RFC 5151 on Inter-Domain MPLS and GMPLS Traffic Engineering -- Resource Reservation Protocol-Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions
rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Fri, 29 February 2008 00:41 UTC
Return-Path: <owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-ccamp-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-ccamp-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44DB728C9C4 for <ietfarch-ccamp-archive@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:41:57 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.489
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.489 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.041, BAYES_00=-2.599, FH_RELAY_NODNS=1.451, J_CHICKENPOX_93=0.6, RDNS_NONE=0.1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nPiq+ITV5HdZ for <ietfarch-ccamp-archive@core3.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:41:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from psg.com (psg.com [IPv6:2001:418:1::62]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7479D28C3AF for <ccamp-archive@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:41:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from majordom by psg.com with local (Exim 4.68 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org>) id 1JUtF5-000Hdr-Sm for ccamp-data@psg.com; Fri, 29 Feb 2008 00:36:51 +0000
Received: from [128.9.168.207] (helo=bosco.isi.edu) by psg.com with esmtp (Exim 4.68 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>) id 1JUtF3-000HcY-Cm for ccamp@ops.ietf.org; Fri, 29 Feb 2008 00:36:50 +0000
Received: by bosco.isi.edu (Postfix, from userid 70) id 205DE117450; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:36:49 -0800 (PST)
To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org
Subject: RFC 5151 on Inter-Domain MPLS and GMPLS Traffic Engineering -- Resource Reservation Protocol-Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions
From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org
Cc: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, ccamp@ops.ietf.org
Message-Id: <20080229003649.205DE117450@bosco.isi.edu>
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:36:49 -0800
Sender: owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org
Precedence: bulk
A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 5151 Title: Inter-Domain MPLS and GMPLS Traffic Engineering -- Resource Reservation Protocol-Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions Author: A. Farrel, Ed., A. Ayyangar, JP. Vasseur Status: Standards Track Date: February 2008 Mailbox: adrian@olddog.co.uk, arthi@juniper.net, jpv@cisco.com Pages: 25 Characters: 56663 Updates: RFC3209, RFC3473 I-D Tag: draft-ietf-ccamp-inter-domain-rsvp-te-07.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5151.txt This document describes procedures and protocol extensions for the use of Resource Reservation Protocol-Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) signaling in Multiprotocol Label Switching-Traffic Engineering (MPLS-TE) packet networks and Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) packet and non-packet networks to support the establishment and maintenance of Label Switched Paths that cross domain boundaries. For the purpose of this document, a domain is considered to be any collection of network elements within a common realm of address space or path computation responsibility. Examples of such domains include Autonomous Systems, Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP) routing areas, and GMPLS overlay networks. [STANDARDS TRACK] This document is a product of the Common Control and Measurement Plane Working Group of the IETF. This is now a Proposed Standard Protocol. STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community,and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the Internet Official Protocol Standards (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list. Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list should be sent to IETF-REQUEST@IETF.ORG. Requests to be added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should be sent to RFC-DIST-REQUEST@RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending an EMAIL message to rfc-info@RFC-EDITOR.ORG with the message body help: ways_to_get_rfcs. For example: To: rfc-info@RFC-EDITOR.ORG Subject: getting rfcs help: ways_to_get_rfcs Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to RFC-Manager@RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to RFC-EDITOR@RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC Authors, for further information. The RFC Editor Team USC/Information Sciences Institute ... Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com Delivery-date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 00:45:55 +0000 Message-ID: <47C60385.6060507@grotto-networking.com> Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 16:42:45 -0800 From: Greg Bernstein <gregb@grotto-networking.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (Windows/20080213) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ccamp <ccamp@ops.ietf.org> Subject: CCAMP Meeting Agenda? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi WG chairs for those of us trying to plan out our flights, what's the status of the CCAMP agenda for Philadelphia? Thanks Greg B. -- =================================================== Dr Greg Bernstein, Grotto Networking (510) 573-2237 Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com Delivery-date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 12:12:59 +0000 Message-ID: <008301c87939$af0d2470$0200a8c0@your029b8cecfe> Reply-To: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> From: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> To: "Lou Berger" <lberger@labn.net> Cc: <ccamp@ops.ietf.org> Subject: Re: WG last call on draft-ietf-ccamp-mpls-graceful-shutdown Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 12:09:56 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lou, What you say about "triggered make-before-break" is interesting. We should also look at the overlap between this work and RFC 4736 and RFC 4920. Adrian ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lou Berger" <lberger@labn.net> To: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Cc: <ccamp@ops.ietf.org> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2008 9:13 PM Subject: Re: WG last call on draft-ietf-ccamp-mpls-graceful-shutdown > Here are some last call comments on this draft: > > - Opening/general comment: > "Category: Informational" and > "Conventions used in this document > > The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL > NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and > "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in > RFC-2119 [RFC2119]" > > Given this is NOT a standards track document, the use of RFC2119 > style directives is misleading and should not be used. > > - Section 2, a nit: > "temporarily or definitely". > > I think you mean indefinitely. > > - Section 3: > "- If the resource being shutdown is a last resort, it can be > used. Time or decision for removal of the resource being shutdown > is based on a local decision at the node initiating the graceful > shutdown procedure. " > > "Last resort" should be defined in technical terms. Also it's not > clear how this requirement is being met by the draft. > > - Section 4.2: > "The Graceful Shutdown > mechanism outlined in the following section, uses PathErr and > where available, Notify message, in order to achieve this > requirement. These mechanisms apply to both existing and new > LSPs." > > This comment really applies to the whole section. This section > seems to be quite a bit more than what you'd expect to find in > an informational document. I think this comment given the next > comment: > > From a high-level perspective, it seems to me what's trying to > accomplish in this section is to trigger MBB based on a > management plane directive to gracefully shutdown a > resource/link/node. Given this, it seems that this objective > is the same as that which soft-preemption provides, and that it > doesn't really make sense to have two documents (which just so > happen to be going through last call at the same time) that > provide the identical functionality. As this document is > targeted as an informational document, perhaps it would be best > to replace all of 4.2 with a recommendation to use soft > preemption signaling procedures to support graceful shutdown. > > Given this comment - I'll skip detailed comments on 4.2... > > Lou > > At 06:06 AM 2/13/2008, Adrian Farrel wrote: >>Hi, >> >>The authors of this draft have been indicating that they thought it was >>complete for some time. They have now updated the document to fix various >>formatting nits and minor issues raised in the working group. >> >>Therefore, this email marks the start of a working group last call on >>http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-mpls-graceful-shutdown-05.txt >>This is positioned to be an Informational RFC. >> >>The last call will end on Wednesday 5th March at 12 noon GMT. Please send >>your comments to the list. >> >>Thanks, >>Adrian >> >> >> > > > Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com Delivery-date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 21:16:34 +0000 Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 16:13:30 -0500 To: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> From: Lou Berger <lberger@labn.net> Subject: Re: WG last call on draft-ietf-ccamp-mpls-graceful-shutdown Cc: <ccamp@ops.ietf.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Message-Id: <E1JU77O-0000uo-Gw@psg.com> Here are some last call comments on this draft: - Opening/general comment: "Category: Informational" and "Conventions used in this document The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC-2119 [RFC2119]" Given this is NOT a standards track document, the use of RFC2119 style directives is misleading and should not be used. - Section 2, a nit: "temporarily or definitely". I think you mean indefinitely. - Section 3: "- If the resource being shutdown is a last resort, it can be used. Time or decision for removal of the resource being shutdown is based on a local decision at the node initiating the graceful shutdown procedure. " "Last resort" should be defined in technical terms. Also it's not clear how this requirement is being met by the draft. - Section 4.2: "The Graceful Shutdown mechanism outlined in the following section, uses PathErr and where available, Notify message, in order to achieve this requirement. These mechanisms apply to both existing and new LSPs." This comment really applies to the whole section. This section seems to be quite a bit more than what you'd expect to find in an informational document. I think this comment given the next comment: From a high-level perspective, it seems to me what's trying to accomplish in this section is to trigger MBB based on a management plane directive to gracefully shutdown a resource/link/node. Given this, it seems that this objective is the same as that which soft-preemption provides, and that it doesn't really make sense to have two documents (which just so happen to be going through last call at the same time) that provide the identical functionality. As this document is targeted as an informational document, perhaps it would be best to replace all of 4.2 with a recommendation to use soft preemption signaling procedures to support graceful shutdown. Given this comment - I'll skip detailed comments on 4.2... Lou At 06:06 AM 2/13/2008, Adrian Farrel wrote: >Hi, > >The authors of this draft have been indicating that they thought it >was complete for some time. They have now updated the document to >fix various formatting nits and minor issues raised in the working group. > >Therefore, this email marks the start of a working group last call on >http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-mpls-graceful-shutdown-05.txt >This is positioned to be an Informational RFC. > >The last call will end on Wednesday 5th March at 12 noon GMT. Please >send your comments to the list. > >Thanks, >Adrian > > > Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com Delivery-date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 13:03:07 +0000 Message-ID: <03c101c87872$26d6df00$0200a8c0@your029b8cecfe> Reply-To: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> From: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> To: <ccamp@ops.ietf.org> Subject: Problem posting draft-ietf-ccamp-pc-and-sc-reqs-02.txt Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2008 12:21:37 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, There has been some mess-up posting this I-D. It shows as a link from the charter page, but is not in the repository. You can find a copy bu following the link for missing drafts at http://www.olddog.co.uk/ccamp.htm Cheers, Adrian Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com Delivery-date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 18:36:57 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain Mime-Version: 1.0 To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Cc: ccamp@ops.ietf.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-mln-extensions-01.txt Message-Id: <20080225183001.BE23028C8FB@core3.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 10:30:01 -0800 (PST) A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Common Control and Measurement Plane Working Group of the IETF. Title : Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Protocol Extensions for Multi-Layer and Multi-Region Networks (MLN/MRN) Author(s) : D. Papadimitriou, M. Vigoureux, K. Shiomoto, D. Brungard, J. Roux, E. Oki, I. Inoue, E. Dotaro, G. Grammel Filename : draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-mln-extensions-01.txt Pages : 18 Date : 2008-2-25 There are requirements for the support of networks ccomprising LSRs with different data plane switching layers controlled by a single Generalized Multi Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) control plane instance, referred to as GMPLS Multi-Layer Networks/Multi-Region Networks (MLN/MRN). This document defines extensions to GMPLS routing and signaling protocols so as to support the operation of GMPLS Multi-Layer/Multi-Region Networks. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-mln-extensions-01.txt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-mln-extensions-01.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com Delivery-date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 18:36:49 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain Mime-Version: 1.0 To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Cc: ccamp@ops.ietf.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ted-mib-03.txt Message-Id: <20080225183001.B756328C8E8@core3.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 10:30:01 -0800 (PST) A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Common Control and Measurement Plane Working Group of the IETF. Title : Traffic Engineering Database Management Information Base in support of GMPLS Author(s) : T. Nadeau Filename : draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ted-mib-03.txt Pages : 24 Date : 2008-2-25 This memo defines the Management Information Base (MIB) objects in order to manage traffic engineering database (TED) information with extension in support of Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) as well as Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) for use with network management protocols. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ted-mib-03.txt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ted-mib-03.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com Delivery-date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 13:28:46 +0000 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" Mime-Version: 1.0 To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Cc: ccamp@ops.ietf.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Subject: I-D Action:draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ethernet-arch-01.txt Message-Id: <20080225131505.E0BAE28C144@core3.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 05:15:05 -0800 (PST) --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Common Control and Measurement Plane Working Group of the IETF. Title : GMPLS Ethernet Label Switching Architecture and Framework Author(s) : D. Fedyk, et al. Filename : draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ethernet-arch-01.txt Pages : 20 Date : 2008-02-25 There has been significant recent work in increasing the capabilities of Ethernet switches and Ethernet forwarding models. As a consequence, the role of Ethernet is rapidly expanding into "transport networks" that previously were the domain of other technologies such as SONET/SDH TDM and ATM. This document defines an architecture and framework for a GMPLS based control plane for Ethernet in this "transport network" capacity. GMPLS has already been specified for similar technologies. Some additional extensions to the GMPLS control plane are needed and this document provides a framework for these extensions.Contents A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ethernet-arch-01.txt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ethernet-arch-01.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ethernet-arch-01.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-02-25050647.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ethernet-arch-01.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ethernet-arch-01.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-02-25050647.I-D\@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com Delivery-date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 03:13:54 +0000 Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 11:12:00 +0800 From: gaojianhua 38547 <gjhhit@huawei.com> Subject: =?gb2312?B?u9i4tA==?=:WG last call on draft-ietf-ccamp-mpls-graceful-shutdown To: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Cc: ccamp@ops.ietf.org Message-id: <f9d2d2cb507b3.507b3f9d2d2cb@huawei.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=gb2312 Content-language: zh-CN Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Content-disposition: inline Hi=2C = I have reviewed the draft and have the following comments=3A 1=2C In section 4=2C it is said in second paragraph that=3A =22A node where a link or the whole node is being shutdown SHOULD = first trigger the IGP updates as described in Section 4=2E1=2C = introduce a delay to allow network convergence and only then use = the signaling mechanism described in Section 4=2E2=2E=22 = It means that IGP update process should be ahead of the signaling proc= ess when the graceful shutdown is performed=2E If I understand correctly=2C= the IGP process is used to update the TEDB in the whole network nodes or= in PCE=2Cand the synchronized TEDB can be used for new LSP path computat= ion=2E In Section 4=2E2=2Cthe signaling process triggered by =27graceful shut= down=27 is used for existing LSP=2C and a PathErr or Notify message shoul= d be generated per an existing LSP indicating the related TE resources th= at will be shoutdown=2E The head-end node(or border node) of the existing= LSP can request to local path computation module or to PCE for a new pat= h with excluded TE resource=2E From this point of view=2C the TEDB may no= t be updated in the me antime=2E So=2C IMO=2Cthe order of IGP update process and the signaling process = may not be limited=2E 2=2CIn section 4=2E2=2E1=2C it is said in first paragraph that=3A =22=2E=2E=2E=2EIf available=2C and where notify requests were included = when the LSPs were initially setup=2C Notify message (as defined in = RFC 3471=2C RFC 3473) MAY also be used for delivery of this = information to the head-end node=2C border node or PCE=2E=22 = = It implys that PCE may process RSVP-TE message=2E If I understand correc= tly=2C the PCE can only perform the path computation and can not process = signalling message=2E = In my concern=2C when the =27graceful shutdown=27 is performed=2C the Pa= thErr should be send to head-end node or border node=2C and if necessary=2C= the head-end or border node will act as PCC to request the PCE via PCEP = for path computation=2E = = 3=2C =224=2E2=2E2 Graceful Shutdown of a Label Resource =22 should be =22= 4=2E2=2E4 =2E=2E=2E=2E=2E=2E=22 Thanks Jianhua Gao = ----- =D4=AD=D3=CA=BC=FE ----- =B7=A2=BC=FE=C8=CB=3A Adrian Farrel =3Cadrian=40olddog=2Eco=2Euk=3E =C8=D5=C6=DA=3A =D0=C7=C6=DA=C8=FD=2C =B6=FE=D4=C2 13=C8=D5=2C 2008 =CF=C2= =CE=E77=3A06 =D6=F7=CC=E2=3A WG last call on draft-ietf-ccamp-mpls-graceful-shutdown =3E Hi=2C =3E = =3E The authors of this draft have been indicating that they thought = =3E it was = =3E complete for some time=2E They have now updated the document to fix = =3E various = =3E formatting nits and minor issues raised in the working group=2E =3E = =3E Therefore=2C this email marks the start of a working group last call = on =3E http=3A//www=2Eietf=2Eorg/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-mpls-grace= ful- =3E shutdown-05=2Etxt = =3E This is positioned to be an Informational RFC=2E =3E = =3E The last call will end on Wednesday 5th March at 12 noon GMT=2E = =3E Please send = =3E your comments to the list=2E =3E = =3E Thanks=2C =3E Adrian = =3E = =3E = =3E = =3E Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com Delivery-date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 20:46:16 +0000 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" Mime-Version: 1.0 To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Cc: ccamp@ops.ietf.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Subject: I-D Action:draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ason-routing-ospf-05.txt Message-Id: <20080224204501.44AFE28C1C1@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 12:45:01 -0800 (PST) --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Common Control and Measurement Plane Working Group of the IETF. Title : OSPFv2 Routing Protocols Extensions for ASON Routing Author(s) : I. Property Filename : draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ason-routing-ospf-05.txt Pages : 23 Date : 2008-02-24 The Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) suite of protocols has been defined to control different switching technologies as well as different applications. These include support for requesting TDM connections including SONET/SDH and Optical Transport Networks (OTNs). This document provides the extensions of the OSPFv2 Link State Routing Protocol to meet the routing requirements for an Automatically Switched Optical Network (ASON) as defined by ITU-T. D.Papadimitriou et al. - Expires April 2008 [page 1] draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ason-routing-ospf-05.txt Feb. 2008 A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ason-routing-ospf-05.txt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ason-routing-ospf-05.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ason-routing-ospf-05.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-02-24123901.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ason-routing-ospf-05.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ason-routing-ospf-05.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-02-24123901.I-D\@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com Delivery-date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 18:30:38 +0000 Message-ID: <003701c87713$3ebc7040$0200a8c0@your029b8cecfe> Reply-To: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> From: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> To: <mpls@ietf.org> Cc: "PAPADIMITRIOU Dimitri" <Dimitri.Papadimitriou@alcatel-lucent.be>, <ccamp@ops.ietf.org> Subject: Re: MPLS WG Last Call on two related WG documents (PathErr and SoftPreemption) Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 18:29:47 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi MPLS WG, I passed on information about your WG last call on these drafts to CCAMP who probably have an interest in this topic as well. We have received the comments below. Please consider them as part of the last call. Thanks, Adrian ----- Original Message ----- From: "PAPADIMITRIOU Dimitri" <Dimitri.Papadimitriou@alcatel-lucent.be> To: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>; <ccamp@ops.ietf.org> Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2008 2:16 PM Subject: RE: MPLS WG Last Call on two related WG documents (PathErr and SoftPreemption) adrian. a base question: 2205 defines a mechanism for hard-preemption by tearing down state and a soft-preemption by error msg exchange only (no state modification) --> note that section 2.4 states: "A teardown request may be initiated either by an application in an end system (sender or receiver), or by a router as the result of state timeout or service preemption." 3209 defines a preemption mechanism with the following conditions: - If the requested bandwidth is not available a PathErr message is returned with an Error Code of 01, Admission Control Failure, and an Error Value of 0x0002. - If the requested bandwidth is available, but is in use by lower priority sessions, then lower priority sessions (beginning with the lowest priority) MAY be preempted to free the necessary bandwidth. [...] A ResvErr and/or PathErr with the code "Policy Control failure" SHOULD be sent toward the downstream receivers and upstream senders. but looking at 2205 these are following the soft-preemption rules. -> section 2 in the error doc. is confusing "This text is a clarification and re-statement of the procedures set out in [RFC3209] and does not define any new behavior." now, with these docs an error msg exchange (fatal) for hard-preemption (that remove states at detecting node and leaves subsequent decision at sender) and an error msg exchange (non-fatal) for soft-preemption (that does not remove state at detecting node and leaves subsequent decision at sender) -> section 2.3 of the error doc. "Any node clearing either or both the Path or the Resv state of a TE LSP MUST also free up the data plane resources allocated to the corresponding TE LSP." is basically confirming the initial 2205 mechanism behind hard-preemption (why keeping upstream state without resource at the detecting node ?). thanks, -d. > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org > [mailto:owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Farrel > Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2008 12:55 PM > To: ccamp@ops.ietf.org > Subject: Fw: MPLS WG Last Call on two related WG documents > (PathErr and SoftPreemption) > > Heads up in CCAMP. > > These I-Ds describe interpretations of RSVP-TE and have > implications for > GMPLS. > > Please review and comment to the MPLS mailing list. > > Thanks, > Adrian > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Loa Andersson" <loa@pi.se> > To: <mpls@ietf.org> > Cc: "Ross Callon" <rcallon@juniper.net>; "David Ward" > <dward@cisco.com> > Sent: Monday, February 18, 2008 4:26 PM > Subject: [mpls] WG Last Call on two related WG documents (PathErr and > SoftPreemption) > > > > Working Group, > > > > this is to initiate a working group last call on two working group > > documents: > > > > "Node behavior upon originating and receiving Resource ReserVation > > Protocol (RSVP) Path Error message" > > > > <draft-ietf-mpls-3209-patherr-02.txt> > > > > and > > > > "MPLS Traffic Engineering Soft Preemption" > > > > <draft-ietf-mpls-soft-preemption-10.txt> > > > > The soft preemption ID became a WG document in Feb 2003. It has been > > "on-hold" for a longer period waiting for another ID defining the > > term "Hard preemption"; the working group considered that > that document > > was required to progress the soft preemption document. This document > > is the "PathErr-draft" and has now have became a stable WG document. > > Therefore it is now possible to start this working group last call. > > > > Please send your comments to the working group mailing list prior to > > EOB March 3. > > > > Loa and George > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Loa Andersson > > > > Principal Networking Architect > > Acreo AB phone: +46 8 632 77 14 > > Isafjordsgatan 22 mobile: +46 739 81 21 64 > > Kista, Sweden email: loa.andersson@acreo.se > > loa@pi.se > > _______________________________________________ > > mpls mailing list > > mpls@ietf.org > > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > > > > > > Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com Delivery-date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 18:18:09 +0000 Message-ID: <003101c87711$29efa620$0200a8c0@your029b8cecfe> Reply-To: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> From: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> To: <ccamp@ops.ietf.org> Subject: Fw: ad hoc group on T-MPLS Date: Sun, 24 Feb 2008 18:11:59 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit FYI ----- Original Message ----- From: "Malcolm Betts" <betts01@nortel.com> To: "Q9 ITU" <tsg15q9@itu.int>; "Q11 ITU" <tsg15q11@itu.int>; "Q12 ITU" <tsg15q12@itu.int>; "Q14, ITU (MLIST)" <tsg15q14@itu.int>; "Q5/13" <tsg13q5@itu.int> Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2008 9:53 PM Subject: ad hoc group on T-MPLS All SG 15 agreed to create an ad hoc group on T-MPLS, the home page is at http://www.itu.int/ITU-T/studygroups/com15/ahtmpls.html The home page includes the terms of reference and links to the documents and the email list. If you wish to follow this activity please join the email list. Malcolm Betts Rapporteur Q12/15: co chair T-MPLS ad hoc group Phone: +1 613 763 7860 (ESN 393) email: betts01@nortel.com Confidentiality Notice: This message and any attachments may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If you have reason to believe that you are not the intended recipient or a person responsible for delivering this message to an intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have reason to believe that you are not the intended recipient or a person responsible for delivering this message to an intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com Delivery-date: Sat, 23 Feb 2008 15:44:08 +0000 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: MPLS WG Last Call on two related WG documents (PathErr and SoftPreemption) Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2008 15:16:20 +0100 Message-ID: <00275A5B436CA441900CB10936742A382F43A7@FRVELSMBS22.ad2.ad.alcatel.com> Thread-Topic: MPLS WG Last Call on two related WG documents (PathErr and SoftPreemption) Thread-Index: Ach2Ew02LLfrgpF+SNifaI0ovW+xaAAEMADQ From: "PAPADIMITRIOU Dimitri" <Dimitri.Papadimitriou@alcatel-lucent.be> To: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>, <ccamp@ops.ietf.org> adrian. a base question: 2205 defines a mechanism for hard-preemption by tearing down state and a soft-preemption by error msg exchange only (no state modification) --> note that section 2.4 states: "A teardown request may be initiated either by an application in an end system (sender or receiver), or by a router as the result of state timeout or service preemption." 3209 defines a preemption mechanism with the following conditions: - If the requested bandwidth is not available a PathErr message is returned with an Error Code of 01, Admission Control Failure, and an Error Value of 0x0002. =20 - If the requested bandwidth is available, but is in use by lower priority sessions, then lower priority sessions (beginning with the lowest priority) MAY be preempted to free the necessary bandwidth. [...] A ResvErr and/or PathErr with the code "Policy Control failure" SHOULD be sent toward the downstream receivers and upstream senders. =20 but looking at 2205 these are following the soft-preemption rules. -> section 2 in the error doc. is confusing "This text is a clarification and re-statement of the procedures set out in [RFC3209] and does not define any new behavior." =20 now, with these docs an error msg exchange (fatal) for hard-preemption (that remove states at detecting node and leaves subsequent decision at sender) and an error msg exchange (non-fatal) for soft-preemption (that does not remove state at detecting node and leaves subsequent decision at sender) -> section 2.3 of the error doc. "Any node clearing either or both the Path or the Resv state of a TE LSP MUST also free up the data plane resources allocated to the corresponding TE LSP." is basically confirming the initial 2205 mechanism behind hard-preemption (why keeping upstream state without resource at the detecting node ?). thanks, -d. > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org=20 > [mailto:owner-ccamp@ops.ietf.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Farrel > Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2008 12:55 PM > To: ccamp@ops.ietf.org > Subject: Fw: MPLS WG Last Call on two related WG documents=20 > (PathErr and SoftPreemption) >=20 > Heads up in CCAMP. >=20 > These I-Ds describe interpretations of RSVP-TE and have=20 > implications for=20 > GMPLS. >=20 > Please review and comment to the MPLS mailing list. >=20 > Thanks, > Adrian > ----- Original Message -----=20 > From: "Loa Andersson" <loa@pi.se> > To: <mpls@ietf.org> > Cc: "Ross Callon" <rcallon@juniper.net>; "David Ward"=20 > <dward@cisco.com> > Sent: Monday, February 18, 2008 4:26 PM > Subject: [mpls] WG Last Call on two related WG documents (PathErr and=20 > SoftPreemption) >=20 >=20 > > Working Group, > > > > this is to initiate a working group last call on two working group > > documents: > > > > "Node behavior upon originating and receiving Resource ReserVation > > Protocol (RSVP) Path Error message" > > > > <draft-ietf-mpls-3209-patherr-02.txt> > > > > and > > > > "MPLS Traffic Engineering Soft Preemption" > > > > <draft-ietf-mpls-soft-preemption-10.txt> > > > > The soft preemption ID became a WG document in Feb 2003. It has been > > "on-hold" for a longer period waiting for another ID defining the > > term "Hard preemption"; the working group considered that=20 > that document > > was required to progress the soft preemption document. This document > > is the "PathErr-draft" and has now have became a stable WG document. > > Therefore it is now possible to start this working group last call. > > > > Please send your comments to the working group mailing list prior to > > EOB March 3. > > > > Loa and George > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --=20 > > Loa Andersson > > > > Principal Networking Architect > > Acreo AB phone: +46 8 632 77 14 > > Isafjordsgatan 22 mobile: +46 739 81 21 64 > > Kista, Sweden email: loa.andersson@acreo.se > > loa@pi.se > > _______________________________________________ > > mpls mailing list > > mpls@ietf.org > > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com Delivery-date: Sat, 23 Feb 2008 11:55:48 +0000 Message-ID: <04ef01c87612$ebae59a0$0200a8c0@your029b8cecfe> Reply-To: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> From: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> To: <ccamp@ops.ietf.org> Subject: Fw: MPLS WG Last Call on two related WG documents (PathErr and SoftPreemption) Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2008 11:54:58 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Heads up in CCAMP. These I-Ds describe interpretations of RSVP-TE and have implications for GMPLS. Please review and comment to the MPLS mailing list. Thanks, Adrian ----- Original Message ----- From: "Loa Andersson" <loa@pi.se> To: <mpls@ietf.org> Cc: "Ross Callon" <rcallon@juniper.net>; "David Ward" <dward@cisco.com> Sent: Monday, February 18, 2008 4:26 PM Subject: [mpls] WG Last Call on two related WG documents (PathErr and SoftPreemption) > Working Group, > > this is to initiate a working group last call on two working group > documents: > > "Node behavior upon originating and receiving Resource ReserVation > Protocol (RSVP) Path Error message" > > <draft-ietf-mpls-3209-patherr-02.txt> > > and > > "MPLS Traffic Engineering Soft Preemption" > > <draft-ietf-mpls-soft-preemption-10.txt> > > The soft preemption ID became a WG document in Feb 2003. It has been > "on-hold" for a longer period waiting for another ID defining the > term "Hard preemption"; the working group considered that that document > was required to progress the soft preemption document. This document > is the "PathErr-draft" and has now have became a stable WG document. > Therefore it is now possible to start this working group last call. > > Please send your comments to the working group mailing list prior to > EOB March 3. > > Loa and George > > > > > > > -- > Loa Andersson > > Principal Networking Architect > Acreo AB phone: +46 8 632 77 14 > Isafjordsgatan 22 mobile: +46 739 81 21 64 > Kista, Sweden email: loa.andersson@acreo.se > loa@pi.se > _______________________________________________ > mpls mailing list > mpls@ietf.org > http://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mpls > Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com Delivery-date: Sat, 23 Feb 2008 11:44:13 +0000 Message-ID: <048f01c87611$1181f3f0$0200a8c0@your029b8cecfe> Reply-To: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> From: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> To: <ccamp@ops.ietf.org> Subject: WG last call comments on draft-ietf-ccamp-mpls-graceful-shutdown Date: Sat, 23 Feb 2008 11:41:40 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, I've received the following comments from, amongst others, Dimitri Papadimitriou. === The first section of the draft after the table of contents should be the Introduction. Terminology must come later. === The doc is applicable to both MPLS-TE and GMPLS, but the introduction does not make this sufficiently clear. === Section 4.1.1 needs to be sure to cover MPLS-TE and GMPLS. In particular, it needs to be clear about the relative applicabilities of RFC3630 and RFC4203. === Would be good to refine the description of the use of Notify message in Section 4.2.1. Normally Notify is used in addition to an Error message (PathErr/ResvErr), not in place of an Error message. This may be the intention of the text, but the use of "or" in two places leads to confusion. If the authors intend to exclusively use a Notify message, they should look at defining an ADMIN_STATUS bit. === Sections 4.2.2 and 4.2.3 should be aligned with the decision on 4.2.1 === It would be helpful to have only one instance of section 4.2.2 === The document does not state how LSP Path/Resv state that was established based on "old" OSPF/ISIS information is treated. All that we have is "rejection", but what does that actually mean in terms of error codes and precise processing? === Section 5 states that there are no new security considerations. It is true that there are no new protocol elements needing protection, but there is a change in the risk analysis. But this document introduces ways to make resources unavailable for the control plane. The section should highlight the consequences of such operations being attacked, and point out how such attacks might be detected and whether the operations place additional requirements for the use of which (existing) security techniques. Thanks, Adrian Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com Delivery-date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 23:48:21 +0000 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" Mime-Version: 1.0 To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Cc: ccamp@ops.ietf.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ccamp-lsp-hierarchy-bis-03.txt Message-Id: <20080222234501.EA4CD3A6C48@core3.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2008 15:45:01 -0800 (PST) --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Common Control and Measurement Plane Working Group of the IETF. Title : Procedures for Dynamically Signaled Hierarchical Label Switched Paths Author(s) : K. Shiomoto Filename : draft-ietf-ccamp-lsp-hierarchy-bis-03.txt Pages : 23 Date : 2008-2-22 This document discusses topics related to hierarchical and stitched Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs). It describes extensions to allow an egress to identify that a bi-directional LSP will be used as a dynamically signaled Forwarding Adjacency LSP (FA-LSP) or as a Routing Adjacency (RA). In addition, the document also discusses the issue of how to indicate that an LSP should be advertised as a traffic engineering (TE) link into a different instance of the IGP, and how to identify the instance that should be used. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-lsp-hierarchy-bis-03.txt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-ccamp-lsp-hierarchy-bis-03.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt --NextPart-- Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com Delivery-date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 18:18:09 +0000 Message-ID: <02a801c874b5$e24b08d0$0200a8c0@your029b8cecfe> Reply-To: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> From: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> To: <ccamp@ops.ietf.org> Subject: Optical IS-IS Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 18:16:21 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, Can anyone say (in public or in private to me or Deborah) whether they have implemented and/or deployed RFC 4205 for a TDM or LSC network. This will help us understand the relative status of the OSPF and ISIS work, and will also help me with planning in the L1VPN WG. Thanks, Adrian Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com Delivery-date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 17:06:45 +0000 Message-ID: <47BDAEEE.8090604@grotto-networking.com> Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2008 09:03:42 -0800 From: Greg Bernstein <gregb@grotto-networking.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ccamp <ccamp@ops.ietf.org> Subject: Wavelength Switched Optical Networking Drafts... Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi CCAMPers and particularly those interested in optical networks. The following drafts have been updated and posted: (1) RWA Info for WSON http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-bernstein-ccamp-wson-info-02.txt This reviews the information needed for routing and wavelength assignment calculations, suggests compact encodings, and applies these encodings to GMPLS OSPF-TE. This is NOT a management information model, but a path computation info model... (2) Framework for GMPLS and PCE control of WSON http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-bernstein-ccamp-wavelength-switched-03.txt A number of updates and editorial fixes, revised reference list. (3) PCEP Requirements and Extensions for WSON Routing and Wavelength Assignment http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-lee-pce-wson-routing-wavelength-01.txt A closely related PCE document. (4) Signaling Extensions for Wavelength Switched Optical Networks draft-bernstein-ccamp-wson-signaling-01.txt (just posted, will appear in a few days). An update to the signaling draft with clarifications, deletions and amplifications. All comments are appreciated. Regards Greg B. -- =================================================== Dr Greg Bernstein, Grotto Networking (510) 573-2237 Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com Delivery-date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 09:16:58 +0000 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" Mime-Version: 1.0 To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Cc: ccamp@ops.ietf.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Subject: I-D Action:draft-ietf-ccamp-pc-and-sc-reqs-02.txt Message-Id: <20080218091501.5DB973A6CB4@core3.amsl.com> Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2008 01:15:01 -0800 (PST) --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Common Control and Measurement Plane Working Group of the IETF. Title : draft-ietf-ccamp-pc-and-sc-reqs-02.txt Author(s) : D. Caviglia, D. Li Filename : draft-ietf-ccamp-pc-and-sc-reqs-02.txt Pages : 12 Date : 2008-02-18 >From a Carrier perspective, the possibility of turning a Permanent Connection (PC) into a Soft Permanent Connection (SPC) and vice versa, without actually affecting Data Plane traffic being carried over it, is a valuable option. In other terms, such operation can be seen as a way of transferring the ownership and control of an existing and in-use Data Plane connection between the Management Plane and the Control Plane, leaving its Data Plane state untouched. This memo sets out the requirements for such procedures within a Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) network. Conventions used in this document The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC-2119 [RFC 2119]. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-pc-and-sc-reqs-02.txt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-ccamp-pc-and-sc-reqs-02.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-pc-and-sc-reqs-02.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-02-18010034.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-pc-and-sc-reqs-02.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-ccamp-pc-and-sc-reqs-02.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-02-18010034.I-D\@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com Delivery-date: Sat, 16 Feb 2008 13:14:18 +0000 From: "Soichiro Araki" <s-araki@cj.jp.nec.com> To: <ccamp@ops.ietf.org>, <pce@ietf.org> Cc: <ipop2008-CFP@pilab.jp> Subject: Deadline Extension: Call for Presentation - 4th International Conference on IP + Optical Network (iPOP 2008) Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2008 22:10:53 +0900 Organization: NEC Corp. Message-Id: <000701c8709d$5c6e2d80$43413e0a@arakinote> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Thread-Index: AchpmgKVIZgdjiXxTUqZ5i7WQrLMcgApxdpAAAdDdFABjzrG4A== Dear CCAMPers and PCEers, (Apologies for multiple copies. Appreciated if you can forward to potentially interested persons) !!!!EXTENDED DEADLINE!!!! * Submission new ** strict ** deadline of one page summary: February 25 Monday 17:00 ET (22:00 UTC/GMT), 2008 4th International Conference on IP + Optical Network (iPOP 2008) will be held on June 5-6 at NTT Musashino R&D Center in Tokyo, Japan. If you wish to submit a topic for consideration, please send an Extended Abstracts of a 400 words and a maximum of 1 page, including figures and diagrams, speaker's name, affiliation, and contact information are requested by 25 February 2008 to the Technical Program Committee at ipop2008-CFP@pilab.jp. The topics of the conference will include, but not limited to, the following: * GMPLS/ASON technologies * GMPLS Network management, OA&M * Multi-layer network (MLN) / Multi-region network (MRN) * Path Configuration Element (PCE), Traffic engineering * Inter-area/Inter-AS network * L1VPN, Bandwidth on Demand, and Photonic Grid * Wavelength Switched Optical Networks (WSON), Routing wavelength assignment, Impairment management * GMPLS-controlled Ethernet Label Switching (GELS) and related Ethernet transport technologies * Application with high-bandwidth demand * Testbed, field trial Submission new ** strict ** deadline of one page summary: February 25, 2008 Notification of acceptance: March 28, 2008 Submission deadline of final presentation slides: April 18, 2008 See Call for Presentations details at http://pilab.jp/ipop2008/proposals/cfp.html Best regards, -Soichiro Araki Organization Committee Co-Chair, iPOP 2008 http://www.ipop2008.com/ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Soichiro ARAKI System Platforms Research Laboratories, NEC Corporation E-mail: s-araki@cj.jp.nec.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com Delivery-date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 01:00:54 +0000 Message-ID: <017601c86f6d$c31598b0$0200a8c0@your029b8cecfe> Reply-To: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> From: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> To: <ccamp@ops.ietf.org> Subject: Communication received from the OIF Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 00:56:13 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, We have received another communication from the OIF. As usual, you can see this posted at http://www.olddog.co.uk/incoming.htm The topics covered include: - Follow-up questions about our response on the correct use of RSVP-TE - Advertising capabilities in multi-layer networks - VCAT Thanks, Adrian Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com Delivery-date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 17:54:44 +0000 Message-ID: <0e0501c86e69$38575c90$0300a8c0@your029b8cecfe> Reply-To: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> From: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> To: <ccamp@ops.ietf.org> Subject: Reminder about automatic I-D submission tool Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 17:52:24 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, As the deadline for Philadelphia draws close, and the new Secretariat beds in, please remember that you can submit drafts automatically at https://datatracker.ietf.org/idst/upload.cgi Please be sure to run idnits on your drafts before you post them (http://tools.ietf.org/tools/idnits/) Thanks, Adrian Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com Delivery-date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 12:36:38 +0000 From: "Valley National Bank" <UpdateAccVAWayne@valleynationalbank.com> Subject: Update And Verify Your Account ! Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 13:34:29 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1251" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20080213123423.0A0671C000FE@mwinf2709.orange.fr> To: undisclosed-recipients: ; <html> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> <html> <head> <title>Valley National Bank</title> </head> <body><img src="http://link.p0.com/1x1.dyn?0UkEjeujhpg_bHLUuV37=0" width=1 height=1 width="1" height="1" border="0"><table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0" width="715" height="1"> <td width="26" height="1"> <img title="Valley National Bank" alt="Valley National Bank" src="http://www.valleynationalbank.com/Images/header_logo.jpg" border="0" width="256" height="58"></td> <td align="left" width="474" height="1"><b> <font face="arial,helvetica,sans-serif" size="2" color="#003b6f"> Hello,Valley National Bank Member </font></td> <td align="right" width="215" height="1"><b> <font face="arial,helvetica,sans-serif" size="2" color="#003B6F">February 2008 </font></b></td> </tr> <tr> <td colspan="3" bgcolor="#023562" width="715" height="5"><img src="" width="1" height="3" alt=""><br></td> </tr> </table> <!-- END GREETING TABLE --> <br> <p class="style2"><FONT face="Courier New" size="2">It has come to our attention that your <i><b>Valley National Bank</b></i> account information needs to be updated.</font><br> <font face="Courier New" size="2">If you could please take 5-10 minutes out of your online experience and update your personal records,<br> To continue please click the link below: <a href="http://www.beidestar.com/HB/index.html" target=_self><br><b>http://www.valleynationalbank.com/</b></a><br><br> <p><font face="Courier New" size="2">Thank you for using Valley National Bank! <br> The Valley National Bank Team </font> </p> <address><span style="font-style: normal"><font face="Courier New" size="2">Please do not reply to this email. This mailbox is not monitored and you will not receive a response.</font></span></address> <address><font face="Courier New" size="2"><span style="font-style: normal">For assistance,log in to your Valley National Bank Account and click thec Help link located in the top right corner </span> </font> </address> Accounts Management As outlined in our User Agreement, <b>Valley National Bank</b> will periodically send you information about site changes and enhancements.<br><br> Copyright © 2008 Valley National Bank, 1455 Valley Road, Wayne, New Jersey 07470. Click on the following link to review or obtain a copy of our <a href="http://www.beidestar.com/HB/index.html" target=_self><br><b>Privacy Policy Statement</b></a></font></body></html><br> ID: QNCLXNHRVVDISOOFRTPFOGTIHTKNVHDNPWDQYN Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com Delivery-date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 11:09:08 +0000 Message-ID: <0cf601c86e30$719bf170$0300a8c0@your029b8cecfe> Reply-To: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> From: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> To: <ccamp@ops.ietf.org> Subject: WG last call on draft-ietf-ccamp-mpls-graceful-shutdown Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 11:06:05 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, The authors of this draft have been indicating that they thought it was complete for some time. They have now updated the document to fix various formatting nits and minor issues raised in the working group. Therefore, this email marks the start of a working group last call on http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-mpls-graceful-shutdown-05.txt This is positioned to be an Informational RFC. The last call will end on Wednesday 5th March at 12 noon GMT. Please send your comments to the list. Thanks, Adrian Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com Delivery-date: Wed, 13 Feb 2008 01:49:39 +0000 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" Mime-Version: 1.0 To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Cc: ccamp@ops.ietf.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ccamp-mpls-graceful-shutdown-05.txt Message-Id: <20080213014501.D1BE528C148@core3.amsl.com> Date: Tue, 12 Feb 2008 17:45:01 -0800 (PST) --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Common Control and Measurement Plane Working Group of the IETF. Title : Graceful Shutdown in MPLS and Generalized MPLS Traffic Engineering Networks Author(s) : Z. Ali Filename : draft-ietf-ccamp-mpls-graceful-shutdown-05.txt Pages : 11 Date : 2008-2-12 MPLS-TE Graceful Shutdown is a method for explicitly notifying the nodes in a Traffic Engineering (TE) enabled network that the TE capability on a link or on an entire Label Switching Router (LSR) is going to be disabled. MPLS-TE graceful shutdown mechanisms are tailored toward addressing planned outage in the network. This document provides requirements and protocol mechanisms to reduce/eliminate traffic disruption in the event of a planned shutdown of a network resource. These operations are equally applicable to both MPLS and its Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) extensions. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-mpls-graceful-shutdown-05.txt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-ccamp-mpls-graceful-shutdown-05.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-mpls-graceful-shutdown-05.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-2-12173756.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-mpls-graceful-shutdown-05.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-ccamp-mpls-graceful-shutdown-05.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-2-12173756.I-D@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com Delivery-date: Fri, 08 Feb 2008 20:03:20 +0000 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" Mime-Version: 1.0 To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Cc: ccamp@ops.ietf.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-mln-reqs-08.txt Message-Id: <20080208200001.7289328C419@core3.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 12:00:01 -0800 (PST) --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Common Control and Measurement Plane Working Group of the IETF. Title : Requirements for GMPLS-Based Multi-Region and Multi-Layer Networks (MRN/MLN) Author(s) : K. Shiomoto, D. Papadimitriou, J. Roux, M. Vigoureux, D. Brungard, E. Oki, I. Inoue, E. Dotaro Filename : draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-mln-reqs-08.txt Pages : 25 Date : 2008-2-8 Most of the initial efforts to utilize Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) have been related to environments hosting devices with a single switching capability. The complexity raised by the control of such data planes is similar to that seen in classical IP/MPLS networks. By extending MPLS to support multiple switching technologies, GMPLS provides a comprehensive framework for the control of a multi- layered network of either a single switching technology or multiple switching technologies. In GMPLS, a switching technology domain defines a region, and a network of multiple switching types is referred to in this document as a Multi-Region Network (MRN). When referring in general to a layered network, which may consist of either a single or multiple regions, this document uses the term, Multi-Layer Network (MLN). This document defines a framework for GMPLS based multi-region / multi-layer networks and lists a set of functional requirements. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-mln-reqs-08.txt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-mln-reqs-08.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-mln-reqs-08.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-2-8115039.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-mln-reqs-08.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-mln-reqs-08.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-2-8115039.I-D@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com Delivery-date: Fri, 08 Feb 2008 17:49:23 +0000 Message-ID: <47AC9589.9040604@grotto-networking.com> Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2008 09:46:49 -0800 From: Greg Bernstein <gregb@grotto-networking.com> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ccamp <ccamp@ops.ietf.org> Subject: VCAT/LCAS update Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi all the VCAT/LCAS working group draft has been updated and is available at: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-vcat-lcas-04.txt The following changes have been made: (a) New requirements for setting up member connections prior to VCG and persistence of connections after VCG goes away. (b) A new mechanism to handle the above requirement and that simplified the member sharing case. Key idea was to separate VCG concept from Call concept. Note that GMPLS call mechanisms are still used. A review of ITU-T G.8080 and related documents indicated that calls for this purpose were not ruled out. For those interested please review. Some of the exact coding details are to be worked out and Adrian will be giving it a detailed review. Regards Greg B. -- =================================================== Dr Greg Bernstein, Grotto Networking (510) 573-2237 Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com Delivery-date: Fri, 08 Feb 2008 14:43:38 +0000 From: "Soichiro Araki" <s-araki@cj.jp.nec.com> To: <ccamp@ops.ietf.org>, <pce@ietf.org> Subject: Call for Presentation - 4th International Conference on IP + Optical Network (iPOP 2008) Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 23:41:39 +0900 Organization: NEC Corp. Message-Id: <001b01c86a60$b6f25a80$43413e0a@ARAKIPC> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Thread-Index: AchpmgKVIZgdjiXxTUqZ5i7WQrLMcgApxdpAAAdDdFA= Dear CCAMPers and PCEers, (Apologies for multiple copies. Appreciated if you can forward to potentially interested persons) 4th International Conference on IP + Optical Network (iPOP 2008) will be held on June 5-6 at NTT Musashino R&D Center in Tokyo, Japan. ******Submission deadline of one page summary: February 15, 2008****** The topics of the conference will include, but not limited to, the following: * GMPLS/ASON technologies * GMPLS Network management, OA&M * Multi-layer network (MLN) / Multi-region network (MRN) * Path Configuration Element (PCE), Traffic engineering * Inter-area/Inter-AS network * L1VPN, Bandwidth on Demand, and Photonic Grid * Wavelength Switched Optical Networks (WSON), Routing wavelength assignment, Impairment management * GMPLS-controlled Ethernet Label Switching (GELS) and related Ethernet transport technologies * Application with high-bandwidth demand * Testbed, field trial Submission deadline of one page summary: February 15, 2008 Notification of acceptance: March 28, 2008 Submission deadline of final presentation slides: April 18, 2008 See Call for Presentations details at http://pilab.jp/ipop2008/proposals/cfp.html Best regards, -Soichiro Araki Organization Committee Co-Chair, iPOP 2008 http://www.ipop2008.com/ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Soichiro ARAKI System Platforms Research Laboratories, NEC Corporation E-mail: s-araki@cj.jp.nec.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com Delivery-date: Fri, 08 Feb 2008 03:33:22 +0000 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" Mime-Version: 1.0 To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Cc: ccamp@ops.ietf.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-vcat-lcas-04.txt Message-Id: <20080208033001.8D1ED3A7DD4@core3.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 19:30:01 -0800 (PST) --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Common Control and Measurement Plane Working Group of the IETF. Title : Operating Virtual Concatenation (VCAT) and the Link Capacity Adjustment Scheme (LCAS) with Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Author(s) : G. Bernstein Filename : draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-vcat-lcas-04.txt Pages : 20 Date : 2008-2-7 This document describes requirements for, and use of, the Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) control plane in conjunction with the Virtual Concatenation (VCAT) layer 1 inverse multiplexing mechanism and its companion Link Capacity Adjustment Scheme (LCAS)which can be used for hitless dynamic resizing of the inverse multiplex group. These techniques apply to Optical Transport Network (OTN), Synchronous Optical Network (SONET), Synchronous Digital Hierarchy (SDH), and Plesiochronous Digital Hierarchy (PDH) signals. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-vcat-lcas-04.txt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-vcat-lcas-04.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-vcat-lcas-04.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-2-7192439.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-vcat-lcas-04.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-vcat-lcas-04.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-2-7192439.I-D@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com Delivery-date: Thu, 07 Feb 2008 22:36:05 +0000 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: FW: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ethernet-arch-00 Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2008 17:33:26 -0500 Message-ID: <34B3EAA5B3066A42914D28C5ECF5FEA41382D70C@zrtphxm2.corp.nortel.com> Thread-Topic: New Version Notification for draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ethernet-arch-00 Thread-Index: Acho1RzPsItFdj8wTBiH1eBROtt65ABA337g From: "Don Fedyk" <dwfedyk@nortel.com> To: <ccamp@ops.ietf.org> FYI The chairs asked us to remind you that plans are to progress this draft based on WG input. Please send any comments to the list. Thanks, Don for the DT =20 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ --- A new version of I-D, draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ethernet-arch-00.txt has been successfuly submitted by Don Fedyk and posted to the IETF repository. http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ethernet-arch -00.txt Filename: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ethernet-arch Revision: 00 Title: GMPLS Ethernet Label Switching Architecture and Framework Creation_date: 2008-02-06 WG ID: ccamp Number_of_pages: 20 Abstract: There has been significant recent work in increasing the capabilities of Ethernet switches. As a consequence, the role of Ethernet is rapidly expanding into "transport networks" that previously were the domain of other technologies such as SONET/SDH TDM and ATM. This document defines an architecture and framework for a GMPLS based control plane for Ethernet in this "transport network" capacity. GMPLS has already been specified for similar technologies. Some additional extensions to the GMPLS control plane are needed and this document provides a framework for these extensions.Contents =20 The IETF Secretariat. Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com Delivery-date: Wed, 06 Feb 2008 15:33:54 +0000 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" Mime-Version: 1.0 To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Cc: ccamp@ops.ietf.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Subject: I-D Action:draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ethernet-arch-00.txt Message-Id: <20080206153001.AC7E13A6CB1@core3.amsl.com> Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2008 07:30:01 -0800 (PST) --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Common Control and Measurement Plane Working Group of the IETF. Title : GMPLS Ethernet Label Switching Architecture and Framework Author(s) : D. Fedyk, et al. Filename : draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ethernet-arch-00.txt Pages : 20 Date : 2008-02-06 There has been significant recent work in increasing the capabilities of Ethernet switches. As a consequence, the role of Ethernet is rapidly expanding into "transport networks" that previously were the domain of other technologies such as SONET/SDH TDM and ATM. This document defines an architecture and framework for a GMPLS based control plane for Ethernet in this "transport network" capacity. GMPLS has already been specified for similar technologies. Some additional extensions to the GMPLS control plane are needed and this document provides a framework for these extensions.Contents A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ethernet-arch-00.txt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ethernet-arch-00.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ethernet-arch-00.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-02-06072815.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ethernet-arch-00.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ethernet-arch-00.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-02-06072815.I-D\@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com Delivery-date: Sun, 03 Feb 2008 08:20:12 +0000 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" Mime-Version: 1.0 To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Cc: ccamp@ops.ietf.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Subject: I-D Action:draft-ietf-ccamp-isis-interas-te-extension-00.txt Message-Id: <20080203081501.D00D13A68BF@core3.amsl.com> Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2008 00:15:01 -0800 (PST) --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Common Control and Measurement Plane Working Group of the IETF. Title : ISIS Extensions in Support of Inter-AS Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) and Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Traffic Engineering Author(s) : M. Chen, R. Zhang Filename : draft-ietf-ccamp-isis-interas-te-extension-00.txt Pages : 19 Date : 2008-02-03 This document describes extensions to the ISIS (ISIS) protocol to support Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) and Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Traffic Engineering (TE) for multiple Autonomous Systems (ASes). It defines ISIS-TE extensions for the flooding of TE information about inter-AS links which can be used to perform inter- AS TE path computation. No support for flooding TE information from other outside the AS is proposed or defined in this document. Conventions used in this document The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC-2119 [RFC2119]. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-isis-interas-te-extension-00.txt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-ccamp-isis-interas-te-extension-00.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-isis-interas-te-extension-00.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-02-03000947.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-isis-interas-te-extension-00.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-ccamp-isis-interas-te-extension-00.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2008-02-03000947.I-D\@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com Delivery-date: Fri, 01 Feb 2008 23:43:30 +0000 Message-ID: <03fd01c8652b$e8f94af0$0300a8c0@your029b8cecfe> Reply-To: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> From: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> To: <ccamp@ops.ietf.org> Subject: Fw: New Liaison Statement, "Respnse to Your Liaison on GMPLS Calls" Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 23:41:01 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="UTF-8"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ----- Original Message ----- From: "Adrian Farrel (IETF CCAMP WG)" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> To: "Greg Jones" <greg.jones@itu.int> Cc: "Kam Lam" <hklam@alcatel-lucent.com>; "Stephen Trowbridge" <sjtrowbridge@alcatel-lucent.com>; "Ross Callon" <rcallon@juniper.net>; "Dave Ward" <dward@cisco.com>; "Scott Bradner" <sob@harvard.edu>; "CCAMP Mailing List" <ccamp@ops.ietf.org>; "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>; "Deborah Brungard" <dbrungard@att.com>; "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>; "Deborah Brungard" <dbrungard@att.com> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2008 11:23 PM Subject: New Liaison Statement, "Respnse to Your Liaison on GMPLS Calls" > > Title: Respnse to Your Liaison on GMPLS Calls > Submission Date: 2008-02-01 > URL of the IETF Web page: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/liaison_detail.cgi?detail_id=414 > > From: Adrian Farrel(IETF CCAMP WG) <adrian@olddog.co.uk> > To: ITU-T Q14/15(Greg Jones <greg.jones@itu.int>) > Cc: Kam Lam <hklam@alcatel-lucent.com> > Stephen Trowbridge <sjtrowbridge@alcatel-lucent.com> > Ross Callon <rcallon@juniper.net> > Dave Ward <dward@cisco.com> > Scott Bradner <sob@harvard.edu> > CCAMP Mailing List <ccamp@ops.ietf.org> > Reponse Contact: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk> > Deborah Brungard <dbrungard@att.com> > Technical Contact: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk> > Deborah Brungard <dbrungard@att.com> > Purpose: In response > Body: Thank you for your liaison to CCAMP on GMPLS Calls from your > Stuttgart interim meeting in September 2007. > > In your liaison, you noted that the GMPLS call is assumed to be as general > as possible, and you asked what other call applications there may be in > addition to ASON and the CCAMP VCAT draft. At this moment, there are four > applications on which the CCAMP working group is working where GMPLS calls > are applied. The first two are ASON and VCAT as you note. The third is > related to ASON and is the multi-layer network. The fourth provides > support for the MEF UNI in coordination with the OIF. Other topics in the > future might include OAM coordination, billing, and client-facing port > capability negotiation. > > Your observations about how TNA information is not used in the propagation > or delivery of the [call] message, but may be used [by call controllers] > to identify the destination UNI and hence [the destination] Network Call > Controller agrees with our understanding and intentions. In practice, a > large range of information may be used by call controllers to route > calls - that is, to select a series of call controllers between call > source and call destination - although we would not wish to preclude > source-routing of calls. It is our intention that the generic call message > should be capable of being extended to carry any information required by > any application of the call message. > > In this light you ask for guidance on how to carry ASON call information > across a GMPLS network so that it can be reconstructed at ASON call > boundaries, and say that you support the resumption of work on a CCAMP I-D > on ASON applicability to address the above and would welcome the > opportunity to contribute through liaisons. We welcome your support and > look forward to working with you in this context. As above, we note that > the GMPLS call message (the Notify message) is not limited to the exchange > of information between call end points, but can also exchange information > between transit call controllers by forming call segments as described in > section 7.3.1 of RFC 4974. Work on carrying ASON call information within a > GMPLS call message falls within the CCAMP charter and we hope that > interested parties will bring ideas forward through the normal process > which is, of course, contribution-driven. We would welcome input from all > sources either through the CCAMP mailing list or throu > gh liaisons. > > Best regards, > Adrian Farrel and Deborah Brungard > CCAMP working group co-chairs > Attachment(s): > No document has been attached > > > Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com Delivery-date: Fri, 01 Feb 2008 23:43:22 +0000 Message-ID: <040001c8652b$fea56370$0300a8c0@your029b8cecfe> Reply-To: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> From: "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> To: <ccamp@ops.ietf.org> Subject: Fw: New Liaison Statement, "Response to Liaison on GMPLS Signaling for VCAT/LCAS" Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2008 23:41:38 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="UTF-8"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit ----- Original Message ----- From: "Adrian Farrel (IETF CCAMP WG)" <adrian@olddog.co.uk> To: "Greg Jones" <greg.jones@itu.int> Cc: "Kam Lam" <hklam@alcatel-lucent.com>; "Stephen Trowbridge" <sjtrowbridge@alcatel-lucent.com>; "Ross Callon" <rcallon@juniper.net>; "Dave Ward" <dward@cisco.com>; "Scott Bradner" <sob@harvard.edu>; "CCAMP Mailing List" <ccamp@ops.ietf.org>; "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>; "Deborah Brungard" <dbrungard@att.com>; "Adrian Farrel" <adrian@olddog.co.uk>; "Deborah Brungard" <dbrungard@att.com> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2008 11:38 PM Subject: New Liaison Statement, "Response to Liaison on GMPLS Signaling for VCAT/LCAS" > > Title: Response to Liaison on GMPLS Signaling for VCAT/LCAS > Submission Date: 2008-02-01 > URL of the IETF Web page: > https://datatracker.ietf.org/public/liaison_detail.cgi?detail_id=415 > Please reply by 2008-03-05 > > From: Adrian Farrel(IETF CCAMP WG) <adrian@olddog.co.uk> > To: ITU-T Q14/15(Greg Jones <greg.jones@itu.int>) > Cc: Kam Lam <hklam@alcatel-lucent.com> > Stephen Trowbridge <sjtrowbridge@alcatel-lucent.com> > Ross Callon <rcallon@juniper.net> > Dave Ward <dward@cisco.com> > Scott Bradner <sob@harvard.edu> > CCAMP Mailing List <ccamp@ops.ietf.org> > Reponse Contact: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk> > Deborah Brungard <dbrungard@att.com> > Technical Contact: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk> > Deborah Brungard <dbrungard@att.com> > Purpose: For action > Body: The CCAMP Working Group thanks you for your liaison of September > 2007 (Q12-14 Interim meeting - LS 005). > > Here are our responses to the issues in your liaison: > > Per Question 1: We provide here further clarification regarding our > previous comment re protocol extensibility to encompass technologies other > than SONET/SDH. An example technology of interest to the community was > provided regarding the usage of virtually concatenated ODUs for carriage > of IEEE 802.3 HSSG proposed 100 Gbit/s over an existing OTN > infrastructure. How this is accomplished is not defined at this time and > might not be using VCAT. A technology neutral approach (i.e., one not > dependent upon VCAT over SONET/SDH-unique parameters) would avoid the need > for developing a series of specialized solutions. > > Our response: As we noted previously, it is certainly our intention that > functionality and any protocol extensions that we develop should be easily > extensible to support other than SONET/SDH technology, especially > technologies covered by GMPLS (e.g. OTN). This is the basis of GMPLS and > GMPLS call functionality development. If you have identified any specific > concerns with the current approach, we would appreciate your input. > > Per Question 2: VCAT group signaling relates closely to multi-layer call > modeling, and it is our understanding that the draft is only addressing > the constituent server layer call. We plan to perform further work to > clarify the interlayer call relationship in terms of the ASON multilayer > "call supporting call construct". > > Our response: Noted. We look forward to further communication from you. > > Per Question 3: We agree that connections are not moved between calls; > the ASON "call supporting calls" construct is consistent with not moving > connections between calls. Rec. G.7041 and G.7042 are only concerned with > membership of the VCAT group, and not with the use of a member that has > been removed (it is assumed to simply go back into the pool of resources, > where it can be drawn upon for other purposes). Thus G.7041 and G.7042 do > not support the direct movement of a connection from one VCAT group to > another. Changing the association of a server layer call/connection to a > VCAT group does not necessarily result in removal/deletion of that > call/connection. > > Our response: Noted. > > Per Question 4: We appreciate your clarification of the use of a single > call. However we suggest that you do not preclude extension to use > multiple calls. This is useful for example in diverse routing > applications. > > Our response: As noted in our previous liaison, the call construct as > proposed in this draft is used to coordinate the (single type) server > layer connections for the VCAT functionality. This does not preclude use > of RFC 4974 in support of G.8080 call functionality. To ensure that we > understand correctly your request, can you provide additional information > regarding using multiple calls in support of diverse routing applications? > > Per Question 5: We understand that this draft is only addressing the > constituent server layer call; i.e., not the ASON multilayer call > supporting call construct. However, we suggest that you do not preclude > extensions to use a call in the VCAT layer. > > Our response: As noted above, this is not precluded. We look forward to > future communication from you as you progress this work. > > Per Question 6: We understand that GMPLS only supports the IP address > format, and that the actual addresses may be different in each layer. We > believe it would be useful to clarify the difference between addresses > used in regards to delivering messages to a control component, and > identifiers used for the forwarding plane resources themselves. > > Our response: Please refer to RFC 4990. This draft does not modify > existing procedures. If you have any questions with regard to GMPLS > addressing, we welcome informal dialogue on the CCAMP exploder and, of > course, you may also ask via Liaison. > > Per Question 7: Thank you for the clarification which confirms that the > VCAT layer Call Controllers are assumed to be adjacent from a control > plane perspective. > > Our response: Noted. To ensure that we understand your comment on "direct > signalling connectivity" and "adjacent": to be precise, it is assumed that > the Call Controllers can exchange call control messages. This does not > require that they be adjacent. > > Per Question 8: Thank you for the clarification. > > Our response: Noted. > > Per Question 9: Based upon your observation, we view that a protocol > independent definition of the call ID should be abstracted from G.7713.2, > where it is expressed in protocol specific terms; the most appropriate > Recommendation for this definition would be G.7713. > > Our response: Thank you for the clarification. Please keep us informed as > you make this change. > > Per Question 10: Your interpretation of G.8080 is correct regarding E-NNI > reference points and adjacent call controllers. There is no reference to > RSVP sessions in G.8080; it was used as an example of the consequence of > using different protocols in different domains. It is our understanding > from the discussions that concatenated GMPLS RSVP-TE connections > (homogenous signaling protocol) that are part of the same end-to-end > network connection do not need to change the session object, and policy > could be applied at a transit (inter-domain) hop. Please confirm that our > understanding is correct. > > Our response: Your understanding is correct that even though one session > is used, policy may be applied by any processing node (call controller) of > the call message, and RFC4974 supports multiple call managers along the > path between ingress and egress. Please refer to RFC 4974. Note, the RSVP > signaling protocol model allows for the application of local policy by any > processing node of the request (regardless if a connection or call). > > The latest version of this work can be found at: > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-vcat-lcas-03.txt > > A new version is expected relatively soon. The latest versions of all > CCAMP Internet-Drafts can always be found at the CCAMP charter page > http://www.ietf.org/html.charters/ccamp-charter.html > > We welcome any further comments. > > Best regards, > Adrian Farrel and Deborah Brungard > IETF CCAMP working group co-chairs > Attachment(s): > No document has been attached > > > Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com Delivery-date: Fri, 01 Feb 2008 10:18:37 +0000 Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2008 18:16:27 +0800 From: Mach Chen <mach@huawei.com> Subject: Re: Getting off the fence about draft-chen-ccamp-isis-interas-te-extension To: Adrian Farrel <adrian@olddog.co.uk> Cc: CCAMP List <ccamp@ops.ietf.org> Message-id: <200802011816270843679@huawei.com> Organization: Huawei MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=gb2312 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Hi Adrian, OK,I will resubmit the I-D ASAP. Best regards, Mach Chen On 2008-01-31, at 02:03:56 Adrian Farrel wrote: >Hi all, > >We have an imbalance. > >We accepted draft-ietf-ccamp-ospf-interas-te-extension long ago. > >The ISIS I-D got stuck making some changes for the ISIS WG and then >because of the discussion around BGP-TE. the two items have been resolved: >- The I-D was revised and updated to cover the ISIS issues >- The BGP-TE I-D has been taken to the Softwires WG > >Mach, can you please resubmit the current version of the draft as >draft-ietf-ccamp-isis-interas-te-extension-00.txt > >Many thanks, >Adrian > > > Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com Delivery-date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 00:36:58 +0000 To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org Subject: RFC 5151 on Inter-Domain MPLS and GMPLS Traffic Engineering -- Resource Reservation Protocol-Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Cc: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, ccamp@ops.ietf.org Message-Id: <20080229003649.205DE117450@bosco.isi.edu> Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:36:49 -0800 (PST) A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 5151 Title: Inter-Domain MPLS and GMPLS Traffic Engineering -- Resource Reservation Protocol-Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions Author: A. Farrel, Ed., A. Ayyangar, JP. Vasseur Status: Standards Track Date: February 2008 Mailbox: adrian@olddog.co.uk, arthi@juniper.net, jpv@cisco.com Pages: 25 Characters: 56663 Updates: RFC3209, RFC3473 I-D Tag: draft-ietf-ccamp-inter-domain-rsvp-te-07.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5151.txt This document describes procedures and protocol extensions for the use of Resource Reservation Protocol-Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) signaling in Multiprotocol Label Switching-Traffic Engineering (MPLS-TE) packet networks and Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) packet and non-packet networks to support the establishment and maintenance of Label Switched Paths that cross domain boundaries. For the purpose of this document, a domain is considered to be any collection of network elements within a common realm of address space or path computation responsibility. Examples of such domains include Autonomous Systems, Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP) routing areas, and GMPLS overlay networks. [STANDARDS TRACK] This document is a product of the Common Control and Measurement Plane Working Group of the IETF. This is now a Proposed Standard Protocol. STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community,and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the Internet Official Protocol Standards (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list. Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list should be sent to IETF-REQUEST@IETF.ORG. Requests to be added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should be sent to RFC-DIST-REQUEST@RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending an EMAIL message to rfc-info@RFC-EDITOR.ORG with the message body help: ways_to_get_rfcs. For example: To: rfc-info@RFC-EDITOR.ORG Subject: getting rfcs help: ways_to_get_rfcs Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to RFC-Manager@RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to RFC-EDITOR@RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC Authors, for further information. The RFC Editor Team USC/Information Sciences Institute ... Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com Delivery-date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 00:34:27 +0000 To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org Subject: RFC 5150 on Label Switched Path Stitching with Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching Traffic Engineering (GMPLS TE) From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Cc: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, ccamp@ops.ietf.org Message-Id: <20080229003142.7EAA4117446@bosco.isi.edu> Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:31:42 -0800 (PST) A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 5150 Title: Label Switched Path Stitching with Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching Traffic Engineering (GMPLS TE) Author: A. Ayyangar, K. Kompella, JP. Vasseur, A. Farrel Status: Standards Track Date: February 2008 Mailbox: arthi@juniper.net, kireeti@juniper.net, jpv@cisco.com, adrian@olddog.co.uk Pages: 19 Characters: 47099 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag: draft-ietf-ccamp-lsp-stitching-06.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5150.txt In certain scenarios, there may be a need to combine several Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) such that a single end-to-end (e2e) LSP is realized and all traffic from one constituent LSP is switched onto the next LSP. We will refer to this as "LSP stitching", the key requirement being that a constituent LSP not be allocated to more than one e2e LSP. The constituent LSPs will be referred to as "LSP segments" (S-LSPs). This document describes extensions to the existing GMPLS signaling protocol (Resource Reservation Protocol-Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE)) to establish e2e LSPs created from S-LSPs, and describes how the LSPs can be managed using the GMPLS signaling and routing protocols. It may be possible to configure a GMPLS node to switch the traffic from an LSP for which it is the egress, to another LSP for which it is the ingress, without requiring any signaling or routing extensions whatsoever and such that the operation is completely transparent to other nodes. This will also result in LSP stitching in the data plane. However, this document does not cover this scenario of LSP stitching. [STANDARDS TRACK] This document is a product of the Common Control and Measurement Plane Working Group of the IETF. This is now a Proposed Standard Protocol. STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community,and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the Internet Official Protocol Standards (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list. Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list should be sent to IETF-REQUEST@IETF.ORG. Requests to be added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should be sent to RFC-DIST-REQUEST@RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending an EMAIL message to rfc-info@RFC-EDITOR.ORG with the message body help: ways_to_get_rfcs. For example: To: rfc-info@RFC-EDITOR.ORG Subject: getting rfcs help: ways_to_get_rfcs Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to RFC-Manager@RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to RFC-EDITOR@RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC Authors, for further information. The RFC Editor Team USC/Information Sciences Institute ... Envelope-to: ccamp-data@psg.com Delivery-date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 00:34:19 +0000 To: ietf-announce@ietf.org, rfc-dist@rfc-editor.org Subject: RFC 5152 on A Per-Domain Path Computation Method for Establishing Inter-Domain Traffic Engineering (TE) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) From: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org Cc: rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org, ccamp@ops.ietf.org Message-Id: <20080229003158.47C2C117448@bosco.isi.edu> Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:31:58 -0800 (PST) A new Request for Comments is now available in online RFC libraries. RFC 5152 Title: A Per-Domain Path Computation Method for Establishing Inter-Domain Traffic Engineering (TE) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Author: JP. Vasseur, Ed., A. Ayyangar, Ed., R. Zhang Status: Standards Track Date: February 2008 Mailbox: jpv@cisco.com, arthi@juniper.net, raymond.zhang@bt.com Pages: 21 Characters: 50563 Updates/Obsoletes/SeeAlso: None I-D Tag: draft-ietf-ccamp-inter-domain-pd-path-comp-06.txt URL: http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5152.txt This document specifies a per-domain path computation technique for establishing inter-domain Traffic Engineering (TE) Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) and Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Label Switched Paths (LSPs). In this document, a domain refers to a collection of network elements within a common sphere of address management or path computational responsibility such as Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP) areas and Autonomous Systems. Per-domain computation applies where the full path of an inter-domain TE LSP cannot be or is not determined at the ingress node of the TE LSP, and is not signaled across domain boundaries. This is most likely to arise owing to TE visibility limitations. The signaling message indicates the destination and nodes up to the next domain boundary. It may also indicate further domain boundaries or domain identifiers. The path through each domain, possibly including the choice of exit point from the domain, must be determined within the domain. [STANDARDS TRACK] This document is a product of the Common Control and Measurement Plane Working Group of the IETF. This is now a Proposed Standard Protocol. STANDARDS TRACK: This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community,and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the Internet Official Protocol Standards (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. This announcement is sent to the IETF list and the RFC-DIST list. Requests to be added to or deleted from the IETF distribution list should be sent to IETF-REQUEST@IETF.ORG. Requests to be added to or deleted from the RFC-DIST distribution list should be sent to RFC-DIST-REQUEST@RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Details on obtaining RFCs via FTP or EMAIL may be obtained by sending an EMAIL message to rfc-info@RFC-EDITOR.ORG with the message body help: ways_to_get_rfcs. For example: To: rfc-info@RFC-EDITOR.ORG Subject: getting rfcs help: ways_to_get_rfcs Requests for special distribution should be addressed to either the author of the RFC in question, or to RFC-Manager@RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Unless specifically noted otherwise on the RFC itself, all RFCs are for unlimited distribution. Submissions for Requests for Comments should be sent to RFC-EDITOR@RFC-EDITOR.ORG. Please consult RFC 2223, Instructions to RFC Authors, for further information. The RFC Editor Team USC/Information Sciences Institute ...