draft-ietf-teas-gmpls-scsi-01.txt   draft-ietf-teas-gmpls-scsi-02.txt 
TEAS Working Group D. Ceccarelli TEAS Working Group D. Ceccarelli
Internet-Draft Ericsson Internet-Draft Ericsson
Intended status: Standards Track L. Berger Intended status: Standards Track L. Berger
Expires: July 16, 2017 LabN Consulting, L.L.C. Expires: September 28, 2017 LabN Consulting, L.L.C.
January 12, 2017 March 27, 2017
Generalized Routing Interface Switching Capability Descriptor Switching Generalized Interface Switching Capability Descriptor - Switching
Capability Specific Information Capability Specific Information
draft-ietf-teas-gmpls-scsi-01 draft-ietf-teas-gmpls-scsi-02
Abstract Abstract
This document defines a generic information structure for information This document defines a generic information structure for information
carried in routing protocol Interface Switching Capability Descriptor carried in routing protocol Interface Switching Capability Descriptor
(ISCD) Switching Capability Specific Information (SCSI) fields. This (ISCD) Switching Capability Specific Information (SCSI) fields. This
"Generalized SCSI" can be used with routing protocols that define "Generalized SCSI" can be used with routing protocols that define
GMPLS ISCDs, and any specific technology. This document does not GMPLS ISCDs, and any specific technology. This document does not
modify an existing technology specific formats and is defined for use modify an existing technology specific formats and is defined for use
in conjunction with new GMPLS Switching Capability types. in conjunction with new GMPLS Switching Capability types.
skipping to change at page 1, line 38 skipping to change at page 1, line 38
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 http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://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 July 16, 2017. This Internet-Draft will expire on September 28, 2017.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2017 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
skipping to change at page 2, line 17 skipping to change at page 2, line 17
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. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Generalized SCSI Formats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. Generalized SCSI Formats . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4. Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
The Interface Switching Capability Descriptor (ISCD) [RFC4202] allows The Interface Switching Capability Descriptor (ISCD) [RFC4202] allows
routing protocols such as OSPF and ISIS to carry technology specific routing protocols such as OSPF and ISIS to carry technology specific
information in the the Switching Capability-specific information information in the the Switching Capability-specific information
(SCSI) field, see [RFC4203] and [RFC5307]. The format of an SCSI (SCSI) field, see [RFC4203] and [RFC5307]. The format of an SCSI
field is dictated by the specific technology being represented as field is dictated by the specific technology being represented as
indicated by the ISCD Switching Capability (SC) type field. Existing indicated by the ISCD Switching Capability (SC) type field. Existing
skipping to change at page 4, line 37 skipping to change at page 4, line 37
Value field. The value of the field MUST be zero or divisible by Value field. The value of the field MUST be zero or divisible by
4. Note that this implies that the Value field can be omitted or 4. Note that this implies that the Value field can be omitted or
contain padding. contain padding.
Value (variable): Value (variable):
A variable length field, formatted according to the value of the A variable length field, formatted according to the value of the
Type field. This field can be omitted for certain types. Type field. This field can be omitted for certain types.
4. Procedures 4. Procedures
The Generalized SCSI is used with ISCDs (defined in [RFC4203] and The ISCD can include a Generalized SCSI when advertising technologies
[RFC5307]) of technologies whose Switching Capability definition whose Switching Capability definition references this document. The
reference this document. The corollary of this is that the corollary of this is that the Generalized SCSI MUST NOT be used for
Generalized SCSI MUST NOT be used for ISCDs of technologies whose ISCDs of technologies whose Switching Capability definition do not
Switching Capability definition do not reference this document. reference this document.
The Generalized SCSI MAY contain a sequence of zero or more SCSI- The Generalized SCSI MAY contain a sequence of zero or more SCSI-
TLVs. Sub-TLV parsing (format) errors, such as an underrun or TLVs. Sub-TLV parsing (format) errors, such as an underrun or
overrun, MUST be treated as a malformed ISCD. SCSI-TLVs MUST be overrun, MUST be treated as a malformed ISCD. SCSI-TLVs MUST be
processed in the order received and, if re-originated, ordering MUST processed in the order received and, if re-originated, ordering MUST
be preserved. Unknown SCSI-TLVs MUST be ignored and transparently be preserved. Unknown SCSI-TLVs MUST be ignored and transparently
processed, i.e., re-originated when appropriate. Processing related processed, i.e., re-originated when appropriate. Processing related
to multiple SCSI-TLVs of the same type may be further refined based to multiple SCSI-TLVs of the same type may be further refined based
on the definition on the type. on the definition on the type.
skipping to change at page 5, line 33 skipping to change at page 5, line 33
IANA is requested to create and maintain a new registry, the IANA is requested to create and maintain a new registry, the
"Generalized SCSI (Switching Capability Specific Information) TLVs "Generalized SCSI (Switching Capability Specific Information) TLVs
Types" registry under either the the "Generalized Multi-Protocol Types" registry under either the the "Generalized Multi-Protocol
Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Parameters" registry or a new Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Parameters" registry or a new
"Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Routing "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Routing
Parameters" registry. Parameters" registry.
The definition of the new registry is as follows: The definition of the new registry is as follows:
Value SCSI-TLV SwitchCap Reference Value SCSI-TLV Switching Type Reference
--------- -------------------------- --------- --------- --------- ----------------------- -------------- ---------
0 Reserved [This ID] 0 Reserved [This ID]
1-32768 Unassigned, for use by [per value] 1-65535 Unassigned (Any, or [This ID]
specific technology [This ID] value list)
32768-65535 Unassigned, for others (Any, or
value list) [This ID]
New allocation requests to this registry SHALL indicate the value or New allocation requests to this registry must indicate the value or
values to be used in the SwitchCap column. values to be used in the Switching Type column.
The registry should be established with registration policies of The registry should be established with registration policies of
"Standards Action" for Standards Track documents, and "Specification "Specification Required", see [RFC5226].
Required" for other documents, see [RFC5226]. The designated expert
is any current TEAS WG chair.
7. References REMOVE THIS AFTER PUBLICATION: The designated expert will be
appointed by the Routing AD. It is suggested to appoint any current
TEAS WG chair.
7.1. Normative References 7. Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Adrian Farrel and Julien Meuric for
the careful review and suggestions.
8. References
8.1. 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, DOI 10.17487/ Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, DOI 10.17487/
RFC2119, March 1997, RFC2119, March 1997,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC4202] Kompella, K., Ed. and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "Routing Extensions [RFC4202] Kompella, K., Ed. and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "Routing Extensions
in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
(GMPLS)", RFC 4202, DOI 10.17487/RFC4202, October 2005, (GMPLS)", RFC 4202, DOI 10.17487/RFC4202, October 2005,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4202>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4202>.
skipping to change at page 6, line 30 skipping to change at page 6, line 35
[RFC4203] Kompella, K., Ed. and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "OSPF Extensions in [RFC4203] Kompella, K., Ed. and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "OSPF Extensions in
Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
(GMPLS)", RFC 4203, DOI 10.17487/RFC4203, October 2005, (GMPLS)", RFC 4203, DOI 10.17487/RFC4203, October 2005,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4203>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4203>.
[RFC5307] Kompella, K., Ed. and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "IS-IS Extensions [RFC5307] Kompella, K., Ed. and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "IS-IS Extensions
in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
(GMPLS)", RFC 5307, DOI 10.17487/RFC5307, October 2008, (GMPLS)", RFC 5307, DOI 10.17487/RFC5307, October 2008,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5307>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5307>.
7.2. Informative References 8.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-ccamp-ospf-availability-extension] [I-D.ietf-ccamp-ospf-availability-extension]
Long, H., Ye, M., Mirsky, G., D'Alessandro, A., and H. Long, H., Ye, M., Mirsky, G., D'Alessandro, A., and H.
Shah, "OSPF-TE Link Availability Extension for Links with Shah, "OSPF-TE Link Availability Extension for Links with
Variable Discrete Bandwidth", Variable Discrete Bandwidth",
draft-ietf-ccamp-ospf-availability-extension-08 (work in draft-ietf-ccamp-ospf-availability-extension-09 (work in
progress), October 2016. progress), February 2017.
[RFC2154] Murphy, S., Badger, M., and B. Wellington, "OSPF with [RFC2154] Murphy, S., Badger, M., and B. Wellington, "OSPF with
Digital Signatures", RFC 2154, DOI 10.17487/RFC2154, Digital Signatures", RFC 2154, DOI 10.17487/RFC2154,
June 1997, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2154>. June 1997, <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2154>.
[RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an [RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226, IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5226, May 2008, DOI 10.17487/RFC5226, May 2008,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5226>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5226>.
 End of changes. 14 change blocks. 
29 lines changed or deleted 35 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.45. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/