draft-ietf-mpls-rmr-10.txt		draft-ietf-mpls-rmr-11.txt
	MPLS WG K. Kompella		MPLS WG K. Kompella
	Internet-Draft Juniper Networks, Inc.		Internet-Draft Juniper Networks, Inc.
	Intended status: Standards Track L. Contreras		Intended status: Standards Track L. Contreras
	Expires: November 22, 2019 Telefonica		Expires: December 10, 2019 Telefonica
	May 21, 2019		June 8, 2019
	Resilient MPLS Rings		Resilient MPLS Rings
	draft-ietf-mpls-rmr-10		draft-ietf-mpls-rmr-11
	Abstract		Abstract
	This document describes the use of the MPLS control and data planes		This document describes the use of the MPLS control and data planes
	on ring topologies. It describes the special nature of rings, and		on ring topologies. It describes the special nature of rings, and
	proceeds to show how MPLS can be effectively used in such topologies.		proceeds to show how MPLS can be effectively used in such topologies.
	It describes how MPLS rings are configured, auto-discovered and		It describes how MPLS rings are configured, auto-discovered and
	signaled, as well as how the data plane works. Companion documents		signaled, as well as how the data plane works. Companion documents
	describe the details of discovery and signaling for specific		describe the details of discovery and signaling for specific
	protocols.		protocols.
	skipping to change at page 1, line 43 ¶		skipping to change at page 1, line 43 ¶
	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 https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.		Drafts is at https://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 November 22, 2019.		This Internet-Draft will expire on December 10, 2019.
	Copyright Notice		Copyright Notice
	Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the		Copyright (c) 2019 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
	(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of		(https://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 2, line 41 ¶		skipping to change at page 2, line 41 ¶
	4.2. Ring Announcement Phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10		4.2. Ring Announcement Phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
	4.3. Mastership Phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11		4.3. Mastership Phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
	4.4. Ring Identification Phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11		4.4. Ring Identification Phase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
	4.5. Ring Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12		4.5. Ring Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
	5. Ring Signaling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12		5. Ring Signaling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
	6. Ring OAM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12		6. Ring OAM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
	7. Advanced Topics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13		7. Advanced Topics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
	7.1. Half-rings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13		7.1. Half-rings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
	7.2. Hub Node Resilience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13		7.2. Hub Node Resilience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
	8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13		8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
	9. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14		9. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
	10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14		10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
	11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14		11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
	11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14		11.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
	11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14		11.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
	Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15		Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
	1. Introduction		1. Introduction
	Rings are a very common topology in transport networks. A ring is		Rings are a very common topology in transport networks. A ring is
	the simplest topology offering link and node resilience. Rings are		the simplest topology offering link and node resilience. Rings are
	skipping to change at page 13, line 40 ¶		skipping to change at page 13, line 40 ¶
	If H1 fails, traffic from X to Z will drop until the T-LDP session		If H1 fails, traffic from X to Z will drop until the T-LDP session
	from H1 to Z fails, the IGP reconverges, and H2's label to Z is		from H1 to Z fails, the IGP reconverges, and H2's label to Z is
	chosen. Thereafter, traffic will go from X to H2 via a ring LSP,		chosen. Thereafter, traffic will go from X to H2 via a ring LSP,
	then to Z via LDP. However, this convergence could take a long time.		then to Z via LDP. However, this convergence could take a long time.
	Since this is a very common and important situation, it is again a		Since this is a very common and important situation, it is again a
	useful problem to solve. However, this topic too will not be		useful problem to solve. However, this topic too will not be
	addressed in this document; that task is left for a future document.		addressed in this document; that task is left for a future document.
	8. Security Considerations		8. Security Considerations
	This document presents a new method of using MPLS in rings. The use		This document proposes extensions to IS-IS, OSPF, LDP and RSVP-TE,
	of MPLS in rings is not new, so this per se does not pose security		all of which have mechanisms to secure them. The extensions proposed
	concerns. The question is, rather, whether the extensions to		do not represent per se a compromise to network security when the
	protocols suggested here do so. IS-IS and OSPF have security		control plane is secured, since any manipulation of the content of
	mechanisms that ensure secure exchange of information, as do RSVP-TE		the messages or even the control plane misinterpretation of the
	and LDP. The extensions proposed here are protected by the same		semantics are avoided.
	mechanisms.
	One can also ask whether the semantic content of these extensions can
	be used to compromise a network or initiate a denial-of-service
	attack. To do so would require either compromising the control plane
	processing these requests, or manipulating the content of the
	messages. The former is outside the scope of this document; the
	latter is addressed by the security mechanisms of the underlying
	protocols.
	9. Acknowledgments		9. Acknowledgments
	Many thanks to Pierre Bichon whose exemplar of self-organizing		Many thanks to Pierre Bichon whose exemplar of self-organizing
	networks and whose urging for ever simpler provisioning led to the		networks and whose urging for ever simpler provisioning led to the
	notion of promiscuous nodes.		notion of promiscuous nodes.
	10. IANA Considerations		10. IANA Considerations
	There are no requests as yet to IANA for this document.		There are no requests as yet to IANA for this document.
End of changes. 5 change blocks.
	20 lines changed or deleted		11 lines changed or added
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.47. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/