Pseudowire Preferential Forwarding Status Bit
draft-ietf-pwe3-redundancy-bit-07

The information below is for an old version of the document
Document Type Active Internet-Draft (pwe3 WG)
Last updated 2012-05-24 (latest revision 2012-05-01)
Replaces draft-muley-dutta-pwe3-redundancy-bit
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 IESG Evaluation::Revised I-D Needed
Telechat date
Needs a YES. Needs 5 more YES or NO OBJECTION positions to pass.
Responsible AD Stewart Bryant
IESG note Andy Malis (amalis@gmail.com) is the document shepherd.
Send notices to pwe3-chairs@tools.ietf.org, draft-ietf-pwe3-redundancy-bit@tools.ietf.org
Network Working Group                                Praveen Muley, Ed. 
Internet Draft                                   Mustapha Aissaoui, Ed. 
Updates: RFC 5542                                        Alcatel-Lucent 
Intended Status: Standards Track                                        
Expires: November 1, 2012                                                
  
                                                                         
 
                                    
                                                            May 1, 2012 
                                      
               Pseudowire Preferential Forwarding Status Bit  
                  draft-ietf-pwe3-redundancy-bit-07.txt 

Abstract 

   This document describes a mechanism for standby status signaling of 
   redundant pseudowires (PWs) between their termination points. A set 
   of redundant PWs is configured between provider edge (PE) nodes in 
   single-segment pseudowire (SS-PW) applications, or between 
   terminating provider edge (T-PE) nodes in multi-segment pseudowire 
   (MS-PW) applications.  

   In order for the PE/T-PE nodes to indicate the preferred PW to use 
   for forwarding PW packets to one another, a new status bit is needed 
   to indicate a preferential forwarding status of Active or Standby for 
   each PW in a redundant set.  

   In addition, a second status bit is defined to allow peer PE nodes to 
   coordinate a switchover operation of the PW. 

   Finally, this document updates the PW operational status textual 
   convention defined in RFC 5542 [9]. 

 

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 

 
 
 
Muley et al.           Expires November 1,2012                 [Page 1] 


Internet-Draft  PW Preferential Forwarding Status Bit       May 1, 2012 
    

   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 August 1, 2012. 

 

Copyright Notice 

   Copyright (c) 2011 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. 

 

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 [1]. 

 

Table of Contents 

    
   1. Introduction.................................................. 3 
   2. Motivation and Scope.......................................... 5 
   3. Terminology .................................................. 7 
   4. PE Architecture............................................... 9 
   5. Modes of Operation........................................... 10 
      5.1. Independent Mode: ...................................... 10 
      5.2. Master/Slave Mode:...................................... 13 
   6. PW State Transition Signaling Procedures..................... 15 
      6.1. PW Standby Notification Procedures in Independent mode.. 15 
      6.2. PW Standby notification procedures in Master/Slave mode. 16 
         6.2.1. PW State Machine................................... 16 
      6.3. Coordination of PW Switchover........................... 17 
 
 
Muley et al.           Expires November 1, 2012                [Page 2] 


Internet-Draft  PW Preferential Forwarding Status Bit       May 1, 2012 
    

         6.3.1. Procedures at the requesting endpoint.............. 19 
         6.3.2. Procedures at the receiving endpoint............... 20 
   7. Status Mapping............................................... 21 
      7.1. AC Defect State Entry/Exit.............................. 21 
      7.2. PW Defect State Entry/Exit.............................. 21 
Show full document text