draft-ietf-forces-protoextension-02.txt   draft-ietf-forces-protoextension-03.txt 
Internet Engineering Task Force J. Hadi Salim Internet Engineering Task Force J. Hadi Salim
Internet-Draft Mojatatu Networks Internet-Draft Mojatatu Networks
Updates: 7121 (if approved) June 3, 2014 Updates: 7121,5810 (if approved) July 3, 2014
Intended status: Standards Track Intended status: Standards Track
Expires: December 5, 2014 Expires: January 4, 2015
ForCES Protocol Extensions ForCES Protocol Extensions
draft-ietf-forces-protoextension-02 draft-ietf-forces-protoextension-03
Abstract Abstract
Experience in implementing and deploying ForCES architecture has Experience in implementing and deploying ForCES architecture has
demonstrated need for a few small extensions both to ease demonstrated need for a few small extensions both to ease
programmability and to improve wire efficiency of some transactions. programmability and to improve wire efficiency of some transactions.
This document describes extensions to the ForCES Protocol This documents updates both RFC 5810 and RFC 7121. semantics to
Specification[RFC 5810] semantics to achieve that end goal. achieve that end goal.
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on December 5, 2014. This Internet-Draft will expire on January 4, 2015.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
skipping to change at page 2, line 19 skipping to change at page 2, line 19
1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2. Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.2. Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Problem Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3. Problem Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1. Table Ranges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.1. Table Ranges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.2. Error codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.2. Error codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4. Protocol Update Proposal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4. Protocol Update Proposal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.1. Table Ranges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4.1. Table Ranges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.2. Error Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 4.2. Error Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.2.1. New Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 4.2.1. New Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.2.2. Vendor Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 4.2.2. Vendor Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.2.3. Extended Result TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 4.2.3. Extended Result TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.2.3.1. Extended Result Backward compatibility . . . . . . 9 4.2.3.1. Extended Result Backward compatibility . . . . . . 9
4.3. Large Table Dumping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4.3. Large Table Dumping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 5. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Appendix A. Appendix A - New FEPO version . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Appendix A. Appendix A - New FEPO version . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
skipping to change at page 5, line 7 skipping to change at page 5, line 7
which are backward compatible. The document also clarifies details which are backward compatible. The document also clarifies details
of how dumping of a large table residing on an FE is achieved. To of how dumping of a large table residing on an FE is achieved. To
summarize: summarize:
1. A table range operation to allow a controller or control 1. A table range operation to allow a controller or control
application to request an arbitrary range of table rows is application to request an arbitrary range of table rows is
introduced. introduced.
2. Additional error codes returned to the controller (or control 2. Additional error codes returned to the controller (or control
application) by an FE are introduced. Additionally a new application) by an FE are introduced. Additionally a new
extension to carry details on error codes is introduced. extension to carry details on error codes is introduced. As a
result the FEPO LFB is updated over [RFC7121].
3. While already supported FE response to a GET request of a large 3. While already supported FE response to a GET request of a large
table which does not fit in a single PL message is not described table which does not fit in a single PL message is not described
in [RFC5810]. This document clarifies the details. in [RFC5810]. This document clarifies the details.
3. Problem Overview 3. Problem Overview
In this section we present sample use cases to illustrate each In this section we present sample use cases to illustrate each
challenge being addressed. challenge being addressed.
skipping to change at page 11, line 44 skipping to change at page 11, line 44
| DATA TLV (SPARSE/FULL) | | DATA TLV (SPARSE/FULL) |
| | | |
| (N) Query-Response, EOT,AT, OP=GET-RESPONSE | | (N) Query-Response, EOT,AT, OP=GET-RESPONSE |
|<-----------------------------------------------------| |<-----------------------------------------------------|
| correlattor = X | | correlattor = X |
| RESULT TLV (SUCCESS) | | RESULT TLV (SUCCESS) |
| | | |
Figure 4: EXTENDEDRESULT-TLV Figure 4: EXTENDEDRESULT-TLV
The last message which carries the EOT flag to go the CE MUST not The last message which carries the EOT flag to go the CE MUST NOT
carry any data. This allows us to mirror ForCES 2PC messaging carry any data. This allows us to mirror ForCES 2PC messaging
[RFC5810] where the last message is an empty commit message. GET [RFC5810] where the last message is an empty commit message. GET
response will carry a result code TLV in such a case. response will carry a result code TLV in such a case.
5. Acknowledgements 5. Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank Evangelos Haleplidis and Joel Halpern The author would like to thank Evangelos Haleplidis and Joel Halpern
for discussions that made this document better. for discussions that made this document better.
6. IANA Considerations 6. IANA Considerations
skipping to change at page 12, line 43 skipping to change at page 12, line 43
7. Security Considerations 7. Security Considerations
The security considerations that have been described in the ForCES The security considerations that have been described in the ForCES
protocol [RFC5810] apply to this document as well. protocol [RFC5810] apply to this document as well.
8. References 8. References
8.1. Normative References 8.1. Normative References
[RFC3746] Yang, L., Dantu, R., Anderson, T., and R. Gopal,
"Forwarding and Control Element Separation (ForCES)
Framework", RFC 3746, April 2004.
[RFC5810] Doria, A., Hadi Salim, J., Haas, R., Khosravi, H., Wang, [RFC5810] Doria, A., Hadi Salim, J., Haas, R., Khosravi, H., Wang,
W., Dong, L., Gopal, R., and J. Halpern, "Forwarding and W., Dong, L., Gopal, R., and J. Halpern, "Forwarding and
Control Element Separation (ForCES) Protocol Control Element Separation (ForCES) Protocol
Specification", RFC 5810, March 2010. Specification", RFC 5810, March 2010.
[RFC5811] Hadi Salim, J. and K. Ogawa, "SCTP-Based Transport Mapping [RFC5811] Hadi Salim, J. and K. Ogawa, "SCTP-Based Transport Mapping
Layer (TML) for the Forwarding and Control Element Layer (TML) for the Forwarding and Control Element
Separation (ForCES) Protocol", RFC 5811, March 2010. Separation (ForCES) Protocol", RFC 5811, March 2010.
[RFC5812] Halpern, J. and J. Hadi Salim, "Forwarding and Control
Element Separation (ForCES) Forwarding Element Model",
RFC 5812, March 2010.
[RFC7121] Ogawa, K., Wang, W., Haleplidis, E., and J. Hadi Salim, [RFC7121] Ogawa, K., Wang, W., Haleplidis, E., and J. Hadi Salim,
"High Availability within a Forwarding and Control Element "High Availability within a Forwarding and Control Element
Separation (ForCES) Network Element", RFC 7121, Separation (ForCES) Network Element", RFC 7121,
February 2014. February 2014.
8.2. Informative References 8.2. Informative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC3746] Yang, L., Dantu, R., Anderson, T., and R. Gopal,
"Forwarding and Control Element Separation (ForCES)
Framework", RFC 3746, April 2004.
Appendix A. Appendix A - New FEPO version Appendix A. Appendix A - New FEPO version
<LFBLibrary xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:forces:lfbmodel:1.0" <LFBLibrary xmlns="urn:ietf:params:xml:ns:forces:lfbmodel:1.0"
xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="lfb-schema.xsd" provides="FEPO"> xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="lfb-schema.xsd" provides="FEPO">
<!-- XXX --> <!-- XXX -->
<dataTypeDefs> <dataTypeDefs>
<dataTypeDef> <dataTypeDef>
<name>CEHBPolicyValues</name> <name>CEHBPolicyValues</name>
<synopsis> <synopsis>
 End of changes. 11 change blocks. 
17 lines changed or deleted 14 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.41. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/