draft-ietf-ospf-te-metric-extensions-02.txt   draft-ietf-ospf-te-metric-extensions-03.txt 
Network Working Group S. Giacalone Network Working Group S. Giacalone
Internet Draft Thomson Reuters Internet Draft Thomson Reuters
Intended status: Proposed Standard Intended status: Proposed Standard
Expires: June 2013 D. Ward Expires: August 2013 D. Ward
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
J. Drake J. Drake
Juniper Networks Juniper Networks
A. Atlas A. Atlas
Juniper Networks Juniper Networks
S. Previdi S. Previdi
Cisco Systems Cisco Systems
December 18, 2012 February 25, 2013
OSPF Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions OSPF Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions
draft-ietf-ospf-te-metric-extensions-02.txt draft-ietf-ospf-te-metric-extensions-03.txt
Abstract Abstract
In certain networks, such as, but not limited to, financial In certain networks, such as, but not limited to, financial
information networks (e.g. stock market data providers), network information networks (e.g. stock market data providers), network
performance criteria (e.g. latency) are becoming as critical to data performance criteria (e.g. latency) are becoming as critical to data
path selection as other metrics. path selection as other metrics.
This document describes extensions to OSPF TE [RFC3630] such that This document describes extensions to OSPF TE [RFC3630] such that
network performance information can be distributed and collected in a network performance information can be distributed and collected in a
skipping to change at page 2, line 21 skipping to change at page 2, line 21
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."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
This Internet-Draft will expire on June 18, 2013. This Internet-Draft will expire on August 25, 2013.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2012 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
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
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction...................................................3 1. Introduction...................................................3
2. Conventions used in this document..............................4 2. Conventions used in this document..............................4
3. TE Metric Extensions to OSPF TE................................4 3. TE Metric Extensions to OSPF TE................................5
4. Sub TLV Details................................................6 4. Sub TLV Details................................................6
4.1. Unidirectional Link Delay Sub-TLV.........................6 4.1. Unidirectional Link Delay Sub-TLV.........................6
4.1.1. Type.................................................6 4.1.1. Type.................................................7
4.1.2. Length...............................................6 4.1.2. Length...............................................7
4.1.3. A bit................................................7 4.1.3. A bit................................................7
4.1.4. Reserved.............................................7 4.1.4. Reserved.............................................7
4.1.5. Delay Value..........................................7 4.1.5. Delay Value..........................................7
4.2. Unidirectional Delay Variation Sub-TLV....................7 4.2. Unidirectional Delay Variation Sub-TLV....................7
4.2.1. Type.................................................7 4.2.1. Type.................................................8
4.2.2. Length...............................................7 4.2.2. Length...............................................8
4.2.3. Reserved.............................................8 4.2.3. Reserved.............................................8
4.2.4. Delay Variation......................................8 4.2.4. Delay Variation......................................8
4.3. Unidirectional Link Loss Sub-TLV..........................8 4.3. Unidirectional Link Loss Sub-TLV..........................8
4.3.1. Type.................................................8 4.3.1. Type.................................................8
4.3.2. Length...............................................8 4.3.2. Length...............................................9
4.3.3. A bit................................................8 4.3.3. A bit................................................9
4.3.4. Reserved.............................................9 4.3.4. Reserved.............................................9
4.3.5. Link Loss............................................9 4.3.5. Link Loss............................................9
4.4. Unidirectional Residual Bandwidth Sub-TLV.................9 4.4. Unidirectional Residual Bandwidth Sub-TLV.................9
4.4.1. Type.................................................9 4.4.1. Type................................................10
4.4.2. Length..............................................10 4.4.2. Length..............................................10
4.4.3. Residual Bandwidth..................................10 4.4.3. Residual Bandwidth..................................10
4.5. Unidirectional Available Bandwidth Sub-TLV...............10 4.5. Unidirectional Available Bandwidth Sub-TLV...............10
4.4.4. Type................................................10 4.4.4. Type................................................11
4.4.5. Length..............................................11 4.4.5. Length..............................................11
4.4.6. Available Bandwidth.................................11 4.4.6. Available Bandwidth.................................11
5. Announcement Thresholds and Filters...........................11 5. Announcement Thresholds and Filters...........................11
6. Announcement Suppression......................................11 6. Announcement Suppression......................................12
7. Network Stability and Announcement Periodicity................12 7. Network Stability and Announcement Periodicity................12
8. Compatibility.................................................12 8. Compatibility.................................................12
9. Security Considerations.......................................12 9. Security Considerations.......................................12
10. IANA Considerations..........................................12 10. IANA Considerations..........................................12
11. References...................................................12 11. References...................................................13
11.1. Normative References....................................12 11.1. Normative References....................................13
11.2. Informative References..................................13 11.2. Informative References..................................13
12. Acknowledgments..............................................13 12. Acknowledgments..............................................13
13. Author's Addresses...........................................14 13. Author's Addresses...........................................14
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
In certain networks, such as, but not limited to, financial In certain networks, such as, but not limited to, financial
information networks (e.g. stock market data providers), network information networks (e.g. stock market data providers), network
performance information (e.g. latency) is becoming as critical to performance information (e.g. latency) is becoming as critical to
data path selection as other metrics. data path selection as other metrics.
skipping to change at page 4, line 22 skipping to change at page 4, line 22
The data distributed by OSPF TE Metric Extensions is meant to be used The data distributed by OSPF TE Metric Extensions is meant to be used
as part of the operation of the routing protocol (e.g. by replacing as part of the operation of the routing protocol (e.g. by replacing
cost with latency or considering bandwidth as well as cost), by cost with latency or considering bandwidth as well as cost), by
enhancing CSPF, or for other uses such as supplementing the data used enhancing CSPF, or for other uses such as supplementing the data used
by an Alto server [Alto]. With respect to CSPF, the data distributed by an Alto server [Alto]. With respect to CSPF, the data distributed
by OSPF TE Metric Extensions can be used to setup, fail over, and by OSPF TE Metric Extensions can be used to setup, fail over, and
fail back data paths using protocols such as RSVP-TE [RFC3209]. fail back data paths using protocols such as RSVP-TE [RFC3209].
Note that the mechanisms described in this document only disseminate Note that the mechanisms described in this document only disseminate
performance information. The methods for initially gathering that performance information. The methods for initially gathering that
performance information, such as [Frost], or acting on it once it is performance information, such as [RFC6375], or acting on it once it
distributed are outside the scope of this document. is distributed are outside the scope of this document. Example
mechanisms to measure latency, delay variation, and loss in an MPLS
network are given in [RFC6374]. While this document does not
specify how the performance information should be obtained, the
measurement of delay SHOULD NOT vary significantly based upon the
offered traffic load. Thus, queuing delays SHOULD NOT be included
in the delay measurement. For links, such as Forwarding
Adjacencies, care must be taken that measurement of the associated
delay avoids significant queuing delay; that could be accomplished
in a variety of ways, including either by measuring with a traffic
class that experiences minimal queuing or by summing the measured
link delays of the components of the link's path.
2. Conventions used in this document 2. Conventions used in this document
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC-2119 [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in RFC-2119 [RFC2119].
In this document, these words will appear with that interpretation In this document, these words will appear with that interpretation
only when in ALL CAPS. Lower case uses of these words are not to be only when in ALL CAPS. Lower case uses of these words are not to be
interpreted as carrying RFC-2119 significance. interpreted as carrying RFC-2119 significance.
skipping to change at page 12, line 37 skipping to change at page 13, line 9
10. IANA Considerations 10. IANA Considerations
IANA maintains the registry for the sub-TLVs. OSPF TE Metric IANA maintains the registry for the sub-TLVs. OSPF TE Metric
Extensions will require one new type code per sub-TLV defined in this Extensions will require one new type code per sub-TLV defined in this
document. document.
11. References 11. References
11.1. Normative References 11.1. Normative 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.
[RFC3630] Katz, D., Kompella, K., Yeung, D., "Traffic [RFC3630] Katz, D., Kompella, K., Yeung, D., "Traffic
Engineering (TE) Extensions to OSPF Version 2", RFC 3630, Engineering (TE) Extensions to OSPF Version 2", RFC 3630,
September 2003. September 2003.
[RFC6374] Frost, D. and S. Bryant, "Packet Loss and Delay
Measurement for MPLS Networks", RFC 6374, September 2011.
11.2. Informative References 11.2. Informative References
[RFC2328] Moy, J, "OSPF Version 2", RFC 2328, April 1998 [RFC2328] Moy, J, "OSPF Version 2", RFC 2328, April 1998
[RFC3031] Rosen, E., Viswanathan, A., Callon, R., "Multiprotocol [RFC3031] Rosen, E., Viswanathan, A., Callon, R., "Multiprotocol
Label Switching Architecture", January 2001 Label Switching Architecture", January 2001
[RFC3209] Awduche, D., Berger, L., Gan, D., Li, T., Srinivasan, [RFC3209] Awduche, D., Berger, L., Gan, D., Li, T., Srinivasan,
V., and G. Swallow, "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP V., and G. Swallow, "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP
Tunnels", RFC 3209, December 2001. Tunnels", RFC 3209, December 2001.
[RFC5250] Berger, L., Bryskin I., Zinin, A., Coltun, R., "The OSPF [RFC5250] Berger, L., Bryskin I., Zinin, A., Coltun, R., "The OSPF
Opaque LSA Option", RFC 5250, July 2008. Opaque LSA Option", RFC 5250, July 2008.
[Frost] D. Frost, S. Bryant"A Packet Loss and Delay Measurement [RFC6375] Frost, D. and S. Bryant, "A Packet Loss and Delay
Profile for MPLS-based Transport Networks" Measurement Profile for MPLS-Based Transport Networks",
RFC 6375, September 2011.
[Alto] R. Alimi R. Penno Y. Yang, "ALTO Protocol" [Alto] R. Alimi R. Penno Y. Yang, "ALTO Protocol"
12. Acknowledgments 12. Acknowledgments
The authors would like to recognize Ayman Soliman for his The authors would like to recognize Ayman Soliman for his
contributions. contributions.
This document was prepared using 2-Word-v2.0.template.dot. This document was prepared using 2-Word-v2.0.template.dot.
 End of changes. 17 change blocks. 
23 lines changed or deleted 38 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/