draft-ietf-mpls-rmr-08.txt   draft-ietf-mpls-rmr-09.txt 
MPLS WG K. Kompella MPLS WG K. Kompella
Internet-Draft Juniper Networks, Inc. Internet-Draft Juniper Networks, Inc.
Intended status: Standards Track L. Contreras Intended status: Standards Track L. Contreras
Expires: April 25, 2019 Telefonica Expires: July 15, 2019 Telefonica
October 22, 2018 January 11, 2019
Resilient MPLS Rings Resilient MPLS Rings
draft-ietf-mpls-rmr-08 draft-ietf-mpls-rmr-09
Abstract Abstract
This document describes the use of the MPLS control and data planes This document describes the use of the MPLS control and data planes
on ring topologies. It describes the special nature of rings, and on ring topologies. It describes the special nature of rings, and
proceeds to show how MPLS can be effectively used in such topologies. proceeds to show how MPLS can be effectively used in such topologies.
It describes how MPLS rings are configured, auto-discovered and It describes how MPLS rings are configured, auto-discovered and
signaled, as well as how the data plane works. Companion documents signaled, as well as how the data plane works. Companion documents
describe the details of discovery and signaling for specific describe the details of discovery and signaling for specific
protocols. protocols.
skipping to change at page 1, line 43 skipping to change at page 1, line 43
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 https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at https://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 25, 2019. This Internet-Draft will expire on July 15, 2019.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2019 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
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
skipping to change at page 3, line 12 skipping to change at page 3, line 12
the simplest topology offering link and node resilience. Rings are the simplest topology offering link and node resilience. Rings are
nearly ubiquitous in access and aggregation networks. As MPLS nearly ubiquitous in access and aggregation networks. As MPLS
increases its presence in such networks, and takes on a greater role increases its presence in such networks, and takes on a greater role
in transport, it is imperative that MPLS handles rings well; this is in transport, it is imperative that MPLS handles rings well; this is
not the case today. not the case today.
This document describes the special nature of rings, and the special This document describes the special nature of rings, and the special
needs of MPLS on rings. It then shows how these needs can be met in needs of MPLS on rings. It then shows how these needs can be met in
several ways, some of which involve extensions to protocols such as several ways, some of which involve extensions to protocols such as
IS-IS [RFC5305], OSPF[RFC3630], RSVP-TE [RFC3209] and LDP [RFC5036]. IS-IS [RFC5305], OSPF[RFC3630], RSVP-TE [RFC3209] and LDP [RFC5036].
RMR LSPs can also be signaled with SPRING [RFC8402]; that will be
described in a future document.
The intent of this document is to handle rings that "occur The intent of this document is to handle rings that "occur
naturally". Many access and aggregation networks in metros have naturally". Many access and aggregation networks in metros have
their start as a simple ring. They may then grow into more complex their start as a simple ring. They may then grow into more complex
topologies, for example, by adding parallel links to the ring, or by topologies, for example, by adding parallel links to the ring, or by
adding "express" links. The goal here is to discover these rings adding "express" links. The goal here is to discover these rings
(with some guidance), and run MPLS over them efficiently. The intent (with some guidance), and run MPLS over them efficiently. The intent
is not to construct rings in a mesh network, and use those for is not to construct rings in a mesh network, and use those for
protection. protection.
skipping to change at page 10, line 8 skipping to change at page 10, line 8
Ring Node TLV Format Ring Node TLV Format
[RMR Nbr Type][RMR Nbr Length][Nbr Address][Nbr Flags] [RMR Nbr Type][RMR Nbr Length][Nbr Address][Nbr Flags]
Ring Neighbor Sub-TLV Format Ring Neighbor Sub-TLV Format
0 1 0 1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|MV |SS | SO | MBZ |SU |M| |MV | SS | SO | MBZ |SU |M|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
MV: Mastership Value MV: Mastership Value
SS: Supported Signaling Protocols (10 = RSVP-TE; 01 = LDP) SS: Supported Signaling Protocols
(100 = RSVP-TE; 010 = LDP; 001 = SPRING)
SO: Supported OAM Protocols (100 = BFD; 010 = CFM; 001 = EFM) SO: Supported OAM Protocols (100 = BFD; 010 = CFM; 001 = EFM)
SU: Signaling Protocol to Use (00 = none; 01 = LDP; 10 = RSVP-TE) SU: Signaling Protocol to Use (00 = none; 01 = LDP; 10 = RSVP-TE)
M : Elected Master (0 = no, 1 = yes) M : Elected Master (0 = no, 1 = yes)
Flags for a Ring Node TLV Flags for a Ring Node TLV
0 1 0 1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|RD |OAM| MBZ | |RD |OAM| MBZ |
skipping to change at page 14, line 23 skipping to change at page 14, line 23
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3630>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3630>.
[RFC5036] Andersson, L., Ed., Minei, I., Ed., and B. Thomas, Ed., [RFC5036] Andersson, L., Ed., Minei, I., Ed., and B. Thomas, Ed.,
"LDP Specification", RFC 5036, DOI 10.17487/RFC5036, "LDP Specification", RFC 5036, DOI 10.17487/RFC5036,
October 2007, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5036>. October 2007, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5036>.
[RFC5305] Li, T. and H. Smit, "IS-IS Extensions for Traffic [RFC5305] Li, T. and H. Smit, "IS-IS Extensions for Traffic
Engineering", RFC 5305, DOI 10.17487/RFC5305, October Engineering", RFC 5305, DOI 10.17487/RFC5305, October
2008, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5305>. 2008, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5305>.
[RFC8402] Filsfils, C., Ed., Previdi, S., Ed., Ginsberg, L.,
Decraene, B., Litkowski, S., and R. Shakir, "Segment
Routing Architecture", RFC 8402, DOI 10.17487/RFC8402,
July 2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8402>.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Kireeti Kompella Kireeti Kompella
Juniper Networks, Inc. Juniper Networks, Inc.
1133 Innovation Way 1133 Innovation Way
Sunnyvale, CA 94089 Sunnyvale, CA 94089
USA USA
Email: kireeti.kompella@gmail.com Email: kireeti.kompella@gmail.com
 End of changes. 8 change blocks. 
7 lines changed or deleted 15 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.47. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/