Pseudowire Redundancy on S-PE
draft-ietf-pals-redundancy-spe-02

The information below is for an old version of the document
Document Type Active Internet-Draft (pals WG)
Last updated 2015-10-22 (latest revision 2015-08-04)
Replaces draft-ietf-pwe3-redundancy-spe
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status Proposed Standard
Formats plain text pdf html bibtex
Stream WG state Submitted to IESG for Publication
Document shepherd Matthew Bocci
Shepherd write-up Show (last changed 2015-08-04)
IESG IESG state IESG Evaluation::Revised I-D Needed
Consensus Boilerplate Yes
Telechat date
Needs 7 more YES or NO OBJECTION positions to pass.
Responsible AD Deborah Brungard
Send notices to draft-ietf-pals-redundancy-spe.all@ietf.org
IANA IANA review state IANA OK - No Actions Needed
IANA action state None
Network Working Group                                            J. Dong
Internet-Draft                                                   H. Wang
Intended status: Standards Track                     Huawei Technologies
Expires: February 5, 2016                                 August 4, 2015

                     Pseudowire Redundancy on S-PE
                   draft-ietf-pals-redundancy-spe-02

Abstract

   This document describes Multi-Segment Pseudowire (MS-PW) protection
   scenarios in which the pseudowire redundancy is provided on the
   Switching-PE (S-PE).  Operations of the S-PEs which provide PW
   redundancy are specified in this document.  Signaling of the
   preferential forwarding status as defined in RFC 6870 is reused.
   This document does not require any change to the T-PEs of MS-PW.

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 February 5, 2016.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2015 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

Dong & Wang             Expires February 5, 2016                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft            PW redundancy on S-PE              August 2015

   (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.  Typical Scenarios of PW Redundancy on S-PE  . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.1.  MS-PW Redundancy on S-PE  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.2.  MS-PW Redundancy on S-PE with S-PE Protection . . . . . .   3
   3.  S-PE Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     3.1.  Operations of Scenario 1  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     3.2.  Operations of Scenario 2  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   4.  VCCV Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   5.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   7.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   8.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     8.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     8.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8

1.  Introduction

   [RFC6718] describes the framework and requirements for pseudowire
   (PW) redundancy, and [RFC6870] specifies Pseudowire (PW) redundancy
   mechanism for scenarios where a set of redundant PWs is configured
   between provider edge (PE) nodes in single-segment pseudowire (SS-PW)
   [RFC3985] applications, or between terminating provider edge (T-PE)
   nodes in multi-segment pseudowire (MS-PW) [RFC5659] applications.

   In some MS-PW scenarios, there are benefits to provide PW redundancy
   on S-PEs, such as reducing the burden on the access T-PE nodes, and
   enabling faster protection switching compared to the end-to-end MS-PW
   protection mechanisms.  This document describes some scenarios in
   which PW redundancy is provided on S-PEs, and specifies the
   operations of the S-PEs.  Signaling of the preferential forwarding
   status as defined in [RFC6870] is reused.  This document does not
   require any change to the T-PEs of MS-PW.

Dong & Wang             Expires February 5, 2016                [Page 2]
Internet-Draft            PW redundancy on S-PE              August 2015

2.  Typical Scenarios of PW Redundancy on S-PE

   In some MS-PW deployment scenarios, there are benefits to provide PW
   redundancy on S-PEs.  This section describes typical scenarios of PW
Show full document text