Network Working Group                                       Luca Martini
Internet Draft                                       Cisco Systems, Inc.
Category: Standards Track
Expiration Date: July 2006
                                                          George Swallow
                                                     Cisco Systems, Inc.

                                                            January 2006


                    Target Choice of Pseudowire Type


                draft-ietf-pwe3-wildcard-pw-type-00.txt

Status of this Memo

   By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
   applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
   have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
   aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of 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/1id-abstracts.html

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html


Abstract

   The Generalized PWid FEC permits a procedure know as single-sided
   signaling as documented.  In this procedure, one end of the
   pseudowire always initiates the pseudowire setup and the target of
   that label mapping message only signals in response.  For certain
   applications of pseudowires it is advantages to configure the
   pseudowire type (PW type) at the target of the initial label mapping
   message.  This document specifies a means of doing this.



Martini & Swallow            Standards Track                    [Page 1]


Internet Draft   draft-ietf-pwe3-wildcard-pw-type-00.txt    January 2006


Contents

 1      Introduction  ..............................................   3
 1.1    Conventions  ...............................................   3
 2      Wildcard PW Type  ..........................................   3
 3      Procedures  ................................................   4
 4      Security Considerations  ...................................   4
 5      IANA Considerations  .......................................   4
 6      References  ................................................   5










































Martini & Swallow            Standards Track                    [Page 2]


Internet Draft   draft-ietf-pwe3-wildcard-pw-type-00.txt    January 2006


1. Introduction

   The Generalized PWid FEC [CONTROL] permits a procedure know as sin-
   gle-sided signaling as documented in [L2VPNSIG].  In this procedure,
   one end of the pseudowire always initiates the pseudowire setup.  The
   target router of that initial label mapping message only signals in
   response.  For certain applications of pseudowires it is advantages
   to configure the pseudowire type (PW_Type) at the target of the ini-
   tial label mapping message.

   For certain applications where an igress PE is serving as part of a
   gateway function between a layer two network and layer two attachment
   circuits on remote PEs, the initial setup may be caused by signaling
   from the layer 2 network.  However, the layer 2 signaling may not
   contain sufficient information to determine the PW type.  This infor-
   mation, however would be known at the PE supporting the targeted
   attachment circuit.

   By the procedures of [CONTROL] both label mapping messages must carry
   the PW type and the two unidirectional mapping messages must be in
   agreement.  Thus within the current procedures the initiator must
   specify the PW_Type.



1.1. Conventions

   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 [KEYWORDS].


2. Wildcard PW Type

   In order to allow a PE to initiate the signaling exchange for a pseu-
   dowire without knowing the pseudowire type, the following procedure
   is used.

   The initiating PE includes a PW type of 0x7fff [to be assigned by
   IANA].  The semantics are the following:

   1.  To the targeted PE, this value indicates that it is to determine
       the PW type (for both directions) and signal that in a label
       mapping message back to the initiating PE.

   2.  For the procedures of [CONTROL] this PW type is interpreted to
       match any PW type other than itself.  That is the targeted PE may
       respond with any valid PW type other than the Wildcard PW type.



Martini & Swallow            Standards Track                    [Page 3]


Internet Draft   draft-ietf-pwe3-wildcard-pw-type-00.txt    January 2006


3. Procedures

   A targeted PE which receives a Wildcard PW type follows the normal
   procedures in checking the AGI and TAII values.  If a label mapping
   message has already been issued, it MUST respond to this message with
   a Label_Release message.

   If PE2 cannot map the TAI to one of its Forwarders, then PE2 sends a
   Label Release message to PE1, with a Status Code of "Unas-
   signed/Unrecognized TAI", and the processing of the Label Mapping
   message is complete.  Otherwise, it responds with a Label_Mapping
   message with the configured PW type.

   When the initiating PE receives a Label_Mapping message from the tar-
   geted PE it uses this as the PW type for both directions.  If it is
   unable to support the PW type it MUST send a Label_Release message
   for the label allocated in the Label_Mapping message which initiated
   the exchange.  It also SHOULD respond to the received Label_Mapping
   message with a Label_Release message.  Further actions are beyond the
   scope of this document but could include notifying the associated
   application (if any) or notifying network management.


4. Security Considerations

   This draft does not impact the security aspects of [CONTROL].  The
   message exchanges remain the same.


5. IANA Considerations

   This document requests the following allocation be made from the IETF
   consensus range of the "Pseudowire Type" registry as defined in
   [IANA].

         PW type        Description

         0x7FFF (TBA)   Wildcard













Martini & Swallow            Standards Track                    [Page 4]


Internet Draft   draft-ietf-pwe3-wildcard-pw-type-00.txt    January 2006


6. References

Normative References

   [KEYWORDS]   Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
                Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.

   [CONTROL]    Martini, L., et al., "Pseudowire Setup and
                Maintenance using the Label Distribution Protocol",
                draft-ietf-pwe3-control-protocol-17.txt, June 2005.

   [L2VPNSIG]   Rosen, E., et al., Provisioning, Autodiscovery, and
                Signaling in L2VPNs", draft-ietf-l2vpn-signaling-06.txt,
                September 2005.

   [IANA]       Martini, L., and Townsley, M., "IANA Allocations for
                pseudo Wire Edge to Edge Emulation (PWE3)",
                draft-ietf-pwe3-iana-allocation-17.txt, June 2005.



Authors' Addresses

      Luca Martini
      Cisco Systems
      9155 East Nichols Avenue, Suite 400
      Englewood, CO, 80112
      Email:  lmartini@cisco.com

      George Swallow
      Cisco Systems
      1414 Massachusetts Ave,
      Boxborough, MA 01719
      Email:  swallow@cisco.com



Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).  This document is subject
   to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and
   except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.









Martini & Swallow            Standards Track                    [Page 5]


Internet Draft   draft-ietf-pwe3-wildcard-pw-type-00.txt    January 2006


Expiration Date

   July 2006


Disclaimer of Validity

   This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
   "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
   OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
   ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
   INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
   INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
   WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
   Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
   pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
   this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
   might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
   made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
   on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
   found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
   assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
   attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
   such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
   specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
   http://www.ietf.org/ipr.

   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
   rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
   this standard.  Please address the information to the IETF at
   ietf-ipr@ietf.org.















Martini & Swallow            Standards Track                    [Page 6]