PCEP Extension for Native IP Network
draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-native-ip-04

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (pce WG)
Last updated 2019-08-25
Replaces draft-wang-pce-pcep-extension-native-ip
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text xml pdf html bibtex
Stream WG state WG Document
Document shepherd No shepherd assigned
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
PCE Working Group                                                A. Wang
Internet-Draft                                             China Telecom
Intended status: Standards Track                             B. Khasanov
Expires: February 27, 2020                                        Huawei
                                                           S. Cheruathur
                                                        Juniper Networks
                                                                  C. Zhu
                                                         ZTE Corporation
                                                                 S. Fang
                                                                  Huawei
                                                         August 26, 2019

                  PCEP Extension for Native IP Network
               draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-native-ip-04

Abstract

   This document defines the Path Computation Element Communication
   Protocol (PCEP) extension for Central Control Dynamic Routing (CCDR)
   based application in Native IP network.  The scenario and framework
   of CCDR in native IP is described in
   [I-D.ietf-teas-native-ip-scenarios] and
   [I-D.ietf-teas-pce-native-ip].  This draft describes the key
   information that is transferred between Path Computation Element
   (PCE) and Path Computation Clients (PCC) to accomplish the End to End
   (E2E) traffic assurance in Native IP network under central control
   mode.

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 February 27, 2020.

Wang, et al.            Expires February 27, 2020               [Page 1]
Internet-Draft    PCEP Extension for Native IP Network       August 2019

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2019 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 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.  Conventions used in this document . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   4.  CCI Objects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   5.  CCI Object associated TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     5.1.  Peer Address List TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     5.2.  Peer Prefix Association TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
       5.2.1.  Prefix sub TLV  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     5.3.  Explicit Peer Route TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   6.  Management Consideration  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   7.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   8.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     8.1.  CCI Object Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     8.2.  CCI Object Associated TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   9.  Acknowledgement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   10. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     10.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     10.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10

1.  Introduction

   Traditionally, Multiprotocol Label Switching Traffic Engineering
   (MPLS-TE) traffic assurance requires the corresponding network
   devices support Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) or the complex
   Resource ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP)/Label Distribution Protocol
   (LDP) /Segment Routing etc. technologies to assure the End-to-End
   (E2E) traffic performance.  But in native IP network, there will be
   no such signaling protocol to synchronize the action among different
   network devices.  It is necessary to use the central control mode
Show full document text