MPLS Flow Identification Considerations
draft-bryant-mpls-sfl-control-01

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2017-03-10
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text pdf html bibtex
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
MPLS Working Group                                             S. Bryant
Internet-Draft                                                    Huawei
Intended status: Standards Track                              G. Swallow
Expires: September 11, 2017                                 S. Sivabalan
                                                           Cisco Systems
                                                          March 10, 2017

                MPLS Flow Identification Considerations
                    draft-bryant-mpls-sfl-control-01

Abstract

   In draft-bryant-mpls-sfl-framework the concept of MPLS synonymous
   flow labels (SFL) was introduced.  This document describes a control
   protocol that runs over an associated control header to request,
   withdrawn and extend the lifetime of such labels.

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 http://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 September 11, 2017.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2017 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
   (http://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 Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of

Bryant, et al.         Expires September 11, 2017               [Page 1]
Internet-Draft                   MPLS FI                      March 2017

   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   3.  SFL Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
     3.1.  SFL Control Message . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     3.2.  SFL Control Proceedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
       3.2.1.  Request/Grant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
       3.2.2.  Refresh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
       3.2.3.  Withdraw  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
       3.2.4.  Timer Accuracy  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   4.  Return Path . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   5.  Manageability Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   6.  Privacy Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   7.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   8.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   9.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11

1.  Introduction

   In [I-D.bryant-mpls-sfl-framework] the concept of MPLS synonymous
   flow labels (SFL) was introduced.  This document describes a simple
   control protocol that runs over an associated control header to
   request, withdrawn and extend the lifetime of such labels.

2.  Requirements Language

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
   "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
   [RFC2119].

3.  SFL Control

   This section describes the process by which the RFC6374 Querier
   requests SFLs, the process by which the RFC6374 Responder sends them
   to the Querier, and the process for managing the SFL lifetime.  SFL
   Control Messages are carried over the SFL Control ACH.  The SFL ACH
   is carried over a Pseudowire(PW) in place of the PW Control Word
   (CW), over an MPLS LSP using the GAL, or over some other mutually
   agreed path.  Similarly the response may be returned over a PW, over
   a bidirectional LSP or over some other mutually agreed path.  See
Show full document text