draft-ietf-ccamp-ospf-availability-extension-02.txt   draft-ietf-ccamp-ospf-availability-extension-03.txt 
Network Working Group H. Long, M.Ye Network Working Group H. Long, M.Ye
Internet Draft Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd Internet Draft Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd
Intended status: Standards Track G. Mirsky Intended status: Standards Track G. Mirsky
Ericsson Ericsson
A.D'Alessandro A.D'Alessandro
Telecom Italia S.p.A Telecom Italia S.p.A
H. Shah H. Shah
Ciena Ciena
Expires: January 2016 July 6, 2015 Expires: April 13, 2016 October 16, 2015
OSPF Routing Extension for Links with Variable Discrete Bandwidth OSPF Routing Extension for Links with Variable Discrete Bandwidth
draft-ietf-ccamp-ospf-availability-extension-02.txt draft-ietf-ccamp-ospf-availability-extension-03.txt
Abstract Abstract
A packet switching network MAY contain links with variable discrete A network MAY contain links with variable discrete bandwidth, e.g.,
bandwidth, e.g., copper, radio, etc. The bandwidth of such links MAY copper, radio, etc. The bandwidth of such links may change
change discretely in reaction to changing external environment. discretely in reaction to changing external environment.
Availability is typically used for describing such links during Availability is typically used for describing such links during
network planning. This document introduces an OPTIONAL ISCD network planning. This document introduces an optional ISCD
Availability sub-TLV in OSPF routing protocol. This extension can be Availability sub-TLV in OSPF routing protocol. This extension can be
used for route computation in a Packet Switched Network (PSN) that used for route computation in a network that contains links with
contains links with discretely variable bandwidth. variable discrete bandwidth.
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts. Drafts.
skipping to change at page 2, line 4 skipping to change at page 1, line 43
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts. Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six
months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents
at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as
reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
This Internet-Draft will expire on April 13, 2016.
This Internet-Draft will expire on January 6, 2016.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with
respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this
document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in
Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without
warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction ................................................ 3 1. Introduction ................................................ 3
2. Overview .................................................... 4 2. Overview .................................................... 3
3. Extension to OSPF Routing Protocol........................... 4 3. Extension to OSPF Routing Protocol........................... 4
3.1. Interface Switching Capacity Descriptor................. 4 3.1. Interface Switching Capacity Descriptor................. 4
3.2. ISCD Availability sub-TLV............................... 5 3.2. ISCD Availability sub-TLV............................... 4
3.3. Signaling Process....................................... 6 3.3. Signaling Process....................................... 5
4. Security Considerations...................................... 7 4. Security Considerations...................................... 5
5. IANA Considerations ......................................... 7 5. IANA Considerations ......................................... 5
6. References .................................................. 7 6. References .................................................. 5
6.1. Normative References.................................... 7 6.1. Normative References.................................... 5
6.2. Informative References.................................. 8 6.2. Informative References.................................. 6
7. Acknowledgments ............................................. 8 7. Acknowledgments ............................................. 6
Conventions used in this document Conventions used in this document
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC-2119 [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in RFC-2119 [RFC2119].
The following acronyms are used in this draft: The following acronyms are used in this draft:
OSPF Open Shortest Path First OSPF Open Shortest Path First
skipping to change at page 3, line 4 skipping to change at page 2, line 47
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC-2119 [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in RFC-2119 [RFC2119].
The following acronyms are used in this draft: The following acronyms are used in this draft:
OSPF Open Shortest Path First OSPF Open Shortest Path First
PSN Packet Switched Network PSN Packet Switched Network
SNR Signal-to-noise Ratio SNR Signal-to-noise Ratio
LSP Label Switched Path LSP Label Switched Path
ISCD Interface Switching Capacity Descriptor ISCD Interface Switching Capacity Descriptor
PE Provider Edge
LSA Link State Advertisement LSA Link State Advertisement
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
Some data communication technologies allow seamless change of Some data communication technologies, e.g., microwave, and copper,
maximum physical bandwidth through a set of known discrete values. allow seamless change of maximum physical bandwidth through a set of
For example, in mobile backhaul network, microwave links are very known discrete values. The parameter availability [G.827, F.1703,
popular for providing connection of last hops. In case of heavy rain, P.530] is often used to describe the link capacity during network
to maintain the link connectivity, the microwave link MAY lower the planning. The availability is a time scale that the requested
modulation level since demodulating the lower modulation level needs bandwidth is ensured. Assigning different availability classes to
lower signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). This is called adaptive different types of service over such kind of links provides more
modulation technology [EN 302 217]. However, a lower modulation efficient planning of link capacity. To set up an LSP across these
level also means lower link bandwidth. When link bandwidth is links, availability information is required for the nodes to verify
reduced because of modulation down-shifting, high-priority traffic bandwidth satisfaction and make bandwidth reservation. The
can be maintained, while lower-priority traffic is dropped. availability information should be inherited from the availability
Similarly, the copper links MAY change their effective link requirements of the services expected to be carried on the LSP. For
bandwidth due to external interference. example, voice service usually needs "five nines" availability,
while non-real time services may adequately perform at four or three
The parameter availability [G.827, F.1703, P.530] is often used to nines availability. Since different service types may need different
describe the link capacity during network planning. Assigning availabilities guarantees, multiple <availability, bandwidth> pairs
different availability classes to different types of service over may be required when signaling. The signaling extension for links
such kind of links provides more efficient planning of link capacity. with discrete bandwidth is defined in [ASTE].
To set up an LSP across these links, availability information is
required for the nodes to verify bandwidth satisfaction and make
bandwidth reservation. The availability information SHOULD be
inherited from the availability requirements of the services
expected to be carried on the LSP. For example, voice service
usually needs "five nines" availability, while non-real time
services MAY adequately perform at four or three nines availability.
For the route computation, the availability information SHOULD be For the route computation, the availability information should be
provided along with bandwidth resource information. In this document, provided along with bandwidth resource information. In this document,
an extension on Interface Switching Capacity Descriptor (ISCD) an extension on Interface Switching Capacity Descriptor (ISCD)
[RFC4202] for availability information is defined to support in [RFC4202] for availability information is defined to support in
routing signaling. The extension reuses the reserved field in the routing signaling. The extension reuses the reserved field in the
ISCD and also introduces an OPTIONAL Availability sub-TLV. ISCD and also introduces an optional Availability sub-TLV.
If there is a hop that cannot support the Availability sub-TLV, the If there is a hop that cannot support the Availability sub-TLV, the
Availability sub-TLV SHOULD be ignored. Availability sub-TLV should be ignored.
2. Overview 2. Overview
A node which has link(s) with variable bandwidth attached SHOULD A node which has link(s) with variable bandwidth attached should
contain a <bandwidth, availability> information list in its OSPF TE contain a <bandwidth, availability> information list in its OSPF TE
LSA messages. The list provides the information that how much LSA messages. The list provides the information that how much
bandwidth a link can support for a specified availability. This bandwidth a link can support for a specified availability. This
information is used for path calculation by the PE node(s). information is used for path calculation by the node(s).
To setup an label switching path (LSP), a PE node MAY collect link To setup a label switching path (LSP), a node may collect link
information which is spread in OSPF TE LSA messages by network nodes information which is spread in OSPF TE LSA messages by network nodes
to get know about the network topology, calculate out an LSP route to get know about the network topology, calculate out an LSP route
based on the network topology and send the calculated LSP route to based on the network topology and send the calculated LSP route to
signaling to initiate a PATH/RESV message for setting up the LSP. signaling to initiate a PATH/RESV message for setting up the LSP.
Availability information is required to carry in the signaling Availability information is required to carry in the signaling
message to better utilize the link bandwidth. The signaling message to better utilize the link bandwidth. The signaling
extension for availability can be found in [ASTE]. extension for availability can be found in [ASTE].
3. Extension to OSPF Routing Protocol 3. Extension to OSPF Routing Protocol
3.1. Interface Switching Capacity Descriptor 3.1. Interface Switching Capacity Descriptor
The Interface Switching Capacity Descriptor (ISCD) sub-TLV [RFC 4203] The Interface Switching Capacity Descriptor (ISCD) sub-TLV is
has the following format: defined in Section 1.4 of [RFC 4203].
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Switching Cap | Encoding | AI | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 0 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 1 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 2 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 3 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 4 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 5 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 6 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 7 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Switching Capacity-specific Information |
| (variable) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
A new AI field is defined in this document.
AI: ISCD Availability sub-TLV index, 8 bits
This new field is the index of Availability sub-TLV for this
ISCD sub-TLV.
3.2. ISCD Availability sub-TLV 3.2. ISCD Availability sub-TLV
The Switching Capability field MAY be PSC-1/LSC. The Switching The Switching Capability field MAY be PSC-1, LSC. The Switching
Capability specific information field MAY include one or more ISCD Capability specific information field MAY include one or more ISCD
Availability sub-TLV(s). The ISCD Availability sub-TLV has the Availability sub-TLV(s). The ISCD Availability sub-TLV has the
following format: following format:
0 1 2 3 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 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length | | Type | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Index | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Availability level | | Availability level |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| LSP Bandwidth at Availability level n | | LSP Bandwidth at Availability level n |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Type: 0x01, 16 bits; Type: 0x01, 16 bits;
Length: 16 bits; Length: 16 bits;
Index: 8 bits
This field is the index of this Availability sub-TLV,
referred by the AI field of the ISCD sub-TLV.
Availability level: 32 bits Availability level: 32 bits
This field is a 32-bit IEEE floating point number which This field is a 32-bit IEEE floating point number which
describes the decimal value of availability guarantee of the describes the decimal value of availability guarantee of the
switching capacity in the ISCD object which has the AI value switching capacity in the ISCD object which has the AI value
equal to Index of this sub-TLV. The value MUST be less than equal to Index of this sub-TLV. The value MUST be less than
1. 1.
LSP Bandwidth at Availability level n: 32 bits LSP Bandwidth at Availability level n: 32 bits
skipping to change at page 6, line 46 skipping to change at page 5, line 12
describes the LSP Bandwidth at a certain Availability level describes the LSP Bandwidth at a certain Availability level
which was described in the Availability field. which was described in the Availability field.
3.3. Signaling Process 3.3. Signaling Process
A node which has link(s) with variable bandwidth attached SHOULD A node which has link(s) with variable bandwidth attached SHOULD
contain one or more ISCD Availability sub-TLVs in its OSPF TE LSA contain one or more ISCD Availability sub-TLVs in its OSPF TE LSA
messages. Each ISCD Availability sub-TLV provides the information messages. Each ISCD Availability sub-TLV provides the information
about how much bandwidth a link can support for a specified about how much bandwidth a link can support for a specified
availability. This information SHOULD be used for path calculation availability. This information SHOULD be used for path calculation
by the PE node(s). by the node(s).
A node that doesn't support ISCD Availability sub-TLV SHOULD ignore A node that doesn't support ISCD Availability sub-TLV SHOULD ignore
ISCD Availability sub-TLV. ISCD Availability sub-TLV.
4. Security Considerations 4. Security Considerations
This document does not introduce new security considerations to the This document does not introduce new security considerations to the
existing OSPF protocol. existing OSPF protocol.
5. IANA Considerations 5. IANA Considerations
skipping to change at page 7, line 30 skipping to change at page 5, line 42
--- ---- ------------------ ----------- --- ---- ------------------ -----------
0 - Reserved Reserved value 0 - Reserved Reserved value
0x01 8 see Section 3.2 Availability 0x01 8 see Section 3.2 Availability
6. References 6. References
6.1. Normative References 6.1. Normative References
[RFC4203] Kompella, K., Ed., and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "OSPF Extensions
in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
(GMPLS)", RFC 4203, October 2005.
[ASTE] H., Long, M., Ye, Mirsky, G., Alessandro, A., Shah, H.,
"Ethernet Traffic Parameters with Availability
Information", Work in Progress, June, 2015
6.2. Informative References
[RFC2210] Wroclawski, J., "The Use of RSVP with IETF Integrated [RFC2210] Wroclawski, J., "The Use of RSVP with IETF Integrated
Services", RFC 2210, September 1997. Services", RFC 2210, September 1997.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", RFC 2119, March 1997
[RFC3209] Awduche, D., Berger, L., Gan, D., Li, T., Srinivasan, [RFC3209] Awduche, D., Berger, L., Gan, D., Li, T., Srinivasan,
V.,and G. Swallow, "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP V.,and G. Swallow, "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP
Tunnels", RFC 3209, December 2001. Tunnels", RFC 3209, December 2001.
[RFC3473] Berger, L., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching [RFC3473] Berger, L., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
(GMPLS) Signaling Resource ReserVation Protocol-Traffic (GMPLS) Signaling Resource ReserVation Protocol-Traffic
Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions", RFC 3473, January 2003. Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions", RFC 3473, January 2003.
[RFC4202] Kompella, K. and Rekhter, Y. (Editors), "Routing [RFC4202] Kompella, K. and Rekhter, Y. (Editors), "Routing
Extensions in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Extensions in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label
Switching (GMPLS)", RFC 4202, October 2005. Switching (GMPLS)", RFC 4202, October 2005.
[RFC4203] Kompella, K., Ed., and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "OSPF Extensions [MCOS] Minei, I., Gan, D., Kompella, K., and X. Li, "Extensions
in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching for Differentiated Services-aware Traffic Engineered
(GMPLS)", RFC 4203, October 2005. LSPs", Work in Progress, June 2006.
[G.827] ITU-T Recommendation, "Availability performance parameters [G.827] ITU-T Recommendation, "Availability performance parameters
and objectives for end-to-end international constant bit- and objectives for end-to-end international constant bit-
rate digital paths", September, 2003. rate digital paths", September, 2003.
[F.1703] ITU-R Recommendation, "Availability objectives for real [F.1703] ITU-R Recommendation, "Availability objectives for real
digital fixed wireless links used in 27 500 km digital fixed wireless links used in 27 500 km
hypothetical reference paths and connections", January, hypothetical reference paths and connections", January,
2005. 2005.
[P.530] ITU-R Recommendation," Propagation data and prediction [P.530] ITU-R Recommendation," Propagation data and prediction
methods required for the design of terrestrial line-of- methods required for the design of terrestrial line-of-
sight systems", February, 2012 sight systems", February, 2012
[EN 302 217] ETSI standard, "Fixed Radio Systems; Characteristics [EN 302 217] ETSI standard, "Fixed Radio Systems; Characteristics
and requirements for point-to-point equipment and and requirements for point-to-point equipment and
antennas", April, 2009 antennas", April, 2009
[ASTE] H., Long, M., Ye, Mirsky, G., Alessandro, A., Shah, H.,
"RSVP-TE Signaling Extension for Links with Variable
Discrete Bandwidth", Work in Progress, February, 2014
6.2. Informative References
[MCOS] Minei, I., Gan, D., Kompella, K., and X. Li, "Extensions
for Differentiated Services-aware Traffic Engineered
LSPs", Work in Progress, June 2006.
7. Acknowledgments 7. Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Lou Berger for his comments on the
document.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Hao Long Hao Long
Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
No.1899, Xiyuan Avenue, Hi-tech Western District No.1899, Xiyuan Avenue, Hi-tech Western District
Chengdu 611731, P.R.China Chengdu 611731, P.R.China
Phone: +86-18615778750 Phone: +86-18615778750
Email: longhao@huawei.com Email: longhao@huawei.com
Min Ye Min Ye
Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
 End of changes. 30 change blocks. 
111 lines changed or deleted 68 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.42. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/