draft-ietf-ccamp-ethernet-traffic-parameters-08.txt   draft-ietf-ccamp-ethernet-traffic-parameters-09.txt 
Network Working Group D. Papadimitriou Network Working Group D. Papadimitriou
Internet Draft Alcatel-Lucent Internet Draft Alcatel-Lucent
Intended status: Standards Track April 15, 2009 Intended status: Standards Track November 8, 2009
Expires: October 14, 2009 Expires: November 7, 2009
Ethernet Traffic Parameters Ethernet Traffic Parameters
draft-ietf-ccamp-ethernet-traffic-parameters-08.txt draft-ietf-ccamp-ethernet-traffic-parameters-09.txt
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. the 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.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference at any 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."
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.
Copyright and License 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 in effect on the date of
publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your
rights and restrictions with respect to this document.
Abstract Abstract
This document describes the Metro Ethernet Forum (MEF) - specific This document describes the support of Metro Ethernet Forum (MEF)
Ethernet Traffic Parameters as described in MEF10.1 when using Ethernet Traffic Parameters as described in MEF10.1 when using
Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Resource Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Resource
ReSerVation Protocol - Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) signaling. ReSerVation Protocol - Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) signaling.
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
Per [RFC3471], Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Per [RFC3471], Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)
allows the inclusion of technology specific parameters in signaling. allows the inclusion of technology specific parameters in signaling.
Ethernet SENDER_TSPEC and FLOWSPEC specific objects are introduced in Ethernet SENDER_TSPEC and FLOWSPEC specific objects are introduced in
this document that describe Metro Ethernet Forum (MEF) Ethernet this document that supports Metro Ethernet Forum (MEF) Ethernet
traffic parameters as specified in [MEF10.1]. traffic parameters as specified in [MEF10.1].
These traffic parameters MUST be used when the L2SC value is These traffic parameters MUST be used when the L2SC value is
specified in the LSP Switching Type field of a Generalized Label specified in the LSP Switching Type field of a Generalized Label
Request (see [RFC3471]) and the LSP encoding type is Ethernet. For Request (see [RFC3471]) and the LSP encoding type is Ethernet. For
example: example:
o For Ethernet Private Line (EPL) services [MEF6], these traffic o For Ethernet Private Line (EPL) services [MEF6], these traffic
parameters are applicable non-discriminately to each EVC crossing a parameters are applicable to each EVC crossing a given port.
given port.
o For Ethernet Virtual Private Line (EVPL) services [MEF6], these o For Ethernet Virtual Private Line (EVPL) services [MEF6], these
traffic parameters are applicable per Ethernet Virtual Connection traffic parameters are applicable per Ethernet Virtual Connection
(EVC) with single or multiple Class of Service (CoS), independent (EVC) with single or multiple Class of Service (CoS), independent
of its associated (set of) VLAN ID (VID). of its associated (set of) VLAN ID (VID).
Association between EVC and VIDs is detailed in [MEF10.1]. The Association between EVC and VIDs is detailed in [MEF10.1]. The
format and encoding of the (set of) VIDs is documented in a format and encoding of the (set of) VIDs is documented in a
companion document [GMPLS-ESVCS]. companion document [GMPLS-ESVCS].
This does not prevent broader usage for Ethernet LSP of the traffic This does not preclude broader usage of the traffic parameters
parameters specified in this document. specified in this document for Ethernet LSP.
2. Conventions used in this document 2. 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].
Moreover, the reader is assumed to be familiar with the terminology Moreover, the reader is assumed to be familiar with the terminology
[MEF10.1] as well as [RFC3471] and [RFC3473]. [MEF10.1] as well as [RFC3471] and [RFC3473].
3. Overview 3. Overview
The Ethernet SENDER_TSPEC/FLOWSPEC object includes the Ethernet link The Ethernet SENDER_TSPEC/FLOWSPEC object includes the Ethernet link
type (switching granularity) of the requested LSP, and the MTU value type (switching granularity) of the requested LSP and the MTU value
for the LSP. for the LSP.
The Bandwidth Profile defines the set of traffic parameters The Bandwidth Profile defines the set of traffic parameters
applicable to a sequence of Service Frames, referred to as bandwidth applicable to a sequence of Service Frames, referred to as bandwidth
profile parameters: profile parameters:
o Committed Rate: indicates the rate at which traffic commits to be o Committed Rate: indicates the rate at which traffic commits to be
sent to the Ethernet LSP. The Committed Rate is described in terms sent to the Ethernet LSP. The Committed Rate is described in terms
of the CIR (Committed Information Rate) and CBS (Committed Burst of the CIR (Committed Information Rate) and CBS (Committed Burst
Size) traffic parameters. Size) traffic parameters.
skipping to change at page 3, line 27 skipping to change at page 3, line 42
without any performance objectives. without any performance objectives.
o EBS defines a limit on the maximum number of information unit o EBS defines a limit on the maximum number of information unit
(e.g., bytes) available for a burst of frames sent at the (e.g., bytes) available for a burst of frames sent at the
interface speed to remain EIR-conformant. interface speed to remain EIR-conformant.
o Color mode (CM): indicates whether the "color-aware" or "color- o Color mode (CM): indicates whether the "color-aware" or "color-
blind" property is employed by the bandwidth profile. blind" property is employed by the bandwidth profile.
o Coupling flag (CF): allows the choice between two modes of o Coupling flag (CF): allows the choice between two modes of
operations of the rate enforcement algorithm. operation of the rate enforcement algorithm.
4. Ethernet SENDER_TSPEC Object 4. Ethernet SENDER_TSPEC Object
The Ethernet SENDER_TSPEC object (Class-Num = 12, Class-Type = TBA by The Ethernet SENDER_TSPEC object (Class-Num = 12, Class-Type = TBA by
IANA, with recommended value 6) has the following format: IANA, with recommended value 6) has the 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Length | Class-Num (12)| C-Type (6) | | Length | Class-Num (12)| C-Type (6) |
skipping to change at page 4, line 30 skipping to change at page 4, line 47
Values 256 through 65535 are not to be assigned at this time. Values 256 through 65535 are not to be assigned at this time.
Before any assignments can be made in this range, there Before any assignments can be made in this range, there
MUST be a Standards Track RFC that specifies IANA Considerations MUST be a Standards Track RFC that specifies IANA Considerations
that covers the range being assigned. that covers the range being assigned.
MTU: 16 bits MTU: 16 bits
This is a two-octet value indicating the MTU in octets. This is a two-octet value indicating the MTU in octets.
The MTU field MUST NOT take a value smaller than 46 bytes for The MTU field MUST NOT take a value smaller than 46 bytes for
Ethernet v2 and 38 bytes for IEEE 802.3. Ethernet V2 and 38 bytes for IEEE 802.3.
TLV (Type-Length-Value): TLV (Type-Length-Value):
The Ethernet SENDER_TSPEC object MUST include at least one TLV The Ethernet SENDER_TSPEC object MUST include at least one TLV
and MAY include more than one TLV. and MAY include more than one TLV.
Each TLV MUST have the following format: Each TLV MUST have the 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
skipping to change at page 6, line 25 skipping to change at page 6, line 43
Flag 1 (bit 0): coupling flag (CF) Flag 1 (bit 0): coupling flag (CF)
Flag 2 (bit 1): color mode (CM) Flag 2 (bit 1): color mode (CM)
Where bit 0 is the low order bit. Other flags are reserved, they Where bit 0 is the low order bit. Other flags are reserved, they
SHOULD be set to zero when sent, and SHOULD be ignored when SHOULD be set to zero when sent, and SHOULD be ignored when
received. received.
A flag is set to value 1 to indicate that the corresponding A flag is set to value 1 to indicate that the corresponding
metering is requested. metering is requested.
The Flag 1 allows the choice between two modes of operations of The Flag 1 allows the choice between two modes of operation of
the rate enforcement algorithm. the rate enforcement algorithm.
The Flag 2 indicates whether the color-aware or color-blind The Flag 2 indicates whether the color-aware or color-blind
property is employed by the bandwidth profile. When Flag 2 is property is employed by the bandwidth profile. When Flag 2 is
set to value 0 (1), the bandwidth profile algorithm is said to set to value 0 (1), the bandwidth profile algorithm is said to
be in color blind (color aware) mode. be in color blind (color aware) mode.
Index: 8 bits Index: 8 bits
The index field is used to reference bandwidth allocated for a The index field is used to reference bandwidth allocated for a
given traffic class in case a multiple-class LSP is being given traffic class in case a multiple-class LSP is being
requested. The index field value MUST correspond to at least one requested. The index field value MUST correspond to at least one
of the index values included in the CLASSTYPE object [RFC4124] or of the index values included in the CLASSTYPE object [RFC4124] or
EXTENDED_CLASSTYPE object [MCOS]. EXTENDED_CLASSTYPE object [MCOS].
A given index value j can be associated to at most N Class-Type A given index value j can be associated to at most N Class-Type
values CTi (i =< N) of the extended Class-Type object. This values CTi (i =< N) of the extended Class-Type object. This
applies in case a set of one or more CTi maps a single (shared) BW applies in case a set of one or more CTi maps a single (shared) BW
profile. An example of value setting consists then in assigning profile. An example of value setting consists then in assigning
skipping to change at page 7, line 15 skipping to change at page 7, line 31
then in assigning the 3 LSB of the index field itself to the CTi then in assigning the 3 LSB of the index field itself to the CTi
value itself (comprised in the range [0x00,0x07]). This applies in value itself (comprised in the range [0x00,0x07]). This applies in
case a single CTi maps a single (dedicated) BW profile or multiple case a single CTi maps a single (dedicated) BW profile or multiple
(dedicated) BW profiles. In the former case (single BW profile), (dedicated) BW profiles. In the former case (single BW profile),
the Ethernet SENDER_TSPEC object includes a single Ethernet the Ethernet SENDER_TSPEC object includes a single Ethernet
Bandwidth Profile TLV. In the second case, the Ethernet Bandwidth Profile TLV. In the second case, the Ethernet
SENDER_TSPEC includes a set of more than one Ethernet Bandwidth SENDER_TSPEC includes a set of more than one Ethernet Bandwidth
Profile TLVs (whose respective Index value is associated to a Profile TLVs (whose respective Index value is associated to a
single CTi value). single CTi value).
Note that the current specification allow for combining shared and Note that the current specification allows for combining shared
dedicated BW profiles to the same LSP. That is, an Ethernet and dedicated BW profiles to the same LSP. That is, an Ethernet
SENDER_TSPEC object MAY include multiple Ethernet Bandwidth SENDER_TSPEC object MAY include multiple Ethernet Bandwidth
Profile TLVs whose respective index can be associated on a 1:1 Profile TLVs whose respective index can be associated on a 1:1
basis to a single CTi or to a set of multiple CTi. basis to a single CTi or to a set of multiple CTi.
For each subobject of the extended Class-Type object [MCOS]: For each subobject of the extended Class-Type object [MCOS]:
o Each CTi value SHOULD correspond 1:1 to MEF CE VLAN-CoS o Each CTi value SHOULD correspond 1:1 to MEF CE VLAN-CoS
o The BW requested per CTi field MAY be used for bandwidth o The BW requested per CTi field MAY be used for bandwidth
accounting purposes. accounting purposes.
By default, the value of the Index field MUST be set to 0. By default, the value of the Index field MUST be set to 0.
skipping to change at page 8, line 48 skipping to change at page 9, line 19
object SHOULD be forwarded and delivered unchanged to both object SHOULD be forwarded and delivered unchanged to both
intermediate and egress nodes. intermediate and egress nodes.
The Ethernet FLOWSPEC object carries reservation request information The Ethernet FLOWSPEC object carries reservation request information
generated by receivers. As with any FLOWSPEC object, Ethernet generated by receivers. As with any FLOWSPEC object, Ethernet
FLOWSPEC object flows upstream toward the ingress node. FLOWSPEC object flows upstream toward the ingress node.
Intermediate and egress nodes MUST verify that the node itself and Intermediate and egress nodes MUST verify that the node itself and
the interfaces on which the LSP will be established can support the the interfaces on which the LSP will be established can support the
requested Switching Granularity, MTU and values included in sub- requested Switching Granularity, MTU and values included in sub-
object TLVs. If the requested value(s) can not be supported, the object TLVs. These nodes MUST be configured with the same pre-defined
receiver node MUST generate a PathErr message with the error code CT sets as the index value signaled as part of the index field of the
"Traffic Control Error" and the error value "Service unsupported" Ethernet Bandwidth Profile TLV (see Section 4.1). If the requested
(see [RFC2205]). value(s) can not be supported, the receiver node MUST generate a
PathErr message with the error code "Traffic Control Error" and the
error value "Service unsupported" (see [RFC2205]).
In addition, if the MTU field is received with a value smaller than In addition, if the MTU field is received with a value smaller than
the minimum transfer unit size of the Ethernet frame (e.g. 46 bytes the minimum transfer unit size of the Ethernet frame (e.g. 46 bytes
for Ethernet v2, 38 bytes for IEEE 802.3), the node MUST generate a for Ethernet V2, 38 bytes for IEEE 802.3), the node MUST generate a
PathErr message with the error code "Traffic Control Error" and the PathErr message with the error code "Traffic Control Error" and the
error value "Bad Tspec value" (see [RFC2205]). error value "Bad Tspec value" (see [RFC2205]).
Error processing of the Extended Class-Type object follows rules Error processing of the Extended Class-Type object follows rules
defined in [MCOS]. Moreover, an LSR receiving a Path message with the defined in [MCOS]. Moreover, an LSR receiving a Path message with the
Extended Class-Type object, which recognizes the object and the Extended Class-Type object, which recognizes the object and the
particular Class-Type but does detect a mismatch in the index values, particular Class-Type but does detect a mismatch in the index values,
MUST send a PathErr message towards the sender with the error code MUST send a PathErr message towards the sender with the error code
"Extended Class-Type Error" and the error value "Class-Type mismatch" "Extended Class-Type Error" and the error value "Class-Type mismatch"
(see [RFC2205]). (see [RFC2205]).
skipping to change at page 11, line 48 skipping to change at page 12, line 19
10. Acknowledgments 10. Acknowledgments
Many thanks to Adrian Farrel for his comments. Lou Berger provided Many thanks to Adrian Farrel for his comments. Lou Berger provided
the input on control traffic processing. the input on control traffic processing.
11. References 11. References
11.1. Normative References 11.1. Normative References
[GMPLS-ESVCS] Berger, L., et al., "Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Support [GMPLS-ESVCS] Berger, L., et al., "Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Support
For Metro Ethernet Forum and G.8011 Ethernet For Metro Ethernet Forum and G.8011 Ethernet
Services", draft-berger-ccamp-gmpls-ether-svcs, work Services", draft-berger-ccamp-gmpls-ether-svcs, work
in progress. in progress.
[RFC2205] Braden, R., Zhang, L., Berson, S., Herzog, S., and S. [RFC2205] Braden, R., Zhang, L., Berson, S., Herzog, S., and S.
Jamin, "Resource ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP) -- Jamin, "Resource ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP) --
Version 1 Functional Specification", RFC 2205, Version 1 Functional Specification", RFC 2205,
September 1997. September 1997.
[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 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. Requirement Levels", BCP 14, 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 V., and G. Swallow, "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for
LSP Tunnels", RFC 3209, December 2001. LSP Tunnels", RFC 3209, December 2001.
[RFC3471] Berger, L., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching [RFC3471] Berger, L., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
(GMPLS) Signaling Functional Description", RFC 3471, (GMPLS) Signaling Functional Description", RFC 3471,
January 2003. January 2003.
[RFC3473] Berger, L., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label [RFC3473] Berger, L., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label
Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Resource ReserVation Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Resource ReserVation
Protocol-Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions", RFC Protocol-Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions", RFC
3473, January 2003. 3473, January 2003.
[RFC4124] Le Faucheur et al, "Protocol extensions for support of [RFC4124] Le Faucheur et al, "Protocol extensions for support of
Diff-Serv-aware MPLS Traffic Engineering", RFC4124. Diff-Serv-aware MPLS Traffic Engineering", RFC4124.
[RFC4506] Eisler, M., Ed. "XDR: External Data Representation [RFC4506] Eisler, M., Ed. "XDR: External Data Representation
Standard", RFC 4506, STD 67, May 2006. Standard", RFC 4506, STD 67, May 2006.
11.2. Informative References 11.2. Informative References
[MEF10.1] The MEF Technical Specification, "Ethernet Services [MEF10.1] The MEF Technical Specification, "Ethernet Services
Attributes Phase 2", MEF 10.1, November 2006. Attributes Phase 2", MEF 10.1, November 2006.
[MEF6] The Metro Ethernet Forum, "Ethernet Services Definitions [MEF6] The Metro Ethernet Forum, "Ethernet Services
- Phase I", MEF 6, June 2004. Definitions - Phase I", MEF 6, June 2004.
[MEF11] The Metro Ethernet Forum, "User Network Interface (UNI) [MEF11] The Metro Ethernet Forum, "User Network Interface (UNI)
Requirements and Framework", MEF 11, November 2004. Requirements and Framework", MEF 11, November 2004.
[MCOS] Minei, I., et al., "Extensions for Differentiated [MCOS] Minei, I., et al., "Extensions for Differentiated
Services-aware Traffic Engineered LSPs", draft-minei- Services-aware Traffic Engineered LSPs", draft-minei-
diffserv-te-multi-class, work in progress. diffserv-te-multi-class, work in progress.
[MPLS-SEC] Fang, L. et al., "Security Framework for MPLS and GMPLS [MPLS-SEC] Fang, L. et al., "Security Framework for MPLS and GMPLS
Networks", draft-ietf-mpls-mpls-and-gmpls-security- Networks", draft-ietf-mpls-mpls-and-gmpls-security-
framework, work in progress. framework, work in progress.
Author's Addresses Author's Addresses
Dimitri Papadimitriou Dimitri Papadimitriou
Alcatel-Lucent Bell Alcatel-Lucent Bell
Copernicuslaan 50 Copernicuslaan 50
B-2018 Antwerpen, Belgium B-2018 Antwerpen, Belgium
Phone: +32 3 2408491 Phone: +32 3 2408491
E-mail: dimitri.papadimitriou@alcatel-lucent.be E-mail: dimitri.papadimitriou@alcatel-lucent.be
Full Copyright Statement
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 in effect on the date of
publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your
rights and restrictions with respect to this document.
 End of changes. 35 change blocks. 
64 lines changed or deleted 73 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.37a. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/