draft-ietf-pce-association-diversity-14.txt   draft-ietf-pce-association-diversity-15.txt 
PCE Working Group S. Litkowski PCE Working Group S. Litkowski
Internet-Draft S. Sivabalan Internet-Draft S. Sivabalan
Intended status: Standards Track Cisco Systems, Inc. Intended status: Standards Track Cisco Systems, Inc.
Expires: July 29, 2020 C. Barth Expires: December 23, 2020 C. Barth
Juniper Networks Juniper Networks
M. Negi M. Negi
Huawei Technologies RtBrick India
January 26, 2020 June 21, 2020
Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extension for LSP Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extension for LSP
Diversity Constraint Signaling Diversity Constraint Signaling
draft-ietf-pce-association-diversity-14 draft-ietf-pce-association-diversity-15
Abstract Abstract
This document introduces a simple mechanism to associate a group of This document introduces a simple mechanism to associate a group of
Label Switched Paths (LSPs) via an extension to the Path Computation Label Switched Paths (LSPs) via an extension to the Path Computation
Element (PCE) communication Protocol (PCEP) with the purpose of Element (PCE) communication Protocol (PCEP) with the purpose of
computing diverse (disjointed) paths for those LSPs. The proposed computing diverse (disjointed) paths for those LSPs. The proposed
extension allows a Path Computation Client (PCC) to advertise to a extension allows a Path Computation Client (PCC) to advertise to a
PCE that a particular LSP belongs to a particular disjoint-group, PCE that a particular LSP belongs to a particular disjoint-group,
thus the PCE knows that the LSPs in the same group need to be thus the PCE knows that the LSPs in the same group need to be
skipping to change at page 1, line 42 skipping to change at page 1, line 42
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 July 29, 2020. This Internet-Draft will expire on December 23, 2020.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2020 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 18, line 30 skipping to change at page 18, line 30
7. IANA Considerations 7. IANA Considerations
7.1. Association Type 7.1. Association Type
This document defines a new Association type, originally described in This document defines a new Association type, originally described in
[I-D.ietf-pce-association-group]. IANA is requested to make the [I-D.ietf-pce-association-group]. IANA is requested to make the
assignment of a new value for the sub-registry "ASSOCIATION Type assignment of a new value for the sub-registry "ASSOCIATION Type
Field" (request to be created in [I-D.ietf-pce-association-group]), Field" (request to be created in [I-D.ietf-pce-association-group]),
as follows: as follows:
+------------------+--------------------------------+-------------+ +------------------+---------------------------------+--------------+
| Association type | Association Name | Reference | | Association type | Association Name | Reference |
+------------------+--------------------------------+-------------+ +------------------+---------------------------------+--------------+
| TBD1 | Disjointness Association Type | [This.I-D] | | TBD1 | Disjointness Association Type | [This.I-D] |
+------------------+--------------------------------+-------------+ +------------------+---------------------------------+--------------+
7.2. PCEP TLVs 7.2. PCEP TLVs
This document defines the following new PCEP TLVs and the IANA is This document defines the following new PCEP TLVs and the IANA is
requested to make the assignment of new values for the existing "PCEP requested to make the assignment of new values for the existing "PCEP
TLV Type Indicators" registry as follows: TLV Type Indicators" registry as follows:
+----------+---------------------------------+-------------+ +----------+----------------------------------+--------------+
| TLV Type | TLV Name | Reference | | TLV Type | TLV Name | Reference |
+----------+---------------------------------+-------------+ +----------+----------------------------------+--------------+
| TBD2 | Disjointness Configuration TLV | [This.I-D] | | TBD2 | Disjointness Configuration TLV | [This.I-D] |
| TBD3 | Disjointness Status TLV | [This.I-D] | | TBD3 | Disjointness Status TLV | [This.I-D] |
+----------+---------------------------------+-------------+ +----------+----------------------------------+--------------+
This document requests that a new sub-registry, named "Disjointness This document requests that a new sub-registry, named "Disjointness
Configuration TLV Flag Field", is created within the "Path Configuration TLV Flag Field", is created within the "Path
Computation Element Protocol (PCEP) Numbers" registry to manage the Computation Element Protocol (PCEP) Numbers" registry to manage the
Flag field in the Disjointness Configuration TLV. New values are to Flag field in the Disjointness Configuration TLV. New values are to
be assigned by Standards Action [RFC8126]. Each bit should be be assigned by Standards Action [RFC8126]. Each bit should be
tracked with the following qualities: tracked with the following qualities:
o Bit number (count from 0 as the most significant bit) o Bit number (count from 0 as the most significant bit)
o Flag Name o Flag Name
o Reference o Reference
+------------+-------------------------+-------------+ +------------+-------------------------+--------------+
| Bit Number | Name | Reference | | Bit Number | Name | Reference |
+------------+-------------------------+-------------+ +------------+-------------------------+--------------+
| 31 | L - Link Diverse | [This.I-D] | | 31 | L - Link Diverse | [This.I-D] |
| 30 | N - Node Diverse | [This.I-D] | | 30 | N - Node Diverse | [This.I-D] |
| 29 | S - SRLG Diverse | [This.I-D] | | 29 | S - SRLG Diverse | [This.I-D] |
| 28 | P - Shortest Path | [This.I-D] | | 28 | P - Shortest Path | [This.I-D] |
| 27 | T - Strict Disjointness | [This.I-D] | | 27 | T - Strict Disjointness | [This.I-D] |
+------------+-------------------------+-------------+ +------------+-------------------------+--------------+
Table 1: Disjointness Configuration TLV Table 1: Disjointness Configuration TLV
7.3. Objective Functions 7.3. Objective Functions
Three new Objective Functions have been defined in this document. Three new Objective Functions have been defined in this document.
IANA is requested to make the following allocations from the PCEP IANA is requested to make the following allocations from the PCEP
"Objective Function" sub-registry: "Objective Function" sub-registry:
+------------+----------------------------------------+-------------+ +------------+---------------------------------------+--------------+
| Code Point | Name | Reference | | Code Point | Name | Reference |
+------------+----------------------------------------+-------------+ +------------+---------------------------------------+--------------+
| TBD4 | Minimize the number of shared Links | [This.I-D] | | TBD4 | Minimize the number of shared Links | [This.I-D] |
| | (MSL) | | | | (MSL) | |
| TBD5 | Minimize the number of shared SRLGs | [This.I-D] | | TBD5 | Minimize the number of shared SRLGs | [This.I-D] |
| | (MSS) | | | | (MSS) | |
| TBD6 | Minimize the number of shared Nodes | [This.I-D] | | TBD6 | Minimize the number of shared Nodes | [This.I-D] |
| | (MSN) | | | | (MSN) | |
+------------+----------------------------------------+-------------+ +------------+---------------------------------------+--------------+
7.4. NO-PATH-VECTOR Bit Flags 7.4. NO-PATH-VECTOR Bit Flags
This documents defines new bits for the NO-PATH-VECTOR TLV in the This documents defines new bits for the NO-PATH-VECTOR TLV in the
"NO-PATH-VECTOR TLV Flag Field" sub-registry of the "Path Computation "NO-PATH-VECTOR TLV Flag Field" sub-registry of the "Path Computation
Element Protocol (PCEP) Numbers" registry. IANA is requested to make Element Protocol (PCEP) Numbers" registry. IANA is requested to make
the following allocation: the following allocation:
+------------+-----------------------------------------+------------+ +-----------+-----------------------------------------+-------------+
| Bit Number | Name | Reference | | Bit | Name | Reference |
+------------+-----------------------------------------+------------+ | Number | | |
| TBD7 | Disjoint path not found | [This.I-D] | +-----------+-----------------------------------------+-------------+
| TBD8 | Requested disjoint computation not | [This.I-D] | | TBD7 | Disjoint path not found | [This.I-D] |
| | supported | | | TBD8 | Requested disjoint computation not | [This.I-D] |
+------------+-----------------------------------------+------------+ | | supported | |
+-----------+-----------------------------------------+-------------+
Table 2: NO-PATH-VECTOR TLV Table 2: NO-PATH-VECTOR TLV
7.5. PCEP-ERROR Codes 7.5. PCEP-ERROR Codes
This document defines new Error-Value within existing Error-Type This document defines new Error-Value within existing Error-Type
related to path protection association. IANA is requested to related to path protection association. IANA is requested to
allocate new error values within the "PCEP-ERROR Object Error Types allocate new error values within the "PCEP-ERROR Object Error Types
and Values" sub-registry of the PCEP Numbers registry, as follows: and Values" sub-registry of the PCEP Numbers registry, as follows:
+----------+-------------------------+------------------------------+ +----------+-------------------------+------------------------------+
| Error- | Meaning | Reference | | Error- | Meaning | Reference |
| Type | | | | Type | | |
+----------+-------------------------+------------------------------+ +----------+-------------------------+------------------------------+
| 6 | Mandatory Object | [I-D.ietf-pce-association-gr | | 6 | Mandatory Object | [I-D.ietf-pce-association-gr |
| | missing | oup] | | | missing | oup] |
| | Error-value=TBD10: | [This.I-D] | | | Error-value=TBD10: | [This.I-D] |
| | DISJOINTNESS- | | | | DISJOINTNESS- | |
| | CONFIGURATION TLV | | | | CONFIGURATION TLV | |
| | missing | | | | missing | |
| 10 | Reception of an invalid | [RFC5440] | | 10 | Reception of an | [RFC5440] |
| | object | | | | invalid object | |
| | Error-value=TBD9: | [This.I-D] | | | Error-value=TBD9: | [This.I-D] |
| | Incompatible OF code | | | | Incompatible OF code | |
+----------+-------------------------+------------------------------+ +----------+-------------------------+------------------------------+
8. Manageability Considerations 8. Manageability Considerations
8.1. Control of Function and Policy 8.1. Control of Function and Policy
An operator SHOULD be allowed to configure the disjointness An operator SHOULD be allowed to configure the disjointness
association groups and disjoint parameters at the PCEP peers and association groups and disjoint parameters at the PCEP peers and
associate it with the LSPs. The Operator-configured Association associate it with the LSPs. The Operator-configured Association
skipping to change at page 24, line 36 skipping to change at page 24, line 36
Canada Canada
EMail: msiva@cisco.com EMail: msiva@cisco.com
Colby Barth Colby Barth
Juniper Networks Juniper Networks
EMail: cbarth@juniper.net EMail: cbarth@juniper.net
Mahendra Singh Negi Mahendra Singh Negi
Huawei Technologies RtBrick India
Divyashree Techno Park, Whitefield N-17L, Floor-1, 18th Cross Rd, HSR Layout Sector-3
Bangalore, Karnataka 560066 Bangalore, Karnataka 560102
India India
EMail: mahend.ietf@gmail.com EMail: mahend.ietf@gmail.com
 End of changes. 14 change blocks. 
51 lines changed or deleted 52 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/