CCAMP Working Group E. Bellagamba, Ed.
Internet-Draft L. Andersson, Ed.
Intended status: Standards Track Ericsson
Expires: April 26, 2010 P. Skoldstrom
Acreo AB
October 23, 2009
RSVP-TE Extensions for MPLS-TP OAM Configuration
draft-bellagamba-ccamp-rsvp-te-mpls-tp-oam-ext-03
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 April 26, 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
Bellagamba, et al. Expires April 26, 2010 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft RSVP-TE Ext for MPLS-TP OAM Config October 2009
Transport Profile (MPLS-TP) Operations, Administration and
Maintenance (OAM) functionalities through extensions to RSVP-TE.
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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.3.1. Local Discriminator sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.3.2. Suggested TX interval . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.4. BFD CC&CV OAM Configuration TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.4.1. Source unique MEP-ID sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5. BFD OAM configuration errors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Appendix A. Additional Stuff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Bellagamba, et al. Expires April 26, 2010 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft RSVP-TE Ext for MPLS-TP OAM Config October 2009
1. Introduction
This document defines a method for the configuration of MPLS
Transport Profile (MPLS-TP) Operations, Administration and
Maintenance (OAM) functionalities through extensions to RSVP-TE.
The procedures included describe Bidirectional Forwarding Detection
(BFD) configuration for Continuity Check (CC) and Connection
Verification (CV). Updated versions of this document will describe
the configuration of the remaining MPLS-TP OAM functionalities.
The future updates of this document are meant to proceed consequently
to the upcoming MPLS-TP documents defining the MPLS-TP specific OAM
functionalities and with [MPLS-TP-IDENTIF] which specifies
identifiers for MPLS-TP objects.
1.1. Contributing Authors
The editors gratefully acknowledge the precious contributions of Lou
Berger, Annamaria Fulignoli, Andras Kern, David Jocha, David
Sinicrope, Attila Takacs and Benoit 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.
For the cases where a control plane is used with MPLS-TP, the GMPLS
control plane, RSVP-TE [RFC3471] and/or OSPF-TE [RFC3630] ISIS-TE
[5307] 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 [MPLS-TP OAM
Analysis].
Bellagamba, et al. Expires April 26, 2010 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft RSVP-TE Ext for MPLS-TP OAM Config October 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 will
describe RSVP-TE extensions for the other MPLS-TP OAM functionalities
as needed.
Bidirectional Forwarding Detection (BFD), 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.
[BFD] sect. 3 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 April 26, 2010 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft RSVP-TE Ext for MPLS-TP OAM Config October 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 unique MEP
ID parameter MUST be included along with the Discriminator and timing
values as described in the following sections.
Bellagamba, et al. Expires April 26, 2010 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft RSVP-TE Ext for MPLS-TP OAM Config October 2009
3.2. OAM Configuration TLV
Below is reported the "OAM Configuration TLV", defined in [OAM-CONF-
FWK]. It specifies which OAM technology/method should be used for
the LSP. The OAM Configuration TLV is carried in the LSP_ATTRIBUTES
object in Path messages.
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 (2) (IANA) | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| OAM Type | Reserved | OAM Function |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
~ sub-TLVs ~
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Type: indicates the OAM Configuration TLV (2) (IANA to assign).
OAM Type: one octect that specifies the technology specific OAM Type.
If the requested OAM Type is not supported an error must be
generated: "OAM Problem/Unsupported OAM Type".
In this document a new OAM Type - OAM Type 2 - is defined: MPLS-TP
OAM.
+----------+--------------+
| OAM Type | Description |
+----------+--------------+
| 0 | Reserved |
| 1 | Ethernet OAM |
| 2 | MPLS-TP OAM |
| 3-256 | Reserved |
+----------+--------------+
The receiving node when the BFD OAM Type is requested should look for
the corresponding technology specific BFD OAM configuration TLV.
OAM Function Flags: a two octect field that specifies pro-active OAM
functions that should be established and configured. If the selected
OAM Function(s) is(are) not supported an error must be generated:
"OAM Problem/Unsupported OAM Function".
Bellagamba, et al. Expires April 26, 2010 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft RSVP-TE Ext for MPLS-TP OAM Config October 2009
The Flag 0 was already in use for "Connectivity Monitoring" and it
will be used in this document to establish MPLS-TP Continuity Check
(CC) functionality. A new Flag 3 is defined here and will be used to
establish MPLS-TP Continuity Check and Connectivity Verification (CC
& CV) functionality. Control Plane control of on Demand functions
are for further studies.
The following table summarizes the Flags usage.
+----------+--------------------------------------------------------+
| OAM Type | Description |
+----------+--------------------------------------------------------+
| 0 | Continuity Check (CC) |
| 1 | Reserved |
| 2 | Reserved |
| 3 | Continuity Check and Connectivity Verification (CC&CV) |
| 4-16 | Reserved |
+----------+--------------------------------------------------------+
The receiving LER when the MPLS-TP OAM Type is requested should check
which Flags are set and look for the corresponding technology
specific configuration TLV.
- "BFD CC OAM Configuration TLV" which MUST be used if Flag = 0
for configuring BFD for setting up the proactive MPLS-TP CC OAM
tool (TLV type = 4, IANA to define);
- "BFD CC&CV OAM Configuration TLV" which MUST be used if Flag = 3
for configuring BFD for setting up the proactive MPLS-TP CC&CV OAM
tool (TLV type = 5, IANA to define).
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 April 26, 2010 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft RSVP-TE Ext for MPLS-TP OAM Config October 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] sect. 6.1. When the BFD
OAM Configuration TLV is carried in the Resv message, the flag is not
taken into consideration by the receiving node.
The BFD CC OAM Configuration TLV MUST include the following sub-TLVs
in the Path message:
- "Local Discriminator" sub-TLV;
- "Suggested TX interval" sub-TLV.
The BFD CC OAM Configuration TLV MUST include the following sub-TLVs
in the Resv message:
- "Local Discriminator" sub-TLV;
- "Suggested TX interval" sub-TLV 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 April 26, 2010 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft RSVP-TE Ext for MPLS-TP OAM Config October 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 as
defined in [BFD].
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 Suggested 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 Suggested 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,
Bellagamba, et al. Expires April 26, 2010 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft RSVP-TE Ext for MPLS-TP OAM Config October 2009
that the system initiating the signaling want to have when both
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 "Suggested 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 "Suggested 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] sect. 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 April 26, 2010 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft RSVP-TE Ext for MPLS-TP OAM Config October 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] sect. 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 in the Path message:
- "Local Discriminator" sub-TLV;
- "Suggested TX interval" sub-TLV;
- "Source unique MEP-ID" sub-TLV.
The BFD CC&CV OAM Configuration TLV MUST include the following sub-
TLVs in the Resv message:
- "Local Discriminator" sub-TLV;
- "Suggested TX interval" sub-TLV if a different timing value
needs to be used;
- "Source unique MEP-ID" sub-TLV.
Bellagamba, et al. Expires April 26, 2010 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft RSVP-TE Ext for MPLS-TP OAM Config October 2009
3.4.1. Source unique MEP-ID sub-TLV
The MPLS Generic Associated Channel specification (see[RFC5586] sect.
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 "Source unique MEP-ID" 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|Source unique MEP-ID Type (3)(IANA)| Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
~ Source unique MEP-ID ~
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Length: indicates the TLV total length (in octects) including sub-
TLVs.
Source unique MEP-ID: the unique MEP Identifier of the source of the
BFD packet. Please refer to [MPLS-TP-IDENTIF] for a detailed
explanation of the field composition and to possible changes of the
field definition. As the writing time, the "Source unique MEP-ID" is
defined to be the Network_IF_ID. The Network_IF_ID is also defined
in [MPLS-TP-IDENTIF], section 4.
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:
Bellagamba, et al. Expires April 26, 2010 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft RSVP-TE Ext for MPLS-TP OAM Config October 2009
- "Local Discriminator" sub-TLV type: 1
- "Suggested TX interval" sub-TLV type: 2
- "Source unique MEP-ID" sub-TLV type: 3
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"
- "OAM Problem/Unsupported BFD TX rate interval"
- "OAM Problem/Unsupported MEP ID Format"
6. Security Considerations
The signaling of OAM related parameters and the automatic
establishment of OAM entities introduces additional security
considerations to those discussed in [RFC3473]. In particular, a
network element could be overloaded, if an attacker would request
liveliness monitoring, with frequent periodic messages, for a high
number of LSPs, targeting a single network element.
Security aspects will be covered in more detailed in subsequent
versions of this document.
7. References
7.1. Normative References
[BFD] Katz, D. and D. Ward, "Bidirectional Forwarding
Detection", 2009, <draft-ietf-bfd-base>.
[BFD-CV] Fulignoli, A., Boutros, S., and M. Vigoreux, "MPLS-TP BFD
for Proactive CC-CV and RDI", 2009,
<draft-asm-mpls-tp-bfd-cc-cv>.
[MPLS-TP-IDENTIF]
Bocci, M. and G. Swallow, "MPLS-TP Identifiers", 2009,
<draft-swallow-mpls-tp-identifiers>.
Bellagamba, et al. Expires April 26, 2010 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft RSVP-TE Ext for MPLS-TP OAM Config October 2009
[MPLS-TP-OAM-FWK]
Busi, I. and B. Niven-Jenkins, "MPLS-TP OAM Framework and
Overview", 2009, <draft-ietf-mpls-tp-oam-framework>.
[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>.
[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>.
[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.
[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>.
[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>.
Appendix A. Additional Stuff
This becomes an Appendix.
Bellagamba, et al. Expires April 26, 2010 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft RSVP-TE Ext for MPLS-TP OAM Config October 2009
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
Pontus Skoldstrom
Acreo AB
Electrum 236
Kista, 164 40
Sweden
Phone: +46 8 6327731
Email: pontus.skoldstrom@acreo.se
Bellagamba, et al. Expires April 26, 2010 [Page 15]