Resource ReserVation Protocol-Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) Path Diversity using Exclude Route
draft-ietf-teas-lsp-diversity-09

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (teas WG)
Last updated 2017-11-12
Replaces draft-ietf-ccamp-lsp-diversity
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status Proposed Standard
Formats plain text pdf html bibtex
Reviews
Stream WG state Submitted to IESG for Publication (wg milestone: Jul 2015 - Submit XRO based LSP... )
Document shepherd Lou Berger
Shepherd write-up Show (last changed 2017-04-28)
IESG IESG state Approved-announcement to be sent::AD Followup
Consensus Boilerplate Yes
Telechat date
Responsible AD Deborah Brungard
Send notices to (None)
IANA IANA review state Version Changed - Review Needed
IANA action state None
TEAS Working Group                                    Zafar Ali, Ed. 
   Internet Draft                                   George Swallow, Ed. 
   Intended status: Standard Track                        Cisco Systems 
   Updates RFC4874                                        F. Zhang, Ed. 
   Expires: May 17, 2018                                         Huawei 
                                                         D. Beller, Ed. 
                                                                  Nokia 
                                                      November 13, 2017 
    
      Resource ReserVation Protocol-Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) Path 
                       Diversity using Exclude Route 

                    draft-ietf-teas-lsp-diversity-09.txt 

   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 September 28, 2017. 
       
   Copyright Notice 

   Copyright (c) 2017 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. 

   Ali, Swallow, Zhang, Beller, et al. Expires May 2018           [Page 1] 

   Internet Draft      draft-ietf-teas-lsp-diversity-09.txt 

   Abstract 

   Resource ReSerVation Protocol-Traffic Engineering provides support 
   for the communication of exclusion information during label switched 
   path (LSP) setup. This document specifies two new diversity 
   subobjects for the RSVP eXclude Route Object (XRO) and the Explicit 
   Exclusion Route Subobject (EXRS). Three different mechanisms are 
   defined to accomplish LSP diversity in the provider or core network: 
   the signaled diversity type indicates whether diversity is based on 
   client, path computation engine (PCE), or network assigned 
   identifiers. 
   The solution described in this document is based on the assumption 
   that LSPs are requested sequentially, i.e., the time period between 
   the LSP setup requests for the two LSPs may be relatively long (in 
   the order of days, weeks, months). Re-routing the LSP that was 
   established first and may have existed for some time is not 
   considered. 
    
   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]. 

   Table of Contents 

   1. Introduction..................................................3 
      1.1. Client-Initiated Identifier..............................5 
      1.2. PCE-allocated Identifier.................................6 
      1.3. Network-Assigned Identifier..............................7 
   2. RSVP-TE signaling extensions..................................9 
      2.1. Diversity XRO Subobject..................................9 
      2.2. Diversity EXRS Subobject................................16 
      2.3. Processing rules for the Diversity XRO and EXRS 
           subobjects..............................................16 
   3. Security Considerations......................................20 
   4. IANA Considerations..........................................20 
      4.1. New XRO subobject types.................................20 
      4.2. New EXRS subobject types................................21 
      4.3. New RSVP error sub-codes................................21 
   5. Acknowledgements.............................................22 
   6. References...................................................22 
      6.1. Normative References....................................22 
      6.2. Informative References..................................23 
    

    
Show full document text