Extensions to RSVP-TE for Label Switched Path (LSP) Egress Protection
RFC 8400

Document Type RFC - Proposed Standard (June 2018; Errata)
Last updated 2018-06-21
Replaces draft-ietf-mpls-rsvp-egress-protection
Stream IETF
Formats plain text pdf html bibtex
Reviews
Stream WG state Submitted to IESG for Publication
Document shepherd Vishnu Beeram
Shepherd write-up Show (last changed 2017-11-03)
IESG IESG state RFC 8400 (Proposed Standard)
Consensus Boilerplate Yes
Telechat date
Responsible AD Deborah Brungard
Send notices to Vishnu Beeram <vishnupavan@gmail.com>
IANA IANA review state IANA OK - Actions Needed
IANA action state RFC-Ed-Ack
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)                           H. Chen
Request for Comments: 8400                           Huawei Technologies
Category: Standards Track                                         A. Liu
ISSN: 2070-1721                                                    Ciena
                                                                 T. Saad
                                                           Cisco Systems
                                                                   F. Xu
                                                                 Verizon
                                                                L. Huang
                                                            China Mobile
                                                               June 2018

 Extensions to RSVP-TE for Label Switched Path (LSP) Egress Protection

Abstract

   This document describes extensions to Resource Reservation Protocol -
   Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) for locally protecting the egress
   node(s) of a Point-to-Point (P2P) or Point-to-Multipoint (P2MP)
   Traffic Engineered (TE) Label Switched Path (LSP).

Status of This Memo

   This is an Internet Standards Track document.

   This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
   (IETF).  It represents the consensus of the IETF community.  It has
   received public review and has been approved for publication by the
   Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG).  Further information on
   Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 7841.

   Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
   and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
   https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8400.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2018 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
   (https://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.

Chen, et al.                 Standards Track                    [Page 1]
RFC 8400               RSVP LSP Egress Protection              June 2018

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
     1.1.  Local Protection of Egress Nodes  . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   2.  Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   3.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  Protocol Extensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     4.1.  Extensions to SERO  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
       4.1.1.  Primary Egress Subobject  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
       4.1.2.  P2P LSP ID Subobject  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   5.  Egress Protection Behaviors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     5.1.  Ingress Behavior  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     5.2.  Primary Egress Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     5.3.  Backup Egress Behavior  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     5.4.  Transit Node and PLR Behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
       5.4.1.  Signaling for One-to-One Protection . . . . . . . . .  12
       5.4.2.  Signaling for Facility Protection . . . . . . . . . .  12
       5.4.3.  Signaling for S2L Sub-LSP Protection  . . . . . . . .  13
       5.4.4.  PLR Procedures during Local Repair  . . . . . . . . .  14
   6.  Application Traffic Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
     6.1.  A Typical Application . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
     6.2.  PLR Procedure for Applications  . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
     6.3.  Egress Procedures for Applications  . . . . . . . . . . .  17
   7.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  17
   8.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
   9.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
     9.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  18
     9.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
   Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  19
   Contributors  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  20
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  21

1.  Introduction

   [RFC4090] describes two methods for locally protecting the transit
   nodes of a P2P LSP: one-to-one and facility protection.  [RFC4875]
   specifies how these methods can be used to protect the transit nodes
   of a P2MP LSP.  These documents do not discuss the procedures for
   locally protecting the egress node(s) of an LSP.

   This document fills that void and specifies extensions to RSVP-TE for
   local protection of the egress node(s) of an LSP.  "Egress node" and
   "egress" are used interchangeably.
Show full document text