Pseudowire Control Word Negotiation Mechanism Update
draft-ietf-pwe3-cbit-negotiation-03

The information below is for an old version of the document
Document Type Active Internet-Draft (pwe3 WG)
Last updated 2012-06-15 (latest revision 2012-04-13)
Replaces draft-jin-pwe3-cbit-negotiation
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status Proposed Standard
Formats plain text pdf html
Stream WG state Submitted to IESG for Publication
Consensus Unknown
Document shepherd Andrew Malis
IESG IESG state Waiting for AD Go-Ahead
Telechat date
Responsible AD Stewart Bryant
IESG note Andrew Malis (amalis@gmail.com) is the document shepherd.
Send notices to pwe3-chairs@tools.ietf.org, draft-ietf-pwe3-cbit-negotiation@tools.ietf.org
Network Working Group                             Lizhong Jin (ed.), ZTE
Internet-Draft                                 Raymond Key (ed.), Huawei
Updates: 4447 (if approved)                 Simon Delord, Alcatel-Lucent
Category: Standards Track                         Thomas Nadeau, Juniper
Expires: October 13, 2012                Vishwas Manral, Hewlett-Packard 
                                                     Sami Boutros, Cisco
                                                    Reshad Rahman, Cisco

                                                          April 13, 2012

          Pseudowire Control Word Negotiation Mechanism Update
                  draft-ietf-pwe3-cbit-negotiation-03

Abstract

   This document describes the problem of control word negotiation 
   mechanism specified in [RFC4447].  Based on the problem analysis, a 
   message exchanging mechanism is introduced to solve this control word 
   negotiation issue.  This document is to update [RFC4447] control word 
   negotiation mechanism.

Status of this Memo 

   This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the 
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 
 
   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that 
   other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- 
   Drafts. 
 
   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." 
 
   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at 
   http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. 
 
   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at 
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. 
 
   This Internet-Draft will expire on April 13, 2012.

Jin, et al.               Expires October 2012                  [Page 1]
Internet-Draft     draft-ietf-pwe3-cbit-negotiation-03        April 2012

Copyright Notice 
    
   Copyright (c) 2012 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. Problem Statement  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
   3. Control word re-negotiation by label request message . . . . . . 4
   4. Backward Compatibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
   5. Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
   6. IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
   7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
   8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
   8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
   Appendix A. Updated C-bit Handling Procedures Diagram . . . . . . . 8

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 [RFC2119]. 

Jin, et al.               Expires October 2012                  [Page 2]
Internet-Draft     draft-ietf-pwe3-cbit-negotiation-03        April 2012

1. Introduction

   This document describes the problem of control word negotiation 
   mechanism specified in [RFC4447].  Based on the problem analysis, a 
   message exchanging mechanism is introduced to solve this negotiation 
   issue. The control word negotiation mechanism in this document is to 
   update [RFC4447] section 6.2 "PW Types for Which the Control Word is 
   NOT Mandatory".

2. Problem Statement

   [RFC4447] section 6 describes the control word negotiation mechanism. 
   Each PW endpoint has the capability of being configurable with a 
   parameter that specifies whether the use of the control word is 
   PREFERRED or NOT PREFERRED.  While in some case of control word 
Show full document text