CCAMP Working Group E. Bellagamba, Ed.
Internet-Draft L. Andersson, Ed.
Intended status: Experimental Ericsson
Expires: March 28, 2010 P. Skoldstrom
Acreo AB
September 24, 2009
RSVP-TE Extensions for MPLS-TP OAM Configuration
draft-bellagamba-ccamp-rsvp-te-mpls-tp-oam-ext-01
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
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.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on March 28, 2010.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2009 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 in effect on the date of
publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
and restrictions with respect to this document.
Abstract
This document defines a method for the configuration of MPLS-TP OAM
Bellagamba, et al. Expires March 28, 2010 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft RSVP-TE Ext for MPLS-TP OAM Config September 2009
functionalities through RSVP-TE Control Plane. The procedures
presented are experimental and currently describe BFD configuration
for CC and CV. Updated version of this document will possibly
describe the configuration of the remaining MPLS-TP OAM
functionalities.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.1. Contributing Authors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3. Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Overview of BFD OAM operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. RSVP-TE Extensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1. Operation overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.2. OAM Configuration TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.3. BFD CC OAM Configuration TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.3.1. Local Discriminator sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.3.2. Suggested TX interval . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.4. BFD CC&CV OAM Configuration TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.4.1. Trail Termination Source Identifier (TTSI) sub-TLV . . 11
3.4.1.1. LSP ME ID IPv4 Source/Destination Address
Format sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.4.1.2. LSP ME ID IPv6 Source/Destination Address
Format sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
3.4.1.3. FEC128PWv4 ME ID Format sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . 13
3.4.1.4. FEC128PWv6 ME ID Format sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . 14
3.4.1.5. ICC-based ME ID Format sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . 15
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
5. BFD OAM configuration errors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Appendix A. Additional Stuff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Bellagamba, et al. Expires March 28, 2010 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft RSVP-TE Ext for MPLS-TP OAM Config September 2009
1. Introduction
This document provides extensions to RSVP-TE in order to accommodate
the MPLS-TP CC (Continuity Check) and CV (Connectivity Verification)
MPLS-TP OAM functionalities. Further revisions of this document
might describe RSVP-TE extensions for the other MPLS-TP OAM
functionalities.
The procedures described are experimental and are intended to be
possibly updated with other proposed OAM tools and BFD future
extensions.
The document intent is both disseminating experimental results
carried out within Ericsson Research and provide an initial input for
further Control Plane extension in CCAMP IETF group.
1.1. Contributing Authors
The editors gratefully acknowledge the precious contributions of (in
alphabetical order) Annamaria Fulignoli, Andras Kern, David Jocha,
David Sinicrope, Attila Takacs and Benoit C Tremblay.
1.2. Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
1.3. Background
MPLS Transport Profile (MPLS-TP), describes a profile of MPLS that
enables operational models typical in transport networks, while
providing additional OAM, survivability and other maintenance
functions not currently supported by MPLS.
RSVP-TE control plane [RFC3471] has been chosen to support the
establishment of MPLS-TP LSPs.
[MPLS-TP-OAM-REQ] defines the requirements by which the OAM
functionality of MPLS-TP should abide.
The MPLS-TP design team provided recommendations regarding the
functionalities that should be covered by the existing toolsets and
which extensions or new tools will be needed in order to provide full
coverage of the OAM functionalities for MPLS-TP. A detailed overview
of the adopted OAM tools will be documented in the next revision of
[MPLS-TP OAM Analysis].
Bellagamba, et al. Expires March 28, 2010 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft RSVP-TE Ext for MPLS-TP OAM Config September 2009
This document provides extensions to RSVP-TE in order to accommodate
the MPLS-TP CC (Continuity Check) and CV (Connectivity Verification)
MPLS-TP OAM functionalities. Further revisions of this document
might describe RSVP-TE extensions for the other MPLS-TP OAM
functionalities.
Bidirectional Forwarding Detection, as described in [BFD], defines a
protocol that provides low-overhead, short-duration detection of
failures in the path between two forwarding engines, including the
interfaces, data link(s), and to the extent possible the forwarding
engines themselves. BFD can be used to track the liveliness of
MPLS-TP point-to-point and p2mp connections and detect data plane
failures. This version of the draft is focused on unidirectional and
bidirectional p2p connection.
BFD has been chosen to cover MPLS-TP CC functionality.
An extended version of BFD, as described in [BFD-CV], has been chosen
to accomplish both MPLS-TP CC and CV.
2. Overview of BFD OAM operation
BFD is a simple hello protocol that in many respects is similar to
the detection components of well-known routing protocols. A pair of
system transmits BFD packets periodically over each path between the
two systems, and if a system stops receiving BFD packets for long
enough, some component in that particular bidirectional path to the
neighboring system is assumed to have failed. Systems may also
negotiate to not send periodic BFD packets in order to reduce
overhead.
A path is only declared to be operational when two-way communication
has been established between systems, though this does not preclude
the use of unidirectional links.
Section 3 in [BFD] states that a separate BFD session is created for
each communications path and data protocol in use between two
systems.
Each system estimates how quickly it can send and receive BFD packets
in order to come to an agreement with its neighbor about how rapidly
detection of failure will take place. These estimates can be
modified in real time in order to adapt to unusual situations. This
design also allows for fast systems on a shared medium with a slow
system to be able to more rapidly detect failures between the fast
systems while allowing the slow system to participate to the best of
its ability.
Bellagamba, et al. Expires March 28, 2010 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft RSVP-TE Ext for MPLS-TP OAM Config September 2009
The ability of each system to control the BFD packet transmission
rate in both directions provides a mechanism for congestion control,
particularly when BFD is used across multiple network hops.
As recommended in [BFD-CV], the BFD tool needs to be extended for the
CV functionality by the addition of a unique identifier in order to
meet the requirements. The document in [BFD-CV] specifies the BFD
extension and behavior to meet the requirements for MPLS-TP proactive
Continuity Check and Connectivity Verification functionality and the
RDI functionality as defined in [MPLS-TP-OAM-REQ].
3. RSVP-TE Extensions
3.1. Operation overview
Below, extension to RSVP-TE for setting up BFD or BFD extended
version are defined in order to configure MPLS-TP CC and CV OAM
functionalities during the LSP setup.
The terms "ingress LER" and "egress LER" will not refer in this
document to any direction in the forwarding plane, but only to the
LER triggering the LSP setup (ingress LER) and the one triggering the
response to it (egress LER).
During the LSP signaling, the Control Plane instance in the ingress
and the egress LER announces the BFD OAM Configuration TLV (inside
the LSP_ATTRIBUTES object carried by the Path and Resv message
respectively), which includes the "Local Discriminator" sub-TLV.
During the BFD session the ingress LER will use as "MyDiscriminator"
the value announced in the "Local Discriminator"(Path message) and as
"YourDiscriminator" the value received in the "Local Discriminator"
(Resv message).
The system initiating the signaling MUST advertise the interval value
at which it requires BFD control packets both in transmission and
reception. If the receiving system can not support this value, a new
value can be signaled back in the Resv message, with the constraint
that the new value MUST be comprised between the Maximum and Minimum
values indicated by the ingress. If the egress system can not
support any value in the indicated range, it will reply with an
error.
In the case BFD extended version should be configured, the ME ID
unique parameter MUST be included along with the Discriminator and
timing values as described in the following sections.
Bellagamba, et al. Expires March 28, 2010 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft RSVP-TE Ext for MPLS-TP OAM Config September 2009
3.2. OAM Configuration TLV
This TLV is specified in [OAM-CONF-FWK] and is used to select which
OAM technology/method should be used for the LSP. In this document a
new OAM Type: BFD OAM is defined.
+----------+--------------+
| OAM Type | Description |
+----------+--------------+
| 0 | Reserved |
| 1 | Ethernet OAM |
| 2 | BFD |
| 3-256 | Reserved |
+----------+--------------+
The receiving node when the BFD OAM Type is requested should look for
the corresponding technology specific BFD OAM configuration TLV.
The receiving LER, when the BFD OAM Type is requested, should look
for the corresponding technology specific BFD OAM configuration TLV.
There are two types of allowed BFD OAM configuration TLV:
- "BFD CC OAM Configuration TLV" which MUST be used for
configuring BFD for setting up the proactive MPLS-TP CC OAM tool
(TLV type = 4)
- "BFD CC&CV OAM Configuration TLV" which MUST be used for
configuring BFD for setting up the proactive MPLS-TP CC&CV OAM
tool (TLV type = 5)
In case the receiving LER does not support the CC&CV functionality,
an error "OAM Problem/Unsupported BFD functionality" must be
generated when receiving the BFD CC&CV OAM Configuration TLV.
3.3. BFD CC OAM Configuration TLV
The BFD CC OAM Configuration TLV (depicted below) is defined for BFD
OAM specific configuration parameters. The BFD CC OAM Configuration
TLV is carried as a sub-TLV of the "OAM Configuration TLV" in the
LSP_ATTRIBUTES object both in Path and Resv messages.
This new TLV accommodates generic BFD OAM information and carries
sub-TLVs.
Bellagamba, et al. Expires March 28, 2010 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft RSVP-TE Ext for MPLS-TP OAM Config September 2009
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type (4) (IANA) | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|Vers.|R| Reserved (set to all 0s) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
~ sub TLVs ~
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Type: indicates a new type, the "BFD CC OAM Configuration TLV" (4)
(IANA to define).
Length: indicates the total length including sub-TLVs.
Version: identifies the BFD protocol version. If a node does not
support a specific BFD version an error must be generated: "OAM
Problem/Unsupported OAM Version "
R Flag: Role Flag. If set, the receiving node is required to act
with an Active Role as described in [BFD], section 6.1. When the BFD
OAM Configuration TLV is carried in the Resv message, the flag it not
taken into consideration by the receiving node.
The BFD CC OAM Configuration TLV MUST include the following sub-TLVs
during the Path signaling:
- "Local Discriminator" sub-TLV (described in paragraph 3.3.1)
- "Required TX interval" sub-TLV (described in paragraph 3.3.2)
The BFD CC OAM Configuration TLV MUST include the following sub-TLVs
during the Resv signaling:
- "Local Discriminator" sub-TLV (described in paragraph 3.3.1)
- "Required TX interval" sub-TLV (described in paragraph 3.3.2) if
a different timing value needs to be used.
3.3.1. Local Discriminator sub-TLV
The Local Discriminator sub-TLV is depicted below.
Bellagamba, et al. Expires March 28, 2010 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft RSVP-TE Ext for MPLS-TP OAM Config September 2009
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type (1) (IANA) | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Local Discriminator |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Type: indicates a new type, the Local Discriminator sub TLV (1) (IANA
to define).
Length: indicates the total length of the TLV including padding.
Local Discriminator: A unique, nonzero discriminator value generated
by the transmitting system and referring to itself, used to
demultiplex multiple BFD sessions between the same pair of systems.
This Discriminator will be signaled both by the ingress LSR and the
egress LSR in the Path and Resv message respectively.
3.3.2. Suggested TX interval
The Required TX interval sub-TLV is depicted below.
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Req. TX int. Type (2) (IANA) | Length = 24 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Acceptable Min. Asynchronous TX interval |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Suggested Asynchronous TX interval |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Acceptable Max. Asynchronous TX interval |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Required Echo TX Interval |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Detect. Mult | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Type: indicates a new type, the Required TX interval sub TLV (3)
(IANA to define).
Length: indicates the total length of the TLV including padding, it
is set to 24 (octects).
Suggested Asynchronous TX interval: the interval, in microseconds,
that the system initiating the signaling want to have when both
Bellagamba, et al. Expires March 28, 2010 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft RSVP-TE Ext for MPLS-TP OAM Config September 2009
transmitting and receiving BFD Control packets, less any jitter
applied. The value zero is reserved. If the receiving system can
not support this value, a new value can be signaled back in the Resv
message, with the constraint that the new value will be not higher
than "Acceptable Max. Asynchronous TX interval" and not lower than
"Acceptable Min. Asynchronous TX interval".
Acceptable Min. Asynchronous TX interval: the maximum TX interval, in
microseconds, that the system initiating the signaling can support.
In case the receiving system sends back this TLV for proposing a
different "Required Asynchronous TX interval", the "Acceptable Min.
Asynchronous TX interval" will not be taken into consideration by the
system which initiated the signaling.
Acceptable Max. Asynchronous TX interval: the minimum TX interval, in
microseconds, that the system initiating the signaling can support.
In case the receiving system sends back this TLV for proposing a
different "Required Asynchronous TX interval", the "Acceptable Max.
Asynchronous TX interval" will not be taken into consideration by the
system which initiated the signaling.
Required Echo TX Interval: the minimum interval, in microseconds,
between received BFD Echo packets that this system is capable of
supporting, less any jitter applied by the sender as described in
[BFD], section 6.8.9. This value is also an indication for the
receiving system of the minimum interval between transmitted BFD Echo
packets. If this value is zero, the transmitting system does not
support the receipt of BFD Echo packets. If the receiving system can
not support this value an error MUST be generated "Unsupported BFD TX
rate interval"
3.4. BFD CC&CV OAM Configuration TLV
The BFD CC&CV OAM Configuration TLV (depicted below) is defined for
BFD OAM specific configuration parameters. The BFD CC&CV OAM
Configuration TLV is carried as a sub-TLV of the "OAM Configuration
TLV" in the LSP_ATTRIBUTES object both in Path and Resv messages.
This new TLV accommodates generic BFD OAM information and carries
sub-TLVs.
Bellagamba, et al. Expires March 28, 2010 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft RSVP-TE Ext for MPLS-TP OAM Config September 2009
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| BFD CC&CV Type (5) (IANA) | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|Vers.|R| Reserved (set to all 0s) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
~ sub TLVs ~
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Type: indicates a new type, the BFD CC&CV OAM Configuration TLV (5)
(IANA to define).
Length: indicates the TLV total length (in octects) including sub-
TLVs.
Version: identifies the BFD protocol version. If a node does not
support a specific BFD version an error must be generated: "OAM
Problem/Unsupported OAM Version"
R Flag: Role Flag. If set, the receiving node is required to act
with an Active Role as described in [BFD], section 6.1. When the BFD
OAM Configuration TLV is carried in the Resv message, the flag it not
taken into consideration by the receiving node.
The BFD CC&CV OAM Configuration TLV MUST include the following sub-
TLVs during the Path signaling:
The BFD CC&CV OAM Configuration TLV MUST include the following sub-
TLVs during the Path signaling:
- "Local Discriminator" sub-TLV (described in paragraph 3.3.1)
- "Required TX interval" sub-TLV (described in paragraph 3.3.2)
- "Trail Termination Source Identifier" sub-TLV (described in
paragraph 3.4.1)
The BFD CC OAM Configuration TLV MUST include the following sub-TLVs
during the Resv signaling:
- "Local Discriminator" sub-TLV (described in paragraph 3.3.1)
- "Required TX interval" sub-TLV (described in paragraph 3.3.2) if
a different timing value needs to be used.
Bellagamba, et al. Expires March 28, 2010 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft RSVP-TE Ext for MPLS-TP OAM Config September 2009
The BFD CC&CV OAM Configuration TLV MUST include the following sub-
TLVs during the Resv signaling:
3.4.1. Trail Termination Source Identifier (TTSI) sub-TLV
The MPLS Generic Associated Channel specification (see[RFC5586]
section 3) describes the ACH TLV structure that can be used to
provide additional context information to the G-ACh packet.
In this section it is showed how the TTSI sub-TLV in the BFD CC&CV
OAM Configuration TLV can be used to configure the TLV Objects in the
ACH TLV for providing the MEP Identifier information and the ME
Identifier information as required by[MPLS-TP-OAM-FWK].
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| TTSI Type (3) (IANA) | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| MEP ID value |Reserved ( fixed to all ZEROs) !
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
~ Unique ME ID sub-TLV ~
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Length: indicates the TLV total length (in octects) including sub-
TLVs.
MEP ID value: 13-bit integer value field, identifying the
transmitting MEP within the ME. The three MSBs of the first octet
are not used and should be set to ZERO.
Unique ME ID: the value of the ME identifier. The ME Identifier Type
transmitted and expected MUST be the same at both MEPs. Since
different formats/semantics of ME ID Value can be chosen, the ME ID
Value is encoded as a further TLV and the possible options are
described in the next paragraphs.
3.4.1.1. LSP ME ID IPv4 Source/Destination Address Format sub-TLV
This ME ID format MAY be used to identify an LME (as defined in
[MPLS-TP-OAM-FWK]) where IPv4 addresses are used to identify the LERs
terminating the LSP.
Bellagamba, et al. Expires March 28, 2010 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft RSVP-TE Ext for MPLS-TP OAM Config September 2009
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| LSP ME ID IPv4 Type (1)(IANA) | Length = 16 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| IPv4 source address |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| IPv4 destination address |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Tunnel Index | Tunnel Instance Index |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
ME ID Type: indicates the specific format.
Length: indicates the sub-TLV total length and it is set to 16
(octets).
IPv4 source address: set to the IPv4 address of the LSP source port/
node.
IPv4 destination address: set to the IPv4 address of the LSP
destination port/node.
TunnelIndex: 2 octets field as defined in RFC 3812.
TunnelInstance Index: 2 octets field as defined in RFC 3812.
If the receiving LER does not support this ME ID format in an error
must be generated: "OAM Problem/Unsupported ME ID Format".
3.4.1.2. LSP ME ID IPv6 Source/Destination Address Format sub-TLV
This ME ID format MAY be used to identify an LME (as defined in
[MPLS-TP-OAM-FWK]) where IPv6 addresses are used to identify the LERs
terminating the LSP.
Bellagamba, et al. Expires March 28, 2010 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft RSVP-TE Ext for MPLS-TP OAM Config September 2009
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| LSP ME ID IPv6 Type (2)(IANA) | Length = 40 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| IPv6 source address |
~ (16 bytes) ~
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| IPv6 destination address |
~ (16 bytes) ~
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Tunnel Index | TunnelInstance Index |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
ME ID Type: indicates the specific format.
Length: indicates the sub-TLV total length and it is set to 40
(octets).
IPv6 source address: set to the IPv6 address of the LSP source port/
node.
IPv6 destination address: set to the IPv6 address of the LSP
destination port/node.
TunnelIndex: 2 octets field as defined in RFC 3812.
TunnelInstance Index: 2 octets field as defined in RFC 3812.
If the receiving LER does not support this ME ID format in an error
must be generated: "OAM Problem/Unsupported ME ID Format".
3.4.1.3. FEC128PWv4 ME ID Format sub-TLV
It contains a PW ID that terminates on a PE identified by an IPv4
address.
Bellagamba, et al. Expires March 28, 2010 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft RSVP-TE Ext for MPLS-TP OAM Config September 2009
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|FEC128PWv4 ME ID Type (3)(IANA)| Length = 16 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| IPv4 Address |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Group ID |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| PW ID |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
FEC128PWv4 Type: indicates the specific format.
Length: indicates the sub-TLV total length and it is set to 16
(octets).
IPv4 Address: IPv4 addresses are used to identify the T-PEs
terminating the PW.
Group ID: indicates an arbitrary 32-bit value that represents a group
of PWs that is used to create groups in the PW space, as specified in
Section 5.2 of [RFC4447].
PW ID: a non-zero 32-bit pseudowire connection ID (PW ID) as
specified in Section 5.2 of [RFC4447] that terminates on a PE
identified by an IPv4 address.
If the receiving LER does not support this ME ID format in an error
must be generated: "OAM Problem/Unsupported ME ID Format".
3.4.1.4. FEC128PWv6 ME ID Format sub-TLV
It contains a PW ID that terminates on a PE identified by an IPv6
address.
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|FEC128PWv4 ME ID Type (4)(IANA)| Length = 28 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
~ IPv6 Address ~
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Group ID |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| PW ID |
Bellagamba, et al. Expires March 28, 2010 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft RSVP-TE Ext for MPLS-TP OAM Config September 2009
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
FEC128PWv6 Type: indicates the specific format.
Length: indicates the sub-TLV total length and it is set to 28
(octets).
IPv6 Address: IPv6 addresses are used to identify the T-PEs
terminating the PW.
Group ID: indicates an arbitrary 32-bit value that represents a group
of PWs that is used to create groups in the PW space, as specified in
Section 5.2 of [RFC4447].
PW ID: a non-zero 32-bit pseudowire connection ID (PW ID) as
specified in Section 5.2 of [RFC4447] that terminates on a PE
identified by an IPv6 address.
If the receiving LER does not support this ME ID format in an error
must be generated: "OAM Problem/Unsupported ME ID Format".
3.4.1.5. ICC-based ME ID Format sub-TLV
This ME ID format MAY be used to identify SME, LME, LTCME, PME and
PTCME(as defined in [MPLS-TP-OAM-FWK]) independently on LER/T-PE
addressing schemes as well as of the FECs used to identify the PW.
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ME ID Type | Length = 20 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
+ +
| MEG ID |
+ (13 bytes) +
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
ME ID Type: it identifies the specific format, value = TBD.
Length: indicates the total length and it is set to 20.
MEG ID value: Refer to Annex A of ITU-T Recommendation Y.1731 for the
format used for the MEG ID field with ICC-based format.
Bellagamba, et al. Expires March 28, 2010 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft RSVP-TE Ext for MPLS-TP OAM Config September 2009
If the receiving LER does not support this ME ID format in an error
must be generated: "OAM Problem/Unsupported ME ID Format".
4. IANA Considerations
This document specifies the following new TLV types.
sub-TLVs types to be carried in the OAM Configuration TLV in
LSP_ATTRIBUTES:
- "BFD CC OAM Configuration" sub-TLV type: 4
- "BFD CC&CV OAM Configuration" sub-TLV type (to be carried in the
OAM Configuration TLV in LSP_ATTRIBUTES): 5
sub-TLV types to be carried in the BFD OAM Configuration sub-TLV:
- "Local Discriminator" sub-TLV type: 1
- "Suggested TX interval" sub-TLV type: 2
- "Trail Termination Source Identifier (TTSI)" sub-TLV type: 3
sub-TLV types to be carried in the TTSI sub-TLV:
- "LSP ME ID IPv4 Source/Destination Address Format" sub-TLV type:
1
- "LSP ME ID IPv6 Source/Destination Address Format" sub-TLV type:
2
- "FEC128PWv4 ME ID Format" sub-TLV type: 3
- "FEC128PWv6 ME ID Format" sub-TLV type: 4
- "ICC-based ME ID Format" sub-TLV type: 5
5. BFD OAM configuration errors
In addition to error values specified in [OAM-CONF-FWK] and [ETH-OAM]
this document defines the following values for the "OAM Problem"
Error Code:
- "OAM Problem/Unsupported BFD functionality"
Bellagamba, et al. Expires March 28, 2010 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft RSVP-TE Ext for MPLS-TP OAM Config September 2009
- "OAM Problem/Unsupported BFD TX rate interval"
- "OAM Problem/Unsupported ME ID Format"
6. Security Considerations
In addition to error values specified in [OAM-CONF-FWK] and [ETH-OAM]
this document defines the following values for the "OAM Problem"
Error Code:
7. References
7.1. Normative References
[BFD] Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding
Detection", 2009, <draft-ietf-bfd-base-09.txt>.
[BFD-CV] Fulignoli, A., Boutros, S., and M. Vigoreux, "MPLS-TP BFD
for Proactive CC-CV and RDI", 2009,
<draft-fulignoli-mpls-tp-bfd-cv-proactive-and-rdi-01>.
[MPLS-TP-OAM-FWK]
Busi, I. and B. Niven-Jenkins, "MPLS-TP OAM Framework and
Overview", 2009, <draft-ietf-mpls-tp-oam-framework-00>.
[MPLS-TP-OAM-REQ]
Vigoureux, M., Ward, D., and M. Betts, "Requirements for
OAM in MPLS Transport Networks", 2009,
<draft-ietf-mpls-tp-oam-requirements-03>.
[OAM-CONF-FWK]
Takacs, A., Fedyk, D., and J. van He, "OAM Configuration
Framework for GMPLS RSVP-TE", 2009,
<draft-ietf-ccamp-oam-configuration-fwk-01>.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC3471] Berger, L., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
(GMPLS) Signaling Functional Description", RFC 3471,
January 2003.
[RFC4447] Martini, L., Rosen, E., El-Aawar, N., Smith, T., and G.
Heron, "Pseudowire Setup and Maintenance Using the Label
Distribution Protocol (LDP)", RFC 4447, April 2006.
Bellagamba, et al. Expires March 28, 2010 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft RSVP-TE Ext for MPLS-TP OAM Config September 2009
[RFC5586] Bocci, M., Vigoureux, M., and S. Bryant, "MPLS Generic
Associated Channel", RFC 5586, June 2009.
7.2. Informative References
[ETH-OAM] Takacs, A., Gero, B., Fedyk, D., Mohan, D., and D. Long,
"GMPLS RSVP-TE Extensions for Ethernet OAM", 2009,
<draft-ietf-ccamp-rsvp-te-eth-oam-ext-01>.
[LSP Ping]
Kompella, K. and G. Swallow, "Detecting Multi-Protocol
Label Switched (MPLS) Data Plane Failures", 2006, <RFC
3479>.
[MPLS-TP OAM Analysis]
Sprecher, N., Nadeau, T., van Helvoort, H., and
Weingarten, "MPLS-TP OAM Analysis", 2006,
<draft-sprecher-mpls-tp-oam-analysis-05>.
Appendix A. Additional Stuff
This becomes an Appendix.
Authors' Addresses
Elisa Bellagamba (editor)
Ericsson
Farogatan 6
Kista, 164 40
Sweden
Phone: +46 761440785
Email: elisa.bellagamba@ericsson.com
Loa Andersson (editor)
Ericsson
Farogatan 6
Kista, 164 40
Sweden
Phone:
Email: loa.andersson@ericsson.com
Bellagamba, et al. Expires March 28, 2010 [Page 18]
Internet-Draft RSVP-TE Ext for MPLS-TP OAM Config September 2009
Pontus Skoldstrom
Acreo AB
Electrum 236
Kista, 164 40
Sweden
Phone: +46 8 6327731
Email: pontus.skoldstrom@acreo.se
Bellagamba, et al. Expires March 28, 2010 [Page 19]