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