Network Working Group Raymond Key (editor), Huawei
Internet Draft Simon Delord, Telstra
Category: Informational Frederic Jounay, Orange CH
Expires: October 2013 Lu Huang, China Mobile
Zhihua Liu, China Telecom
Manuel Paul, Deutsche Telekom
Ruediger Kunze, Deutsche Telekom
Nick Del Regno, Verizon
Josh Rogers, Time Warner Cable
April 4, 2013
Requirements for MEF E-Tree Support in L2VPN
draft-ietf-l2vpn-etree-reqt-04
Abstract
This document provides functional requirements for Metro Ethernet
Forum (MEF) Ethernet Tree (E-Tree) support in multipoint L2VPN
solutions (referred to as simply L2VPN). It is intended that
potential solutions will use these requirements as guidelines.
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on October 4, 2013.
Key, et al. Expires October 2013 [Page 1]
Internet Draft Requirement E-Tree in L2VPN April 2013
Table of Contents
1. Introduction....................................................3
2. IETF Multipoint Ethernet L2VPN Services.........................3
2.1. VPLS..........................................................3
2.2. E-VPN.........................................................3
3. MEF Multipoint Ethernet Services................................3
3.1. Similarity between E-LAN and E-Tree...........................3
3.2. Difference between E-LAN and E-Tree...........................4
3.3. E-Tree Use Cases..............................................4
3.4. Generic E-Tree Service........................................5
4. Problem Statement...............................................5
4.1. Motivation....................................................5
4.2. Leaf-to-Leaf Communication Restriction........................5
5. Requirements....................................................6
5.1. Functional Requirements.......................................6
5.2. Applicability.................................................6
5.3. Backward Compatibility........................................7
5.4. External Network Network Interface............................7
6. Security Consideration..........................................7
7. IANA Considerations.............................................7
8. Acknowledgements................................................7
9. References......................................................7
9.1. Normative References..........................................7
9.2. Informative References........................................8
Appendix
A. Frequently Asked Questions......................................9
A.1. Are E-Tree requirements addressed in the Virtual
Private Multicast Service (VPMS) requirements?................9
A.2. Are there any potential deployment scenarios for
a "VPLS Only" solution?......................................10
Authors' Addresses................................................13
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements....................14
Conventions used in this document
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
Key, et al. Expires October 2013 [Page 2]
Internet Draft Requirement E-Tree in L2VPN April 2013
1. Introduction
datatracker.ietf.org