draft-ietf-pce-comm-protocol-gen-reqs-05.txt   draft-ietf-pce-comm-protocol-gen-reqs-06.txt 
IETF Internet Draft PCE Working Group Jerry Ash (AT&T) IETF Internet Draft PCE Working Group Jerry Ash (AT&T)
Proposed Status: Informational Editor Proposed Status: Informational Editor
Expires: December 2006 J.L. Le Roux (France Telecom) Expires: December 2006 J.L. Le Roux (France Telecom)
Editor Editor
May 2006 May 2006
draft-ietf-pce-comm-protocol-gen-reqs-05.txt draft-ietf-pce-comm-protocol-gen-reqs-06.txt
PCE Communication Protocol Generic Requirements PCE Communication Protocol Generic Requirements
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79. aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.
skipping to change at page 2, line 23 skipping to change at page 2, line 23
6.1 Basic Protocol Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 6.1 Basic Protocol Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6.1.1 Commonality of PCC-PCE and PCE-PCE Communication . . . 5 6.1.1 Commonality of PCC-PCE and PCE-PCE Communication . . . 5
6.1.2 Client-Server Communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 6.1.2 Client-Server Communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6.1.3 Transport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 6.1.3 Transport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6.1.4 Path Computation Requests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 6.1.4 Path Computation Requests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6.1.5 Path Computation Responses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 6.1.5 Path Computation Responses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6.1.6 Cancellation of Pending Requests . . . . . . . . . . . 8 6.1.6 Cancellation of Pending Requests . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6.1.7 Multiple Requests and Responses . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 6.1.7 Multiple Requests and Responses . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6.1.8 Reliable Message Exchange . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 6.1.8 Reliable Message Exchange . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6.1.9 Secure Message Exchange . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 6.1.9 Secure Message Exchange . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6.1.10 Request Prioritization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 6.1.10 Request Prioritization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6.1.11 Unsolicited Notifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 6.1.11 Unsolicited Notifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6.1.12 Asynchronous Communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 6.1.12 Asynchronous Communication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6.1.13 Communication Overhead Minimization . . . . . . . . . 10 6.1.13 Communication Overhead Minimization . . . . . . . . . 10
6.1.14 Extensibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 6.1.14 Extensibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6.1.15 Scalability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 6.1.15 Scalability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6.1.16 Constraints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 6.1.16 Constraints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
6.1.17 Objective Functions Supported . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 6.1.17 Objective Functions Supported . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
6.2 Deployment Support Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 6.2 Deployment Support Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
6.2.1 Support for Different Service Provider Environments . . 13 6.2.1 Support for Different Service Provider Environments . . 13
6.2.2 Policy Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 6.2.2 Policy Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
skipping to change at page 9, line 38 skipping to change at page 9, line 38
on and re-use where possible techniques developed in other protocols on and re-use where possible techniques developed in other protocols
to overcome the same shortcomings. Functionality MUST NOT be added to overcome the same shortcomings. Functionality MUST NOT be added
to the PCECP where the chosen transport protocol already provides it. to the PCECP where the chosen transport protocol already provides it.
6.1.9 Secure Message Exchange 6.1.9 Secure Message Exchange
The PCC-PCE communication protocol MUST include provisions to ensure The PCC-PCE communication protocol MUST include provisions to ensure
the security of the exchanges between the entities. In particular, the security of the exchanges between the entities. In particular,
it MUST support mechanisms to prevent spoofing (e.g., it MUST support mechanisms to prevent spoofing (e.g.,
authentication), snooping (e.g., encryption) and DOS attacks (e.g., authentication), snooping (e.g., encryption) and DOS attacks (e.g.,
rate limiting, no promiscuous listening).
The PCC-PCE communication protocol MUST include provisions to ensure
the security of the exchanges between the entities. In particular,
it MUST support mechanisms to prevent spoofing (e.g.,
authentication), snooping (e.g., encryption) and DOS attacks (e.g.,
packet filtering, rate limiting, no promiscuous listening). Where packet filtering, rate limiting, no promiscuous listening). Where
the PCE-PCC communication takes place entirely within one limited the PCE-PCC communication takes place entirely within one limited
domain, the use of a private address space which is not available to domain, the use of a private address space which is not available to
customer systems MAY be used to help protect the information customer systems MAY be used to help protect the information
exchange, but other mechanisms MUST also be available. exchange, but other mechanisms MUST also be available.
This function may be provided by the transport protocol or directly This function may be provided by the transport protocol or directly
by the PCECP. by the PCECP.
See Section 7 for further discussion of security considerations. See Section 7 for further discussion of security considerations.
 End of changes. 3 change blocks. 
7 lines changed or deleted 2 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.31. The latest version is available from http://www.levkowetz.com/ietf/tools/rfcdiff/