Joint Working Team (JWT) Report on MPLS Architectural Considerations for a Transport Profile
RFC 5317

Document Type RFC - Informational (February 2009; Errata)
Was draft-bryant-mpls-tp-jwt-report (individual in gen area)
Last updated 2013-03-02
Stream IETF
Formats plain text pdf html
Stream WG state (None)
Consensus Unknown
Document shepherd No shepherd assigned
IESG IESG state RFC 5317 (Informational)
Telechat date
Responsible AD David Ward
Send notices to stbryant@cisco.com, loa@pi.nu, draft-bryant-mpls-tp-jwt-report@ietf.org
Network Working Group                                     S. Bryant, Ed.
Request for Comments: 5317                                 Cisco Systems
Category: Informational                                L. Andersson, Ed.
                                                                Acreo AB
                                                           February 2009

                    Joint Working Team (JWT) Report
      on MPLS Architectural Considerations for a Transport Profile

Status of This Memo

   This memo provides information for the Internet community.  It does
   not specify an Internet standard of any kind.  Distribution of this
   memo is unlimited.

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 (http://trustee.ietf.org/
   license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
   Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
   and restrictions with respect to this document.

Abstract

   This RFC archives the report of the IETF - ITU-T Joint Working Team
   (JWT) on the application of MPLS to transport networks.  The JWT
   recommended of Option 1: The IETF and the ITU-T jointly agree to work
   together and bring transport requirements into the IETF and extend
   IETF MPLS forwarding, OAM (Operations, Administration, and
   Management), survivability, network management and control plane
   protocols to meet those requirements through the IETF Standards
   Process.  This RFC is available in ASCII (which contains a summary of
   the slides) and in PDF (which contains the summary and a copy of the
   slides).

Bryant & Andersson           Informational                      [Page 1]
RFC 5317                   JWT MPLS-TP Report              February 2009

Table of Contents

   1. Introduction ....................................................3
   2. Executive Summary ...............................................4
   3. Introduction and Background Material ............................6
   4. High-Level Architecture .........................................6
   5. OAM and Forwarding ..............................................6
   6. Control Plane ...................................................7
   7. Survivability ...................................................7
   8. Network Management ..............................................7
   9. Summary .........................................................7
   10. IANA Considerations ............................................8
   11. Security Considerations ........................................8
   12. The JWT Report .................................................8
   13. Informative References .........................................9

Bryant & Andersson           Informational                      [Page 2]
RFC 5317                   JWT MPLS-TP Report              February 2009

1.  Introduction

   For a number of years, the ITU-T has been designing a connection-
   oriented packet switched technology to be used in Transport Networks.
   A Transport Network can be considered to be the network that provides
   wide area connectivity upon which other services, such as IP or the
   phone network, run.  The ITU-T chose to adapt the IETF's MPLS to this
   task, and introduced a protocol suite known as T-MPLS.

   Quite late in the ITU-T design and specification cycle, there were a
   number of liaison exchanges between the ITU-T and the IETF concerning
   this technology.  These liaisons can be found on the IETF Liaison
   Statement web page [LIAISON].  In addition, the chairs of the MPLS,
   PWE3, BFD, and CCAMP working groups as well as the Routing and
   Internet Area Directors attended a number of ITU-T meetings.  During
   this process, the IETF became increasingly concerned that the
   incompatibility of IETF MPLS and ITU-T T-MPLS would "represent a
   mutual danger to both the Internet and the Transport network".  These
   concerns led the chairs of the IESG and IAB to take the step of
   sending a liaison to the ITU-T, stating that either T-MPLS should
   become fully compliant MPLS protocol, standardized under the IETF
   process (the so-called "Option 1"), or it should become a completely
   disjoint protocol with a new name and completely new set of code
   points (the so-called "Option 2") [Ethertypes].

   Option 1 and Option 2 were discussed at an ITU-T meeting of Question
   12 Study Group 15 in Stuttgart [Stuttgart], where it was proposed
   that a Joint (ITU-T - IETF) Team should be formed to evaluate the
   issues, and make a recommendation to ITU-T management on the best way
Show full document text