draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-native-ip-08.txt   draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-native-ip-09.txt 
PCE Working Group A. Wang PCE Working Group A. Wang
Internet-Draft China Telecom Internet-Draft China Telecom
Intended status: Standards Track B. Khasanov Intended status: Standards Track B. Khasanov
Expires: March 18, 2021 S. Fang Expires: April 23, 2021 S. Fang
R. Tan R. Tan
Huawei Technologies,Co.,Ltd Huawei Technologies,Co.,Ltd
C. Zhu C. Zhu
ZTE Corporation ZTE Corporation
September 14, 2020 October 20, 2020
PCEP Extension for Native IP Network PCEP Extension for Native IP Network
draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-native-ip-08 draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-native-ip-09
Abstract Abstract
This document defines the Path Computation Element Communication This document defines the Path Computation Element Communication
Protocol (PCEP) extension for Central Control Dynamic Routing (CCDR) Protocol (PCEP) extension for Central Control Dynamic Routing (CCDR)
based application in Native IP network. The scenario and framework based application in Native IP network. The scenario and framework
of CCDR in native IP is described in [RFC8735] and of CCDR in native IP is described in [RFC8735] and
[I-D.ietf-teas-pce-native-ip]. This draft describes the key [I-D.ietf-teas-pce-native-ip]. This draft describes the key
information that is transferred between Path Computation Element information that is transferred between Path Computation Element
(PCE) and Path Computation Clients (PCC) to accomplish the End to End (PCE) and Path Computation Clients (PCC) to accomplish the End to End
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 March 18, 2021. This Internet-Draft will expire on April 23, 2021.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2020 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 20 skipping to change at page 2, line 20
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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Conventions used in this document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Conventions used in this document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. STATEFUL-PCE-CAPABILITY TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4. Capability Advertisemnt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
5. PCE-Initiated Native IP TE Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4.1. Open message . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
6. New Objects Extension . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 5. PCEP messages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
7. Objects Formats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 5.1. The PCInitiate message . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
7.1. BGP Peer Info Object . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5.2. The PCRpt message . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7.2. Explicit Peer Route Object . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 6. PCECC Native IP TE Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7.3. Peer Prefix Association Object . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 6.1. BGP Session Establishment Procedures . . . . . . . . . . 6
8. New Error-Types and Error-Values Defined . . . . . . . . . . 16 6.2. Explicit Route Establish Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . 9
9. Management Consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 6.3. BGP Prefix Advertisement Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . 12
10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 7. New PCEP Objects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
11. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 7.1. CCI Object . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
11.1. PCEP Object Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 7.2. BGP Peer Info Object . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
12. Acknowledgement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 7.3. Explicit Peer Route Object . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
13. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 7.4. Peer Prefix Association Object . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 8. New Error-Types and Error-Values Defined . . . . . . . . . . 19
9. Management Consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
11. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
11.1. PCEP Object Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
12. Contributor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
13. Acknowledgement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
14. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
Traditionally, Multiprotocol Label Switching Traffic Engineering Generally, Multiprotocol Label Switching Traffic Engineering (MPLS-
(MPLS-TE) requires the corresponding network devices support TE) requires the corresponding network devices support Multiprotocol
Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) or Resource ReSerVation Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) or Resource ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP)/Label
(RSVP)/Label Distribution Protocol (LDP) technologies to assure the Distribution Protocol (LDP) technologies to assure the End-to-End
End-to-End (E2E) traffic performance. But in native IP network, (E2E) traffic performance. But in native IP network, there will be
there will be no such signaling protocol to synchronize the action no such signaling protocol to synchronize the action among different
among different network devices. It is necessary to use the central network devices. It is necessary to use the central control mode
control mode that described in [RFC8283] to correlate the forwarding that described in [RFC8283] to correlate the forwarding behavior
behavior among different network devices. Draft among different network devices. Draft [I-D.ietf-teas-pce-native-ip]
[I-D.ietf-teas-pce-native-ip] describes the architecture and solution describes the architecture and solution philosophy for the E2E
philosophy for the E2E traffic assurance in Native IP network via traffic assurance in Native IP network via Multi Border Gateway
Dual/Multi Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) solution. This draft Protocol (BGP) solution. This draft describes the corresponding Path
describes the corresponding Path Computation Element Communication Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) extensions to
Protocol (PCEP) extensions to transfer the key information about peer transfer the key information about BGP peer info, peer prefix
address list, peer prefix association and the explicit peer route on association and the explicit peer route on on-path routers.
on-path routers.
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", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here.
3. Terminology 3. Terminology
This document uses the following terms defined in [RFC5440]: PCE, This document uses the following terms defined in [RFC5440]: PCE,
PCEP PCEP
The following terms are defined in this document: The following terms are defined in this document:
o CCDR: Central Control Dynamic Routing o CCDR: Central Control Dynamic Routing
o E2E: End to End o E2E: End to End
o BPI: BGP Peer Info o BPI: BGP Peer Info
o EPR: Explicit Peer Route o EPR: Explicit Peer Route
o PPA: Peer Prefix Association o PPA: Peer Prefix Association
o QoS: Quality of Service o QoS: Quality of Service
4. STATEFUL-PCE-CAPABILITY TLV 4. Capability Advertisemnt
The format of STATEFUL-PCE-CAPABILITY is defined in [RFC8231] and 4.1. Open message
included here for easy reference with the addition of the new N flag.
The right bits of N flag have been defined by other RFC documents.
0 1 2 3 During the PCEP Initialization Phase, PCEP Speakers (PCE or PCC)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 advertise their support of Native IP extensions.
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length=4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Flags |N|*|*|*|*|*|*|I|S|U|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-++-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-++-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 1: STATEFUL-PCE-CAPABILITY TLV Format
A new flag is defined to indicate the sender's support for traffic This document defines a new Path Setup Type (PST) [RFC8408] for
engineering in Native IP network. The newly defined PCEP Objects and Native-IP, as follows:
its proceeding procedures, as stated in Section 6 MUST be supported
by PCC or PCE when this flag is set.
N( NATIVE-IP-TE-CAPABILITY-----1 bit): If set to 1 by a PCC/PCE, the o PST = TBD1: Path is a Native IP path as per
N flag indicate that the PCC/PCE can support the traffic engineering [I-D.ietf-teas-pce-native-ip].
in Native IP network. The NATIVE-IP-TE-CAPABILITY flag MUST be set
by both the PCC and PCE in order to enable PCE-initiated Native IP
traffic engineering.
5. PCE-Initiated Native IP TE Procedures A PCEP speaker MUST indicate its support of the function described in
this document by sending a PATH-SETUP-TYPE-CAPABILITY TLV in the OPEN
object with this new PST included in the PST list.
PCE-Initated Native IP TE solution utilizing the existing PCE LSP [I-D.ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller] defined the PCECC-
Initate Request message(PCInitiate)[RFC8281], PCE Report CAPABILITY sub-TLV to exchange information about their PCECC
message(PCRpt) [RFC8281]and PCE Update message(PCUpd)[RFC8281] to capability. A new flag is defined in PCECC-CAPABILITY sub-TLV for
accomplish the multi BGP sessions establishment, end to end TE path Native IP.
deployment, and route prefixes advertisement among different BGP
sessions.
There is no label switch path within the Native IP environment, but N (NATIVE-IP-TE-CAPABILITY - 1 bit - TBD2): If set to 1 by a PCEP
there exist end to end forwarding path that assigned to the priority speaker, it indicates that the PCEP speaker is capable for TE in
traffic. Such path can be identified by the PLSP-ID that defined in Native IP network as specified in this document. The flag MUST be
Label Switched Path(LSP) object [RFC8231]_. _The PLSP-ID is assigned set by both the PCC and PCE in order to support this extension.
by each PCC, based on the Symbolic Path Name TLV in the LSP object
that from PCInitiate message. The Symbolic Path Name TLV can be used
to identify the end to end TE path in Native IP environment. The
association of Symbolic Path Name and each PLSP-ID in every PCC
assures the TE policies are assigned end to end in the network.
6. New Objects Extension 5. PCEP messages
Three new objects are defined in this draft: PCECC Native IP TE solution utilizing the existing PCE LSP Initate
Request message(PCInitiate)[RFC8281], and PCE Report message(PCRpt)
[RFC8281] to accomplish the multi BGP sessions establishment, end to
end TE path deployment, and route prefixes advertisement among
different BGP sessions. A new PST for Native-IP is used to indicate
the path setup based on TE in Native IP networks.
o BPI Object: BGP Peer Info Object, used to indicate the PCC which The extended PCInitiate message described in
BGP peer it should be peered with dynamically. [I-D.ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller] is used to download
or cleanup central controller's instructions (CCIs).
[I-D.ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller] specify an object
called CCI for the encoding of central controller's instructions.
This document specify a new CCI object-type for Native IP. The PCEP
messages are extended in this document to handle the PCECC operations
for Native IP. Three new PCEP Objects (BGP Peer Info (BPI) Object,
Explicit Peer Route (EPR) Object and Peer Prefix Association (PPA)
Object) are defined in this document. Refer toSection 7 for detail
object definitions.
o EPR Object: Explicit Peer Route object, used to indicate the PCC 5.1. The PCInitiate message
which route should be taken into to arrive to the peer.
o PPA Object: Peer Prefix Association Object, used to indicate the The PCInitiate Message defined in [RFC8281] and extended in
PCC which prefixes should be advertised via the corresponding BGP [I-D.ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller] is further extended
peer. to support Native-IP CCI.
7. Objects Formats The format of the extended PCInitiate message is as follows:
Each extension object takes the similar format, that is to say, it <PCInitiate Message> ::= <Common Header>
began with the common object header defined in [RFC5440] as the <PCE-initiated-lsp-list>
following: Where:
<Common Header> is defined in [RFC5440]
0 1 2 3 <PCE-initiated-lsp-list> ::= <PCE-initiated-lsp-request>
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 [<PCE-initiated-lsp-list>]
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Object-Class | OT |Res|P|I| Object Length(bytes) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| (Object body) |
// //
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 2: PCEP Object Format
Different object-class, object type and the corresponding object body <PCE-initiated-lsp-request> ::=
is defined separately in the following sections. (<PCE-initiated-lsp-instantiation>|
<PCE-initiated-lsp-deletion>|
<PCE-initiated-lsp-central-control>)
7.1. BGP Peer Info Object <PCE-initiated-lsp-central-control> ::= <SRP>
(<LSP>
<cci-list>)|
((<BPI>|<EPR>|<PPA>)
<CCI>)
<cci-list> ::= <CCI>
[<cci-list>]
Where:
<cci-list> is as per
[I-D.ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller].
<PCE-initiated-lsp-instantiation> and
<PCE-initiated-lsp-deletion> are as per
[RFC8281].
The LSP and SRP object is defined in [RFC8231].
When PCInitiate message is used create Native IP instructions, the
SRP and CCI objects MUST be present. The error handling for missing
SRP or CCI object is as per
[I-D.ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller]. Further either one
of BPI, EPR, or PPA object MUST be present. If none of them are
present, the receiving PCC MUST send a PCErr message with Error-
type=6 (Mandatory Object missing) and Error-value=TBD (Native IP
object missing).
To cleanup the SRP object must set the R (remove) bit.
5.2. The PCRpt message
The PCRpt message is used to acknowledge the Native-IP instructions
received from the central controller (PCE).
The format of the PCRpt message is as follows:
<PCRpt Message> ::= <Common Header>
<state-report-list>
Where:
<state-report-list> ::= <state-report>[<state-report-list>]
<state-report> ::= (<lsp-state-report>|
<central-control-report>)
<lsp-state-report> ::= [<SRP>]
<LSP>
<path>
<central-control-report> ::= [<SRP>]
(<LSP>
<cci-list>)|
((<BPI>|<EPR>|<PPA>)
<CCI>)
Where:
<path> is as per [RFC8231] and the LSP and SRP object are
also defined in [RFC8231].
The error handling for missing CCI object is as per
[I-D.ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller]. Further either one
of BPI, EPR, or PPA object MUST be present. If none of them are
present, the receiving PCE MUST send a PCErr message with Error-
type=6 (Mandatory Object missing) and Error-value=TBD ( Native IP
object missing).
6. PCECC Native IP TE Procedures
The detail procedures for the TE in native IP environment are
described in the following sections.
6.1. BGP Session Establishment Procedures
The procedures for establishing the BGP session between two peers is
shown below, using the PCInitiate and PCRpt message pair.
The PCInitiate message should be sent to PCC which acts as BGP
routers and route reflector. In the example in Figure 1, it should
be sent to R1(M1), R3(M2 & M3) and R7(M4), when R3 acts as RR.
When PCC receives the BPI and CCI object (with the R bit set to 0 in
SRP object) in PCInitiate message, the PCC should try to establish
the BGP session with the indicated Peer AS and Local/Peer IP address.
When PCC creates successfully the BGP session that is indicated by
the associated information, it should report the result via the PCRpt
messages, with BPI object included, and the corresponding SRP and CCI
object.
When PCC receives this message with the R bit set to 1 in SRP object
in PCInitiate message, the PCC should clear the BGP session that
indicated by the BPI object.
When PCC clears successfully the specified BGP session, it should
report the result via the PCRpt message, with the BPI object
included, and the corresponding SRP and CCI object.
M2 PCInitiate Message: M3 PCInitiate Message:
CC-ID=X3(Symbolic Path Name=Class A) CC-ID=X3(Symbolic Path Name=Class A)
BPI Object(Local IP=R3_A, Peer IP=R1_A) BPI Object(Local IP=R3_A, Peer IP=R7_A)
M2-R PCRpt Message: M3-R PCRpt Message:
CC-ID=X3 CC-ID=X3
BPI Object(Local IP=R3_A, Peer IP=R1_A) BPI Object(Local IP=R3_A, Peer IP=R7_A)
^ ^
| |
+------------------------------------^------------------+
|
|
|
| +------------------+
M1 PCInitiate Message: +----------+ PCE +-----------+
CC-ID=X1(Symbolic Path Name=Class A) | | +--------^---------+ |
BPI Object(Local IP=R1_A, Peer IP=R3_A) | | | |
| | | |
<------+ +-------------+ +---+
M1-R PCRpt Message: | | | |
CC-ID=X1 | +v-+ | |
BPI Object(Local IP=R1_A, Peer IP=R3_A +------------------+R3+-------------------+ | )
| +--+ | |
| | |
+v-+ +--+ +--+ +-v+ |
|R1+----------+R5+----------+R6+---------+R7| |
++-+ +--+ +--+ +-++ |
M4 PCInitiate Message: | | |
CC-ID=X7(Symbolic Path Name=Class A) | | |
BPI Object(Local IP=R7_A,Peer IP=R3_A) | +--+ +--+ | |
+------------+R2+----------+R4+-----------+ |
|
M4-R PCRpt Message: |
CC-ID=X7 <----------------------------------------------------+
BPI Object(Local IP=R3_A, Peer IP=R1_A)
Figure 1: BGP Session Establishment Procedures(R3 act as RR)
If the PCC cannot establish the BGP session that required by this
object, it should report the error values with the newly defined
error type(Error-type=TBD) and error value(Error-Value=01 or 02),
which is indicated in Section 8
6.2. Explicit Route Establish Procedures
The detail procedures for the explicit route establishment procedures
is shown below, using PCInitiate and PCRpt message pair.
The PCInitiate message should be sent to the on-path routers
respectively. In the example, for explicit route from R1 to R7, the
PCInitiate message should be sent to R1(M1), R2(M2) and R4(M3), as
shown in Figure 2. For explicit route from R7 to R1, the PCInitiate
message should be sent to R7(M1), R4(M2) and R2(M3), as shown in
Figure 3..
When PCC receives the EPR and the CCI object (with the R bit set to 0
in SRP object) in PCInitiate message, the PCC should install the
explicit route to the the peer.
When PCC install successfully the explicit route to the peer, it
should report the result via the PCRpt messages, with EPR object
included, and the corresponding SRP and CCI object.
When PCC receives the EPR and the CCI object with the R bit set to 1
in SRP object in PCInitiate message, the PCC should clear the
explicit route to the peer that indicated by the EPR object.
When PCC clear successfully the explicit route that indicated by this
object, it should report the result via the PCRpt message, with the
EPR object included, and the corresponding SRP and CCI object.
+------------------+
M1 PCInitiate Message: +----------+ PCE +-----------+
CC-ID=X1(Symbolic Path Name=Class A) | +----^---^---^-----+ |
EPR Object(Peer Address=R7_A | | | | |
Next Hop=R2_A) | | | | |
| | | | |
M1-R PCRpt Message: <---------------+ | | | |
CC-ID=X1 | | +v-+ | |
EPR Object(Peer Address=R7_A +------------+ +---+R3+-------------------+ )
Next Hop=R2_A) | | +--+ | |
| | | |
+v-+ +--+ | | +--+ +-v+
|R1+------+R5++ +----------------+R6+----+R7|
++-+ +--+ | | +--+ +-++
| | | |
M2 PCInitiate Message | +---+ +---+ |
CC-ID=X2(Symbolic Path Name=Class A) | +v-+ | | +v-+ |
EPR Object(Peer Address=R7_A +----------+R2+-+ +--------+R4+-----------+
Next Hop=R4_A) | |
| |
M2-R PCRpt Message | |
CC-ID=X2(Symbolic Path Name=Class A) <----------------------+ |
EPR Object(Peer Address=R7_A |
Next Hop=R4_A) |
v
M3 PCInitiate Message
CC-ID=X4(Symbolic Path Name=Class A)
EPR Object(Peer Address=R7_A
Next Hop=R7_A)
M3-R PCRpt Message
CC-ID=X4(Symbolic Path Name=Class A)
EPR Object(Peer Address=R7_A
Next Hop=R7_A)
Figure 2: Explicit Route Establish Procedures(From R1 to R7)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| |
v +------------------+ |
M1 PCInitiate Message: +----------+ PCE +-----+-----+
CC-ID=X7(Symbolic Path Name=Class A) | +----^---^---^-----+ |
EPR Object(Peer Address=R1_A | | | | |
Next Hop=R4_A) | | | | |
| | | | |
M1-R PCRpt Message: | | | | |
CC-ID=X7 | | +v-+ | |
EPR Object(Peer Address=R1_A +------------+ +---+R3+-------------------+ )
Next Hop=R4_A) | | +--+ | |
| | | |
+v-+ +--+ | | +--+ +-v+
|R1+------+R5++ +----------------+R6+----+R7|
++-+ +--+ | | +--+ +-++
| | | |
M3 PCInitiate Message | +---+ +---+ |
CC-ID=X2(Symbolic Path Name=Class A) | +v-+ | | +v-+ |
EPR Object(Peer Address=R1_A +----------+R2+-+ +--------+R4+-----------+
Next Hop=R1_A) | |
| |
M3-R PCRpt Message | |
CC-ID=X2(Symbolic Path Name=Class A) <----------------------+ |
EPR Object(Peer Address=R1_A |
Next Hop=R1_A) |
v
M2 PCInitiate Message
CC-ID=X4(Symbolic Path Name=Class A)
EPR Object(Peer Address=R1_A
Next Hop=R2_A)
M2-R PCRpt Message
CC-ID=X4(Symbolic Path Name=Class A)
EPR Object(Peer Address=R1_A
Next Hop=R2_A)
Figure 3: Explicit Route Establish Procedures(From R7 to R1)
Upon the error occurs, the PCC SHOULD send the corresponding
error(Error-type=TBD, Error-value=03) information that defined in
Section 8. When the peer info that associated with the Symbolic Path
Name is not the same as the peer info that indicated in EPR object in
PCC, an error (Error-type=TBD, Error-value=04) should be reported via
the PCRpt message.
6.3. BGP Prefix Advertisement Procedures
The detail procedures for BGP prefix advertisement is shown below,
using PCInitiate and PCRpt message pair.
The PCInitiate message should be sent to PCC that acts as BGP peer
router only. In the example, it should be sent to R1(M1) and R7(M2)
respectively.
When PCC receives the PPA and the CCI object (with the R bit set to 0
in SRP object) in PCInitiate message, the PCC should send the
prefixes indicated in this object to the appointed BGP peer.
When PCC sends successfully the prefixes to the appointed BGP peer,
it should report the result via the PCRpt messages, with PPA object
included, and the corresponding SRP and CCI object.
When PCC receives the PPA and the CCI object with the R bit set to 1
in SRP object in PCInitiate message, the PCC should withdraw the
prefixes advertisement to the peer that indicated by this object.
When PCC withdraws successfully the prefixes that indicated by this
object, it should report the result via the PCRpt message, with the
PPA object included, and the corresponding SRP and CCI object.
The IPv4 prefix MUST only be advertised via the IPv4 BGP session and
the IPv6 prefix MUST only be advertised via the IPv6 BGP session. If
mismatch occur, an error(Error-type=TBD, Error-value=05) should be
reported.
When the peer info that associated with the Symbolic Path Name is not
the same as the peer info that indicated in PPA object in PCC, an
error (Error-type=TBD, Error-value=06) should be reported via the
PCRpt message.
M2 PCInitiate Message:
CC-ID=X7(Symbolic Path Name=Class A)
PPA Object(Peer IP=R1_A, Prefix=7_A)
<-----+
M2-R PCRpt Message: |
CC-ID=X7 |
PPA Object(Peer IP=R1_A, Prefix=7_A) |
|
|
|
+------------------+ |
M1 PCInitiate Message: +----------+ PCE +-----------+ |
CC-ID=X1(Symbolic Path Name=Class A) | +------------------+ | |
PPA Object(Peer IP=R7_A, Prefix=1_A) | | |
| | |
<----------+ +---+
M1-R PCRpt Message: | |
CC-ID=X1 | +--+ |
PPA Object(Peer IP=R7_A,Prefix=1_A) +------------------+R3+-------------------+ )
| +--+ |
| |
+v-+ +--+ +--+ +-v+
|R1+----------+R5+----------+R6+---------+R7|
++-+ +--+ +--+ +-++
| |
| |
| +--+ +--+ |
+------------+R2+----------+R4+-----------+
Figure 4: BGP Prefix Advertisement Procedures
7. New PCEP Objects
One new CCI Object and three new PCEP objects are defined in this
draft. All new PCEP objects are as per [RFC5440]
7.1. CCI Object
The Central Control Instructions (CCI) Object is used by the PCE to
specify the forwarding instructions is defined in
[I-D.ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller]. This document
defines another object-type for Native-IP.
CCI Object-Type is TBD for Native-IP as below
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| CC-ID |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Reserved | Flags |
+---------------------------------------------------------------+
| |
// Optional TLV //
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 5: CCI Object for Native IP
Figure 1
The field CC-ID is as described in
[I-D.ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller]. Following fields
are defined for CCI Object-Type TBD
Reserved: is set to zero while sending, ignored on receipt.
Flags: is used to carry any additional information pertaining to the
CCI. Currently no flag bits are defined.
The Symbolic Path Name TLV [RFC8231] MUST be included in the CCI
Object-Type TBD to identify the end to end TE path in Native IP
environment and MUST be unique.
7.2. BGP Peer Info Object
The BGP Peer Info object is used to specify the information about the The BGP Peer Info object is used to specify the information about the
peer that the PCC should establish the BGP relationship with. This peer that the PCC should establish the BGP relationship with. This
object should only be included and sent to the head and end router of object should only be included and sent to the head and end router of
the E2E path in case there is no Route Reflection (RR) involved. If the E2E path in case there is no Route Reflection (RR) involved. If
the RR is used between the head and end routers, then such the RR is used between the head and end routers, then such
information should be sent to head router, RR and end router information should be sent to head router, RR and end router
respectively. respectively.
By default, there MUST be no prefix be distributed via such BGP By default, there MUST be no prefix be distributed via such BGP
session that established by this object. session that established by this object.
By default, the Local/Peer IP address SHOULD be dedicated to the By default, the Local/Peer IP address SHOULD be dedicated to the
usage of native IP TE solution, and SHOULD not be used by other BGP usage of native IP TE solution, and SHOULD NOT be used by other BGP
sessions that established by manual or non PCE initiated sessions that established by manual or non PCE initiated
configuration. configuration.
BGP Peer Info Object-Class is TBD BGP Peer Info Object-Class is TBD
BGP Peer Info Object-Type is 1 for IPv4 and 2 for IPv6 BGP Peer Info Object-Type is 1 for IPv4 and 2 for IPv6
The format of the BGP Peer Info object body for IPv4(Object-Type=1) The format of the BGP Peer Info object body for IPv4(Object-Type=1)
is as follows: is as follows:
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Peer AS Number | | Peer AS Number |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
skipping to change at page 6, line 18 skipping to change at page 15, line 22
| Peer AS Number | | Peer AS Number |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ETTL | Reserved | | ETTL | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Local IP Address | | Local IP Address |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Peer IP Address | | Peer IP Address |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Additional TLVs | | Additional TLVs |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 3: BGP Peer Info Object Body Format for IPv4 Figure 6: BGP Peer Info Object Body Format for IPv4
The format of the BGP Peer Info object body for IPv6(Object-Type=2) The format of the BGP Peer Info object body for IPv6(Object-Type=2)
is as follows: is as follows:
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Peer AS Number | | Peer AS Number |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ETTL | Reserved | | ETTL | Reserved |
skipping to change at page 6, line 48 skipping to change at page 16, line 30
| | | |
+ + + +
| Peer IP Address (16 bytes) | | Peer IP Address (16 bytes) |
+ + + +
| | | |
+ + + +
| | | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Additional TLVs | | Additional TLVs |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 4: BGP Peer Info Object Body Format for IPv6 Figure 7: BGP Peer Info Object Body Format for IPv6
Peer AS Number: 4 Bytes, to indicate the AS number of Remote Peer. Peer AS Number: 4 Bytes, to indicate the AS number of Remote Peer.
ETTL: 1 Bytes, to indicate the multi hop count for EBGP session. It ETTL: 1 Bytes, to indicate the multi hop count for EBGP session. It
should be 0 and ignored when Local AS and Peer AS is same. should be 0 and ignored when Local AS and Peer AS is same.
Reserved: Bits reserved for future use. Reserved: is set to zero while sending, ignored on receipt..
Local IP Address(4/16 Bytes): IP address of the local router, used to Local IP Address(4/16 Bytes): IP address of the local router, used to
peer with other end router. When Object-Type is 1, length is 4 peer with other end router. When Object-Type is 1, length is 4
bytes; when Object-Type is 2, length is 16 bytes. bytes; when Object-Type is 2, length is 16 bytes.
Peer IP Address(4/16 Bytes): IP address of the peer router, used to Peer IP Address(4/16 Bytes): IP address of the peer router, used to
peer with the local router. When Object-Type is 1, length is 4 peer with the local router. When Object-Type is 1, length is 4
bytes; when Object-Type is 2, length is 16 bytes; bytes; when Object-Type is 2, length is 16 bytes;
Additional TLVs: TLVs that associated with this object, can be used Additional TLVs: TLVs that associated with this object, can be used
to convey other necessary information for dynamic BGP session to convey other necessary information for dynamic BGP session
establishment. Its definition is out of the current document. establishment. Its definition is out of the current document.
The detail procedures for the usage of this object is shown 7.3. Explicit Peer Route Object
below(PCInitiate and PCRpt message pair, other message pairs are
similar)
The PCInitiate message should be sent to R1(M1), R3(M2 & M3) and
R7(M4) when R3 acts as RR.
M2 PCInitiate Message: M3 PCInitiate Message:
PLSP-ID=X3(Symbolic Path Name=Class A) PLSP-ID=X3(Symbolic Path Name=Class A)
BPI Object(Local IP=R3_A, Peer IP=R1_A) BPI Object(Local IP=R3_A, Peer IP=R7_A)
M2-R PCRpt Message: M3-R PCRpt Message:
PLSP-ID=X3 PLSP-ID=X3
BPI Object(Local IP=R3_A, Peer IP=R1_A) BPI Object(Local IP=R3_A, Peer IP=R7_A)
^ ^
| |
+------------------------------------^------------------+
|
|
|
| +------------------+
M1 PCInitiate Message: +----------+ PCE +-----------+
PLSP-ID=X1(Symbolic Path Name=Class A) | | +--------^---------+ |
BPI Object(Local IP=R1_A, Peer IP=R3_A) | | | |
| | | |
<------+ +-------------+ +---+
M1-R PCRpt Message: | | | |
PLSP-ID=X1 | +v-+ | |
BPI Object(Local IP=R1_A, Peer IP=R3_A +------------------+R3+-------------------+ | )
| +--+ | |
| | |
+v-+ +--+ +--+ +-v+ |
|R1+----------+R5+----------+R6+---------+R7| |
++-+ +--+ +--+ +-++ |
M4 PCInitiate Message: | | |
PLSP-ID=X7(Symbolic Path Name=Class A) | | |
BPI Object(Local IP=R7_A,Peer IP=R3_A) | +--+ +--+ | |
+------------+R2+----------+R4+-----------+ |
|
M4-R PCRpt Message: |
PLSP-ID=X7 <----------------------------------------------------+
BPI Object(Local IP=R3_A, Peer IP=R1_A)
Figure 5: BGP Peer Establishment Procedures(R3 act as RR)
When PCC receives this object with the R bit set to 0 in SRP object
in PCInitiate message, the PCC should try to establish the BGP
session with the indicated Peer AS and Local/Peer IP address.
When PCC creates successfully the BGP session that is indicated by
the associated information, it should report the result via the PCRpt
messages, with this object included, and the corresponding SRP and
LSP object.
When PCC receives this object with the R bit set to 1 in SRP object
in PCInitiate message, the PCC should clear the BGP session that
indicated by Local/Peer IP address.
When PCC clears successfully the specified BGP session, it should
report the result via the PCRpt message, with this object included,
and the corresponding SRP and LSP object.
When PCC receives this object with the LSP object in PCE Update
message, the PCC should update the BGP session that identified by the
PLSP-ID with the updated information contained in this object.
When PCC updates successfully the BGP session that is indicated by
the PLSP-ID, it should report the result via the PCRpt message, with
this object included, and the corresponding SRP and LSP object.
Upon PCC can't build the BGP session that required by this object, it
should report the error values with the newly defined error type and
error value, which is indicated in Section 8
7.2. Explicit Peer Route Object
The Explicit Peer Route object is defined to specify the explicit The Explicit Peer Route object is defined to specify the explicit
peer route to the corresponding peer address on each device that is peer route to the corresponding peer address on each device that is
on the E2E assurance path. This Object should be sent to all the on the E2E assurance path. This Object should be sent to all the
devices that locates on the E2E assurance path that calculated by devices that locates on the E2E assurance path that calculated by
PCE. PCE.
The path established by this object should have higher priority than The path established by this object should have higher priority than
other path calculated by dynamic IGP protocol, but should be lower other path calculated by dynamic IGP protocol, but should be lower
priority that the static route configured by manual or NETCONF priority that the static route configured by manual or NETCONF
skipping to change at page 10, line 8 skipping to change at page 17, line 28
Explicit Peer Route Object-Class is TBD. Explicit Peer Route Object-Class is TBD.
Explicit Peer Route Object-Type is 1 for IPv4 and 2 for IPv6 Explicit Peer Route Object-Type is 1 for IPv4 and 2 for IPv6
The format of Explicit Peer Route object body for IPv4(Object-Type=1) The format of Explicit Peer Route object body for IPv4(Object-Type=1)
is as follows: is as follows:
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Route Priority | Resv. | | Route Priority | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| IPv4 Peer Address | | IPv4 Peer Address |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Next Hop Address to the IPv4 Peer Address | | Next Hop Address to the IPv4 Peer Address |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 6: Explicit Peer Route Object Body Format for IPv4 Figure 8: Explicit Peer Route Object Body Format for IPv4
The format of Explicit Peer Route object body for IPv6(Object-Type=2) The format of Explicit Peer Route object body for IPv6(Object-Type=2)
is as follows: is as follows:
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Route Priority | Resv. | | Route Priority | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| | | |
+ + + +
| IPv6 Peer Address | | IPv6 Peer Address |
+ + + +
| | | |
+ + + +
| | | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| | | |
+ + + +
| Next Hop Address to the IPv6 Peer Address | | Next Hop Address to the IPv6 Peer Address |
+ + + +
| | | |
+ + + +
| | | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 7: Explicit Peer Route Object Body Format for IPv6 Figure 9: Explicit Peer Route Object Body Format for IPv6
Route Priority: 2 Bytes, The priority of this explicit route. The Route Priority: 2 Bytes, The priority of this explicit route. The
higher priority should be preferred by the device. higher priority should be preferred by the device.
Resv.: Bit reserved for future use. Reserved.: is set to zero while sending, ignored on receipt.
Peer Address: To indicate the peer address. Peer Address: To indicate the peer address.
Next Hop Address to the Peer: To indicate the next hop address to the Next Hop Address to the Peer: To indicate the next hop address to the
corresponding peer. corresponding peer.
The detail procedures for the usage of this object is shown 7.4. Peer Prefix Association Object
below(PCInitiate and PCRpt message pair, other message pairs are
similar)
For explicit route from R1 to R7, the PCIniitate message should be
sent to R1(M1), R2(M2) and R4(M3).
+------------------+
M1 PCInitiate Message: +----------+ PCE +-----------+
PLSP-ID=X1(Symbolic Path Name=Class A) | +----^---^---^-----+ |
EPR Object(Peer Address=R7_A | | | | |
Next Hop=R2_A) | | | | |
| | | | |
M1-R PCRpt Message: <---------------+ | | | |
PLSP-ID=X1 | | +v-+ | |
EPR Object(Peer Address=R7_A +------------+ +---+R3+-------------------+ )
Next Hop=R2_A) | | +--+ | |
| | | |
+v-+ +--+ | | +--+ +-v+
|R1+------+R5++ +----------------+R6+----+R7|
++-+ +--+ | | +--+ +-++
| | | |
M2 PCInitiate Message | +---+ +---+ |
PLSP-ID=X2(Symbolic Path Name=Class A) | +v-+ | | +v-+ |
EPR Object(Peer Address=R7_A +----------+R2+-+ +--------+R4+-----------+
Next Hop=R4_A) | |
| |
M2-R PCRpt Message | |
PLSP-ID=X2(Symbolic Path Name=Class A) <----------------------+ |
EPR Object(Peer Address=R7_A |
Next Hop=R4_A) |
v
M3 PCInitiate Message
PLSP-ID=X4(Symbolic Path Name=Class A)
EPR Object(Peer Address=R7_A
Next Hop=R7_A)
M3-R PCRpt Message
PLSP-ID=X4(Symbolic Path Name=Class A)
EPR Object(Peer Address=R7_A
Next Hop=R7_A)
Figure 8: Explicit Route Establish Procedures(From R1 to R7)
For explicit route from R7 to R1, the PCIniitate message should be
sent to R7(M1), R4(M2) and R2(M3).
-------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| |
v +------------------+ |
M1 PCInitiate Message: +----------+ PCE +-----+-----+
PLSP-ID=X7(Symbolic Path Name=Class A) | +----^---^---^-----+ |
EPR Object(Peer Address=R1_A | | | | |
Next Hop=R4_A) | | | | |
| | | | |
M1-R PCRpt Message: | | | | |
PLSP-ID=X7 | | +v-+ | |
EPR Object(Peer Address=R1_A +------------+ +---+R3+-------------------+ )
Next Hop=R4_A) | | +--+ | |
| | | |
+v-+ +--+ | | +--+ +-v+
|R1+------+R5++ +----------------+R6+----+R7|
++-+ +--+ | | +--+ +-++
| | | |
M3 PCInitiate Message | +---+ +---+ |
PLSP-ID=X2(Symbolic Path Name=Class A) | +v-+ | | +v-+ |
EPR Object(Peer Address=R1_A +----------+R2+-+ +--------+R4+-----------+
Next Hop=R1_A) | |
| |
M3-R PCRpt Message | |
PLSP-ID=X2(Symbolic Path Name=Class A) <----------------------+ |
EPR Object(Peer Address=R1_A |
Next Hop=R1_A) |
v
M2 PCInitiate Message
PLSP-ID=X4(Symbolic Path Name=Class A)
EPR Object(Peer Address=R1_A
Next Hop=R2_A)
M2-R PCRpt Message
PLSP-ID=X4(Symbolic Path Name=Class A)
EPR Object(Peer Address=R1_A
Next Hop=R2_A)
Figure 9: Explicit Route Establish Procedures(From R7 to R1)
When PCC receives this object with the R bit set to 0 in SRP object
in PCInitiate message, the PCC should install the explicit route to
the the peer.
When PCC install successfully the explicit route to the peer, it
should report the result via the PCRpt messages, with this object
included, and the corresponding SRP and LSP object.
When PCC receives this object with the R bit set to 1 in SRP object
in PCInitiate message, the PCC should clear the explicit route to the
peer that indicated by this object.
When PCC clear successfully the explicit route that indicated by this
object, it should report the result via the PCRpt message, with this
object included, and the corresponding SRP and LSP object.
When PCC receives this object in PCUpd message, the PCC should update
the explicit route according to info indicated in this object.
When PCC updates the path successfully, it should report the result
via the PCRpt message, with this object included, and the
corresponding SRP and LSP object.
Upon the error occurs, the PCC SHOULD send the corresponding error
information that defined in Section 8
7.3. Peer Prefix Association Object
The Peer Prefix Association object is defined to specify the IP The Peer Prefix Association object is defined to specify the IP
prefixes that should be advertised to the corresponding peer. This prefixes that should be advertised to the corresponding peer. This
object should only be included and sent to the head/end router of the object should only be included and sent to the head/end router of the
end2end path. end2end path.
The prefixes information included in this object MUST only be The prefixes information included in this object MUST only be
advertised to the indicated peer, MUST not be advertised to other BGP advertised to the indicated peer, MUST NOT be advertised to other BGP
peers. peers.
Peer Prefix Association Object-Class is TBD Peer Prefix Association Object-Class is TBD
Peer Prefix Association Object-Type is 1 for IPv4 and 2 for IPv6 Peer Prefix Association Object-Type is 1 for IPv4 and 2 for IPv6
The format of the Peer Prefix Association object body is as follows: The format of the Peer Prefix Association object body is as follows:
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Peer IPv4 Address | | Peer IPv4 Address |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| | | |
// IPv4 Prefix subobjects // // IPv4 Prefix subobjects //
| | | |
skipping to change at page 14, line 30 skipping to change at page 19, line 42
[RFC3209], identify the prefixes that will be sent to the peer that [RFC3209], identify the prefixes that will be sent to the peer that
identified by Peer IPv4 Address List. identified by Peer IPv4 Address List.
Peer IPv6 Address: 16 Bytes. Identifies the peer IPv6 address that Peer IPv6 Address: 16 Bytes. Identifies the peer IPv6 address that
the associated prefixes will be sent to. the associated prefixes will be sent to.
IPv6 Prefix subojects: List of IPv6 Prefix subobjects that defined in IPv6 Prefix subojects: List of IPv6 Prefix subobjects that defined in
[RFC3209], identify the prefixes that will be sent to the peer that [RFC3209], identify the prefixes that will be sent to the peer that
identified by Peer IPv6 Address List. identified by Peer IPv6 Address List.
The detail procedures for the usage of this object is shown
below(PCInitiate and PCRpt message pair, other message pairs are
similar)
The PCInitiate message should be sent to R1(M1) and R7(M2)
respectively.
M2 PCInitiate Message:
PLSP-ID=X7(Symbolic Path Name=Class A)
PPA Object(Peer IP=R1_A, Prefix=7_A)
<-----+
M2-R PCRpt Message: |
PLSP-ID=X7 |
PPA Object(Peer IP=R1_A, Prefix=7_A) |
|
|
|
+------------------+ |
M1 PCInitiate Message: +----------+ PCE +-----------+ |
PLSP-ID=X1(Symbolic Path Name=Class A) | +------------------+ | |
PPA Object(Peer IP=R7_A, Prefix=1_A) | | |
| | |
<----------+ +---+
M1-R PCRpt Message: | |
PLSP-ID=X1 | +--+ |
PPA Object(Peer IP=R7_A,Prefix=1_A) +------------------+R3+-------------------+ )
| +--+ |
| |
+v-+ +--+ +--+ +-v+
|R1+----------+R5+----------+R6+---------+R7|
++-+ +--+ +--+ +-++
| |
| |
| +--+ +--+ |
+------------+R2+----------+R4+-----------+
Figure 12: BGP Prefix Advertisement Procedures
When PCC receives this object with the R bit set to 0 in SRP object
in PCInitiate message, the PCC should send the prefixes indicated in
this object to the appointed BGP peer.
When PCC sends successfully the prefixes to the appointed BGP peer,
it should report the result via the PCRpt messages, with this object
included, and the corresponding SRP and LSP object.
When PCC receives this object with the R bit set to 1 in SRP object
in PCInitiate message, the PCC should withdraw the prefixes
advertisement to the peer that indicated by this object.
When PCC withdraws successfully the prefixes that indicated by this
object, it should report the result via the PCRpt message, with this
object included, and the corresponding SRP and LSP object.
When PCC receives this object in PCUpd message, it should update the
BGP routes advertised to the associated peer.
When PCC updates the advertised BGP routes successfully, it should
report the result via the PCRpt message, with this object included,
and the corresponding SRP and LSP object.
The IPv4 prefix MUST only be advertised via the IPv4 BGP session and
the IPv6 prefix MUST only be advertised via the IPv6 BGP session. If
mismatch occur, an error should be reported.
When the peer info that associated with the PLSP-ID is not the same
as the peer info that indicated in this object in PCC, a error should
be reported via the PCRpt message.
Upon the error occurs, the PCC SHOULD send the corresponding error
information that defined in Section 8
The object type of the above three objects should be identical to
assure the prefixes from one address family are advertised via the
peer belong to same address family, and the traffic is forwarded to
the next hop also belong to same address family. If the mismatch
occur, the error should be reported to the PCE.
For one PLSP-ID on the PCC, the object type of PAL object should be
equal to object type of PPA object. If not, the mismatch occurs and
the related error should be reported.
8. New Error-Types and Error-Values Defined 8. New Error-Types and Error-Values Defined
A PCEP-ERROR object is used to report a PCEP error and is A PCEP-ERROR object is used to report a PCEP error and is
characterized by an Error-Type that specifies that type of error and characterized by an Error-Type that specifies that type of error and
an Error-value that provides additional information about the error. an Error-value that provides additional information about the error.
An additional Error-Type and several Error-values are defined to An additional Error-Type and several Error-values are defined to
represent some the errors related to the newly defined objects, which represent some the errors related to the newly defined objects, which
are related to Native IP TE procedures. are related to Native IP TE procedures.
+============+===============+==============================+ +============+===============+==============================+
skipping to change at page 17, line 17 skipping to change at page 20, line 17
+============+===============+==============================+ +============+===============+==============================+
| TBD | Native IP | | | TBD | Native IP | |
| | TE failure | | | | TE failure | |
+------------+---------------+------------------------------+ +------------+---------------+------------------------------+
| | | 0: Unassigned | | | | 0: Unassigned |
+------------+---------------+------------------------------+ +------------+---------------+------------------------------+
| | | 1: Peer AS not match | | | | 1: Peer AS not match |
+------------+---------------+------------------------------+ +------------+---------------+------------------------------+
| | | 2: Peer IP can't be reached | | | | 2: Peer IP can't be reached |
+------------+---------------+------------------------------+ +------------+---------------+------------------------------+
| | | 3: Peer Address mismatch | | | | 3: Explicit Peer Route Error |
+------------+---------------+------------------------------+ +------------+---------------+------------------------------+
| | | 4: PAL/PPA Object AF mismatch| | | | 4: EPR/BPI Peer Info mismatch|
+------------+---------------+------------------------------+ +------------+---------------+------------------------------+
| | | 5: PAL/EPR Object AF mismatch| | | | 5: BPI/PPA Object AF mismatch|
+------------+---------------+------------------------------+ +------------+---------------+------------------------------+
| | | 6: PPA/EPR object AF mismatch| | | | 6: PPA/BPI Peer Info mismatch|
+------------+---------------+------------------------------+ +------------+---------------+------------------------------+
| | | 7: | | | | 7: |
+------------+---------------+------------------------------+ +------------+---------------+------------------------------+
| | | 8: | | | | 8: |
+------------+---------------+------------------------------+ +------------+---------------+------------------------------+
| | | 8: |
+------------+---------------+------------------------------+
| | | 9: | | | | 9: |
+------------+---------------+------------------------------+ +------------+---------------+------------------------------+
Figure 13: Newly defined Error-Type and Error-Value Figure 12: Newly defined Error-Type and Error-Value
9. Management Consideration 9. Management Consideration
The information transferred in this draft is mainly used for the The information transferred in this draft is mainly used for the
light weight BGP session setup, explicit route deployment and the light weight BGP session setup, explicit route deployment and the
prefix distribution. The planning, allocation and distribution of prefix distribution. The planning, allocation and distribution of
the peer addresses within IGP should be accomplished in advanced and the peer addresses within IGP should be accomplished in advanced and
they are out of the scope of this draft. they are out of the scope of this draft.
[RFC8232] describes the state synchronization procedure between [RFC8232] describes the state synchronization procedure between
skipping to change at page 18, line 17 skipping to change at page 21, line 20
Service provider should consider the protection of PCE and their Service provider should consider the protection of PCE and their
communication with the underlay devices, which is described in communication with the underlay devices, which is described in
document [RFC5440] and [RFC8253] document [RFC5440] and [RFC8253]
11. IANA Considerations 11. IANA Considerations
11.1. PCEP Object Types 11.1. PCEP Object Types
IANA is requested to allocate new registry for the PCEP Object Type: IANA is requested to allocate new registry for the PCEP Object Type:
Object-Type Value Name Reference Object-Class Value Name Reference
TBD BGP Peer Info This document TBD CCI Object This document
Object-Type
TBD: Native IP
TBD BGP Peer Info This document
Object-Type Object-Type
1: IPv4 address 1: IPv4 address
2: IPv6 address 2: IPv6 address
TBD Explicit Peer Route This document TBD Explicit Peer Route This document
Object-Type Object-Type
1: IPv4 address 1: IPv4 address
2: IPv6 address 2: IPv6 address
TBD Peer Prefix Association This document TBD Peer Prefix Association This document
Object-Type Object-Type
1: IPv4 address 1: IPv4 address
2: IPv6 address 2: IPv6 address
12. Acknowledgement 12. Contributor
Thanks Dhruv Dhody, Mike Koldychev, Siva Sivabalan, Adam Simpson for Dhruv Dhody has contributed the contents of this draft.
his valuable suggestions and comments.
13. Normative References 13. Acknowledgement
Thanks Mike Koldychev, Siva Sivabalan, Adam Simpson for his valuable
suggestions and comments.
14. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-pce-pcep-extension-for-pce-controller]
Li, Z., Peng, S., Negi, M., Zhao, Q., and C. Zhou, "PCEP
Procedures and Protocol Extensions for Using PCE as a
Central Controller (PCECC) of LSPs", draft-ietf-pce-pcep-
extension-for-pce-controller-07 (work in progress),
September 2020.
[I-D.ietf-teas-pce-native-ip] [I-D.ietf-teas-pce-native-ip]
Wang, A., Khasanov, B., Zhao, Q., and H. Chen, "PCE in Wang, A., Khasanov, B., Zhao, Q., and H. Chen, "PCE in
Native IP Network", draft-ietf-teas-pce-native-ip-11 (work Native IP Network", draft-ietf-teas-pce-native-ip-11 (work
in progress), August 2020. in progress), August 2020.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC3209] Awduche, D., Berger, L., Gan, D., Li, T., Srinivasan, V., [RFC3209] Awduche, D., Berger, L., Gan, D., Li, T., Srinivasan, V.,
and G. Swallow, "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP and G. Swallow, "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP
Tunnels", RFC 3209, DOI 10.17487/RFC3209, December 2001, Tunnels", RFC 3209, DOI 10.17487/RFC3209, December 2001,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3209>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3209>.
[RFC5440] Vasseur, JP., Ed. and JL. Le Roux, Ed., "Path Computation [RFC5440] Vasseur, JP., Ed. and JL. Le Roux, Ed., "Path Computation
Element (PCE) Communication Protocol (PCEP)", RFC 5440, Element (PCE) Communication Protocol (PCEP)", RFC 5440,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5440, March 2009, DOI 10.17487/RFC5440, March 2009,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5440>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5440>.
[RFC8174] Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.
[RFC8231] Crabbe, E., Minei, I., Medved, J., and R. Varga, "Path [RFC8231] Crabbe, E., Minei, I., Medved, J., and R. Varga, "Path
Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)
Extensions for Stateful PCE", RFC 8231, Extensions for Stateful PCE", RFC 8231,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8231, September 2017, DOI 10.17487/RFC8231, September 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8231>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8231>.
[RFC8232] Crabbe, E., Minei, I., Medved, J., Varga, R., Zhang, X., [RFC8232] Crabbe, E., Minei, I., Medved, J., Varga, R., Zhang, X.,
and D. Dhody, "Optimizations of Label Switched Path State and D. Dhody, "Optimizations of Label Switched Path State
Synchronization Procedures for a Stateful PCE", RFC 8232, Synchronization Procedures for a Stateful PCE", RFC 8232,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8232, September 2017, DOI 10.17487/RFC8232, September 2017,
skipping to change at page 19, line 40 skipping to change at page 23, line 23
Extensions for PCE-Initiated LSP Setup in a Stateful PCE Extensions for PCE-Initiated LSP Setup in a Stateful PCE
Model", RFC 8281, DOI 10.17487/RFC8281, December 2017, Model", RFC 8281, DOI 10.17487/RFC8281, December 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8281>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8281>.
[RFC8283] Farrel, A., Ed., Zhao, Q., Ed., Li, Z., and C. Zhou, "An [RFC8283] Farrel, A., Ed., Zhao, Q., Ed., Li, Z., and C. Zhou, "An
Architecture for Use of PCE and the PCE Communication Architecture for Use of PCE and the PCE Communication
Protocol (PCEP) in a Network with Central Control", Protocol (PCEP) in a Network with Central Control",
RFC 8283, DOI 10.17487/RFC8283, December 2017, RFC 8283, DOI 10.17487/RFC8283, December 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8283>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8283>.
[RFC8408] Sivabalan, S., Tantsura, J., Minei, I., Varga, R., and J.
Hardwick, "Conveying Path Setup Type in PCE Communication
Protocol (PCEP) Messages", RFC 8408, DOI 10.17487/RFC8408,
July 2018, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8408>.
[RFC8735] Wang, A., Huang, X., Kou, C., Li, Z., and P. Mi, [RFC8735] Wang, A., Huang, X., Kou, C., Li, Z., and P. Mi,
"Scenarios and Simulation Results of PCE in a Native IP "Scenarios and Simulation Results of PCE in a Native IP
Network", RFC 8735, DOI 10.17487/RFC8735, February 2020, Network", RFC 8735, DOI 10.17487/RFC8735, February 2020,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8735>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8735>.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Aijun Wang Aijun Wang
China Telecom China Telecom
Beiqijia Town, Changping District Beiqijia Town, Changping District
Beijing, Beijing 102209 Beijing, Beijing 102209
China China
Email: wangaj3@chinatelecom.cn Email: wangaj3@chinatelecom.cn
Boris Khasanov Boris Khasanov
Huawei Technologies,Co.,Ltd Huawei Technologies,Co.,Ltd
skipping to change at page 20, line 18 skipping to change at page 23, line 49
China China
Email: wangaj3@chinatelecom.cn Email: wangaj3@chinatelecom.cn
Boris Khasanov Boris Khasanov
Huawei Technologies,Co.,Ltd Huawei Technologies,Co.,Ltd
Moskovskiy Prospekt 97A Moskovskiy Prospekt 97A
St.Petersburg 196084 St.Petersburg 196084
Russia Russia
Email: khasanov.boris@huawei.com Email: bhassanov@yahoo.com
Sheng Fang Sheng Fang
Huawei Technologies,Co.,Ltd Huawei Technologies,Co.,Ltd
Huawei Bld., No.156 Beiqing Rd. Huawei Bld., No.156 Beiqing Rd.
Beijing Beijing
China China
Email: fsheng@huawei.com Email: fsheng@huawei.com
Ren Tan Ren Tan
Huawei Technologies,Co.,Ltd Huawei Technologies,Co.,Ltd
 End of changes. 55 change blocks. 
396 lines changed or deleted 515 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/