draft-ietf-mpls-tp-use-cases-and-design-04.txt   draft-ietf-mpls-tp-use-cases-and-design-05.txt 
INTERNET-DRAFT L. Fang, Ed. INTERNET-DRAFT L. Fang, Ed.
Intended Status: Informational Cisco Intended Status: Informational Cisco
Expires: June 16, 2013 N. Bitar Expires: July 12, 2013 N. Bitar
Verizon Verizon
R. Zhang R. Zhang
Alcatel Lucent Alcatel Lucent
M. Daikoku M. Daikoku
KDDI KDDI
P. Pan P. Pan
Infinera Infinera
December 16, 2012 January 12, 2013
MPLS-TP Applicability; Use Cases and Design MPLS-TP Applicability; Use Cases and Design
draft-ietf-mpls-tp-use-cases-and-design-04.txt draft-ietf-mpls-tp-use-cases-and-design-05.txt
Abstract Abstract
This document provides applicability, use case studies and network This document provides applicability, use case studies and network
design considerations for the Multiprotocol Label Switching Transport design considerations for the Multiprotocol Label Switching Transport
Profile (MPLS-TP). The use cases include Metro Ethernet access and Profile (MPLS-TP). The use cases include Metro Ethernet access and
aggregation transport, Mobile backhaul, and packet optical transport. aggregation transport, Mobile backhaul, and packet optical transport.
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
skipping to change at page 2, line 4 skipping to change at page 2, line 4
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."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html http://www.ietf.org/1id-abstracts.html
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 and License Notice
Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2013 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 respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
skipping to change at page 2, line 29 skipping to change at page 2, line 29
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. MPLS-TP Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3. MPLS-TP Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.1. Metro Access and Aggregation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.1. Metro Access and Aggregation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.2. Packet Optical Transport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.2. Packet Optical Transport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.3. Mobile Backhaul . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.3. Mobile Backhaul . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.3.1. 2G and 3G Mobile Backhaul . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.3.1. 2G and 3G Mobile Backhaul . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.3.2. 4G/LTE Mobile Backhaul . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3.3.2. 4G/LTE Mobile Backhaul . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4. Network Design Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 4. Network Design Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.1. The role of MPLS-TP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 4.1. The role of MPLS-TP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4.2. Provisioning mode . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 4.2. Provisioning mode . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.3. Standards compliance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 4.3. Standards compliance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.4. End-to-end MPLS OAM consistency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 4.4. End-to-end MPLS OAM consistency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.5. PW Design considerations in MPLS-TP networks . . . . . . . 9 4.5. PW Design considerations in MPLS-TP networks . . . . . . . 10
4.6. Proactive and on-demand MPLS-TP OAM tools . . . . . . . . . 10 4.6. Proactive and on-demand MPLS-TP OAM tools . . . . . . . . . 10
4.7. MPLS-TP and IP/MPLS Interworking considerations . . . . . . 10 4.7. MPLS-TP and IP/MPLS Interworking considerations . . . . . . 11
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Contributors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Contributors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
This document provides applicability, use case studies and network This document provides applicability, use case studies and network
design considerations for the Multiprotocol Label Switching Transport design considerations for the Multiprotocol Label Switching Transport
Profile (MPLS-TP). Profile (MPLS-TP).
In recent years, the urgency for moving from traditional transport In recent years, the urgency for moving from traditional transport
technologies, such as SONET/SDH, TDM, and ATM, to new packet technologies, such as SONET/SDH, TDM, and ATM, to new packet
technologies has been rising. This is largely due to the fast growing technologies has been rising. This is largely due to the fast growing
skipping to change at page 4, line 42 skipping to change at page 4, line 42
AIS Alarm Indication Signal AIS Alarm Indication Signal
ASNGW Access Service Network Gateway ASNGW Access Service Network Gateway
ATM Asynchronous Transfer Mode ATM Asynchronous Transfer Mode
BFD Bidirectional Forwarding Detection BFD Bidirectional Forwarding Detection
BTS Base Transceiver Station BTS Base Transceiver Station
CC-CV Continuity Check and Connectivity Verification CC-CV Continuity Check and Connectivity Verification
CDMA Code Division Multiple Access CDMA Code Division Multiple Access
E-LINE Ethernet point-to-point connectivity E-LINE Ethernet point-to-point connectivity
E-LAN Ethernet LAN, provides multipoint connectivity E-LAN Ethernet LAN, provides multipoint connectivity
eNB Evolved Node B eNB Evolved Node B
EPC Evolved Packet Core
E-VLAN Ethernet Virtual Private LAN E-VLAN Ethernet Virtual Private LAN
EVDO Evolution-Data Optimized EVDO Evolution-Data Optimized
G-ACh Generic Associated Channel G-ACh Generic Associated Channel
GAL G-ACh Label GAL G-ACh Label
GMPLS Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching GMPLS Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
GSM Global System for Mobile Communications GSM Global System for Mobile Communications
HSPA High Speed Packet Access HSPA High Speed Packet Access
IPTV Internet Protocol television IPTV Internet Protocol television
L2VPN Layer 2 Virtual Private Network L2VPN Layer 2 Virtual Private Network
L3VPN Layer 3 Virtual Private Network L3VPN Layer 3 Virtual Private Network
skipping to change at page 5, line 21 skipping to change at page 5, line 22
NMS Network Management System NMS Network Management System
MPLS MultiProtocol Label Switching MPLS MultiProtocol Label Switching
MPLS-TP MultiProtocol Label Switching Transport Profile MPLS-TP MultiProtocol Label Switching Transport Profile
MS-PW Multi-Segment Pseudowire MS-PW Multi-Segment Pseudowire
OAM Operations, Administration, and Management OAM Operations, Administration, and Management
OPEX Operating Expenses OPEX Operating Expenses
PE Provider-Edge device PE Provider-Edge device
PSW Packet Data Network Gateway PSW Packet Data Network Gateway
RAN Radio Access Network RAN Radio Access Network
RDI Remote Defect Indication RDI Remote Defect Indication
S1 LTE Standardized interface between eNB and EPC
SDH Synchronous Digital Hierarchy SDH Synchronous Digital Hierarchy
SGW Serving Gateway SGW Serving Gateway
SLA Service Level Agreement SLA Service Level Agreement
SONET Synchronous Optical Network SONET Synchronous Optical Network
S-PE PW Switching Provider Edge S-PE PW Switching Provider Edge
SP Service Provider SP Service Provider
SRLG Shared Risk Link Groups SRLG Shared Risk Link Groups
SS-PW Single-Segment Pseudowire SS-PW Single-Segment Pseudowire
TDM Time Division Multiplexing TDM Time Division Multiplexing
tLDP Targeted Label Distribution Protocol tLDP Targeted Label Distribution Protocol
VPN Virtual Private Network VPN Virtual Private Network
UMTS Universal Mobile Telecommunications System UMTS Universal Mobile Telecommunications System
X2 LTE Standardized interface between eNBs for handover
3. MPLS-TP Use Cases 3. MPLS-TP Use Cases
3.1. Metro Access and Aggregation 3.1. Metro Access and Aggregation
The use of MPLS-TP for Metro access and aggregation transport is the The use of MPLS-TP for Metro access and aggregation transport is the
most common deployment scenario observed in the field. most common deployment scenario observed in the field.
Some operators are building green-field access and aggregation Some operators are building green-field access and aggregation
transport infrastructure, while others are upgrading/replacing their transport infrastructure, while others are upgrading/replacing their
skipping to change at page 8, line 26 skipping to change at page 8, line 30
IP/MPLS has a great advantage in any-to-any connectivity environment. IP/MPLS has a great advantage in any-to-any connectivity environment.
Thus, the use of mature IP or L3VPN technologies is particularly Thus, the use of mature IP or L3VPN technologies is particularly
common in the design of SP's LTE deployment plans. common in the design of SP's LTE deployment plans.
The extended OAM functions defined in MPLS-TP, such as in-band OAM The extended OAM functions defined in MPLS-TP, such as in-band OAM
and path protection mechanisms bring additional advantages to support and path protection mechanisms bring additional advantages to support
SLAs. The dynamic control-plane with GMPLS signaling is especially SLAs. The dynamic control-plane with GMPLS signaling is especially
suited for the mesh environment, to support dynamic topology changes suited for the mesh environment, to support dynamic topology changes
and network optimization. and network optimization.
Some operators are using the similar model as in 2G and 3G Mobile
Backhaul, which uses IP/MPLS in the core, and MPLS-TP with static
provisioning through NMS in aggregation and access. The reasoning is
the following: X2 traffic load in LTE network is currently a very
small percentage, e.g., some large mobile operator observed less than
one percent of total S1 traffic. Therefore, optimizing X2 traffic is
not the design objective, X2 traffic can be carried through the same
static tunnels together with S1 traffic in the aggregation and access
networks, and further forwarded accross IP/MPLS core. In addition,
Mesh protection may be more efficient in regard of bandwidth
utilization, but linear protection and ring protection are considered
simpler by some operators from operation maintenance and trouble
shooting point of view, therefore widely deployed. In general, using
MPLS-TP with NMS model for LTE backhaul is a viable approach. The
design objective of using this approach is to keep the operation
simple and with unified model for mobile backhaul.
4. Network Design Considerations 4. Network Design Considerations
4.1. The role of MPLS-TP 4.1. The role of MPLS-TP
The role of MPLS-TP is to provide a solution to help evolving The role of MPLS-TP is to provide a solution to help evolving
traditional transport towards packet. It is designed to support the traditional transport towards packet. It is designed to support the
transport characteristics/behavior described in [RFC5654]. The transport characteristics/behavior described in [RFC5654]. The
primary use of MPLS-TP is largely to replace legacy transport primary use of MPLS-TP is largely to replace legacy transport
technologies, such as SONET/SDH. MPLS-TP is not designed to replace technologies, such as SONET/SDH. MPLS-TP is not designed to replace
the service support capabilities of IP/MPLS, such as L2VPN, L3VPN, the service support capabilities of IP/MPLS, such as L2VPN, L3VPN,
skipping to change at page 11, line 37 skipping to change at page 12, line 9
MPLS and GMPLS Networks [RFC5920]. MPLS and GMPLS Networks [RFC5920].
6. IANA Considerations 6. IANA Considerations
This document contains no new IANA considerations. This document contains no new IANA considerations.
7. Acknowledgements 7. Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank Adrian Farrel for his review as Routing The authors wish to thank Adrian Farrel for his review as Routing
Area Director, Adrian's detailed comments were of great help for Area Director, Adrian's detailed comments were of great help for
improving the quality of this document. The authors would also like improving the quality of this document, and thank Loa Andersson for
to thank Loa Andersson for his continued support and guidance. his continued support and guidance. The authors would also like to
thank Weiqiang Cheng for his helpful input on LTE Mobile backhaul
based on his knowledge and experience in real world deployment.
8. References 8. References
8.1. Normative References 8.1. Normative References
[RFC5317] Bryant, S., Ed., and L. Andersson, Ed., "Joint Working [RFC5317] Bryant, S., Ed., and L. Andersson, Ed., "Joint Working
Team (JWT) Report on MPLS Architectural Considerations for Team (JWT) Report on MPLS Architectural Considerations for
a Transport Profile", RFC 5317, February 2009. a Transport Profile", RFC 5317, February 2009.
[RFC5654] Niven-Jenkins, B., Ed., Brungard, D., Ed., Betts, M., Ed., [RFC5654] Niven-Jenkins, B., Ed., Brungard, D., Ed., Betts, M., Ed.,
 End of changes. 14 change blocks. 
14 lines changed or deleted 36 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.41. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/