Implementation Recommendations to Improve the Scalability of RSVP-TE Deployments
draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-te-scaling-rec-04

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (teas WG)
Last updated 2017-03-12
Replaces draft-beeram-teas-rsvp-te-scaling-rec
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text pdf html bibtex
Stream WG state WG Document
Document shepherd No shepherd assigned
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
TEAS Working Group                                        V. Beeram, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                          Juniper Networks
Intended status: Standards Track                                I. Minei
Expires: September 13, 2017                                    R. Shakir
                                                             Google, Inc
                                                              D. Pacella
                                                                 Verizon
                                                                 T. Saad
                                                           Cisco Systems
                                                          March 12, 2017

  Implementation Recommendations to Improve the Scalability of RSVP-TE
                              Deployments
                 draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-te-scaling-rec-04

Abstract

   The scale at which RSVP-TE Label Switched Paths (LSPs) get deployed
   is growing continually and the onus is on RSVP-TE implementations
   across the board to keep up with this increasing demand.

   This document makes a set of implementation recommendations to help
   RSVP-TE deployments push the envelope on scaling and advocates the
   use of a couple of techniques - "Refresh-Interval Independent RSVP
   (RI-RSVP)" and "Per-Peer Flow-Control" - for improving scaling.

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 13, 2017.

Beeram, et al.         Expires September 13, 2017               [Page 1]
Internet-Draft         RSVP-TE Scaling - Impl. Rec            March 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.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
     1.1.  Conventions used in this document . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   2.  Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.1.  "RFC2961 specific" Recommendations  . . . . . . . . . . .   3
       2.1.1.  Basic Pre-Requisites  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
       2.1.2.  Making Acknowledgements mandatory . . . . . . . . . .   4
       2.1.3.  Clarifications on reaching Rapid Retry Limit (Rl) . .   4
     2.2.  Refresh-Interval Independent RSVP . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
       2.2.1.  Capability Advertisement  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
       2.2.2.  Compatibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     2.3.  Per-Peer RSVP Flow-Control  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
       2.3.1.  Capability Advertisement  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
       2.3.2.  Compatibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   3.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   4.  Contributors  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   5.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     5.1.  Capability Object Values  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   7.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     7.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     7.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   Appendix A.  Recommended Defaults . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10

1.  Introduction

   The scale at which RSVP-TE [RFC3209] Label Switched Paths (LSPs) get
   deployed is growing continually and there is considerable onus on
Show full document text