L2VPN Working Group Pranjal Kumar Dutta
Marc Lasserre
Internet Draft Alcatel-Lucent
Intended status: Standard
Expires: October 2009 Olen Stokes
Extreme Networks
April 26, 2009
LDP Extensions for Optimized MAC Address Withdrawal in H-VPLS
draft-ietf-l2vpn-vpls-ldp-mac-opt-00.txt
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 October 26, 2009.
Abstract
[RFC4762] describes a mechanism to remove or unlearn MAC addresses
that have been dynamically learned in a VPLS Instance for faster
convergence on topology change. The procedure also removes the MAC
addresses in the VPLS that does not require relearning due to such
topology change. This document defines an extension to MAC Address
Withdrawal procedure with empty MAC List [RFC4762], which enables a
Provider Edge(PE) device to remove only the MAC addresses that needs
to be relearned.
Dutta, et. al. Expires October 26, 2009 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS April 26, 2009
Conventions used in this document
In examples, "C:" and "S:" indicate lines sent by the client and
server respectively.
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 [RFC2119].
Table of Contents
1. Introduction...................................................3
2. Problem Description............................................4
3. Optimized MAC Flush Mechanism..................................6
4. PE-ID TLV......................................................7
5. Application of PE-ID TLV in Optimized MAC Flush...............10
5.1 PE-ID TLV Processing Rules.................................10
5.2 Optimized MAC Flush Procedures...............................11
6. General Applicability of PE-ID TLV............................13
7. Security Considerations.......................................13
8. IANA Considerations...........................................14
9. Acknowledgments...............................................14
10. References...................................................15
10.1. Normative References....................................15
10.2. Informative References..................................15
Author's Addresses...............................................16
Terminology
This document uses the terminology defined in [RFC5036], [RFC4447]
and [RFC4762]. Throughout this document VPLS means the emulated
bridged LAN service offered to a customer. H-VPLS means the
hierarchical connectivity or layout of MTU-s and PE devices offering
the VPLS[RFC4762]. The terms spoke node and MTU-s in H-VPLS are used
interchangeably.
Dutta, et. al Expires October 26,2009 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS April 26, 2009
1. Introduction
A method of Virtual Private LAN Service (VPLS), also known as
Transparent LAN Service (TLS) is described in [RFC4762]. A VPLS is
created using a collection of one or more point-to-point pseudowires
(PWs) [RFC4664] configured in a flat, full-mesh topology. The mesh
topology provides a LAN segment or broadcast domain that is fully
capable of learning and forwarding on Ethernet MAC addresses at the
PE devices.
This VPLS full mesh core configuration can be augmented with
additional non-meshed spoke nodes to provide a Hierarchical VPLS
(H-VPLS) service[RFC4762].
MAC Address Withdrawal mechanism is described in [RFC4762] to
remove or unlearn MAC addresses for faster convergence on topology
change in dual-homed H-VPLS[RFC4762]. In dual-homed H-VPLS, an edge
device termed as MTU-s is connected to two PE devices via primary
spoke PW and backup spoke PW respectively. Such redundancy is
designed to protect against the failure of primary spoke PW or
primary PE device. When MTU-s switches over to backup PW, it is
required to flush the MAC addresses learned in the VPLS in upstream
PE devices participating in full mesh, to avoid black holing of
frames to those addresses. Note that forced switchover to backup PW
can be also performed at MTU-s administratively due to maintenance
activities on the primary spoke PW.
When backup PW is made active by MTU-s, it triggers LDP Address
Withdraw Message with list of MAC addresses to be flushed. The
message is forwarded over the LDP session(s) associated with the
newly activated PW. In order to minimize the impact on LDP
convergence time when MAC List TLV contains a large number of MAC
addresses, it may be preferable to send a LDP Address Withdraw
Message with an empty MAC List. Throughout this document the term
MAC Flush Message is used to specify LDP Address Withdraw Message
with empty MAC List described in [RFC4762] unless specified
otherwise.
As per the processing rules in [RFC4762] a PE device on receiving
a MAC flush message removes all MAC addresses associated with
the specified VPLS instance (as indicated in the FEC TLV) except the
MAC addresses learned over the newly activated PW. The PE device
further triggers MAC flush message to each remote PE device
Dutta, et. al Expires October 26,2009 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS April 26, 2009
connected to it in the VPLS full mesh.
This method of MAC flushing is modeled after Topology Change
Notification (TCN) in Rapid Spanning Tree Protocol (RSTP)[802.1w].
When a bridge switches from failed link to the backup link, the
bridge sends out a TCN message over the newly activated link. The
upstream bridge upon receiving this message flushes its entire MAC
addresses except the ones received over this link and sends the TCN
message out of its other ports in that spanning tree instance. The
message is further relayed along the spanning tree by the other
bridges.
When a PE device in the full-mesh of H-VPLS receives a MAC flush
message it also flushes the MAC addresses which are not affected
due to topology change, thus leading to unnecessary flooding and
relearning. This document describes the problem and a solution to
optimize the MAC flush procedure in [RFC4762] so that flush only
the set of MAC addresses that require relearning when topology
changes in H-VPLS.
[L2VPN-SIG] describes about inter-AS VPLS deployments models where
Multi-Segment PWs (MS-PW) may be used. The solution proposed in
this document is generic and is applicable to MS-PWs in H-VPLS.
2. Problem Description
Figure.1 describes a dual-homed H-VPLS scenerio for a VPLS instance
where the problem with the existing MAC flush method in [RFC4762] is
explained.
Dutta, et. al Expires October 26,2009 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS April 26, 2009
PE-1 PE-3
+--------+ +--------+
| | | |
| -- | | -- |
Customer Site 1 | / \ |------------------| / \ |->
CE-1 /------| \ s/ | | \S / |
\ primary spoke PW | -- | /------| -- |
\ / +--------+ / +--------+
\ (MTU-s)/ | \ / |
+--------+/ | \ / |
| | | \ / |
| -- | | \ / |
| / \ | | H-VPLS Full Mesh Core|
| \S / | | / \ |
| -- | | / \ |
/+--------+\ | / \ |
/ backup spoke PW | / \ |
/ \ +--------+ \--------+--------+
CE-2 \ | | | |
Customer Site 2 \------| -- | | -- |
| / \ |------------------| / \ |->
| \s / | | \S / |
| -- | | -- |
+--------+ +--------+
PE-2 PE-4
Figure 1: Dual homed MTU-s in two tier hierarchy H-VPLS
In Figure.1, the MTU-s is dual-homed to PE-1 and PE-2. Only the
primary spoke PW is active at MTU-s, thus PE-1 acting as the primary
device to reach the full mesh in the VPLS instance. The MAC
addresses of nodes located at access sites (behind CE1 and CE2) are
learned at PE-1 over the primary spoke PW. PE-2, PE-3 and PE-4 learn
those MAC addresses on their respective mesh PWs terminating to
PE-1.
When MTU-s switches to backup spoke PW and activates it, PE-2
Dutta, et. al Expires October 26,2009 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS April 26, 2009
becomes the primary device to reach the full mesh core. Traffic
entering the H-VPLS from CE-1 and CE-2 is diverted by MTU-s to the
backup spoke PW. For faster convergence MTU-s may desire to unlearn
or remove the MAC addresses that have been learned in the upstream
VPLS full-mesh through PE-1. MTU-s may send MAC flush message to
PE-2 once the backup PW has been made active. As per the processing
rules defined in [RFC4762], PE-2 flushes the entire MAC addresses
learned in the VPLS from the PWs terminating at PE-1, PE-3 and PE-4
except the ones learned over the newly activated spoke PW.
In the H-VPLS core, PE devices are connected in full mesh unlike the
spanning tree connectivity in bridges. So the MAC addresses that
require flushing and relearning at PE-2 are only the MAC addresses
those have been learned on the PW connected to PE-1.
PE-2 further relays MAC flush messages to all other PE devices in
the full mesh. Same processing rule applies at all those PE devices.
For example, at PE-3 the entire MAC addresses learned from the PWs
connected to PE-1 and PE-4 are flushed and relearned subsequently.
As the number of PE devices in the full-mesh increases, the number
of unaffected MAC addresses flushed in a VPLS instance also
increases, thus leading to unnecessary flooding and relearning. With
large number of VPLS instances provisioned in the H-VPLS network
topology the amount of unnecessary flooding and relearning
increases.
3. Optimized MAC Flush Mechanism
The basic principle of the optimized MAC flush mechanism is
explained with reference to Figure 1. On switching over to the
backup spoke PW when MTU-s triggers MAC flush message to PE-2, it
also communicates the unique PW endpoint identifier (PE-ID) in PE-1,
the formerly active PE device. In VPLS a PW terminates on a Virtual
Switching Instance (VSI) in a PE device. The PE-ID is relayed in all
the subsequent MAC flush messages triggered by PE-2 to its peer PE
devices in the full mesh. Each PE device that receives the message
identifies the VPLS (From FEC TLV) and its respective PW that
terminates in PE-1 (from PE-ID). Thus the PE device flushes only the
MAC addresses learned from that PW connected to PE-1.
Dutta, et. al Expires October 26,2009 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS April 26, 2009
4. PE-ID TLV
This document defines a PW Endpoint Identifier (PE-ID) TLV for
LDP [RFC5036]. The PE-ID TLV carries the unique identifier of a
generic PW endpoint.
The encoding of PE-ID TLV follows standard LDP TLV encoding in
[RFC5036]. A PE-ID TLV contains a list of one or more PE-ID
Elements. Its encoding is:
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|1|0| PE-ID TLV (0x0405) | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| PE-ID Element 1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
~ ~
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| PE-ID Element n |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 2. PE-ID TLV
U (Unknown) bit of thus LDP TLV MUST be set to 1. If the PE-ID TLV
is not understood then it is ignored the receiving device.
F (Forward) MUST be set to 0. Since the LDP mechanism used here is
targeted, the TLV is not forwarded if it is not understood by the
receiving device.
The Type field MUST be set to 0x405 (subject to IANA approval). This
identifies the TLV type as PE-ID TLV.
Length field specifies the total length in octets of the Value
in PE-ID TLV.
PE-ID Element 1 to PE-ID Element n:
There are several types of PE-ID Elements. The PE-ID Element
Dutta, et. al Expires October 26,2009 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS April 26, 2009
Encoding depends on the type of the PE-ID Element. A PE-ID
Element uniquely identifies a PW Endpoint.
A PE-ID Element value is encoded as 1 octet field that specifies the
element type, 1 octet field that identifies the length in octets of
the element value, and a variable length field that is type
dependent element value.
The PE-ID Element value encoding is:
PE-ID Element Type Length Value
Type name
FEC-128 specific 0x01 2 octets See below.
FEC-129 specific 0x02 Variable See below.
The type of PE-ID Element depends on the type of FEC Element used to
provision the respective PW.
[RFC4447] defines two types of FEC elements that may be used for
provisioning PWs - Pwid FEC (type 128) and the Generalized ID (GID)
FEC (type 129).
The Pwid FEC element includes a fixed-length 32 bit value called the
PWid. The same PWid value must be configured on the local and remote
PE prior to PW setup.
The GID FEC element includes TLV fields for attachment individual
identifiers (AII) that, in conjunction with an attachment group
identifier (AGI), serve as PW endpoint identifiers. The endpoint
identifier on the local PE (denoted as <AGI, source AII or SAII>) is
called the source attachment identifier (SAI) and the endpoint
identifier on the remote PE (denoted as <AGI, target AII or TAII>) is
called the target attachment identifier (TAI). The SAI and TAI can be
distinct values. This is useful for provisioning models where the
local PE (with a particular SAI) does not know and must somehow learn
(e.g. via MP-BGP auto-discovery) of remote TAI values prior to
launching PW setup messages towards the remote PE.
FEC-128 specific PE-ID Element
This sub-type is to be used to identify a PW endpoint only if
Pwid FEC Element is used for signaling the PW. The encoding of
this PE-ID element is as follows:
Dutta, et. al Expires October 26,2009 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS April 26, 2009
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| 0x01 | Length | PW type |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| PW ID |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Endpoint Address |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 3. FEC-128 specific PE-ID Element
PW type
The PW Type value from PWid FEC element.
PW ID
The PW ID value from the Pwid FEC element.
Endpoint Address
32-bit LSR-ID from the LDP-ID used in LDP signaling session
by a PW endpoint.
FEC-129 specific PE-ID element
This sub-type is to be used to indentify a PW endpoint only if
GID FEC Element is used for signaling the PW. The encoding of
this PE-ID element is as follows:
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| 0x02 | Length | PW type |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AGI TLV |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| AII TLV |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 4. FEC-129 specific PE-ID Element
Dutta, et. al Expires October 26,2009 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS April 26, 2009
PW type
The PW Type value from GID FEC element.
PW ID
The PW ID value from the GID FEC element
AGI TLV
The AGI from the corresponding GID Element
AII TLV
The AII associated with the PW endpoint.
5. Application of PE-ID TLV in Optimized MAC Flush
For optimized MAC flush, the PE-ID TLV MAY be sent as an OPTIONAL
parameter in existing LDP Address Withdraw Message with empty MAC
List. The PE-ID TLV carries the unique PW endpoint identifier in a
VPLS as described in section 4.
It is to note that for optimized MAC flush the PE-ID TLV carries
sufficient information for identifying the VPLS instance and the
unique VSI Identifier. For backward compatibility with MAC flush
procedures in [RFC4762] both FEC TLV and PE-ID TLV should be sent in
the MAC flush message. However the inclusion of the FEC-TLV should be
based on what would be the desired effect should the PE-ID not be
understood by the receiver. In cases where the desired action when
the PE-ID is not understood would be to behave as described in
[RFC4762], then the FEC TLV SHOULD be included. In cases where the
desired action when the PE-ID is not understood is to take no
action, then the FEC TLV SHOULD NOT be included. The PE-ID TLV
SHOULD carry the unique VSI identifier in the VPLS instance
(specified in the FEC TLV). The PE-ID TLV SHOULD be placed after the
existing TLVs in MAC Flush message in [RFC4762].
5.1 PE-ID TLV Processing Rules
This section describes the processing rules of PE-ID TLV that SHOULD
be followed in the context of MAC flush procedures in an H-VPLS.
Dutta, et. al Expires October 26,2009 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS April 26, 2009
When an MTU-s triggers MAC flush after activation of backup spoke
PW, it MAY send the PE-ID TLV that identifies VSI in the formerly
active PE device. There may be cases where a PE device in full mesh
initiates MAC flush torwards the core when it detects a spoke PW
failure. In such a case the PE-ID TLV in MAC flush message
MAY identify its own VSI in the VPLS instance. Irrespective of
whether it is the MTU-s or PE device that initiates the MAC flush, a
PE device receiving the PE-ID TLV SHOULD follow the same processing
rules as described in this section.
If MS-PW signaled with GID Element is used in VPLS then a MAC flush
message is processed only at the T-PE nodes. In this section, a PE
device signifies only T-PE in MS-PW case unless specified otherwise.
When a PE device receives a MAC flush with PE-ID TLV, it SHOULD
flush all the MAC addresses learned in the VPLS from the PW that
terminates in the remote VSI identified by the PE-ID element.
If a PE-ID element received in the MAC flush message identifies the
local VSI, it SHOULD flush the MAC addresses learned from its
local spoke PW(s) in the VPLS instance.
If a PE device receives a MAC flush with the PE-ID TLV option
And a valid MAC address list, it SHOULD ignore the option and deal
with MAC addresses explicitly as per [RFC4762].
If a PE device that doesn't support PE-ID TLV receives a MAC flush
message with this option, it MUST ignore the option and follow the
processing rules as per [RFC4762].
5.2 Optimized MAC Flush Procedures
This section explains the optimized MAC flush procedure in the
scenario in Figure.1.
When the backup PW is activated by MTU-s, it may send MAC flush
message to PE-2 with the optional PE-ID TLV. The PE-ID element
carries the VSI identifier in PE-1 for the VPLS. Upon receipt of the
MAC flush message, PE-2 identifies the VPLS instance that requires
MAC flush from the FEC element in the FEC TLV. From the PE-ID TLV,
PE-2 identifies the PW in the VPLS that terminates in PE-1. PE-2
Dutta, et. al Expires October 26,2009 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS April 26, 2009
removes all MAC addresses learned from that PW.
PE-2 relays MAC flush messages with the received PE-ID to all its
peer PE devices. When the message is received at PE-3, it identifies
the PW that terminates in the remote VSI in PE-1. PE-3 removes all
MAC addresses learned on the PW that terminated in PE1.
There may be redundancy scenerios where a PE device in the full mesh
may be required to initiate optimized MAC Address Withdrawal.
Figure 5. shows a redundant H-VPLS topology to protect against
failure of MTU-s device. Provider RSTP may be used as selection
algorithm for active and backup PWs in order to maintain the
connectivity between MTU devices and PE devices at the edge. It is
assumed that PE devices can detect failure on PWs in either
direction through OAM mechanisms such as VCCV procedures for
instance.
MTU-1================PE-1===============PE-3
|| || \ /||
|| Redundancy || \ / ||
|| Provider RSTP || Full-Mesh . ||
|| || / \ ||
|| || / \||
MTU-2----------------PE-2===============PE-4
Backup PW
Figure 5. Redundancy with Provider RSTP
MTU-1, MTU-2, PE-1 and PE-2 participate in provider RSTP. By
configuration in RSTP it is ensured that the PW between MTU-1 and
PE-1 is active and the PW between MTU-2 and PE-2 is blocked (made
backup) at MTU-2 end. When the active PW failure is detected by
RSTP, it activates the PW between MTU-2 and PE-2. When PE-1 detects
the failing PW to MTU-1, it may trigger MAC flush into the full mesh
with PE-ID TLV that carries its own VSI identifier in the VPLS.
Other PE devices in the full mesh that receive the MAC flush
message identify their respective PWs terminating on PE-1 and
flush all the MAC addresses learned from it.
By default, MTU-2 should still trigger MAC flush as currently
Dutta, et. al Expires October 26,2009 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS April 26, 2009
defined in [RFC4762] after the backup PW is made active by RSTP.
Mechanisms to prevent two copies of MAC withdraws to be sent in such
scenerios is out of scope of this document.
[RFC4762] describes multi-domain VPLS service where fully meshed
VPLS networks (domains) are connected together by a single spoke
PW per VPLS service between the VPLS "border" PE devices. To provide
redundancy against failure of the inter-domain spoke, full mesh of
inter-domain spokes can be setup between border PE devices and
provider RSTP may be used for selection of the active inter-domain
spoke. In case of inter-domain spoke PW failure, PE initiated MAC
withdrawal may be used for optimized MAC flushing within individual
domains.
6. General Applicability of PE-ID TLV
This document defines the PE-ID TLV and its application in optimized
flushing of MAC addresses in H-VPLS on topology change. The use of
PE-ID TLV in MAC flush mechanism is OPTIONAL.
Different H-VPLS redundancy scenarios are possible. The use of the
PE-ID TLV applies to H-VPLS dual-homing scenarios described in this
document. The use of the PE-ID TLV in different scenarios is out of
scope. The protocols used in redundancy scenarios are outside the
scope. The document doesn't specify the device that should trigger
optimized MAC flush. The method to select the appropriate PE-ID in
various redundancy scenarios is out of scope.
There may be other L2VPN applications where PE-ID TLV may be
applicable and such applications are outside the scope of this
document.
7. Security Considerations
- Control plane aspects
- LDP security (authentication) methods as described in [RFC5036]
is applicable here. Further this document implements security
considerations as in [RFC4447] and [RFC4762].
- Data plane aspects
Dutta, et. al Expires October 26,2009 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS April 26, 2009
- This specification does not have any impact on the VPLS
forwarding plane.
8. IANA Considerations
The Type field in PE-ID TLV is defined as 0x405 and is subject to
IANA approval.
9. Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the following people who have
provided valuable comments and feedback on the topics discussed in
this document:
Florin Balus
Prashanth Ishwar
Vipin Jain
John Rigby
Ali Sajassi
This document was prepared using 2-Word-v2.0.template.dot.
Dutta, et. al Expires October 26,2009 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS April 26, 2009
10. References
10.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC4762] Lasserre, M. and Kompella, V., "Virtual Private LAN
Services using LDP", RFC 4762, January 2007.
[RFC5036] Andersson, L., et al. "LDP Specification",RFC5036,
October 2007.
10.2. Informative References
[L2VPN-SIG] Rosen, E., et al. .Provisioning, Autodiscovery, and
Signaling in L2VPNs., work in progress.
[RFC4664] Andersson, L., et al. "Framework for Layer 2
Virtual Private Networks (L2VPNs)", RFC 4664,
September 2006.
[RFC4447] Martini. and et al., "Pseudowire Setup and
Maintenance Using Label Distribution Protocol
(LDP)", RFC 4447, April 2006.
[802.1w] "IEEE Standard for Local and metropolitan area
networks. Common specifications Part 3: Media
Access Control (MAC) Bridges. Amendment 2: Rapid
Reconfiguration", IEEE Std 802.1w-2001.
Dutta, et. al Expires October 26,2009 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft Optimized MAC Withdrawal in H-VPLS April 26, 2009
Author's Addresses
Pranjal Kumar Dutta
Alcatel-Lucent
701 E Middlefield Road,
Mountain View, CA 94043
USA
Email: pdutta@alcatel-lucent.com
Marc Lasserre
Alcatel-Lucent
Email: marc.lasserre@alcatel-lucent.com
Olen Stokes
Extreme Networks
PO Box 14129
RTP, NC 27709
USA
Email: ostokes@extremenetworks.com
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.
Acknowledgment
Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
Internet Society.
Dutta, et. al Expires October 26,2009 [Page 16]
