The Tunnel_ID of that are not associated with Calls. The Tunnel_ID of
the SESSION object is not relevant for this procedure and SHOULD the SESSION object is not relevant for this procedure and SHOULD
be set to zero. The Extended_Tunnel_ID of the SESSION object is be set to zero. The Extended_Tunnel_ID of the SESSION object is
not relevant for this procedure and MAY be set to zero or to an not relevant for this procedure and MAY be set to zero or to an
address of the ingress node. address of the ingress node.
- The SESSION ATTRIBUTE object contains priority flags. Currently no - The SESSION ATTRIBUTE object contains priority flags. Currently no
use of these flags is envisioned, however, future work may use of these flags is envisioned, however, future work may
identify value is assigning priorities to Calls; accordingly the identify value in assigning priorities to Calls; accordingly the
Priority fields MAY be set to non-zero values. None of the Flags Priority fields MAY be set to non-zero values. None of the Flags
in the SESSION ATTRIBUTE object is relevant to this process and in the SESSION ATTRIBUTE object is relevant to this process and
this field SHOULD be set to zero. The Session Name field is used this field SHOULD be set to zero. The Session Name field is used
to carry the long Call Id as described in Section 5. to carry the long Call Id as described in Section 5.
Papadimitriou and Farrel - Expires February 2007 August 2006
- The SENDER_TEMPLATE object includes as Sender Address any of the - The SENDER_TEMPLATE object includes as Sender Address any of the
call initiating (ingress) node's IPv4/IPv6 routable addresses. The Call-initiating (ingress) node's IPv4/IPv6 routable addresses. The
LSP_ID is not relevant and SHOULD be set to zero. LSP_ID is not relevant and SHOULD be set to zero.
- The bandwidth value inserted in the SENDER_TSPEC and FLOWSPEC - The bandwidth value inserted in the SENDER_TSPEC and FLOWSPEC
objects MUST be ignored upon receipt and SHOULD be set to zero objects MUST be ignored upon receipt and SHOULD be set to zero
when sent. when sent.
Additionally, ingress/egress nodes that need to communicate their Additionally, ingress/egress nodes that need to communicate their
respective link local capabilities may include a LINK_CAPABILITY respective link local capabilities may include a LINK_CAPABILITY
object in the Notify message. object in the Notify message.
skipping to change at page 14, line 43 skipping to change at page 15, line 44
A node that receives a Notify message carrying the ADMIN STATUS A node that receives a Notify message carrying the ADMIN STATUS
object with the R and C bits set is being requested to set up a Call. object with the R and C bits set is being requested to set up a Call.
The receiver MAY perform authorization and policy according to local The receiver MAY perform authorization and policy according to local
requirements. requirements.
If the Call is acceptable, the receiver responds with a Notify If the Call is acceptable, the receiver responds with a Notify
message reflecting the information from the Call request with two message reflecting the information from the Call request with two
exceptions. exceptions.
- The responder removes any LINK CAPABLITY object that was received - The responder removes any LINK CAPABLITY object that was received
and MAY insert a LINK CAPABILITY object that describes its own and MAY insert a LINK_CAPABILITY object that describes its own
access link. access link.
- The ADMIN STATUS object is sent with only the C bit set. All other - The ADMIN STATUS object is sent with only the C bit set. All other
bits MUST be set to zero. bits MUST be set to zero.
The responder MUST use the Message ID object to ensure reliable The responder MUST use the Message ID object to ensure reliable
delivery of the response. If no Message ID Acknowledgement is delivery of the response. If no Message ID Acknowledgement is
received after the configured number of retries, the responder SHOULD received after the configured number of retries, the responder SHOULD
continue to assume that the Call was successfully established. Call continue to assume that the Call was successfully established. Call
liveliness procedures are covered in Section 6.7. liveliness procedures are covered in Section 6.7.
Papadimitriou and Farrel - Expires February 2007 August 2006
6.2.2 Call Setup Failure and Rejection 6.2.2 Call Setup Failure and Rejection
Call setup may fail or be rejected. Call setup may fail or be rejected.
If the Notify message can not be delivered, no Message ID If the Notify message can not be delivered, no Message ID
acknowledgement will be received by the sender. In the event that the acknowledgement will be received by the sender. In the event that the
sender has retransmitted the Notify message a configurable number of sender has retransmitted the Notify message a configurable number of
times without receiving a Message ID Acknowledgement (as described in times without receiving a Message ID Acknowledgement (as described in
[RFC2961]), the initiator SHOULD declare the Call failed and SHOULD [RFC2961]), the initiator SHOULD declare the Call failed and SHOULD
send a Call teardown request (see Section 6.6). send a Call teardown request (see Section 6.6).
skipping to change at page 15, line 47 skipping to change at page 16, line 49
6.3 Adding a Connections to a Call 6.3 Adding a Connections to a Call
Once a Call has been established, LSPs can be added to the Call. Once a Call has been established, LSPs can be added to the Call.
Since the short Call ID is part of the SESSION Object, any LSP that Since the short Call ID is part of the SESSION Object, any LSP that
has the same Call ID value in the SESSION Object belongs to the same has the same Call ID value in the SESSION Object belongs to the same
Call, and the Notify message used to establish the Call carried the Call, and the Notify message used to establish the Call carried the
same Call ID in its SESSION object. same Call ID in its SESSION object.
There will be no confusion between LSPs that are associated with a There will be no confusion between LSPs that are associated with a
Call and those which are not since the Call ID value MUST be equal to Call and those which are not, since the Call ID value MUST be equal
zero for LSPs which are not associated with a Call, and MUST NOT be to zero for LSPs which are not associated with a Call, and MUST NOT
equal to zero for a valid Call ID. be equal to zero for a valid Call ID.
LSPs for different Calls can be distinguished because the Call ID is LSPs for different Calls can be distinguished because the Call ID is
unique within the context of the source address (in the SENDER unique within the context of the source address (in the SENDER
TEMPLATE object) and the destination address (in the SESSION object). TEMPLATE object) and the destination address (in the SESSION object).
Papadimitriou and Farrel - Expires February 2007 August 2006
Ingress and egress nodes MAY group together LSPs associated with the Ingress and egress nodes MAY group together LSPs associated with the
same Call and process them as a group according to implementation same Call and process them as a group according to implementation
requirements. Transit nodes need not be aware of the association of requirements. Transit nodes need not be aware of the association of
multiple LSPs with the same Call. multiple LSPs with the same Call.
The ingress node MAY choose to set the "Session Name" of an LSP to The ingress node MAY choose to set the "Session Name" of an LSP to
match the long Call ID of the associated Call. match the long Call ID of the associated Call.
The C bit of the ADMIN STATUS object MUST NOT be set on LSP messages The C bit of the ADMIN STATUS object MUST NOT be set on LSP messages
including on Notify messages that pertain to the LSP and MUST be including on Notify messages that pertain to the LSP and MUST be
skipping to change at page 16, line 28 skipping to change at page 17, line 30
Note that once a Call has been established it is symmetric. That is, Note that once a Call has been established it is symmetric. That is,
either end of the Call may add LSPs to the Call. either end of the Call may add LSPs to the Call.
Special care is needed when managing LSPs in the reverse direction Special care is needed when managing LSPs in the reverse direction
since the addresses in the SESSION and SENDER TEMPLATE are reversed. since the addresses in the SESSION and SENDER TEMPLATE are reversed.
However, since the short Call ID is unique in the context of a given However, since the short Call ID is unique in the context of a given
ingress-egress address pair it may safely be used to associate the ingress-egress address pair it may safely be used to associate the
LSP with the Call. LSP with the Call.
Note that since Calls are defined here to be symmetrical the issue of Note that since Calls are defined here to be symmetrical, the issue
potential Call ID collision arises. This is discussed in Section 6.5. of potential Call ID collision arises. This is discussed in Section
6.5.
6.4 Call-Free Connection Setup 6.4 Call-Free Connection Setup
It continues to be possible to set up LSPs as per [RFC3473] without It continues to be possible to set up LSPs as per [RFC3473] without
associating them with a Call. If the short Call ID in the SESSION associating them with a Call. If the short Call ID in the SESSION
Object is set to zero, there is no associated Call and the Session Object is set to zero, there is no associated Call and the Session
Name field in the SESSION ATTRIBUTE object MUST be interpreted simply Name field in the SESSION ATTRIBUTE object MUST be interpreted simply
as the name of the session (see [RFC3209]). as the name of the session (see [RFC3209]).
The C bit of the ADMIN STATUS object MUST NOT be set on messages for The C bit of the ADMIN STATUS object MUST NOT be set on messages for
skipping to change at page 16, line 54 skipping to change at page 18, line 4
Since Calls are symmetrical, it is possible that both ends of a Call Since Calls are symmetrical, it is possible that both ends of a Call
will attempt to establish Calls with the same long Call IDs at the will attempt to establish Calls with the same long Call IDs at the
same time. This is only an issue if the source and destination same time. This is only an issue if the source and destination
address pairs match. This situation can be avoided by applying some address pairs match. This situation can be avoided by applying some
rules to the contents of the long Call ID, but such mechanisms are rules to the contents of the long Call ID, but such mechanisms are
outside the scope of this document. outside the scope of this document.
If a node that has sent a Call setup request and has not yet received If a node that has sent a Call setup request and has not yet received
a response, itself receives a Call setup request with the same long a response, itself receives a Call setup request with the same long
Call ID and matching source/destination addresses it SHOULD process
Papadimitriou and Farrel - Expires February 2007 August 2006
Call ID and matching source/destination addresses, it SHOULD process
as follows. as follows.
- If its source address is numerically greater than the remote - If its source address is numerically greater than the remote
source address, it MUST discard the received message and continue source address, it MUST discard the received message and continue
to wait for a response to its setup request. to wait for a response to its setup request.
- If its source address is numerically smaller than the remote - If its source address is numerically smaller than the remote
source address, it MUST discard state associated with the Call source address, it MUST discard state associated with the Call
setup that it initiated, and MUST respond to the received Call setup that it initiated, and MUST respond to the received Call
setup. setup.
skipping to change at page 18, line 5 skipping to change at page 19, line 5
As with Call/Connection setup, there are several cases to consider. As with Call/Connection setup, there are several cases to consider.
- Removal of a Connection from a Call - Removal of a Connection from a Call
- Removal of the last Connection from a Call - Removal of the last Connection from a Call
- Teardown of an "empty" Call - Teardown of an "empty" Call
The case of tearing down an LSP that is not associated with a Call The case of tearing down an LSP that is not associated with a Call
does not need to be examined as it follows exactly the procedures does not need to be examined as it follows exactly the procedures
described in [RFC3473]. described in [RFC3473].
Papadimitriou and Farrel - Expires February 2007 August 2006
6.6.1 Removal of a Connection from a Call 6.6.1 Removal of a Connection from a Call
An LSP that is associated with a Call may be deleted using the An LSP that is associated with a Call may be deleted using the
standard procedures described in [RFC3743]. No special procedures are standard procedures described in [RFC3473]. No special procedures are
required. required.
Note that it is not possible to remove an LSP from a Call without Note that it is not possible to remove an LSP from a Call without
deleting the LSP. It is not valid to change the short Call ID from deleting the LSP. It is not valid to change the short Call ID from
non-zero to zero since this involves a change to the SESSION object, non-zero to zero since this involves a change to the SESSION object,
which is not allowed. which is not allowed.
6.6.2 Removal of the Last Connection from a Call 6.6.2 Removal of the Last Connection from a Call
When the last LSP associated with a Call is deleted the question When the last LSP associated with a Call is deleted, the question
arises as to what happens to the Call. Since a Call may exist arises as to what happens to the Call. Since a Call may exist
independently of Connections, it is not always acceptable to say that independently of Connections, it is not always acceptable to say that
the removal of the last LSP from a Call removes the Call. the removal of the last LSP from a Call removes the Call.
The removal of the last LSP does not remove the Call and the The removal of the last LSP does not remove the Call and the
procedures described in the next Section MUST be used to delete the procedures described in the next Section MUST be used to delete the
Call. Call.
6.6.3 Teardown of an "Empty" Call 6.6.3 Teardown of an "Empty" Call
skipping to change at page 18, line 44 skipping to change at page 19, line 46
on the teardown request and the D and C bits on the teardown on the teardown request and the D and C bits on the teardown
response. Other bits MUST be set to zero. response. Other bits MUST be set to zero.
When a Notify message is sent for deleting a Call and the initiator When a Notify message is sent for deleting a Call and the initiator
does not receive the corresponding reflected Notify message (or does not receive the corresponding reflected Notify message (or
possibly even the Message ID Ack), the initiator MAY retry the possibly even the Message ID Ack), the initiator MAY retry the
deletion request using the same retry procedures as used during Call deletion request using the same retry procedures as used during Call
establishment. If no response is received after full retry, the node establishment. If no response is received after full retry, the node
deleting the Call MAY declare the Call deleted, but under such deleting the Call MAY declare the Call deleted, but under such
circumstances the node SHOULD avoid re-using the long or short Call circumstances the node SHOULD avoid re-using the long or short Call
IDs for at least the five times the Notify refresh period. IDs for at least five times the Notify refresh period.
6.6.4 Attempted Teardown of a Call with Existing Connections 6.6.4 Attempted Teardown of a Call with Existing Connections
If a Notify request with the D bit of the ADMIN STATUS object set is If a Notify request with the D bit of the ADMIN STATUS object set is
received for a Call for which LSPs still exist, the request MUST be received for a Call for which LSPs still exist, the request MUST be
rejected with the Error Code "Call Management" and Error Value rejected with the Error Code "Call Management" and Error Value
"Connections Still Exist". The state of the Call MUST NOT be changed. "Connections Still Exist". The state of the Call MUST NOT be changed.
Papadimitriou and Farrel - Expires February 2007 August 2006
6.6.5 Teardown of a Call from the Egress 6.6.5 Teardown of a Call from the Egress
Since Calls are symmetric they may be torn down from the ingress or Since Calls are symmetric they may be torn down from the ingress or
egress. egress.
When the Call is "empty" (has no associated LSPs) it may be deleted When the Call is "empty" (has no associated LSPs) it may be deleted
by the egress sending a Notify message just as described above. by the egress sending a Notify message just as described above.
Note that there is a possibility that both ends of a Call initiate Note that there is a possibility that both ends of a Call initiate
Call deletion at the same time. In this case, the Notify message Call deletion at the same time. In this case, the Notify message
acting as teardown request MAY be interpreted by its recipient as a acting as teardown request MAY be interpreted by its recipient as a
teardown response. But since the Notify messages acting as teardown teardown response. But since the Notify messages acting as teardown
requests carry the R bit in the ADMIN STATUS object, they MUST be requests carry the R bit in the ADMIN STATUS object, they MUST be
responded to anyway. If a teardown request Notify message is received responded to anyway. If a teardown request Notify message is received
for an unknown Call ID it is, nevertheless, responded to in the for an unknown Call ID, it is, nevertheless, responded to in the
affirmative. affirmative.
6.7 Control Plane Survivability 6.7 Control Plane Survivability
Delivery of Notify messages is secured using message ID Delivery of Notify messages is secured using message ID
acknowledgements as described in previous sections. acknowledgements as described in previous sections.
Notify messages provide end-to-end communication that does not rely Notify messages provide end-to-end communication that does not rely
on constant paths through the network. Notify messages are routed on constant paths through the network. Notify messages are routed
according to IGP routing information. No consideration is, therefore, according to IGP routing information. No consideration is, therefore,
skipping to change at page 19, line 42 skipping to change at page 20, line 44
interest for node restart and completely disjoint networks. interest for node restart and completely disjoint networks.
Periodic Notify messages SHOULD be sent by the initiator and Periodic Notify messages SHOULD be sent by the initiator and
terminator of the Call to keep the Call alive and to handle ingress terminator of the Call to keep the Call alive and to handle ingress
or egress node restart. The time period for these retransmissions is or egress node restart. The time period for these retransmissions is
a local matter, but it is RECOMMENDED that this period should be a local matter, but it is RECOMMENDED that this period should be
twice the shortest refresh period of any LSP associated with the twice the shortest refresh period of any LSP associated with the
Call. When there are no LSPs associated with a Call, an LSR is Call. When there are no LSPs associated with a Call, an LSR is
RECOMMENDED to use a refresh period of no less than one minute. The RECOMMENDED to use a refresh period of no less than one minute. The
Notify messages are identical to those sent as if establishing the Notify messages are identical to those sent as if establishing the
Call for the first time, except for the LINK CAPABILITY object, which Call for the first time, except for the LINK_CAPABILITY object, which
may have changed since the Call was first established, due to, e.g., may have changed since the Call was first established, due to, e.g.,
the establishment of connections, link failures, and the addition of the establishment of Connections, link failures, or the addition of
new component links. The current link information is useful for the new component links. The current link information is useful for the
establishment of subsequent connections. A node that receives a establishment of subsequent Connections. A node that receives a
refresh Notify message carrying the R bit in the ADMIN STATUS object refresh Notify message carrying the R bit in the ADMIN STATUS object
MUST respond with a Notify response. A node that receives a refresh MUST respond with a Notify response. A node that receives a refresh
Notify message (response or request) MAY reset its timer - thus, in Notify message (response or request) MAY reset its timer - thus, in
normal processing, Notify refreshes involve a single exchange once normal processing, Notify refreshes involve a single exchange once
per time period. per time period.
Papadimitriou and Farrel - Expires February 2007 August 2006
A node (sender or receiver) that is unsure of the status of a Call A node (sender or receiver) that is unsure of the status of a Call
MAY immediately send a Notify message as if establishing the Call for MAY immediately send a Notify message as if establishing the Call for
the first time. the first time.
Failure to receive a refresh Notify request has no specific meaning. Failure to receive a refresh Notify request has no specific meaning.
A node that fails to receive a refresh Notify request MAY send its A node that fails to receive a refresh Notify request MAY send its
own refresh Notify request to establish the status of the call. If an own refresh Notify request to establish the status of the Call. If a
LSR receives no response to a refresh Notify request (including no node receives no response to a refresh Notify request (including no
Message ID Acknowledgement) a node MAY assume that the remote node is Message ID Acknowledgement) a node MAY assume that the remote node is
unreachable or unavailable. It is a local policy matter whether this unreachable or unavailable. It is a local policy matter whether this
causes the local node to teardown associated LSPs and delete the causes the local node to teardown associated LSPs and delete the
Call. Call.
In the event that an edge node restarts without preserved state, it In the event that an edge node restarts without preserved state, it
MAY relearn LSP state from adjacent nodes and Call state from remote MAY relearn LSP state from adjacent nodes and Call state from remote
nodes. If a Path or Resv message is received with a non-zero Call ID nodes. If a Path or Resv message is received with a non-zero Call ID
but without the C bit in the ADMIN STATUS, and for a Call ID that is but without the C bit in the ADMIN STATUS, and for a Call ID that is
not recognized, the receiver is RECOMMENDED to assume that the Call not recognized, the receiver is RECOMMENDED to assume that the Call
establishment is delayed and ignore the received message. If the Call establishment is delayed and ignore the received message. If the Call
setup never materializes the failure by the restarting node to setup never materializes, the failure by the restarting node to
refresh state will cause the LSPs to be torn down. Optionally, the refresh state will cause the LSPs to be torn down. Optionally, the
receiver of such an LSP message for an unknown Call ID may return an receiver of such an LSP message for an unknown Call ID may return an
error (PathErr or ResvErr message) with the error code "Call error (PathErr or ResvErr message) with the error code "Call
Management" and Error Value "Unknown Call ID". Management" and Error Value "Unknown Call ID".
7. Applicability of Call and Connection Procedures 7. Applicability of Call and Connection Procedures
This section considers the applicability of the different Call This section considers the applicability of the different Call
establishment procedures at the NNI and UNI reference points. This establishment procedures at the NNI and UNI reference points. This
section is informative and is not intended to prescribe or prevent section is informative and is not intended to prescribe or prevent
other options. other options.
7.1 Network-initiated Calls 7.1 Network-initiated Calls
Since the link properties and other traffic-engineering attributes Since the link properties and other traffic-engineering attributes
are likely known through the IGP, the LINK CAPABILITY object is not are likely known through the IGP, the LINK_CAPABILITY object is not
usually required. usually required.
In multi-domain networks it is possible that access link properties In multi-domain networks, it is possible that access link properties
and other traffic-engineering attributes are not known since the and other traffic-engineering attributes are not known since the
domains do not share this sort of information. In this case, the Call domains do not share this sort of information. In this case, the Call
setup mechanism may include the LINK CAPABILITY object. setup mechanism may include the LINK_CAPABILITY object.
7.2 User-initiated Calls 7.2 User-initiated Calls
It is possible that the access link properties and other traffic- It is possible that the access link properties and other traffic-
engineering attributes are not shared across the core network. In engineering attributes are not shared across the core network. In
this case, the Call setup mechanism may include the LINK CAPABILITY this case, the Call setup mechanism may include the LINK_CAPABILITY
object. object.
Papadimitriou and Farrel - Expires February 2007 August 2006
Further, the first node within the network may be responsible for Further, the first node within the network may be responsible for
managing the Call. In this case, the Notify message that is used to managing the Call. In this case, the Notify message that is used to
set up the Call is addressed by the user network edge node to the set up the Call is addressed by the user network edge node to the
first node of the core network. Moreover, neither the long Call ID first node of the core network. Moreover, neither the long Call ID
nor the short Call ID is supplied (the Session Name Length is set to nor the short Call ID is supplied (the Session Name Length is set to
zero and the Call ID value is set to zero). The Notify message is zero and the Call ID value is set to zero). The Notify message is
passed to the first network node which is responsible for generating passed to the first network node which is responsible for generating
the long and short Call IDs before dispatching the message to the the long and short Call IDs before dispatching the message to the
remote Call end point (which is known from the SESSION object). remote Call end point (which is known from the SESSION object).
skipping to change at page 21, line 38 skipping to change at page 22, line 40
the process and procedures are identical. the process and procedures are identical.
7.3.1 Call Segments 7.3.1 Call Segments
Call Segments exist between a set of default and configured External Call Segments exist between a set of default and configured External
Call Managers along a path between the ingress and egress nodes, and Call Managers along a path between the ingress and egress nodes, and
use the protocols described in this document. use the protocols described in this document.
The techniques that are used by a given service provider to identify The techniques that are used by a given service provider to identify
which External Call Managers within its network should process a which External Call Managers within its network should process a
given call are beyond the scope of this document. given Call are beyond the scope of this document.
An External Call Manager uses normal IP routing to route the Notify An External Call Manager uses normal IP routing to route the Notify
message to the next External Call Manager. Notify messages (requests message to the next External Call Manager. Notify messages (requests
and responses) are therefore encapsulated in IP packets that identify and responses) are therefore encapsulated in IP packets that identify
the sending and receiving External Call Managers, but the addresses the sending and receiving External Call Managers, but the addresses
used to identify the Call (the Sender Address in the SENDER TEMPLATE used to identify the Call (the Sender Address in the SENDER TEMPLATE
object and the Tunnel Endpoint Address in the SESSION object) object and the Tunnel Endpoint Address in the SESSION object)
continue to identify the endpoints of the Call. continue to identify the endpoints of the Call.
8. Non-support of Call ID 8. Non-support of Call ID
It is important that the procedures described above operate as It is important that the procedures described above operate as
seamlessly as possible with legacy nodes that do not support the seamlessly as possible with legacy nodes that do not support the
extensions described. extensions described.
Clearly there is no need to consider the case where the Call Papadimitriou and Farrel - Expires February 2007 August 2006
Clearly, there is no need to consider the case where the Call
initiator does not support Call setup initiation. initiator does not support Call setup initiation.
8.1 Non-Support by External Call Managers 8.1 Non-Support by External Call Managers
It is unlikely that a Call initiator will be configured to send Call It is unlikely that a Call initiator will be configured to send Call
establishment Notify requests to an external Call manager including establishment Notify requests to an external Call manager, including
the first network node, if that node does not support Call setup. the first network node, if that node does not support Call setup.
A node that receives an unexpected Call setup request will fall into A node that receives an unexpected Call setup request will fall into
one of the following categories. one of the following categories.
- Node does not support RSVP. The message will fail to be delivered - Node does not support RSVP. The message will fail to be delivered
or responded. No Message ID Acknowledgement will be sent. The or responded. No Message ID Acknowledgement will be sent. The
initiator will retry and then give up. initiator will retry and then give up.
- Node supports RSVP or RSVP-TE but not GMPLS. The message will be - Node supports RSVP or RSVP-TE but not GMPLS. The message will be
skipping to change at page 23, line 5 skipping to change at page 24, line 5
implementations as meaning that the fields should be zeroed before implementations as meaning that the fields should be zeroed before
the objects are forwarded. If this happens, LSP setup will not be the objects are forwarded. If this happens, LSP setup will not be
possible. If either of the fields is zeroed either on the Path or the possible. If either of the fields is zeroed either on the Path or the
Resv message, the Resv message will reach the initiator with the Resv message, the Resv message will reach the initiator with the
field set to zero - this is indication to the initiator that some field set to zero - this is indication to the initiator that some
node in the network is preventing Call management. Use of Explicit node in the network is preventing Call management. Use of Explicit
Routes may help to mitigate this issue by avoiding such nodes. Routes may help to mitigate this issue by avoiding such nodes.
Ultimately, however, it may be necessary to upgrade the offending Ultimately, however, it may be necessary to upgrade the offending
nodes to handle these protocol extensions. nodes to handle these protocol extensions.
Papadimitriou and Farrel - Expires February 2007 August 2006
8.3 Non-Support by Egress Node 8.3 Non-Support by Egress Node
It is unlikely that an attempt will be made to set up a Call to It is unlikely that an attempt will be made to set up a Call to
remote node that does not support Calls. remote node that does not support Calls.
If the egress node does not support Call management through the If the egress node does not support Call management through the
Notify message it will react (as described in Section 8.1) in the Notify message it will react (as described in Section 8.1) in the
same way as an External Call Manager. same way as an External Call Manager.
9. Security Considerations 9. Security Considerations
skipping to change at page 23, line 27 skipping to change at page 24, line 29
the security considerations applicable to the features that they the security considerations applicable to the features that they
provide. provide.
9.1 Call and Connection Security Considerations 9.1 Call and Connection Security Considerations
Call setup is vulnerable to attacks both of spoofing and denial of Call setup is vulnerable to attacks both of spoofing and denial of
service. Since Call setup uses Notify messages, the process can be service. Since Call setup uses Notify messages, the process can be
protected by the measures applicable to securing those messages as protected by the measures applicable to securing those messages as
described in [RFC3473]. described in [RFC3473].
Note, additionally, that the process of Call establishment Note, additionally, that the process of independent Call
independent of LSP setup may be used to apply an extra level of establishment, where the Call is set up separately from the LSPs, may
authentication and policy to hop-by-hop LSP setup. It may be possible be used to apply an extra level of authentication and policy for the
to protect the Call setup exchange using end-to-end security end-to-end LSPs above that which is available with Call-less,
mechanisms such as those provided by Insect (see [RFC2402] and hop-by-hop LSP setup. It may be possible to protect the Call setup
[RFC2406]). exchange using end-to-end security mechanisms such as those provided
by IPsec (see [RFC2402] and [RFC2406]).
The frequency of Call establishment is application dependent and hard
to generalize. Key exchange for Call-related message exchanges is
therefore something that should be configured or arranged dynamically
in different deployments according to the advice in [RFC4107]. Note
that the remote RSVP-TE signaling relationship between Call endpoints
is no different from the signaling relationship between LSRs that
establish an LSP. That is, the LSRs are not necessarily IP-adjacent
in the control plane in either case. Thus key exchange should be
regarded as a remote procedure, not a single hop procedure. There are
several procedures for automatic remote exchange of keys, and IKE
[RFC2409] is particularly suggested in [RFC3473].
Papadimitriou and Farrel - Expires February 2007 August 2006
10. IANA Considerations 10. IANA Considerations
10.1 RSVP Objects 10.1 RSVP Objects
A new RSVP object is introduced: A new RSVP object is introduced:
o LINK CAPABILITY object o LINK_CAPABILITY object
Class-Num = TBA (form 10bbbbbb) Class-Num = TBA (form 10bbbbbb)
The Class Number is selected so that nodes not recognizing The Class Number is selected so that nodes not recognizing
this object drop it silently. That is, the top bit is set this object drop it silently. That is, the top bit is set
and the next bit is cleared. and the next bit is cleared.
C-Type = 1 (TE Link Capabilities) C-Type = 1 (TE Link Capabilities)
The LINK CAPABILITY object is only defined for inclusion on Notify The LINK_CAPABILITY object is only defined for inclusion on Notify
messages. messages.
Refer to Section 5.3 of this document. Refer to Section 5.3 of this document.
10.2 RSVP Error Codes and Error Values 10.2 RSVP Error Codes and Error Values
New RSVP Error Codes and Error Values are introduced New RSVP Error Codes and Error Values are introduced
o Error Codes: o Error Codes:
skipping to change at page 24, line 30 skipping to change at page 26, line 5
10.3 RSVP ADMIN_STATUS object Bits 10.3 RSVP ADMIN_STATUS object Bits
[GMPLS-E2E] requests IANA to manage the bits of the RSVP ADMIN_STATUS [GMPLS-E2E] requests IANA to manage the bits of the RSVP ADMIN_STATUS
object. object.
One new bit, the C bit, is defined in this document. Bit number 28 is One new bit, the C bit, is defined in this document. Bit number 28 is
suggested. suggested.
See Section 5.5 of this document. See Section 5.5 of this document.
Papadimitriou and Farrel - Expires February 2007 August 2006
11. Acknowledgements 11. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank George Swallow, Yakov Rekhter, The authors would like to thank George Swallow, Yakov Rekhter,
Lou Berger, Jerry Ash and Kireeti Kompella for their very useful Lou Berger, Jerry Ash and Kireeti Kompella for their very useful
input to and comments on an earlier revision of this document. input to, and comments on, an earlier revision of this document.
Thanks to Lyndon Ong and Ben Mack-Crane for lengthy discussions
during and after working group last call, and to Deborah Brungard for
a final, detailed review.
12. References 12. References
12.1 Normative References 12.1 Normative References
[GMPLS-E2E] Lang, J.P., Rekhter, Y., and D. Papadimitriou, "RSVP- [GMPLS-E2E] Lang, J.P., Rekhter, Y., and D. Papadimitriou, "RSVP-
TE Extensions in support of End-to-End Generalized TE Extensions in support of End-to-End Generalized
Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)-based Recovery," Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)-based Recovery,"
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-recovery-e2e-signaling, work in draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-recovery-e2e-signaling, work in
progress. progress.
skipping to change at page 25, line 11 skipping to change at page 26, line 40
[RFC2205] R. Braden et al., "Resource ReSerVation Protocol [RFC2205] R. Braden et al., "Resource ReSerVation Protocol
(RSVP)- Version 1 Functional Specification," (RSVP)- Version 1 Functional Specification,"
RFC 2205, September 1997. RFC 2205, September 1997.
[RFC2402] Kent, S. and R. Atkinson, "IP Authentication Header," [RFC2402] Kent, S. and R. Atkinson, "IP Authentication Header,"
RFC 2402, November 1998. RFC 2402, November 1998.
[RFC2406] Kent, S. and R. Atkinson, "IP Encapsulating Payload [RFC2406] Kent, S. and R. Atkinson, "IP Encapsulating Payload
(ESP)," RFC 2406, November 1998. (ESP)," RFC 2406, November 1998.
[RFC2409] Harkins, D. and D. Carrel, "The Internet Key Exchange
(IKE)", RFC 2409, November 1998.
[RFC2747] Baker, F., Lindell, B. and M. Talwar, "RSVP
Cryptographic Authentication", RFC 2747, January
2000.
[RFC2961] Berger, L., Gan, D., Swallow, G., Pan, P., Tommasi, [RFC2961] Berger, L., Gan, D., Swallow, G., Pan, P., Tommasi,
F. and S. Molendini, "RSVP Refresh Overhead F. and S. Molendini, "RSVP Refresh Overhead
Reduction Extensions", RFC 2961, April 2001. Reduction Extensions", RFC 2961, April 2001.
[RFC3209] D. Awduche et al., "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for [RFC3209] D. Awduche et al., "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for
LSP Tunnels," RFC 3209, December 2001. LSP Tunnels," RFC 3209, December 2001.
[RFC3471] L. Berger (Editor) et al., "Generalized MPLS - [RFC3471] L. Berger (Editor) et al., "Generalized MPLS -
Signaling Functional Description," RFC 3471, January Signaling Functional Description," RFC 3471, January
2003. 2003.
[RFC3473] L. Berger (Editor) et al., "Generalized MPLS Papadimitriou and Farrel - Expires February 2007 August 2006
Signaling - RSVP-TE Extensions," RFC 3473, January
2003. [RFC3473] L. Berger (Editor) et al., "Generalized MPLS Signaling
- RSVP-TE Extensions," RFC 3473, January 2003.
[RFC3477] Kompella, K. and Y. Rekhter, "Signalling Unnumbered [RFC3477] Kompella, K. and Y. Rekhter, "Signalling Unnumbered
Links in Resource ReSerVation Protocol - Traffic Links in Resource ReSerVation Protocol - Traffic
Engineering (RSVP-TE)," RFC 3477, January 2003. Engineering (RSVP-TE)," RFC 3477, January 2003.
[RFC3945] E. Mannie, Ed., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label [RFC3945] E. Mannie, Ed., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label
Switching (GMPLS) Architecture", RFC 3945, October Switching (GMPLS) Architecture", RFC 3945, October
2004. 2004.
[RFC4139] D. Papadimitriou, et al., "Requirements for [RFC4139] D. Papadimitriou, et al., "Requirements for Generalized
Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Signaling Usage and MPLS (GMPLS) Signaling Usage and Extensions for
Extensions for Automatically Switched Optical Automatically Switched Optical Network (ASON)," RFC
Network (ASON)," RFC 4139, July 2005. 4139, July 2005.
[RFC4201] Kompella K., Rekhter Y., and L. Berger, "Link Bundling [RFC4201] Kompella K., Rekhter Y., and L. Berger, "Link Bundling
in MPLS Traffic Engineering," RFC 4201, October 2005. in MPLS Traffic Engineering," RFC 4201, October 2005.
[RFC4202] Kompella, K. and Y. Rekhter (Editors) et al., "Routing [RFC4202] Kompella, K. and Y. Rekhter (Editors) et al., "Routing
Extensions in Support of Generalized MPLS," RFC 4202, Extensions in Support of Generalized MPLS," RFC 4202,
October 2005. October 2005.
[RFC4208] G. Swallow et al., "GMPLS RSVP Support for the Overlay [RFC4208] Swallow, G., Drake, J., Ishimatsu, H., and Rekhter, Y.
Model," RFC 4208, October 2005. "Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS)
User-Network Interface (UNI): Resource ReserVation
Protocol-Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) Support for the
Overlay Model", RFC 4208, October 2005.
[RFC4426] Lang, J.P., and B. Rajagopalan (Editors) et al., [RFC4426] Lang, J.P., and B. Rajagopalan (Editors) et al.,
"Generalized MPLS Recovery Functional "Generalized MPLS Recovery Functional
Specification," RFC 4426, March 2006. Specification," RFC 4426, March 2006.
12.2 Informative References 12.2 Informative References
[ASON-APPL] D. Papadimitriou et. al., "Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) [ASON-APPL] D. Papadimitriou et. al., "Generalized MPLS (GMPLS)
RSVP-TE signaling usage in support of Automatically RSVP-TE signaling usage in support of Automatically
Switched Optical Network (ASON)," Switched Optical Network (ASON),"
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-rsvp-te-ason, work in progress. draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-rsvp-te-ason, work in progress.
[RFC4107] S. Bellovin and R. Housley, "Guidelines for
Cryptographic Key Management", BCP 107, RFC 4107, June
2005.
For information on the availability of the following document, For information on the availability of the following document,
please see http://www.itu.int. please see http://www.itu.int.
[G.8080] ITU-T, "Architecture for the Automatically Switched [G.8080] ITU-T, "Architecture for the Automatically Switched
Optical Network (ASON)," Recommendation G.8080/ Optical Network (ASON)," Recommendation G.8080/
Y.1304, November 2001 (and Revision, January 2003). Y.1304, November 2001 (and Revision, January 2003).
Papadimitriou and Farrel - Expires February 2007 August 2006
13. Authors' Addresses 13. Authors' Addresses
Dimitri Papadimitriou (Alcatel) Dimitri Papadimitriou (Alcatel)
Fr. Wellesplein 1, Fr. Wellesplein 1,
B-2018 Antwerpen, Belgium B-2018 Antwerpen, Belgium
Phone: +32 3 240-8491 Phone: +32 3 240-8491
EMail: dimitri.papadimitriou@alcatel.be EMail: dimitri.papadimitriou@alcatel.be
John Drake John Drake
Boeing Satellite Systems Boeing Satellite Systems
skipping to change at page 26, line 48 skipping to change at page 28, line 36
Deborah Brungard (AT&T) Deborah Brungard (AT&T)
Rm. D1-3C22 - 200 S. Laurel Ave. Rm. D1-3C22 - 200 S. Laurel Ave.
Middletown, NJ 07748, USA Middletown, NJ 07748, USA
EMail: dbrungard@att.com EMail: dbrungard@att.com
Zafar Ali (Cisco) Zafar Ali (Cisco)
100 South Main St. #200 100 South Main St. #200
Ann Arbor, MI 48104, USA Ann Arbor, MI 48104, USA
EMail: zali@cisco.com EMail: zali@cisco.com
Arthi Ayyangar (Juniper) Arthi Ayyangar (Nuova Systems)
1194 N.Mathilda Ave 2600 San Tomas Expressway
Sunnyvale, CA 94089, USA Santa Clara, CA 95051
EMail: arthi@juniper.net EMail: arthi@nuovasystems.com
Don Fedyk (Nortel Networks) Don Fedyk (Nortel Networks)
600 Technology Park Drive 600 Technology Park Drive
Billerica, MA, 01821, USA Billerica, MA, 01821, USA
Email: dwfedyk@nortel.com Email: dwfedyk@nortel.com
Intellectual Property Statement Intellectual Property Statement
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
this document or the extent to which any license under such rights 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 might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Papadimitriou and Farrel - Expires February 2007 August 2006
Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an 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 attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
http://www.ietf.org/ipr. http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
 End of changes. 96 change blocks. 
161 lines changed or deleted 306 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.32. The latest version is available from http://www.levkowetz.com/ietf/tools/rfcdiff/