MLN/MRN%20draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-mln-reqs-02.txt%20draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-mln-eval-02.txt%20draft-papadimitriou-ccamp-gmpls-mrn-extensions-03.txt

1
MLN/MRNdraft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-mln-reqs-02.txtdra
ft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-mln-eval-02.txt
draft-papadimitriou-ccamp-gmpls-mrn-extensions-03
.txt

• Kohei Shiomoto (NTT), Dimitri Papadimitriou
  (Alcatel), Jean-Louis Le Roux (France Telecom),
  Martin Vigoureux (Alcatel) Deborah Brungard
  (ATT)
• dimitri.papadimitriou_at_alcatel.be

2
Progress

• Req document - editorial update no modification
  from last revision
• Eval document - editorial update no modification
  from last revision
• Open points
• Terminology virtual TE link gt induced TE link
• Requirement on SRLG inheritance process (base
  mechanism in RFC4206)

3
Solution Doc.

• Extensions of GMPLS protocols and procedures
• GMPLS routing extension for the advertisement of
  the internal adaptation capability of hybrid
  nodes.
• GMPLS signaling extension for constrained
  multi-region signaling (SC inclusion/exclusion)
• GMPLS signaling extension for the setup/deletion
  of the virtual TE-links (as well as exact trigger
  for its actual provisioning)
• GMPLS routing and signaling extension for
  graceful TE-link deletion (covered in
  GR-TELINK)

4
Approach

• Focus on protocol extensions and mechanisms not
  applicability or policy of existing GMPLS
  mechanisms and/or extensions

5
Edge to edge association

• No state maintenance on transit LSRs
• Relies on extensions to the GMPLS RSVP-TE Call
  procedure (GMPLS-CALL)
• Mechanism
• exchanging identification and TE attributes
  information directly between TE link end points
  ( LSP head and tail-end points of the LSP(s)
  that may be established)
• Once call is established, resulting association
  populates the local TEDB and the resulting TE
  link is advertized as any other TE link.
• Once an upper layer/lower region LSP makes use of
  this TE link. A set of one or more LSPs must be
  initially established before the FA LSP can be
  used for nesting the incoming LSP

6
Edge to edge association

• In order to distinguish usage of such call from a
  classical call (as defined e.g. in RFC4139),
  a CALL ATTRIBUTE object is introduced
• CALL_ATTRIBUTES object is used to signal
  attributes required in support of a call, or to
  indicate the nature or use of a call
• built on the LSP-ATTRIBUTES object defined in
  RFC4420
• Specific flag to indicate that the association
  initiated between the end-points belonging to as
  call is to be mapped into a TE link
  advertisement.

7
Soft FA

• Setup FA LSP at the control plane level without
  actually committing resources in the data plane.
• Once such FA is established the corresponding TE
  link can be advertized following the procedures
  described in RFC 4206.
• New flag in Attributes Flags TLV of LSP_REQUIRED
  ATTRIBUTES object RFC4420 pre-planned LSP
  Flag.
• The pre-planned LSP Flag can take one of the
  following values
• Flag 0 - the LSP should be fully provisioned
• Flag 1 - the LSP should be provisioned in the
  control plane only.
• Operation of committing data plane resources
  occurs by re-signaling the same LSP with the
  pre-planned Flag set to 0

8
Path Provisioned only LSPs

• Difference b/w
• LSP that is established with 0 bandwidth (path
  only provisioning)
• LSP that is established with a certain bandwidth
  value not committed at the data plane level (i.e.
  pre-planned LSP).
• The former is currently not possible using the
  GMPLS protocol suite (following technology
  specific SENDER_TSPEC/FLOWSPEC)
• GMPLS Traffic Parameters do not support setup of
  0 bandwidth LSPs
• However a soft FA could itself lead to a path
  only provisioned LSP (packet case)
• Question in this document or separate I-D (more
  generic usage ?)

9
Next steps

• Req and eval doc ready for LC
• Note editorial revision may be needed
• Solution doc as WG I-D ?
• Close the MLN/MRN trilogy by 1q07