draft-ietf-pce-stateful-sync-optimizations-06.txt   draft-ietf-pce-stateful-sync-optimizations-07.txt 
PCE Working Group E. Crabbe PCE Working Group E. Crabbe
Internet-Draft Oracle Internet-Draft Oracle
Intended status: Standards Track I. Minei Intended status: Standards Track I. Minei
Expires: April 26, 2017 Google, Inc. Expires: June 11, 2017 Google, Inc.
J. Medved J. Medved
Cisco Systems, Inc. Cisco Systems, Inc.
R. Varga R. Varga
Pantheon Technologies SRO Pantheon Technologies SRO
X. Zhang X. Zhang
D. Dhody D. Dhody
Huawei Technologies Huawei Technologies
October 23, 2016 December 8, 2016
Optimizations of Label Switched Path State Synchronization Procedures Optimizations of Label Switched Path State Synchronization Procedures
for a Stateful PCE for a Stateful PCE
draft-ietf-pce-stateful-sync-optimizations-06 draft-ietf-pce-stateful-sync-optimizations-07
Abstract Abstract
A stateful Path Computation Element (PCE) has access to not only the A stateful Path Computation Element (PCE) has access to not only the
information disseminated by the network's Interior Gateway Protocol information disseminated by the network's Interior Gateway Protocol
(IGP), but also the set of active paths and their reserved resources (IGP), but also the set of active paths and their reserved resources
for its computation. The additional Label Switched Path (LSP) state for its computation. The additional Label Switched Path (LSP) state
information allows the PCE to compute constrained paths while information allows the PCE to compute constrained paths while
considering individual LSPs and their interactions. This requires a considering individual LSPs and their interactions. This requires a
reliable state synchronization mechanism between the PCE and the reliable state synchronization mechanism between the PCE and the
skipping to change at page 2, line 12 skipping to change at page 2, line 12
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on April 26, 2017. This Internet-Draft will expire on June 11, 2017.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2016 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
skipping to change at page 10, line 8 skipping to change at page 10, line 8
The LSP State Database Version Number (LSP-DB-VERSION) TLV is an The LSP State Database Version Number (LSP-DB-VERSION) TLV is an
optional TLV that MAY be included in the OPEN object and the LSP optional TLV that MAY be included in the OPEN object and the LSP
object. object.
The format of the LSP-DB-VERSION TLV is shown in the following The format of the LSP-DB-VERSION TLV is shown in the following
figure: figure:
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=[TBD] | Length=8 | | Type=TBD | Length=8 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| LSP State DB Version Number | | LSP State DB Version Number |
| | | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 4: LSP-DB-VERSION TLV format Figure 4: LSP-DB-VERSION TLV format
The type of the TLV is [TBD] and it has a fixed length of 8 octets. The type of the TLV is TBD and it has a fixed length of 8 octets.
The value contains a 64-bit unsigned integer, representing the LSP The value contains a 64-bit unsigned integer, representing the LSP
State DB Version Number. State DB Version Number.
3.3.2. Speaker Entity Identifier TLV 3.3.2. Speaker Entity Identifier TLV
The Speaker Entity Identifier TLV (SPEAKER-ENTITY-ID) is an optional The Speaker Entity Identifier TLV (SPEAKER-ENTITY-ID) is an optional
TLV that MAY be included in the OPEN Object when a PCEP speaker TLV that MAY be included in the OPEN Object when a PCEP speaker
wishes to determine if state synchronization can be skipped when a wishes to determine if state synchronization can be skipped when a
PCEP session is restarted. It contains a unique identifier for the PCEP session is restarted. It contains a unique identifier for the
node that does not change during the lifetime of the PCEP speaker. node that does not change during the lifetime of the PCEP speaker.
skipping to change at page 11, line 8 skipping to change at page 11, line 8
identifier for future either way. In the latter case when PCEP identifier for future either way. In the latter case when PCEP
session is re-established, it would be correctly associated with session is re-established, it would be correctly associated with
speaker entity identifier and not be considered as an unknown peer. speaker entity identifier and not be considered as an unknown peer.
The format of the SPEAKER-ENTITY-ID TLV is shown in the following The format of the SPEAKER-ENTITY-ID TLV is shown in the following
figure: figure:
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=[TBD] | Length (variable) | | Type=TBD | Length (variable) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| | | |
// Speaker Entity Identifier // // Speaker Entity Identifier //
| | | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 5: SPEAKER-ENTITY-ID TLV format Figure 5: SPEAKER-ENTITY-ID TLV format
The type of the TLV is [TBD] and it has a variable length, which MUST The type of the TLV is TBD and it has a variable length, which MUST
be greater than 0. The Value is padded to 4-octet alignment. The be greater than 0. The Value is padded to 4-octet alignment. The
padding is not included in the Length field. The value contains the padding is not included in the Length field. The value contains the
entity identifier of the speaker transmitting this TLV. This entity identifier of the speaker transmitting this TLV. This
identifier is required to be unique within its scope of visibility, identifier is required to be unique within its scope of visibility,
which is usually limited to a single domain. It MAY be configured by which is usually limited to a single domain. It MAY be configured by
the operator. Alternatively, it can be derived automatically from a the operator. Alternatively, it can be derived automatically from a
suitably-stable unique identifier, such as a MAC address, serial suitably-stable unique identifier, such as a MAC address, serial
number, Traffic Engineering Router ID, or similar. In the case of number, Traffic Engineering Router ID, or similar. In the case of
inter-domain connections, the speaker SHOULD prefix its usual inter-domain connections, the speaker SHOULD prefix its usual
identifier with the domain identifier of its residence, such as identifier with the domain identifier of its residence, such as
skipping to change at page 18, line 14 skipping to change at page 18, line 14
The value comprises a single field - Flags (32 bits): The value comprises a single field - Flags (32 bits):
U (LSP-UPDATE-CAPABILITY - 1 bit): defined in U (LSP-UPDATE-CAPABILITY - 1 bit): defined in
[I-D.ietf-pce-stateful-pce]. [I-D.ietf-pce-stateful-pce].
S (INCLUDE-DB-VERSION - 1 bit): if set to 1 by both PCEP Speakers, S (INCLUDE-DB-VERSION - 1 bit): if set to 1 by both PCEP Speakers,
the PCC will include the LSP-DB-VERSION TLV in each LSP Object. the PCC will include the LSP-DB-VERSION TLV in each LSP Object.
See Section 3.2 for details. See Section 3.2 for details.
I (LSP-INSTANTIATION-CAPABILITY - 1 bit): defined in [I-D.ietf-pce-p I (LSP-INSTANTIATION-CAPABILITY - 1 bit): defined in
ce-initiated-lsp]. [I-D.ietf-pce-pce-initiated-lsp].
T (TRIGGERED-RESYNC - 1 bit): if set to 1 by both PCEP Speakers, the T (TRIGGERED-RESYNC - 1 bit): if set to 1 by both PCEP Speakers, the
PCE can trigger re-synchronization of LSPs at any point in the PCE can trigger re-synchronization of LSPs at any point in the
life of the session. See Section 6.2 for details. life of the session. See Section 6.2 for details.
D (DELTA-LSP-SYNC-CAPABILITY - 1 bit): if set to 1 by a PCEP D (DELTA-LSP-SYNC-CAPABILITY - 1 bit): if set to 1 by a PCEP
speaker, it indicates that the PCEP speaker allows incremental speaker, it indicates that the PCEP speaker allows incremental
(delta) state synchronization. See Section 4.2 for details. (delta) state synchronization. See Section 4.2 for details.
F (TRIGGERED-INITIAL-SYNC - 1 bit): if set to 1 by both PCEP F (TRIGGERED-INITIAL-SYNC - 1 bit): if set to 1 by both PCEP
skipping to change at page 21, line 44 skipping to change at page 21, line 44
P.R. China P.R. China
Email: xiegang09@huawei.com Email: xiegang09@huawei.com
13. References 13. References
13.1. Normative References 13.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-pce-stateful-pce] [I-D.ietf-pce-stateful-pce]
Crabbe, E., Minei, I., Medved, J., and R. Varga, "PCEP Crabbe, E., Minei, I., Medved, J., and R. Varga, "PCEP
Extensions for Stateful PCE", draft-ietf-pce-stateful- Extensions for Stateful PCE", draft-ietf-pce-stateful-
pce-16 (work in progress), September 2016. pce-18 (work in progress), December 2016.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC5440] Vasseur, JP., Ed. and JL. Le Roux, Ed., "Path Computation [RFC5440] Vasseur, JP., Ed. and JL. Le Roux, Ed., "Path Computation
Element (PCE) Communication Protocol (PCEP)", RFC 5440, Element (PCE) Communication Protocol (PCEP)", RFC 5440,
DOI 10.17487/RFC5440, March 2009, DOI 10.17487/RFC5440, March 2009,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5440>. <http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5440>.
skipping to change at page 22, line 23 skipping to change at page 22, line 23
Crabbe, E., Minei, I., Sivabalan, S., and R. Varga, "PCEP Crabbe, E., Minei, I., Sivabalan, S., and R. Varga, "PCEP
Extensions for PCE-initiated LSP Setup in a Stateful PCE Extensions for PCE-initiated LSP Setup in a Stateful PCE
Model", draft-ietf-pce-pce-initiated-lsp-07 (work in Model", draft-ietf-pce-pce-initiated-lsp-07 (work in
progress), July 2016. progress), July 2016.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Edward Crabbe Edward Crabbe
Oracle Oracle
Email: edward.crabbe@gmail.com EMail: edward.crabbe@gmail.com
Ina Minei Ina Minei
Google, Inc. Google, Inc.
1600 Amphitheatre Parkway 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway
Mountain View, CA 94043 Mountain View, CA 94043
US US
Email: inaminei@google.com EMail: inaminei@google.com
Jan Medved Jan Medved
Cisco Systems, Inc. Cisco Systems, Inc.
170 West Tasman Dr. 170 West Tasman Dr.
San Jose, CA 95134 San Jose, CA 95134
US US
Email: jmedved@cisco.com EMail: jmedved@cisco.com
Robert Varga Robert Varga
Pantheon Technologies SRO Pantheon Technologies SRO
Mlynske Nivy 56 Mlynske Nivy 56
Bratislava 821 05 Bratislava 821 05
Slovakia Slovakia
Email: robert.varga@pantheon.sk EMail: robert.varga@pantheon.sk
Xian Zhang Xian Zhang
Huawei Technologies Huawei Technologies
F3-5-B R&D Center, Huawei Industrial Base, Bantian, Longgang District F3-5-B R&D Center, Huawei Industrial Base, Bantian, Longgang District
Shenzhen, Guangdong 518129 Shenzhen, Guangdong 518129
P.R.China P.R.China
Email: zhang.xian@huawei.com EMail: zhang.xian@huawei.com
Dhruv Dhody Dhruv Dhody
Huawei Technologies Huawei Technologies
Divyashree Techno Park, Whitefield Divyashree Techno Park, Whitefield
Bangalore, Karnataka 560066 Bangalore, Karnataka 560066
India India
Email: dhruv.ietf@gmail.com EMail: dhruv.ietf@gmail.com
 End of changes. 16 change blocks. 
16 lines changed or deleted 16 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.45. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/