CCAMP Working Group D. Papadimitriou Internet Draft Alcatel Document: draft-lin-ccamp-gmpls-ason-rsvpte-01.txt Z. Lin Lucent D. Pendarakis Tellium Expiration Date: February 2003 August 2002 Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) RSVP-TE Usage and Extensions For Automatically Switched Optical Network (ASON) Status of this Memo This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026 [1]. 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. 1. Abstract The GMPLS suite of protocol specifications has been defined to provide support for different technologies as well as different applications. These include support for requesting TDM connections based on SDH/SONET as well as Optical Transport Networks (OTNs). This document concentrates on the signaling aspects of the GMPLS suite of protocols, specifically GMPLS signaling using RSVP-TE. It proposes additional extensions to these signaling protocols to support the capabilities of an ASON network. Lin 1 GMPLS RSVP-TE for ASON August 2002 This document proposes appropriate extensions towards the resolution of additional requirements identified and communicated by the ITU-T Study Group 15 in support of ITU's ASON standardization effort. 2. Conventions used in this document 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 [2]. 3. Introduction This document contains the extensions to GMPLS to support the ASON capabilities. The requirements describing the need for these extensions are provided in [GMPLS-ASON] as well as [ASON-RQTS]. These include: - Support for call and connection separation - Support for soft permanent connection - Support for extended restart capabilities - Additional error codes/values to support these extensions This document concentrates on the signaling aspects of the GMPLS suite of protocols, specifically GMPLS signaling using RSVP-TE. It introduces extensions to GMPLS RSVP-TE to support the capabilities as specified in the above referenced documents. Specifically, this document assumes the messages and objects defined by [RFC2205], [RFC2961], [RFC3209], [GMPLS-SIG], [GMPLS-RSVPTE], and [OIF-UNI1] as the basis for the protocols, with extensions in addition to those already defined by these referenced documents. Note that from the perspective of the ASON model ResvErr and ResvTear messages are not used. For backwards compatibility, when an ASON- compliant GMPLS node receives either a ResvErr or ResvTear as a response during the setup phase of message exchange, the GMPLS-ASON node should instead issue a PathTear message downstream and a PathErr (with Path_State_Removed flag set) message upstream. This is so that RSVP states are immediately removed upon error during the setup process. 4. Support for Soft Permanent Connection Lin 2 GMPLS RSVP-TE for ASON August 2002 In the scope of ASON, to support soft permanent connection (SPC) for RSVP-TE, one new sub-type for the GENERALIZED_UNI object is defined. The GENERALIZED_UNI object is defined in Annex A (and may also be found in [OIF-UNI1]). This new sub-type has the same format and structure as the EGRESS_LABEL (the sub-type is the suggested value for the new sub-object): - SPC_LABEL (Type=4, Sub-type=2 [TBA]) The label association of the ingress permanent segment with the switched segment at the switched connection ingress node (i.e. link #1 shown above) is a local policy matter (i.e. between the management system and the switched connection ingress node) and is thus beyond the scope of this document. The processing of the SPC_LABEL sub-object follows that for the EGRESS_LABEL sub-object [OIF-UNI1]. Note that although the explicit label control described in [GMPLS-SIG] and [GMPLS-RSVPTE] may provide a mechanism to support specifying the egress label in the context of supporting the GMPLS application, the SPC services support for the ASON model uses the GENERALIZED_UNI object for this extension to help align the model for both switched connection and soft permanent connection, as well as to use the service level and diversity attributes of the GENERALIZED_UNI object. 5. Support for Call 5.1 Call Identifier and Call Capability Call identifier is used in logical call/connection separation while Call capability is used in complete call/connection separation. The latter is described in the non-normative appendix I. 5.1.1 Call Identifier To identify a call, a new object is defined for RSVP-TE. The CALL_ID object carries the call identifier. The value is globally unique (the Class-num is the suggested value for the new object): CALL_ID (Class-num = 227 [TBA]) 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Lin 3 GMPLS RSVP-TE for ASON August 2002 | Length |Class-Num (227)| C-Type | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Call identifier | ~ ... ~ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Where the following C-types are defined: - C-Type = 1: The call identifier contains operator specific identifier - C-Type = 2: The call identifier contains globally unique part plus an operator specific identifier The following structures are defined for the call identifier: - Call identifier: generic [Length*8-32]-bit identifier. The number of bits for call identifier must be multiples of 32 bits, with minimum size of 32 bits. A possible structure and format of the CALL_ID is described in [GMPLS-ASON]. 5.1.2 Call Capability The call capability feature is provided in the appendix I. 5.2 What Does Current GMPLS Provide The signaling mechanism defined in [RFC2961], [RFC3209] and [GMPLS- SIG] supports automatic connection management; however it does not provide capability to support the call model. A call may be viewed as a special purpose connection that requires a different subset of information to be carried by the messages. This information is targeted to the call controller for the purpose of setting up a call/connection association. The subset of information required for a call is currently for further study. 5.3 Support for Call and Connection To support basic call capability (logical call/connection separation), a call identifier is introduced to the RSVP-TE message sets. This basic call capability helps introduce the call model; Lin 4 GMPLS RSVP-TE for ASON August 2002 however, additional extensions may be needed to fully support the canonical call model (complete call/connection separation). Within the context of this document, every call (during steady state) may have one (or more) associated connections. A zero connection call is defined as a transient state, e.g., during a break-before-make restoration event. In the scope of ASON, to support a logical call/connection separation, a new call identifier is needed as described above. The new GENERALIZED_UNI object is carried by the Path message. The new CALL_ID object is carried by the Path, Resv, PathTear, PathErr, and Notify message. The ResvConf message is left unmodified. The CALL_ID object (along with other objects associated with a call, e.g., GENERALIZED_UNI) is processed by the call controller, while other objects included in these messages are processed by the connection controller as described in [GMPLS-RSVPTE]. Processing of the CALL_ID (and related) object is described in this document. Note: unmodified RSVP message formats are not listed below. 5.3.1 Processing Rules The following processing rules are applicable for the call capability: - The source user must set the CALL_IDÆs C-Type and call identifier value to all-zeros. - For a new call request, the first network node sets the appropriate C-type and value for the CALL_ID. - For an existing call (in case CALL_ID is non-zero) the first network node verifies existence of the call. - Subsequent receiving network nodes (in particular the border nodes) and the destination node MAY process (i.e. verify) the CALL_ID object. - The CALL_ID object on all messages MUST be copied unmodified from the ingress message to the egress message by all other (intermediate) nodes. Indeed, the Class-Num is chosen such that a node which does not support ASON extensions to GMPLS forwards the object unmodified (value in the range 11bbbbbb). - The destination user/client receiving the request uses the CALL_ID value as reference to the requested call between the source user and itself. Subsequent actions related to the call uses the CALL_ID as the reference identifier. Lin 5 GMPLS RSVP-TE for ASON August 2002 5.3.2 Modification to Path Message <Path Message> ::= <Common Header> [ <INTEGRITY> ] [ [<MESSAGE_ID_ACK> | <MESSAGE_ID_NACK>] ... ] [ <MESSAGE_ID> ] <SESSION> <RSVP_HOP> <TIME_VALUES> [ <EXPLICIT_ROUTE> ] <LABEL_REQUEST> [ <CALL_ID> ] [ <PROTECTION> ] [ <LABEL_SET> ... ] [ <SESSION_ATTRIBUTE> ] [ <NOTIFY_REQUEST> ] [ <ADMIN_STATUS> ] [ <GENERALIZED_UNI> ] [ <POLICY_DATA> ... ] <sender descriptor> The format of the sender descriptor for unidirectional LSPs is not modified by this document. The format of the sender descriptor for bidirectional LSPs is not modified by this document. Note that although the GENERALIZED_UNI and CALL_ID objects are optional for GMPLS signaling, these objects are mandatory for ASON- compliant networks, i.e., the Path message must include both GENERALIZED_UNI and CALL_ID objects. 5.3.3 Modification to Resv Message <Resv Message> ::= <Common Header> [ <INTEGRITY> ] [ [<MESSAGE_ID_ACK> | <MESSAGE_ID_NACK>] ... ] [ <MESSAGE_ID> ] <SESSION> <RSVP_HOP> <TIME_VALUES> [ <CALL_ID> ] [ <RESV_CONFIRM> ] Lin 6 GMPLS RSVP-TE for ASON August 2002 <SCOPE> [ <NOTIFY_REQUEST> ] [ <ADMIN_STATUS> ] [ <POLICY_DATA> ... ] <STYLE> <flow descriptor list> <flow descriptor list> is not modified by this document. Note that although the CALL_ID object is optional for GMPLS signaling, this object is mandatory for ASON-compliant networks, i.e., the Resv message must include the CALL_ID object. 5.3.4 Modification to PathTear Message <PathTear Message> ::= <Common Header> [ <INTEGRITY> ] [ [<MESSAGE_ID_ACK> | <MESSAGE_ID_NACK>] ... ] [ <MESSAGE_ID> ] <SESSION> <RSVP_HOP> [ <CALL_ID> ] [ <sender descriptor> ] <sender descriptor> ::= (see earlier definition) Note that although the CALL_ID object is optional for GMPLS signaling, this object is mandatory for ASON-compliant networks, i.e., the PathTear message must include the CALL_ID object. 5.3.5 Modification to PathErr Message <PathErr Message> ::= <Common Header> [ <INTEGRITY> ] [ [<MESSAGE_ID_ACK> | <MESSAGE_ID_NACK>] ... ] [ <MESSAGE_ID> ] <SESSION> [ <CALL_ID> ] <ERROR_SPEC> [ <ACCEPTABLE_LABEL_SET> ] [ <POLICY_DATA> ... ] <sender descriptor> Lin 7 GMPLS RSVP-TE for ASON August 2002 <sender descriptor> ::= (see earlier definition) Note that although the CALL_ID object is optional for GMPLS signaling, this object is mandatory for ASON-compliant networks, i.e., the PathErr message must include the CALL_ID object. 5.3.6 Modification to Notify Message Note that this message may include sessions belonging to several calls. <Notify message> ::= <Common Header> [<INTEGRITY>] [ [<MESSAGE_ID_ACK> | <MESSAGE_ID_NACK>] ... ] [ <MESSAGE_ID> ] <ERROR_SPEC> <notify session list> <notify session list> ::= [ <notify session list> ] <upstream notify session> | <downstream notify session> <upstream notify session> ::= <SESSION> [ <CALL_ID> ] [ <ADMIN_STATUS> ] [<POLICY_DATA>...] <sender descriptor> <downstream notify session> ::= <SESSION> [ <CALL_ID> ] [<POLICY_DATA>...] <flow descriptor list descriptor> Note that although the CALL_ID object is optional for GMPLS signaling, this object is mandatory for ASON-compliant networks, i.e., the Notify message must include the CALL_ID object. 6. Support For Behaviors during Control Plane Failures Various types of control plane failures may occur within the network. These failures may impact the control plane as well as the data plane. Lin 8 GMPLS RSVP-TE for ASON August 2002 As described in [GMPLS-RSVP-TE], current GMPLS restart mechanisms allows support to handle all of these different scenarios, and thus no additional extensions are required. In the scope of the ASON model, several optional procedures MAY take place in order to support the following control plane behaviors (as per [G7713] and [IPO-RQTS]): - A control plane node SHOULD provide capability for persistent storage of call and connection state information. This capability allows each control plane node to recover the states of calls/connections after recovery from a signaling controller entity failure/reboot (or loss of local FSM state). Note that although the restart mechanism allows neighbor control plane nodes to automatically recover (and thus infer) the states of calls/connections, this mechanism can also be used for verification of neighbor states while the persistent storage provides the local recovery of lost state. In this case, per [GMPLS-RSVP-TE], if during the Hello synchronization the restarting node determines that a neighbor does not support state recovery (i.e., local state recovery only), and the restarting node maintains its state on a per neighbor basis, the restarting node should immediately consider the Recovery as completed - A control plane node detecting a failure of all control channels between a pair of nodes SHOULD request an external controller (e.g. the management system) for further instructions, with a default control plane behavior to enter into self-refresh mode (i.e. preservation) for the local call/connection states. As an example, possible external instructions may be to remain in self-refresh mode, or to release local states for certain connections. Specific details are beyond the scope of this document. - A control plane node detecting that one (or more) connections cannot be re-synchronized with its neighbor (e.g., due to different states for the call/connection) SHOULD request an external controller (e.g., the management system) for further instructions on how to handle the non-synchronized connection. As an example, possible instructions may be to maintain the current local connection states. Specifics of the interactions between the control plane and management plane are beyond the scope of this document. - A control plane node (after recovering from node failure) MAY lose information on forwarding adjacencies. In this case the control plane node SHOULD request an external controller (e.g., the management system) for information to recover the forwarding Lin 9 GMPLS RSVP-TE for ASON August 2002 adjacency information. Specifics of the interactions between the control plane and management plane are beyond the scope of this document. 7. Support For Label Usage Labels are defined in GMPLS to provide information on the resources used for a particular connection. The labels may range from specifying a particular timeslot, a particular wavelength to a particular port/fiber. In the context of the automatic switched optical network, the value of a label MAY not be consistently the same across a link. For example, the figure below illustrates the case where two GMPLS/ASON-enabled nodes (A and Z) are interconnected across two non-GMPLS/ASON-enabled nodes (B and C), where these nodes are all SDH/SONET nodes providing, e.g., a VC-4 service. +-----+ +-----+ | | +---+ +---+ | | | A |---| B |---| C |---| Z | | | +---+ +---+ | | +-----+ +-----+ Labels have an associated structure imposed on them for local use based on [GMPLS-SDHSONET] and [GMPLS-OTN]. Once the local label is transmitted across an interface to its neighboring control plane node, the structure of the local label MAY be not significant to the neighbor node since the association between the local and the remote label may not necessarily be the same. This issue does not present a problem in a simple point-to-point connections between two control plane-enabled nodes where the timeslots are mapped 1:1 across the interface. However, in the scope of the ASON, once a non-GMPLS capable sub-network is introduced between these nodes (as in the above figure, where the sub-network provides re-arrangement capability for the timeslots) label scoping MAY become an issue. In this context, there is an implicit assumption that the data plane connections between the GMPLS capable edges already exist prior to any connection request. For instance node A's outgoing VC-4's timeslot #1 (with SUKLM label=[1,0,0,0,0]) as defined in [GMPLS- SONETSDH]) may be mapped onto node BÆs outgoing VC-4's timeslot #6 (label=[6,0,0,0,0]) may be mapped onto node C's outgoing VC-4's timeslot #4 (label=[4,0,0,0,0]). Thus by the time node Z receives the request from node A with label=[1,0,0,0,0], the node Z's local label and the timeslot no longer corresponds to the received label and timeslot information. Lin 10 GMPLS RSVP-TE for ASON August 2002 As such to support the general case, the scope of the label value is considered local to a control plane node. A label association function can be used by the control plane node to map the received (remote) label into a locally significant label. The information necessary to allow mapping from received label value to a locally significant label value may be derived in several ways: - Via manual provisioning of the label association - Via discovery of the label association Either method may be used. In the case of dynamic association, this implies that the discovery mechanism operates at the timeslot/label level before the connection request is processed at the ingress node. Note that in the simple case where two nodes are directly connected, no association may be necessary. In such instances, the label association function provides a one-to-one mapping of the received to local label values. 8. Additional Error Cases In the scope of ASON, the following additional error cases are defined: - Policy control failure: unauthorized source; this error is generated when the receiving node determines that a source user/client initiated request for service is unauthorized based on verification of the request (e.g. not part of contracted service). - Policy control failure: unauthorized destination; this error is generated when the receiving node determines that a destination user/client is unauthorized to be connected with a source user/client. - Routing problem: diversity not available; this error is generated when a receiving node determines that the requested diversity cannot be provided (e.g. due to resource constraints). - Routing problem: service level not available; this error is generated when a receiving node determines that the requested service level cannot be provided (e.g. due to resource constraints). - Routing problem: invalid/unknown connection ID; this error is generated when a receiving node determines that the connection ID generated by the upstream node is not valid/unknown (e.g. does not meet the uniqueness property). Connection ID is defined in [OIF-UNI1]. Lin 11 GMPLS RSVP-TE for ASON August 2002 - Routing problem: no route available toward source; this error is generated when a receiving node determines that there is no available route towards the source node (e.g. due to unavailability of resources). - Routing problem: unacceptable interface ID; this error is generated when a receiving node determines that the interface ID specified by the upstream node is unacceptable (e.g. due to resource contention). - Routing problem: invalid/unknown call ID; this error is generated when a receiving node determines that the call ID generated by the source user/client is invalid/unknown (e.g. does not meet the uniqueness property). - Routing problem: invalid SPC interface ID/label; this error is generated when a receiving node determines that the SPC interface ID (or label, or both interface ID and label) specified by the upstream node is unacceptable (e.g. due to resource contention). 9. Security Considerations The separation of the call and connection as required for ASON model introduces an additional level of management hierarchy to the connection setup. A connection cannot be used to send user traffic until a call with the same CALL_ID value has been set up. Policy and authentication procedures can be applied to the establishment of the call and then can be restricted to connection establishment within the context of a call. These however should not introduce any additional security issues to the protocol. 10. IANA Considerations There are multiple fields and values defined within this document. IANA is requested to administer assignment of these class numbers in the FCFS space as shown in [http://www.iana.org/assignments/rsvp- parameters]. This document makes suggestions on the assignments given below. 10.1 Assignment of New Messages No new messages are defined to support the functions discussed in this document. Lin 12 GMPLS RSVP-TE for ASON August 2002 10.2 Assignment of New Objects Two new objects are defined: - CALL_ID; this object should be assigned an object identifier of the form 11bbbbbb. A suggested value is 227 [TBA]. - GENERALIZED_UNI; this object is defined in [OIF-UNI1] with a class-num of the form 11bbbbbb. A suggested value is 229 [TBA]. 10.3 Assignment of New Sub-Objects (and Sub-types) One new sub-object is defined under the GENERALIZED_UNI object: - SPC_LABEL; this sub-object is part of the GENERALIZED_UNI object, as a sub-type of the EGRESS_LABEL sub-object (which is Type=4). A suggested value is sub-type=2 [TBA]. 10.4 Assignment of New Error Code/Values No new error codes are required. The following new error values are defined, with the suggested values. Note that certain values were defined with the suggested values in [OIF-UNI1] and are included here for completeness. For error values that have already been assigned by IANA, then those assigned values take precedence over the suggested values below; otherwise the values below are suggested for the error types as described. Error code 02 is defined in [RFC2205], while error code 24 is defined in [RFC3209]. 02/100 [TBA]: unauthorized source 02/101 [TBA]: unauthorized destination 24/100 [TBA]: diversity not available 24/101 [TBA]: service level not available 24/102 [TBA]: invalid/unknown connection ID 24/103 [TBA]: no route available toward source 24/104 [TBA]: unacceptable interface ID 24/105 [TBA]: invalid/unknown call ID 24/106 [TBA]: invalid SPC interface ID/label 11. Acknowledgements Lin 13 GMPLS RSVP-TE for ASON August 2002 The authors would like to thank Osama Aboul-Magd, Jerry Ash, Sergio Belotti, Greg Bernstein, Adrian Farrel, Nic Larkin, Lyndon Ong and Yangguang Xu for their comments and contributions to the draft. 12. References 12.1 Normative References 1 Bradner, S., "The Internet Standards Process -- Revision 3", BCP 9, RFC 2026, October 1996. 2 Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997 [G8080] ITU-T Rec. G.8080/Y.1304, Architecture for the Automatically Switched Optical Network (ASON), November 2001 [G7713] ITU-T Rec. G.7713/Y.1704, Distributed Call and Connection Management (DCM), November 2001 [OIF-UNI1] OIF-UNI-01.0, User Network Interface (UNI) 1.0 Signaling Specification [RFC2205] RFC 2205, Resource ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP) -- Version 1 Functional Specification, September 1997 [RFC2961] RFC 2961, RSVP Refresh Overhead Reduction Extensions, April 2001 [RFC3209] RFC 3209, RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP Tunnels, December 2001 [GMPLS-SIG] L. Berger (Editor), Generalized MPLS - Signaling Functional Description, draft-ietf-mpls-generalized-signaling-08.txt, April 2002, Work in progress [GMPLS-RSVPTE] L. Berger (Editor), Generalized MPLS Signaling - RSVP-TE Extensions, draft-ietf-mpls-generalized-rsvp-te-07.txt, April 2002, Work in progress [GMPLS-ASON] Z. Lin, Requirements for Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Usage and Extensions For Automatically Switched Optical Network (ASON), draft-lin-ccamp-gmpls-ason-rqts-00.txt, August 2002, Work in progress Lin 14 GMPLS RSVP-TE for ASON August 2002 [ASON-RQTS] Y. Xue, Carrier Optical Services Requirements, draft- ietf-ipo-carrier-requirements-02.txt, March 2002 [ITU-LIAISE] http://www.ietf.org/IESG/LIAISON/ITU-OIF.html 12.2 Informative References [G807] ITU-T Rec. G.807/Y.1301, Requirements For Automatic Switched Transport Networks (ASTN), July 2001 [IPO-RQTS] O. Aboul-Magd, Automatic Switched Optical Network (ASON) Architecture and Its Related Protocols, draft-ietf-ipo-ason-02.txt, March 2002, Work in progress 13. Author's Addresses Sergio Belotti Alcatel Via Trento 30, I-20059 Vimercate, Italy Email: sergio.belotti@netit.alcatel.it Nic Larkin Data Connection 100 Church Street, Enfield Middlesex EN2 6BQ, UK Email: npl@dataconnection.com Zhi-Wei Lin Lucent 101 Crawfords Corner Road Holmdel, NJ 07733 USA Email: zwlin@lucent.com Dimitri Papadimitriou Alcatel Francis Wellesplein 1, B-2018 Antwerpen, Belgium Email: Dimitri.Papadimitriou@alcatel.be Dimitrios Pendarakis Tellium Lin 15 GMPLS RSVP-TE for ASON August 2002 2 Crescent Place Oceanport, NJ 07757-0901 Email: dpendarakis@tellium.com Yangguang Xu Lucent 1600 Osgood St, Room 21-2A41 North Andover, MA 01845-1043 Email: xuyg@lucent.com Lin 16 GMPLS RSVP-TE for ASON August 2002 Annex A. Normative Information on Structure and Format of the GENERALIZED_UNI Object The GENERALIZED_UNI object is used to support both the call and soft permanent connection concept. This object's Class-num takes the form 11bbbbbb. The general format of this object is as follows(the Class- num is the suggested value for the new object): GENERALIZED_UNI (Class-num = 229 [TBA], C-type = 1) 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Length |Class-Num (229)| C-Type | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Sub-objects | ~ ... ~ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Subobjects: The contents of the GENERALIZED_UNI object are a series of variable-length data items. The common format of the sub- objects is shown 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Length | Type | Sub-type | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Value | ~ ... ~ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ The following sub-objects are defined: A.1 Source TNA Address Sub-Object The Source TNA Address sub-object's Type = 1. The following sub-types are defined: A.1.1 Source TNA Address: IPv4 For the IPv4 address format, the Sub-type = 1. The Value field of the Sub-object contains the IPv4 address format of the source TNA. See [OIF-UNI1] for format and processing details. Lin 17 GMPLS RSVP-TE for ASON August 2002 A.1.2 Source TNA Address: IPv6 For the IPv6 address format, the Sub-type = 2. The Value field of the Sub-object contains the IPv6 address format of the source TNA. See [OIF-UNI1] for format and processing details. A.1.3 Source TNA Address: NSAP For the NSAP address format, the Sub-type = 3. The Value field of the Sub-object contains the NSAP address format of the source TNA. See [OIF-UNI1] for format and processing details. A.2 Destination TNA Address Sub-Object The destination TNA Address sub-object's Type = 2. The following sub- types are defined: A.2.1 Destination TNA Address: IPv4 For the IPv4 address format, the Sub-type = 1. The Value field of the Sub-object contains the IPv4 address format of the destination TNA. See [OIF-UNI1] for format and processing details. A.2.2 Destination TNA Address: IPv6 For the IPv6 address format, the Sub-type = 2. The Value field of the Sub-object contains the IPv6 address format of the destination TNA. See [OIF-UNI1] for format and processing details. A.2.3 Destination TNA Address: NSAP For the NSAP address format, the Sub-type = 3. The Value field of the Sub-object contains the NSAP address format of the destination TNA. See [OIF-UNI1] for format and processing details. A.3 Diversity Sub-Object Lin 18 GMPLS RSVP-TE for ASON August 2002 The Diversity sub-object's Type = 3. For this sub-object, one sub- type is currently defined: Sub-type = 1. The Value field of the sub- object contains the rules for connection diversity. See [OIF-UNI1] for format and processing details. A.4 Egress Label Sub-Object The Egress Label sub-object's Type = 4. For this sub-object, two sub- types are defined: Sub-type = 1; This sub-type is referred to as the EGRESS_LABEL sub- object. See [OIF-UNI1] for format and processing details. Sub-type = 2; This sub-type is referred to as the SPC_LABEL. See above (Section 4, Soft Permanent Connection) for description of this sub-object. A.5 Service Level Sub-Object The Service Level sub-object's Type = 5. For this sub-object, one sub-type is currently defined: Sub-type = 1. The Value field of the sub-object contains the service level specification requested by the user. See [OIF-UNI1] for format and processing details. Lin 19 GMPLS RSVP-TE for ASON August 2002 Appendix I. Non-Normative Extensions for Supporting Complete Separation of Call and Connection This section describes the optional and non-normative capability to support complete separation of call and connection. To support complete separation of call and connection, a call capability object is introduced. I.1 Call Capability A call capability is used to specify the capabilities supported for a call. For RSVP-TE a new CALL_OPS object is defined to be carried by the Path, Resv, PathTear, PathErr, and Notify message. The CALL_OPS object also serves to differentiate the messages to indicate a "call- only" call. In the case for logical separation of call and connection, the CALL_OPS object is not needed. The CALL_OPS object is defined as follows (the Class-num is the suggested value for the new object): CALL_OPS (Class-num = 228 [TBA], C-type = 1) 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Length |Class-Num (228)| C-Type (1) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Reserved | Call ops flag | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Two flags are currently defined for the "call ops flag": 0x01: call without connection 0x02: synchronizing a call (for restart mechanism) I.2 Complete Separation of Call and Connection (RSVP-TE Extensions) A complete separation of call and connection implies that a call (during steady state) may have zero (or more) associated connections. A zero connection call is a steady state, e.g., simply setting up the user end-point relationship prior to connection setup. The following modified messages are used to set up a call. Set up of a connection uses the messages defined in Section 5 above. Lin 20 GMPLS RSVP-TE for ASON August 2002 I.2.1 Modification to Path <Path Message> ::= <Common Header> [ <INTEGRITY> ] [ [<MESSAGE_ID_ACK> | <MESSAGE_ID_NACK>] ... ] [ <MESSAGE_ID> ] <SESSION> <RSVP_HOP> <TIME_VALUES> [ <EXPLICIT_ROUTE> ] <LABEL_REQUEST> <CALL_OPS> <CALL_ID> [ <NOTIFY_REQUEST> ] [ <ADMIN_STATUS> ] <GENERALIZED_UNI> [ <POLICY_DATA> ... ] <sender descriptor> The format of the sender descriptor for unidirectional LSPs is: <sender descriptor> ::= <SENDER_TEMPLATE> <SENDER_TSPEC> [ <RECORD_ROUTE> ] The format of the sender descriptor for bidirectional LSPs is: <sender descriptor> ::= <SENDER_TEMPLATE> <SENDER_TSPEC> [ <RECORD_ROUTE> ] <UPSTREAM_LABEL> Note that LABEL_REQUEST, SENDER_TSPEC and UPSTREAM_LABEL are not required for a call; however these are mandatory objects. As such, for backwards compatibility purposes processing of these objects for a call follows the following rules: - These objects are ignored on receipt; however, a valid-formatted object (e.g., by using the received valid object in the transmitted message) must be included in the generated message. I.2.2 Modification to Resv Lin 21 GMPLS RSVP-TE for ASON August 2002 <Resv Message> ::= <Common Header> [ <INTEGRITY> ] [ [<MESSAGE_ID_ACK> | <MESSAGE_ID_NACK>] ... ] [ <MESSAGE_ID> ] <SESSION> <RSVP_HOP> <TIME_VALUES> <CALL_OPS> <CALL_ID> [ <RESV_CONFIRM> ] [ <NOTIFY_REQUEST> ] [ <ADMIN_STATUS> ] [ <POLICY_DATA> ... ] <STYLE> <flow descriptor list> <flow descriptor list> ::= <FF flow descriptor list> | <SE flow descriptor> <FF flow descriptor list> ::= <FLOWSPEC> <FILTER_SPEC> [ <RECORD_ROUTE> ] | <FF flow descriptor list> <FF flow descriptor> <FF flow descriptor> ::= [ <FLOWSPEC> ] <FILTER_SPEC> [ <RECORD_ROUTE> ] <SE flow descriptor> ::= <FLOWSPEC> <SE filter spec list> <SE filter spec list> ::= <SE filter spec> | <SE filter spec list> <SE filter spec> <SE filter spec> ::= <FILTER_SPEC> [ <RECORD_ROUTE> ] Note that FILTER_SPEC and LABEL are not required for a call; however these are mandatory objects. As such, for backwards compatibility Lin 22 GMPLS RSVP-TE for ASON August 2002 purposes processing of these objects for a call follows the following rules: - These objects are ignored on receipt; however, a valid-formatted object (e.g., by using the received valid object in the transmitted message) must be included in the generated message. I.2.3 Modification to PathTear <PathTear Message> ::= <Common Header> [ <INTEGRITY> ] [ [<MESSAGE_ID_ACK> | <MESSAGE_ID_NACK>] ... ] [ <MESSAGE_ID> ] <SESSION> <RSVP_HOP> <CALL_OPS> <CALL_ID> [ <sender descriptor> ] <sender descriptor> ::= (see earlier definition in this section) I.2.4 Modification to PathErr <PathErr Message> ::= <Common Header> [ <INTEGRITY> ] [ [<MESSAGE_ID_ACK> | <MESSAGE_ID_NACK>] ... ] [ <MESSAGE_ID> ] <SESSION> <CALL_OPS> <CALL_ID> <ERROR_SPEC> [ <POLICY_DATA> ... ] <sender descriptor> <sender descriptor> ::= (see earlier definition in this section) I.2.5 Modification to Notify <Notify message> ::= <Common Header> [<INTEGRITY>] [ [<MESSAGE_ID_ACK> | Lin 23 GMPLS RSVP-TE for ASON August 2002 <MESSAGE_ID_NACK>] ... ] [ <MESSAGE_ID> ] <ERROR_SPEC> <notify session list> <notify session list> ::= [ <notify session list> ] <upstream notify session> | <downstream notify session> <upstream notify session> ::= <SESSION> <CALL_ID> [ <ADMIN_STATUS> ] [<POLICY_DATA>...] <sender descriptor> <downstream notify session> ::= <SESSION> <CALL_ID> [<POLICY_DATA>...] <flow descriptor list descriptor> I.3 IANA Considerations This Appendix defines a new object to support complete separation of call and connection. IANA is requested to administer assignment of these new values from the FCFS range within the RSVP parameters. This document makes suggestions on the assignments given below. I.3.1 Assignment of New Object One new object is defined: - CALL_OPS; this object should be assigned an object identifier of the form 11bbbbbb. A suggested value is 228 [TBA]. Lin 24 GMPLS RSVP-TE for ASON August 2002 Full Copyright Statement "Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2002). All Rights Reserved. This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than English. The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns. This document and the information contained herein is provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS 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. Lin 25
Datatracker
draft-lin-ccamp-gmpls-ason-rsvpte-01
Internet-Draft
