Advertising TE protocols in IS-IS
draft-hegde-isis-advertising-te-protocols-02

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2017-03-13
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text pdf xml 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)
IS-IS WG                                                        S. Hegde
Internet-Draft                                                 C. Bowers
Intended status: Standards Track                        Juniper Networks
Expires: September 13, 2017                                    P. Mattes
                                                              M. Nanduri
                                                            S. Giacalone
                                                               Microsoft
                                                             I. Mohammad
                                                         Arista Networks
                                                          March 12, 2017

                   Advertising TE protocols in IS-IS
              draft-hegde-isis-advertising-te-protocols-02

Abstract

   This document defines a mechanism to indicate which traffic
   engineering protocols are enabled on a link in IS-IS.  It does so by
   introducing a new traffic-engineering protocol sub-TLV for TLV-22.
   This document also describes mechanisms to address backward
   compatibility issues for implementations that have not yet been
   upgraded to software that understands this new sub-TLV.

Requirements Language

   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 RFC 2119 [RFC2119].

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 13, 2017.

Hegde, et al.          Expires September 13, 2017               [Page 1]
Internet-Draft      Advertising TE protocols in IS-IS         March 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
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Motivation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     2.1.  Explicit and unambiguous indication of TE protocol  . . .   4
     2.2.  Limit increases in link state advertisements  . . . . . .   5
   3.  Solution  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     3.1.  Traffic-engineering protocol sub-TLV  . . . . . . . . . .   5
   4.  Backward compatibility  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     4.1.  Scenario with upgraded RSVP-TE transit  router but RSVP-
           TE ingress router not upgraded  . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     4.2.  Scenario with upgraded RSVP-TE ingress  router but RSVP-
           TE transit router not upgraded  . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     4.3.  Need for a long term solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   5.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   6.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   7.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   8.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     8.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     8.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10

1.  Introduction

   IS-IS extensions for traffic engineering are specified in [RFC5305].
   [RFC5305] defines several link attributes such as administrative
   group, maximum link bandwidth, and shared risk link groups (SRLGs)
   which can be used by traffic engineering applications.  Additional
Show full document text