draft-ietf-mpls-rmr-10.txt   draft-ietf-mpls-rmr-11.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: November 22, 2019 Telefonica Expires: December 10, 2019 Telefonica
May 21, 2019 June 8, 2019
Resilient MPLS Rings Resilient MPLS Rings
draft-ietf-mpls-rmr-10 draft-ietf-mpls-rmr-11
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 November 22, 2019. This Internet-Draft will expire on December 10, 2019.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2019 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
skipping to change at page 2, line 41 skipping to change at page 2, line 41
4.2. Ring Announcement Phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4.2. Ring Announcement Phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.3. Mastership Phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 4.3. Mastership Phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.4. Ring Identification Phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 4.4. Ring Identification Phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.5. Ring Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 4.5. Ring Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5. Ring Signaling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 5. Ring Signaling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
6. Ring OAM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 6. Ring OAM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
7. Advanced Topics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 7. Advanced Topics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
7.1. Half-rings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 7.1. Half-rings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
7.2. Hub Node Resilience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 7.2. Hub Node Resilience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
9. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 9. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
Rings are a very common topology in transport networks. A ring is Rings are a very common topology in transport networks. A ring is
the simplest topology offering link and node resilience. Rings are the simplest topology offering link and node resilience. Rings are
skipping to change at page 13, line 40 skipping to change at page 13, line 40
If H1 fails, traffic from X to Z will drop until the T-LDP session If H1 fails, traffic from X to Z will drop until the T-LDP session
from H1 to Z fails, the IGP reconverges, and H2's label to Z is from H1 to Z fails, the IGP reconverges, and H2's label to Z is
chosen. Thereafter, traffic will go from X to H2 via a ring LSP, chosen. Thereafter, traffic will go from X to H2 via a ring LSP,
then to Z via LDP. However, this convergence could take a long time. then to Z via LDP. However, this convergence could take a long time.
Since this is a very common and important situation, it is again a Since this is a very common and important situation, it is again a
useful problem to solve. However, this topic too will not be useful problem to solve. However, this topic too will not be
addressed in this document; that task is left for a future document. addressed in this document; that task is left for a future document.
8. Security Considerations 8. Security Considerations
This document presents a new method of using MPLS in rings. The use This document proposes extensions to IS-IS, OSPF, LDP and RSVP-TE,
of MPLS in rings is not new, so this per se does not pose security all of which have mechanisms to secure them. The extensions proposed
concerns. The question is, rather, whether the extensions to do not represent per se a compromise to network security when the
protocols suggested here do so. IS-IS and OSPF have security control plane is secured, since any manipulation of the content of
mechanisms that ensure secure exchange of information, as do RSVP-TE the messages or even the control plane misinterpretation of the
and LDP. The extensions proposed here are protected by the same semantics are avoided.
mechanisms.
One can also ask whether the semantic content of these extensions can
be used to compromise a network or initiate a denial-of-service
attack. To do so would require either compromising the control plane
processing these requests, or manipulating the content of the
messages. The former is outside the scope of this document; the
latter is addressed by the security mechanisms of the underlying
protocols.
9. Acknowledgments 9. Acknowledgments
Many thanks to Pierre Bichon whose exemplar of self-organizing Many thanks to Pierre Bichon whose exemplar of self-organizing
networks and whose urging for ever simpler provisioning led to the networks and whose urging for ever simpler provisioning led to the
notion of promiscuous nodes. notion of promiscuous nodes.
10. IANA Considerations 10. IANA Considerations
There are no requests as yet to IANA for this document. There are no requests as yet to IANA for this document.
 End of changes. 5 change blocks. 
20 lines changed or deleted 11 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/