Carrying Binding Label/Segment Identifier (SID) in PCE-based Networks.
draft-ietf-pce-binding-label-sid-16

PCE Working Group                                           S. Sivabalan
Internet-Draft                                         Ciena Corporation
Intended status: Standards Track                             C. Filsfils
Expires: 28 September 2023                           Cisco Systems, Inc.
                                                             J. Tantsura
                                                                  Nvidia
                                                              S. Previdi
                                                              C. Li, Ed.
                                                     Huawei Technologies
                                                           27 March 2023

 Carrying Binding Label/Segment Identifier (SID) in PCE-based Networks.
                  draft-ietf-pce-binding-label-sid-16

Abstract

   In order to provide greater scalability, network confidentiality, and
   service independence, Segment Routing (SR) utilizes a Binding Segment
   Identifier (SID) (called BSID) as described in RFC 8402.  It is
   possible to associate a BSID to an RSVP-TE-signaled Traffic
   Engineering Label Switched Path or an SR Traffic Engineering path.
   The BSID can be used by an upstream node for steering traffic into
   the appropriate TE path to enforce SR policies.  This document
   specifies the concept of binding value, which can be either an MPLS
   label or Segment Identifier.  It further specifies an extension to
   Path Computation Element (PCE) communication Protocol(PCEP) for
   reporting the binding value by a Path Computation Client (PCC) to the
   PCE to support PCE-based Traffic Engineering policies.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   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."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on 28 September 2023.

Sivabalan, et al.       Expires 28 September 2023               [Page 1]
Internet-Draft              Binding Label/SID                 March 2023

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2023 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
   license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
   Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
   and restrictions with respect to this document.  Code Components
   extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as
   described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
   provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     1.1.  Motivation and Example  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     1.2.  Summary of the Extension  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   2.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   3.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   4.  Path Binding TLV  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     4.1.  SRv6 Endpoint Behavior and SID Structure  . . . . . . . .   8
   5.  Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   6.  Binding SID in SR-ERO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   7.  Binding SID in SRv6-ERO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   8.  PCE Allocation of Binding label/SID . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   9.  Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
     9.1.  Huawei  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
     9.2.  Cisco . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15
   10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
   11. Manageability Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  16
     11.1.  Control of Function and Policy . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
     11.2.  Information and Data Models  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
     11.3.  Liveness Detection and Monitoring  . . . . . . . . . . .  17
     11.4.  Verify Correct Operations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
     11.5.  Requirements On Other Protocols  . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
     11.6.  Impact On Network Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
   12. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
     12.1.  PCEP TLV Type Indicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17