Transcript RSVP Path computation request and reply messages

Framework for IP/MPLS-GMPLS interworking in
support of IP/MPLS to GMPLS migration
draft-ietf-ccamp-mpls-gmpls-interwork-fmwk-00.txt
CCAMP WG, IETF 66
July 9-14, 2006
Kohei Shiomoto (NTT)
Dimitri Papadimitriou (Alcatel)
Jean-Louis Le Roux (France Telecom)
Deborah Brungard (AT&T)
Kenji Kumaki (KDDI)
Eiji Oki (NTT)
Ichiro Inoue (NTT)
Tomohiro Otani (KDDI)
66th IETF Montreal July 2006
draft-ietf-ccamp-mpls-gmpls-interwork-fmwk-00.txt
1
Scope of this document
• Framework for MPLS and GMPLS interworking
in support of migration from MPLS to GMPLS.
• Issues, models, migration scenarios, operation and
requirements.
• Interworking scenarios that arise during migration.
• Implications for network deployments and for
protocol usage.
66th IETF Montreal July 2006
draft-ietf-ccamp-mpls-gmpls-interwork-fmwk-00.txt
2
Status
• Became WG document
• Covered
– Framework for MPLS and GMPLS interworking in
support of migration from MPLS to GMPLS.
– Issues, models, migration scenarios, operation and
requirements.
– Interworking scenarios that arise during migration.
– Implications for network deployments and for protocol
usage. (More work need to be done)
66th IETF Montreal July 2006
draft-ietf-ccamp-mpls-gmpls-interwork-fmwk-00.txt
3
Work plan
• Ensure that it covers all necessary models.
• Elaborate how to handle signaling objects
and routing TLVs.
66th IETF Montreal July 2006
draft-ietf-ccamp-mpls-gmpls-interwork-fmwk-00.txt
4
Signaling issues
• New Objects
• Fundamental issue
– Generalized Label object
– Upstream Label object
–
–
–
–
Restart Cap object
Admin Status object
Recovery Label object
Notify Request object
– IF_ID object
– Suggested Label object
– Label Set object
– Others (ex. P&R)
– LABEL and
GENERALIZED_LABEL
– Upstream_Label for bidirectionality
• Some objects may be useful to
add advanced features in MPLS.
• Some objects may be
unnecessary in MPLS.
• Some MPLS mechanisms may
be useful in GMPLS (ex. p2mp)
66th IETF Montreal July 2006
draft-ietf-ccamp-mpls-gmpls-interwork-fmwk-00.txt
5
Routing issues
• New sub-TLVs
– Link Local/Remote Identifiers
– Link Protection Type
– Interface Switching Capability
Descriptor
– Shared Risk Link Group
• Unknown TLVs can be ignored
by a router, but must be
forwarded when the LSA is
flooded.
• MPLS LSRs may use the
MPLS part of the LSA but will
not understand the GMPLS part
(e.g., ISCD) to compute a path.
• MPLS LSRs may treat GMPLS
non-PSC LSRs as though they
were PSC LSRs, which may
result in an incorrect path
computation.
• GMPLS non-PSC LSR should
populate adequate MPLS part
of the LSA, which it originates,
to avoid such mis-compuration.
66th IETF Montreal July 2006
draft-ietf-ccamp-mpls-gmpls-interwork-fmwk-00.txt
6