Signaling RSVP-TE tunnels on a shared MPLS forwarding plane
draft-ietf-mpls-rsvp-shared-labels-04

The information below is for an old version of the document
Document Type Active Internet-Draft (mpls WG)
Last updated 2018-10-15 (latest revision 2018-10-08)
Replaces draft-sitaraman-mpls-rsvp-shared-labels
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text pdf html bibtex
Stream WG state Waiting for WG Chair Go-Ahead
Document shepherd Loa Andersson
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to Loa Andersson <loa@pi.nu>
MPLS Working Group                                          H. Sitaraman
Internet-Draft                                                 V. Beeram
Intended status: Standards Track                        Juniper Networks
Expires: April 11, 2019                                        T. Parikh
                                                                 Verizon
                                                                 T. Saad
                                                           Cisco Systems
                                                         October 8, 2018

      Signaling RSVP-TE tunnels on a shared MPLS forwarding plane
               draft-ietf-mpls-rsvp-shared-labels-04.txt

Abstract

   As the scale of MPLS RSVP-TE networks has grown, so the number of
   Label Switched Paths (LSPs) supported by individual network elements
   has increased.  Various implementation recommendations have been
   proposed to manage the resulting increase in control plane state.

   However, those changes have had no effect on the number of labels
   that a transit Label Switching Router (LSR) has to support in the
   forwarding plane.  That number is governed by the number of LSPs
   transiting or terminated at the LSR and is directly related to the
   total LSP state in the control plane.

   This document defines a mechanism to prevent the maximum size of the
   label space limit on an LSR from being a constraint to control plane
   scaling on that node.  It introduces the notion of pre-installed 'per
   Traffic Engineering (TE) link labels' that can be shared by MPLS
   RSVP-TE LSPs that traverse these TE links.  This approach
   significantly reduces the forwarding plane state required to support
   a large number of LSPs.  This couples the feature benefits of the
   RSVP-TE control plane with the simplicity of the Segment Routing MPLS
   forwarding plane.

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 BCP
   14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
   capitals, as shown here.

Sitaraman, et al.        Expires April 11, 2019                 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft            RSVP-TE Shared Labels             October 2018

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 April 11, 2019.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2018 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  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   2.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   3.  Allocation of TE Link Labels  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   4.  Segment Routed RSVP-TE Tunnel Setup . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   5.  Delegating Label Stack Imposition . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     5.1.  Stacking at the Ingress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
       5.1.1.  Stack to Reach Delegation Hop . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
       5.1.2.  Stack to Reach Egress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     5.2.  Explicit Delegation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     5.3.  Automatic Delegation  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
       5.3.1.  Effective Transport Label-Stack Depth (ETLD)  . . . .  10
   6.  Mixing TE Link Labels and Regular Labels in an RSVP-TE Tunnel  12
   7.  Construction of Label Stacks  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
   8.  Facility Backup Protection  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13

Sitaraman, et al.        Expires April 11, 2019                 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft            RSVP-TE Shared Labels             October 2018

Show full document text