Network Assigned Upstream-Label
draft-ietf-teas-network-assigned-upstream-label-05

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (teas WG)
Last updated 2017-04-28 (latest revision 2017-03-13)
Replaces draft-ietf-ccamp-network-assigned-upstream-label
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status Proposed Standard
Formats plain text pdf html bibtex
Stream WG state WG Document (wg milestone: Dec 2015 - Submit network assig... )
Other - see Comment Log
Document shepherd Lou Berger
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Consensus Boilerplate Yes
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to "Lou Berger" <lberger@labn.net>
TEAS Working Group                                         X. Zhang, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                       Huawei Technologies
Intended status: Standards Track                          V. Beeram, Ed.
Expires: September 14, 2017                             Juniper Networks
                                                              I. Bryskin
                                                     Huawei Technologies
                                                           D. Ceccarelli
                                                                Ericsson
                                                     O. Gonzalez de Dios
                                                              Telefonica
                                                          March 13, 2017

                    Network Assigned Upstream-Label
           draft-ietf-teas-network-assigned-upstream-label-05

Abstract

   This document discusses a Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
   (GMPLS) Resource reSerVation Protocol with Traffic Engineering (RSVP-
   TE) mechanism that enables the network to assign an upstream label
   for a bidirectional LSP.  This is useful in scenarios where a given
   node does not have sufficient information to assign the correct
   upstream label on its own and needs to rely on the downstream node to
   pick an appropriate label.

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 14, 2017.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

Zhang, et al.          Expires September 14, 2017               [Page 1]
Internet-Draft       Network Assigned Upstream-Label          March 2017

   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  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
     1.1.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   2.  Unassigned Upstream Label . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.1.  Processing Rules  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.2.  Backwards Compatibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   3.  Use-Case: Wavelength Setup for IP over Optical Networks . . .   4
     3.1.  Initial Setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     3.2.  Wavelength Change . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   4.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   5.  Contributors  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   6.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   7.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   8.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     8.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     8.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8

1.  Introduction

   The Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Resource
   reSerVation Protocol with Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) extensions
   for setting up a bidirectional LSP are specified in [RFC3473].  The
   bidirectional LSP setup is indicated by the presence of an
   UPSTREAM_LABEL Object in the PATH message.  As per the existing setup
   procedure outlined for a bidirectional LSP, each upstream node must
   allocate a valid upstream label on the outgoing interface before
   sending the initial PATH message downstream.  However, there are
   certain scenarios where it is not desirable or possible for a given
   node to pick the upstream label on its own.  This document defines
Show full document text