draft-ietf-gsmp-dyn-part-reqs-01.txt   draft-ietf-gsmp-dyn-part-reqs-02.txt 
Internet Draft T. Anderson Internet Draft T. Anderson
Expiration: June 2002 Intel Labs Expiration: January 2003 Intel Labs
File: draft-ietf-gsmp-dyn-part-reqs-01.txt C. Wang File: draft-ietf-gsmp-dyn-part-reqs-02.txt J. Buerkle
Pacific Broadband Com.
J. Buerkle
Nortel Networks Nortel Networks
December 2001
July 2002
Requirements for the Dynamic Partitioning of Switching Elements Requirements for the Dynamic Partitioning of Switching Elements
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. Internet-Drafts are all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. Internet-Drafts are
working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its
areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also
distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts.
skipping to change at line 54 skipping to change at line 53
Definitions Definitions
In this document, the following definitions will be used. In this document, the following definitions will be used.
Switching Element - A device that switches packets (e.g., an ATM Switching Element - A device that switches packets (e.g., an ATM
switch or MPLS LSR) and whose resources can be divided into switch or MPLS LSR) and whose resources can be divided into
partitions, each of which can be independently controlled by a partitions, each of which can be independently controlled by a
different controller. different controller.
Anderson, et. al. Expires June 2002 1 Anderson, et. al. Expires January 2003 1
December 2001 July 2002
Partition - A partition is a set of switching element (SE) Partition - A partition is a set of switching element (SE)
resources. Partitions are also referred to as virtual SEs. resources. Partitions are also referred to as virtual SEs.
Active Partition - An active partition is a partition in which the Active Partition - An active partition is a partition in which the
resources are in use; either under the direct control of a separate resources are in use; either under the direct control of a separate
controller or under internal policy based control. controller or under internal policy based control.
Controller - The entity responsible for controlling the operations Controller - The entity responsible for controlling the operations
of an active partition. of an active partition.
skipping to change at line 111 skipping to change at line 110
the SE does not asynchronously send a message when dynamic the SE does not asynchronously send a message when dynamic
partitioning occurs. Instead, the SE includes a "resource changed" partitioning occurs. Instead, the SE includes a "resource changed"
error code in the response to a subsequent request by the error code in the response to a subsequent request by the
controller. controller.
Implicit Reactive Notification - This is similar to an Explicit Implicit Reactive Notification - This is similar to an Explicit
Reactive Notification except that the protocol does not contain an Reactive Notification except that the protocol does not contain an
explicit "resource changed" error. In this case, all that the SE explicit "resource changed" error. In this case, all that the SE
can do is to indicate that some unspecified error has occurred when can do is to indicate that some unspecified error has occurred when
the controller attempts to use non-allocated resources. the controller attempts to use non-allocated resources.
Anderson, et. al. Expires January 2003 2
July 2002
Anderson, et. al. Expires June 2002 2
December 2001
Introduction Introduction
Several logical entities are involved in the partitioning and Several logical entities are involved in the partitioning and
control of a SE. First, a switching element (for the purposes of control of a SE. First, a switching element (for the purposes of
this draft) is a device that "switches" packets and whose resources this draft) is a device that "switches" packets, whose resources can
can be partitioned and whose partitions can each be controlled by a be partitioned and whose partitions can each be controlled by a
single controller. (This partitioning also implies the ability to single controller. (This partitioning also implies the ability to
enforce this division of resources between competing partitions). enforce this division of resources between competing partitions).
Second, the partition manager (PM) is a management entity that Second, the partition manager (PM) is a management entity that
specifies the number of virtual SEs into which the SE should be specifies the number of virtual SEs into which the SE should be
partitioned and the resources to be allocated to each virtual SE. partitioned and the resources to be allocated to each virtual SE.
Lastly, a controller directs the use of the resources of one or more Lastly, a controller directs the use of the resources of one or more
partitions to provide a set of services. partitions to provide a set of services.
In the rest of this draft, we will deal exclusively with logical In the rest of this draft, we will deal exclusively with logical
entities although it is worth noting here that there are many entities although it is worth noting here that there are many
skipping to change at line 158 skipping to change at line 157
partitioning will be for the owner of the SE to partition the SE partitioning will be for the owner of the SE to partition the SE
into several virtual SEs and then to lease these to third parties. into several virtual SEs and then to lease these to third parties.
In this case, the PM will likely be physically separate from all of In this case, the PM will likely be physically separate from all of
the controllers. For locality (and therefore ease) of management, the controllers. For locality (and therefore ease) of management,
SEs will be remotely configurable and thus the PM will be physically SEs will be remotely configurable and thus the PM will be physically
separated from the SE. The following illustration depicts this separated from the SE. The following illustration depicts this
arrangement. The dashed lines indicate interactions between the arrangement. The dashed lines indicate interactions between the
entities and are labeled with the cardinality of the relationship entities and are labeled with the cardinality of the relationship
between the entities. between the entities.
Anderson, et. al. Expires June 2002 3 Anderson, et. al. Expires January 2003 3
December 2001 July 2002
------------------ ------------------- ------------------ -------------------
| | * * | | | | * * | |
| Partition |-------------| Controller | | Partition |-------------| Controller |
| Manager | C | | | Manager | C | |
------------------ ------------------- ------------------ -------------------
1 \ / * 1 \ / *
\ / \ /
\ A B / \ A B /
\ / \ /
* \ / * * \ / *
skipping to change at line 213 skipping to change at line 213
currently allocated to one of its active partitions. This could currently allocated to one of its active partitions. This could
involve the following types of request: involve the following types of request:
- A request to relinquish allocated but currently unused - A request to relinquish allocated but currently unused
resources. That is to put a freeze on additional use of the resources. That is to put a freeze on additional use of the
specified resources. specified resources.
- A request to relinquish used resources. - A request to relinquish used resources.
- A request to relinquish an active partition. That is - A request to relinquish an active partition. That is
a request that a controller release control of an active a request that a controller release control of an active
partition. partition.
- The controllerĘs response to a PM request. - The controllerĘs response to a PM request.
Anderson, et. al. Expires January 2003 4
July 2002
As far as the authors know, no proposed standard solutions currently As far as the authors know, no proposed standard solutions currently
exist for interactions of type C. exist for interactions of type C.
Anderson, et. al. Expires June 2002 4
December 2001
Dynamic Partitioning Dynamic Partitioning
Static repartitioning of a SE can be a costly and inefficient Static repartitioning of a SE can be a costly and inefficient
process. First, before static repartitioning can take place, all process. First, before static repartitioning can take place, all
existing connections with controllers must be severed. When this existing connections with controllers must be severed. When this
happens, the SE will typically release all the state configured by happens, the SE will typically release all the state configured by
the controller. Then, the virtual SE must be placed in the "down" the controller. Then, the virtual SE must be placed in the "down"
state while the repartitioning takes place. Once the repartitioning state while the repartitioning takes place. Once the repartitioning
is completed, the partitions are placed in the "up" state and the is completed, the partitions are placed in the "up" state and the
skipping to change at line 268 skipping to change at line 268
notification or an implicit reactive notification to indicate notification or an implicit reactive notification to indicate
resource exhaustion. resource exhaustion.
3. Furthermore, this mechanism MUST support the partitioning of all 3. Furthermore, this mechanism MUST support the partitioning of all
resources discoverable through GSMP (e.g., label tables). Other resources discoverable through GSMP (e.g., label tables). Other
resources used by GSMP indirectly (e.g., CPU) or resources (e.g., resources used by GSMP indirectly (e.g., CPU) or resources (e.g.,
forwarding table entries) used by other types of SEs MAY be forwarding table entries) used by other types of SEs MAY be
supported. supported.
4. If a PM instructs a SE to release resources allocated to an active 4. If a PM instructs a SE to release resources allocated to an active
partition and if any of those resources are currently in use, the partition and if any of those resources are currently in use, the
SE MUST deny the PMĘs request. SE MUST deny the PMĘs request.
Anderson, et. al. Expires January 2003 5
July 2002
5. Subsequent to a resource reallocation failure, the PM SHOULD make 5. Subsequent to a resource reallocation failure, the PM SHOULD make
use of one or both of the capabilities described in requirements 6 use of one or both of the capabilities described in requirements 6
and 7. and 7.
6. A PM SHOULD be able to tell a SE to make an active partition into 6. A PM SHOULD be able to tell a SE to make an active partition into
a frozen partition. a frozen partition.
Anderson, et. al. Expires June 2002 5
December 2001
7. A PM SHOULD be able to contact the controller to ask it to reduce 7. A PM SHOULD be able to contact the controller to ask it to reduce
its resource utilization. its resource utilization.
8. The PM MUST be able to exercise "power on/off" type control of the 8. The PM MUST be able to exercise "power on/off" type control of the
virtual SEs that it has created. When the virtual power to an virtual SEs that it has created. When the virtual power to an
active partition is turned off, the partition becomes inactive and active partition is turned off, the partition becomes inactive and
any controllers associated with that partition are disconnected. any controllers associated with that partition are disconnected.
This capability allows a PM to resort to static partitioning when This capability allows a PM to resort to static partitioning when
a controller is uncooperative about releasing resources. a controller is uncooperative about releasing resources.
9. During dynamic repartitioning, a SE MUST maintain all existing 9. During dynamic repartitioning, a SE MUST maintain all existing
state associated with the partitions being modified. state associated with the partitions being modified.
skipping to change at line 306 skipping to change at line 306
13. SEs MAY inform the PM of resource exhaustion on a particular 13. SEs MAY inform the PM of resource exhaustion on a particular
partition. partition.
14. A controller MAY ask the PM for further resources or a 14. A controller MAY ask the PM for further resources or a
reduction in existing resources. reduction in existing resources.
15. To support the automation of interaction between the PM and 15. To support the automation of interaction between the PM and
attached controllers, the PM MUST be able to determine from the SE attached controllers, the PM MUST be able to determine from the SE
the addresses of the controllers that are currently attached to a the addresses of the controllers that are currently attached to a
virtual SE. Additionally, the SE MAY allow the PM to determine virtual SE. Additionally, the SE MAY allow the PM to determine
which control protocol (and version thereof) is currently managing which control protocol (and version thereof) is currently managing
each active partition. each active partition.
16. A SE MAY support the ability to have one virtual SE provide a
service to another virtual SE within the same physical SE. For
example, a SE may be configured to provide a virtual link between
two virtual SEs. Furthermore:
a. There MUST be a mechanism by which the SE can inform the PM
which of these partition-to-partition services are provided by
the SE.
b. There MUST be a mechanism by which the PM can configure the
available partition-to-partition services.
c. If the configuration of a partition-to-partition service
results in a virtual port being added/removed from a virtual
SE, the SE MUST notify all controllers attached to that virtual
SE (assuming that the corresponding control protocol supports
such notifications).
Security Considerations Security Considerations
Only authorized PMs MUST be allowed to dynamically repartition a SE. Only authorized PMs MUST be allowed to dynamically repartition a SE.
Similarly, only the PM (or an authorized agent of the PM) that is Similarly, only the PM (or an authorized agent of the PM) that is
Anderson, et. al. Expires January 2003 6
July 2002
authorized to partition a SE MUST be allowed to contact controllers authorized to partition a SE MUST be allowed to contact controllers
to request that they decrease their resources or inform them that to request that they decrease their resources or inform them that
their resources have been increased. Likewise, the PM MUST verify their resources have been increased. Likewise, the PM MUST verify
and authenticate that any requests for additional/fewer resources and authenticate that any requests for additional/fewer resources
for a virtual SE have come from a controller authorized to control for a virtual SE have come from a controller authorized to control
the specified virtual SE. the specified virtual SE.
Intellectual Property Considerations Intellectual Property Considerations
The IETF is being notified of intellectual property rights claimed The IETF is being notified of intellectual property rights claimed
in regard to some or all of the specification contained in this in regard to some or all of the specification contained in this
document. For more information, consult the online list of claimed document. For more information, consult the online list of claimed
rights. rights.
Acknowledgements Acknowledgements
The authors would like to acknowledge the contributions of Avri The authors would like to acknowledge the contributions of Avri
Doria to this draft. Doria and Jonathan Sadler to this draft.
Anderson, et. al. Expires June 2002 6
December 2001
Normative References Normative References
[GSMPv3] A. Doria, et. al, "Draft-ietf-gsmp-10.txt", work in
progress.
[RFC2119] S. Bradner, "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] S. Bradner, "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", RFC 2119, BCP 14, March 1997. Requirement Levels", RFC 2119, BCP 14, March 1997.
[RFC3292] A. Doria, et. al., "General Switch Management Protocol
(GSMP) V3", RFC3292, June 2002.
Informative References Informative References
[RFC3015] F. Cuervo, et. al., "Megaco Protocol 1.0," RFC3015, [RFC3015] F. Cuervo, et. al., "Megaco Protocol 1.0," RFC3015,
November 2000. November 2000.
Author Information Author Information
Todd A. Anderson Todd A. Anderson
Intel Intel Labs
2111 SE 25th Avenue JF2-60
2111 NE 25th Avenue
Hillsboro, OR 97124 USA Hillsboro, OR 97124 USA
Phone: +1 503 712 1760 Phone: +1 503 712 1760
Email: todd.a.anderson@intel.com Email: todd.a.anderson@intel.com
Chao-Chun Wang
Pacific Broadband Communications
3103 N. First Street
San Jose, CA 95134
Phone: +1 408 468 6137
Email: ccwang@pbc.com
Joachim Buerkle Joachim Buerkle
Nortel Networks Germany GmbH & Co. KG Nortel Networks Germany GmbH & Co. KG
Hahnstrasse 37-39 Hahnstrasse 37-39
60528 Frankfurt 60528 Frankfurt
Phone: ++49 (0)69 6697 3281 Phone: ++49 (0)69 6697 3281
Email: joachim.buerkle@nortelnetworks.com Email: joachim.buerkle@nortelnetworks.com
Anderson, et. al. Expires June 2002 7 Anderson, et. al. Expires January 2003 7
 End of changes. 

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.25, available from http://www.levkowetz.com/ietf/tools/rfcdiff/