Carrying a Contract Identifier in the PCE communication Protocol (PCEP)
draft-leroux-pce-contract-id-01
| Document | Type |
Expired Internet-Draft
(individual)
Expired & archived
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Author | Jean-Louis Le Roux | ||
| Last updated | 2007-03-07 | ||
| RFC stream | (None) | ||
| Intended RFC status | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Expired | |
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft is available in these formats:
Abstract
The Path Computation Element (PCE) based architecture can be used for computing Traffic Engineered Label Switched Paths (TE LSP) that traverse multiple Autonomous Systems (AS) in MultiProtocol Label Switching (MPLS) and Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) networks. This may require communication between PCEs in each AS, based upon on the PCE communication Protocol (PCEP). When ASes belong to distinct service providers, a per-service negotiation and activation procedure may be required before starting PCE based path computation. For the sake of illustration, the IPSphere Forum (IPSF) is currently specifying an architecture so as to automate the negotiation and activation of such an inter-provider TE LSP service. The result of such negotiation is a per-service contract identifier that needs to be carried in PCEP, so that PCEs can apply inter-provider path computation policies. For that purpose, this draft defines an extension to the PCEP protocol so as to carry a contract ID in request messages.
Authors
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)