draft-ietf-mpls-mldp-hsmp-02.txt   draft-ietf-mpls-mldp-hsmp-03.txt 
Network Working Group L. Jin Network Working Group L. Jin
Internet-Draft Internet-Draft
Intended status: Standards Track F. Jounay Intended status: Standards Track F. Jounay
Expires: April 14, 2014 France Telecom Expires: April 19, 2014 France Telecom
I. Wijnands I. Wijnands
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
N. Leymann N. Leymann
Deutsche Telekom Deutsche Telekom
October 11, 2013 October 16, 2013
LDP Extensions for Hub & Spoke Multipoint Label Switched Path LDP Extensions for Hub & Spoke Multipoint Label Switched Path
draft-ietf-mpls-mldp-hsmp-02.txt draft-ietf-mpls-mldp-hsmp-03.txt
Abstract Abstract
This draft introduces a hub & spoke multipoint LSP (or HSMP LSP for This draft introduces a hub & spoke multipoint LSP (or HSMP LSP for
short), which allows traffic both from root to leaf through P2MP LSP short), which allows traffic both from root to leaf through P2MP LSP
and also leaf to root along the co-routed reverse path. That means and also leaf to root along the co-routed reverse path. That means
traffic entering the HSMP LSP from application/customer at the root traffic entering the HSMP LSP from application/customer at the root
node travels downstream to each leaf node, exactly as if it is node travels downstream to each leaf node, exactly as if it is
travelling downstream along a P2MP LSP to each leaf node. Upstream travelling downstream along a P2MP LSP to each leaf node. Upstream
traffic entering the HSMP LSP at any leaf node travels upstream along traffic entering the HSMP LSP at any leaf node travels upstream along
skipping to change at page 2, line 4 skipping to change at page 2, line 4
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 April 14, 2014. This Internet-Draft will expire on April 19, 2014.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2013 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 3, line 26 skipping to change at page 3, line 26
4.3. Using the HSMP FEC Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4.3. Using the HSMP FEC Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.3.1. HSMP LSP Label Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 4.3.1. HSMP LSP Label Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.3.2. HSMP LSP Label Withdraw . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4.3.2. HSMP LSP Label Withdraw . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.3.3. HSMP LSP Upstream LSR Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4.3.3. HSMP LSP Upstream LSR Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5. HSMP LSP on a LAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 5. HSMP LSP on a LAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6. Redundancy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 6. Redundancy Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
7. Co-routed Path Exceptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 7. Co-routed Path Exceptions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
8. Failure Detection of HSMP LSP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 8. Failure Detection of HSMP LSP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
10.1. New LDP FEC Element types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
10.2. HSMP LSP capability TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
10.3. New sub-TLVs for the Target Stack TLV . . . . . . . . . . 13
11. Acknowledgement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 11. Acknowledgement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
12.1. Normative references . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 12.1. Normative references . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
The point-to-multipoint LSP defined in [RFC6388] allows traffic to The point-to-multipoint LSP defined in [RFC6388] allows traffic to
transmit from root to several leaf nodes, and multipoint-to- transmit from root to several leaf nodes, and multipoint-to-
multipoint LSP allows traffic from every node to transmit to every multipoint LSP allows traffic from every node to transmit to every
other node. This draft introduces a hub & spoke multipoint LSP (or other node. This draft introduces a hub & spoke multipoint LSP (or
HSMP LSP for short), which allows traffic both from root to leaf HSMP LSP for short), which allows traffic both from root to leaf
through P2MP LSP and also leaf to root along the co-routed reverse through P2MP LSP and also leaf to root along the co-routed reverse
path. That means traffic entering the HSMP LSP at the root node path. That means traffic entering the HSMP LSP at the root node
skipping to change at page 12, line 26 skipping to change at page 12, line 26
The same security considerations apply as for the MP2MP LSP described The same security considerations apply as for the MP2MP LSP described
in [RFC6388] and [RFC6425]. in [RFC6388] and [RFC6425].
Although this document introduces new FEC Elements and corresponding Although this document introduces new FEC Elements and corresponding
procedures, the protocol does not bring any new security issues procedures, the protocol does not bring any new security issues
compared to [RFC6388] and [RFC6425]. compared to [RFC6388] and [RFC6425].
10. IANA Considerations 10. IANA Considerations
10.1. New LDP FEC Element types
This document requires allocation of two new LDP FEC Element types This document requires allocation of two new LDP FEC Element types
from the "Label Distribution Protocol (LDP) Parameters registry" the from the "Label Distribution Protocol (LDP) Parameters registry" the
"Forwarding Equivalence Class (FEC) Type Name Space": "Forwarding Equivalence Class (FEC) Type Name Space":
1. the HSMP-upstream FEC type - requested value TBD 1. the HSMP-upstream FEC type - requested value TBD
2. the HSMP-downstream FEC type - requested value TBD 2. the HSMP-downstream FEC type - requested value TBD
The values should be allocated using the lowest free values from the
"IETF Consensus"-range (0-127).
10.2. HSMP LSP capability TLV
This document requires allocation of one new code points for the HSMP This document requires allocation of one new code points for the HSMP
LSP capability TLV from "Label Distribution Protocol (LDP) Parameters LSP capability TLV from "Label Distribution Protocol (LDP) Parameters
registry" the "TLV Type Name Space": registry" the "TLV Type Name Space":
HSMP LSP Capability Parameter - requested value TBD HSMP LSP Capability Parameter - requested value TBD
The value should be allocated from the range 0x0901-0x3DFF (IETF
Consensus) using the first free value within this range.
10.3. New sub-TLVs for the Target Stack TLV
This document requires allocation of two new sub-TLV types for This document requires allocation of two new sub-TLV types for
inclusion within the LSP ping [RFC4379] Target FEC Stack TLV (TLV inclusion within the LSP ping [RFC4379] Target FEC Stack TLV (TLV
type 1). type 1).
1. the HSMP-upstream LDP FEC Stack - requested value TBD 1. the HSMP-upstream LDP FEC Stack - requested value TBD
2. the HSMP-downstream LDP FEC Stack - requested value TBD 2. the HSMP-downstream LDP FEC Stack - requested value TBD
The value should be allocated from the IETF Standards Action range
(0-16383) that is used for mandatory and optional sub-TLVs that
requires a response if not understood. The value should be allocated
using the lowest free value within this range.
11. Acknowledgement 11. Acknowledgement
The author would like to thank Eric Rosen, Sebastien Jobert, Fei Su, The author would like to thank Eric Rosen, Sebastien Jobert, Fei Su,
Edward, Mach Chen, Thomas Morin, Loa Andersson for their valuable Edward, Mach Chen, Thomas Morin, Loa Andersson for their valuable
comments. comments.
12. References 12. References
12.1. Normative references 12.1. Normative references
skipping to change at page 14, line 30 skipping to change at page 14, line 47
IEEE1588v2 , March 2008. IEEE1588v2 , March 2008.
[RFC3376] Cain, B., Deering, S., Kouvelas, I., Fenner, B., and A. [RFC3376] Cain, B., Deering, S., Kouvelas, I., Fenner, B., and A.
Thyagarajan, "Internet Group Management Protocol, Version Thyagarajan, "Internet Group Management Protocol, Version
3", RFC 3376, October 2002. 3", RFC 3376, October 2002.
[RFC4379] Kompella, K. and G. Swallow, "Detecting Multi-Protocol [RFC4379] Kompella, K. and G. Swallow, "Detecting Multi-Protocol
Label Switched (MPLS) Data Plane Failures", RFC 4379, Label Switched (MPLS) Data Plane Failures", RFC 4379,
February 2006. February 2006.
[RFC4762] Lasserre, M. and V. Kompella, "Virtual Private LAN Service
(VPLS) Using Label Distribution Protocol (LDP) Signaling",
RFC 4762, January 2007.
[RFC5036] Andersson, L., Minei, I., and B. Thomas, "LDP [RFC5036] Andersson, L., Minei, I., and B. Thomas, "LDP
Specification", RFC 5036, October 2007. Specification", RFC 5036, October 2007.
[RFC6374] Frost, D. and S. Bryant, "Packet Loss and Delay
Measurement for MPLS Networks", RFC 6374, September 2011.
[RFC6826] Wijnands, IJ., Eckert, T., Leymann, N., and M. Napierala, [RFC6826] Wijnands, IJ., Eckert, T., Leymann, N., and M. Napierala,
"Multipoint LDP In-Band Signaling for Point-to-Multipoint "Multipoint LDP In-Band Signaling for Point-to-Multipoint
and Multipoint-to-Multipoint Label Switched Paths", and Multipoint-to-Multipoint Label Switched Paths",
RFC 6826, January 2013. RFC 6826, January 2013.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Lizhong Jin Lizhong Jin
Shanghai, China Shanghai, China
 End of changes. 12 change blocks. 
13 lines changed or deleted 26 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/