[Pce] draft-bradford-ccamp-path-key-ero-00 and draft-bradford-pce-path-key-01

"Rich Bradford \(rbradfor\)" <rbradfor@cisco.com> Thu, 19 October 2006 21:04 UTC

Received: from [127.0.0.1] (helo=stiedprmman1.va.neustar.com) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Gaf4F-0007Lf-IA; Thu, 19 Oct 2006 17:04:43 -0400
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Gaf4D-0007IA-5X; Thu, 19 Oct 2006 17:04:41 -0400
Received: from rtp-iport-2.cisco.com ([64.102.122.149]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Gaf45-0001zj-7C; Thu, 19 Oct 2006 17:04:41 -0400
Received: from rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com ([64.102.121.158]) by rtp-iport-2.cisco.com with ESMTP; 19 Oct 2006 17:04:31 -0400
Received: from rtp-core-1.cisco.com (rtp-core-1.cisco.com [64.102.124.12]) by rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id k9JL4UtQ011101; Thu, 19 Oct 2006 17:04:30 -0400
Received: from xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com (xbh-rtp-211.cisco.com [64.102.31.102]) by rtp-core-1.cisco.com (8.12.10/8.12.6) with ESMTP id k9JL4UYJ027414; Thu, 19 Oct 2006 17:04:30 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from xmb-rtp-20d.amer.cisco.com ([64.102.31.51]) by xbh-rtp-211.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Thu, 19 Oct 2006 17:04:30 -0400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 17:04:30 -0400
Message-ID: <3C292CE901FC634693F24FB2DDC4D332021D5F65@xmb-rtp-20d.amer.cisco.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: draft-bradford-ccamp-path-key-ero-00 and draft-bradford-pce-path-key-01
Thread-Index: AcY9d8T9GgaiLa33RiWUaPre1Gn2NwD3o5wA
From: "Rich Bradford (rbradfor)" <rbradfor@cisco.com>
To: ccamp@ietf.org, pce@ietf.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 19 Oct 2006 21:04:30.0645 (UTC) FILETIME=[2B8C2E50:01C6F3C2]
DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; l=14594; t=1161291870; x=1162155870; c=relaxed/simple; s=rtpdkim1001; h=Content-Type:From:Subject:Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; d=cisco.com; i=rbradfor@cisco.com; z=From:=22Rich=20Bradford=20\(rbradfor\)=22=20<rbradfor@cisco.com> |Subject:draft-bradford-ccamp-path-key-ero-00=20and=20draft-bradford-pce-path-key -01 |To:<ccamp@ietf.org>,=20<pce@ietf.org>; X=v=3Dcisco.com=3B=20h=3DatadJdiWIK78eC+9OfOaaK1tTn8=3D; b=e+6h6nGM7Q5v40w02FaW7HS5rKn/mfwZyvgE3laUVJjiHrA7uyDRV4m5rYi940hFhCe1gbSO NDIoKJESEIm/tzQSaLKYxAUUvm8toxzUokxS8OeKHc/B1SEo+OR3+1K0;
Authentication-Results: rtp-dkim-1.cisco.com; header.From=rbradfor@cisco.com; dkim=pass ( 65 extraneous bytes; sig from cisco.com verified; );
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 8df1ceff7d5e1ba4a25ab9834397277b
Cc:
Subject: [Pce] draft-bradford-ccamp-path-key-ero-00 and draft-bradford-pce-path-key-01
X-BeenThere: pce@lists.ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Path Computation Element <pce.lists.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce>, <mailto:pce-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www1.ietf.org/pipermail/pce>
List-Post: <mailto:pce@lists.ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pce-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce>, <mailto:pce-request@lists.ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1916156139=="
Errors-To: pce-bounces@lists.ietf.org

Dear WGs,

 

I've posted two new, interrelated IDs proposing a simple extension to
the ERO to allow path segments in separate ASs to remain confidential.
There are indeed various circumstances that require "encoding" a path
segment in some form. I've included the abstracts below. The IDs have
been split into a CCAMP ID specifying just the ERO extensions and the
PCE ID which details the protocol extensions to use Path Keys. The PCE
ID also incorporates feedback from the list including a preliminary look
at security considerations.

 

Comments are very welcome.

 

Thanks,

Rich

 

Abstracts and links follow:

 

 

   Abstract to draft-bradford-ccamp-path-key-ero-00.txt
 
   Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Traffic Engineering (TE)
   Label Switched Paths (LSPs) may be computed by Path Computation
   Elements (PCEs). Where the TE LSP crosses multiple domains, such
   as Autonomous Systems (ASs), the path may be computed by multiple
   PCEs that cooperate, with each responsible for computing a segment
   of the path. To preserve confidentiality of topology with each AS,
   the PCE supports a mechanism to hide the contents of a segment of
   a path, called the Confidential Path Segment (CPS), by encoding
   the contents as a Path Key Sub-object (PKS). This draft describes
   the addition of this object to the Explicit Route Object.

 

This draft can be found under the missing drafts link at:

http://www.olddog.co.uk/ccamp.htm

 

 

 

Tail of Abstract from draft-bradford-pce-path-key-01.

 

   This document defines a mechanism to hide the contents of a

   segment of a path, called the Confidential Path Segment (CPS). The

   CPS may be replaced by a path-key that can be conveyed in the PCE

   Communication Protocol (PCEP) and signaled within in a Resource

   Reservation Protocol (RSVP) explicit route object.

 

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-bradford-pce-path-key-01.txt

 

 

 

 

_______________________________________________
Pce mailing list
Pce@lists.ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pce