PCEP Extension for Native IP Network
draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-native-ip-02

• Status
• IESG evaluation record
• IESG writeups
• Email expansions
• History

• Versions
• 00
• 01
• 02
• 03

PCE Working Group                                                A. Wang
Internet-Draft                                             China Telecom
Intended status: Standards Track                             B. Khasanov
Expires: May 20, 2019                                             Huawei
                                                           S. Cheruathur
                                                        Juniper Networks
                                                                  C. Zhu
                                                         ZTE Corporation
                                                                 S. Fang
                                                                  Huawei
                                                       November 16, 2018

                  PCEP Extension for Native IP Network
               draft-ietf-pce-pcep-extension-native-ip-02

Abstract

   This document defines the PCEP extension for CCDR application in
   Native IP network.  The scenario and architecture 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 PCE and PCC to accomplish the
   end2end 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 May 20, 2019.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

Wang, et al.              Expires May 20, 2019                  [Page 1]
Internet-Draft    PCEP Extension for Native IP Network     November 2018

   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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   3.  CCI Objects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   4.  CCI Object associated TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     4.1.  Peer Address List TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     4.2.  Peer Prefix Association TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
       4.2.1.  Prefix sub TLV  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     4.3.  Explicit Peer Route TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   5.  Management Consideration  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   7.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   8.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8

1.  Introduction

   Traditionally, MPLS-TE traffic assurance requires the corresponding
   network devices support MPLS or the complex RSVP/LDP/Segment Routing
   etc. technologies to assure the end-to-end 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 that described in [RFC8283]
   to correlate the forwarding behavior among different network devices.
   Draft [I-D.ietf-teas-pce-native-ip] describes the architecture and
   solution philosophy for the end2end traffic assurance in Native IP
   network via Dual/Multi BGP solution.  This draft describes the
   corresponding PCEP extension to transfer the key information about
   peer address list, peer prefix association and the explicit peer
   route on on-path router.

2.  Conventions used in this document

   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].