PCEP Extension for Native IP Network
draft-wang-pce-extension-native-ip-01

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2017-03-09
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text pdf html bibtex
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
TEAS Working Group                                             A.Wang
Internet Draft                                           China Telecom
                                                         Boris Khasanov
                                                    Huawei Technologies
                                                      Sudhir Cheruathur
                                                       Juniper Networks
                                                               Chun Zhu
                                                            ZTE Company

Intended status: Standard Track                            March 9,2017
Expires: September 8, 2017

                   PCEP Extension for Native IP Network
                 draft-wang-pce-extension-native-ip-01.txt

Status of this Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. This document may not be modified,
   and derivative works of it may not be created, and it may not be
   published except as an Internet-Draft.

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. This document may not be modified,
   and derivative works of it may not be created, except to publish it
   as an RFC and to translate it into languages other than English.

   It is for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages
   other than English.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that
   other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
   Drafts.

   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."

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt

<A.Wang>              Expires December 30,2016                [Page 1]
Internet-Draft   PCE Extension for Native IP Network      March 8, 2017
   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html

   This Internet-Draft will expire on September8, 201717.

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.

Abstract

   This document defines the PCEP extension for PCE application in
   Native IP network. The scenario and architecture of PCE in native IP
   is described in [I-D.draft-wang-teas-pce-native-ip]. This draft
   describes the key information that is transferred between PCE and
   PCC to accomplish the end2end traffic assurance in Native IP network
   under central control mode.

Table of Contents

   1. Introduction ................................................ 2
   2. Conventions used in this document ............................ 3
   3. New Objects Extension......................................... 3
   4. Object Formats. ............................................. 3
      4.1. Peer Address List object................................ 4
      4.2. Peer Prefix Association................................. 5
      4.3. EXPLICIT PEER ROUTE Object.............................. 6
   5. Management Consideration..................................... 7
   6. Security Considerations...................................... 7
   7. IANA Considerations ......................................... 7
   8. Conclusions ................................................. 7
   9. References .................................................. 7
      9.1. Normative References .................................... 7
      9.2. Informative References.................................. 8
   10. Acknowledgments ............................................ 8

1. Introduction

   Traditionally, MPLS-TE traffic assurance requires the corresponding
   network devices support MPLS or the complex RSVP/LDP/Segment Routing

<A.Wang>              Expires September 7, 2017               [Page 2]
Internet-Draft   PCE Extension for Native IP Network      March 8, 2017
   etc. technologies to assure the end-to-end traffic performance. But
   in native IP network, there will be no such signaling protocol to
Show full document text