Techniques to Improve the Scalability of RSVP Traffic Engineering Deployments
draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-te-scaling-rec-08

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (teas WG)
Last updated 2017-10-30
Replaces draft-beeram-teas-rsvp-te-scaling-rec
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status Proposed Standard
Formats plain text pdf html bibtex
Reviews
Stream WG state Submitted to IESG for Publication
Document shepherd Lou Berger
Shepherd write-up Show (last changed 2017-07-09)
IESG IESG state IESG Evaluation::AD Followup
Consensus Boilerplate Yes
Telechat date
Has a DISCUSS. Has enough positions to pass once DISCUSS positions are resolved.
Responsible AD Deborah Brungard
Send notices to Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net>
IANA IANA review state Version Changed - Review Needed
IANA action state None
TEAS Working Group                                        V. Beeram, Ed.
Internet-Draft                                          Juniper Networks
Intended status: Standards Track                                I. Minei
Expires: May 3, 2018                                           R. Shakir
                                                             Google, Inc
                                                              D. Pacella
                                                                 Verizon
                                                                 T. Saad
                                                           Cisco Systems
                                                        October 30, 2017

   Techniques to Improve the Scalability of RSVP Traffic Engineering
                              Deployments
                 draft-ietf-teas-rsvp-te-scaling-rec-08

Abstract

   At the time of writing, networks which utilize RSVP Traffic
   Engineering (RSVP-TE) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) are encountering
   limitations in the ability of implementations to support the growth
   in the number of LSPs deployed.

   This document defines two techniques, "Refresh-Interval Independent
   RSVP (RI-RSVP)" and "Per-Peer Flow-Control", that reduce the number
   of processing cycles required to maintain RSVP-TE LSP state in Label
   Switching Routers (LSRs) and hence allow implementations to support
   larger scale deployments.

Requirements Language

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
   "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
   14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
   capitals, as shown here.

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/.

Beeram, et al.             Expires May 3, 2018                  [Page 1]
Internet-Draft        RSVP-TE Scaling - Techniques          October 2017

   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 May 3, 2018.

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  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   2.  Requirement for RFC2961 Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
     2.1.  Required Functionality from RFC2961 to be Implemented . .   4
     2.2.  Making Acknowledgements Mandatory . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     2.3.  Clarifications On Reaching Rapid Retry Limit (Rl) . . . .   4
   3.  Refresh-Interval Independent RSVP (RI-RSVP) . . . . . . . . .   5
     3.1.  Capability Advertisement  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     3.2.  Compatibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   4.  Per-Peer RSVP Flow-Control  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     4.1.  Capability Advertisement  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     4.2.  Compatibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   5.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   6.  Contributors  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   7.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     7.1.  Capability Object Values  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   8.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   9.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     9.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     9.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
Show full document text