Re: [PWE3] Shepherd's review of draft-ietf-pwe3-mpls-tp-cv-adv-01
Gregory Mirsky <gregory.mirsky@ericsson.com> Mon, 11 November 2013 22:01 UTC
Return-Path: <gregory.mirsky@ericsson.com>
X-Original-To: pwe3@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pwe3@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7596E21E8092 for <pwe3@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Nov 2013 14:01:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id F5GfwHIDel7v for <pwe3@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Nov 2013 14:01:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from usevmg21.ericsson.net (usevmg21.ericsson.net [198.24.6.65]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7634B11E80F9 for <pwe3@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Nov 2013 14:01:15 -0800 (PST)
X-AuditID: c6180641-b7fbd8e0000011cc-84-528153a95c69
Received: from EUSAAHC005.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [147.117.188.87]) by usevmg21.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 87.E5.04556.9A351825; Mon, 11 Nov 2013 23:01:13 +0100 (CET)
Received: from EUSAAMB103.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.120]) by EUSAAHC005.ericsson.se ([147.117.188.87]) with mapi id 14.02.0328.009; Mon, 11 Nov 2013 17:01:13 -0500
From: Gregory Mirsky <gregory.mirsky@ericsson.com>
To: "Andrew G. Malis" <amalis@gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: Shepherd's review of draft-ietf-pwe3-mpls-tp-cv-adv-01
Thread-Index: AQHOz2XLYUaC0PamkE6Z/HzHOxwGypogs6AA
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2013 22:01:13 +0000
Message-ID: <7347100B5761DC41A166AC17F22DF1121B70FFAE@eusaamb103.ericsson.se>
References: <CAK+d4xt5TFG604PpQ74u-4_9-i_i6spDx0oeMiycbEcN2qmdPA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAK+d4xt5TFG604PpQ74u-4_9-i_i6spDx0oeMiycbEcN2qmdPA@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [147.117.188.135]
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="_004_7347100B5761DC41A166AC17F22DF1121B70FFAEeusaamb103erics_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA2WSf0yMcRzHfZ/nueeebuHrXPrIZXRrGiKn6UJoYdnQL8OYH4dnNOF2V80/ pqSVc6ym6I500Y9DarhRRK0dhzRibEQTknRMp5wzi7vne6zx3+v92fv7+Xyez/vhaKmRDeJS d6fz2t3qtBBWwhzLaFwTfi4lOzmixjVP1fm0Sqw66rQyi6j4BtMrcXxFhZtKpNZJ5m/j01Iz ee3MBZslO159PIA0d+3U3sJOM5WFHhdTeuTHAY6E0rxnPh4HjzrrWD2ScFJsQ9Dk7qOIqEbQ cqKM9bpYrIQPlwxiL8twGJj7HwqvaayAaydzBM9YHAefC14zxLMYrtrdtB5xHlbC4BuhzOBQ MOdYRF4eiVdA/fHTyMtSnAh6a7nQxg8ngdlUJ7RHnuVc92t8owLhxbsy39Iy6GpvZQkHQO/b IRFhBbhOkVk0ToUu102azBoD94zvmAIUYBrWyjTMZhpmI/U98LzyPCI8Hcw3nCzhaVBV3kf/ 4QfNb6n/63K4UnzI81bi4VwEOYYmQUixFYG75D1NxCUEPZYrYiIaELQVlfpsRQjMxocMEQUI HM/ahOlSfNUTii3pr8tpyBdWZPE8qLXYBZMMzwbjt6++dUlAJiGgWDj4vUpkEkJZCo23dMQ+ A/SOATGxRIGhuFb4Cm9YZT/PishlYqGneUio++M5kJ9dwxLWQN29iz7WQcndXPbfC4Pneo7C kz6OAWvHHdqMos4jLkPHZ+7arpx1GXl+7zvAxtYjszO6BU3gmJDAkQOf4pKleLs6nd/J8xpe u0mbkcbrWhDF+QVloTE2ZeEC+UzFk/jSwYgfuG/ZypTQdLt0Y/aGl41b/Zsnt55RBS/nNh6O Lof2TYxG+mW1fMs+u6PeGNw/IiZlLd/ds/Z2gyr4NXTLqhOWLC8Yb2vtHV25PzwvuiPSMeXX qtqF8nFTD4RVKkp6r8sDEyYdyYs4O2LUxNDNlo71uXOpCyGMbod61lRaq1P/BkD9/IesAwAA
Cc: "pwe3@ietf.org" <pwe3@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [PWE3] Shepherd's review of draft-ietf-pwe3-mpls-tp-cv-adv-01
X-BeenThere: pwe3@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Pseudowire Emulation Edge to Edge <pwe3.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/pwe3>, <mailto:pwe3-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pwe3>
List-Post: <mailto:pwe3@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pwe3-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3>, <mailto:pwe3-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2013 22:01:21 -0000
Dear Andy, et. al,
I've posted updated version to address idnits and the shepherd's comments.
Please let me know if there's anything I can help with.
Regards,
Greg
From: Andrew G. Malis [mailto:amalis@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2013 1:32 PM
To: Gregory Mirsky
Cc: pwe3@ietf.org
Subject: Shepherd's review of draft-ietf-pwe3-mpls-tp-cv-adv-01
Greg,
As document shepherd for draft-ietf-pwe3-mpls-tp-cv-adv, I did a WG last call review and have some comments. The good news is that the draft is mostly in good shape for publication, it just needs a quick revision to address the comments below. Also, there were no other WG last call comments which need to be addressed.
First of all, there are some idnits issues that need to be addressed:
Miscellaneous warnings:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
== The document doesn't use any RFC 2119 keywords, yet seems to have RFC
2119 boilerplate text.
-- The document date (September 20, 2013) is 32 days in the past. Is this
intentional?
Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
(See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references
to lower-maturity documents in RFCs)
== Unused Reference: 'RFC5882' is defined on line 270, but no explicit
reference was found in the text
-- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 2434
(Obsoleted by RFC 5226)
I also have some comments of my own, which are mostly editorial in nature. They are embedded in the text below. Just do an update to address the nits and these comments, and I'll be able to forward the draft for publication.
Thanks,
Andy
------------
1. Introduction
Proactive Connectivity Verification (CV), Continuity Check (CC), and
Remote Defect Indication (RDI) for the MPLS Transport Profile
[RFC6428] are applicable to all constructs of the MPLS-TP, including
pseudowires (PWs). If Control Plane is used to operate and manage PW
s/Control Plane/a control plane/
s/PW/PWs/
then procedure defined in [RFC5085] and [RFC5885] should be used to
s/procedure/the procedures/
select proper type of Control Channel and corresponding type of
Connectivity Verification. This document specifies how signaling and
selection process modified to ensure backward compatibility and allow
s/process modified/processes are modified/
use of proactive CV-CC-RDI over MPLS-TP PWs.
1.1. Conventions used in this document
1.1.1. Terminology
BFD: Bidirectional Forwarding Detection
CC: Continuity Check
CV: Connectivity Verification
PE: Provider Edge
VCCV: Virtual Circuit Connectivity Verification
VCCV CC: VCCV Control Channel
1.1.2. Requirements Language
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
[RFC2119].
2. MPLS-TP CC-CV on Pseudowires
PW VCCV can support several CV Types. Ability to support arbitrary
s/Types. Ability to support/Types, and can support/
combination of CV modes advertised in CV Types field of VCCV
s/in CV/in the CV/
Interface Parameter sub-TLV [RFC4446], [RFC4447]. Currently six
types of CV been defined for PW VCCV out of eight bit long field.
s/VCCV out of eight bit long field/VCCV/
This document introduces four new CV types and, to accommodate them,
a new VCCV Extended CV parameter for PW Interface Parameters Sub-TLV
is defined.
Mirsky Expires March 24, 2014 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft VCCV MPLS-TP CV September 2013
2.1. VCCV Extended CV Advertisement sub-TLV
The format of VCCV Extended CV Advertisement is a TLV where:
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type = 0x19 | Length | CV Type | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 1: VCCV Extended CV parameter format
Length - the length of the sub-TLV, including type and the Length
s/Length -/The Length field is/
field itself. Minimum length is 4. It it isrecommended that
s/Minimum/The minimum/
extensions to the sub-TLV be done in 4 bytes increments with Reserved
field being set to zero on transmit and ignored on receipt.
Reserved field must be set to zeroes on transmit and ignored on
receive.
s/Reserved/The Reserved/
CV Type field is a bitmask that lists types of CV monitoring that a
s/CV Type/The CV Type/
PE is capable to support. VCCV Extended CV parameter sub-TLV must
s/VCCV/The VCCV/
appear in combination with VCCV parameter sub-TLV. If VCCV parameter
s/VCCV/the VCCV/ (twice in this line)
sub-TLV is missing then VCCV Extended CV parameter sub-TLV should be
s/VCCV/the VCCV/
ignored.
2.2. MPLS-TP CC-CV Types
The [RFC6428] defines coordinated and independent modes of monitoring
S/The //
point-to-point bi-directional connection that can be applied to
monitoring PWs. At the same time [RFC6310] defines how BFD-based OAM
can map and be mapped to status of an Attachment Circuit. Thus there
could be four MPLS-TP CV types as combination of modes and
functionality:
+---------------+-------------------+-------------------------------+
| Modes | Fault Detection | Fault Detection and Status |
| | Only | Signalling |
+---------------+-------------------+-------------------------------+
| Independent | 0x01 | 0x02 |
| Mode | | |
| Coordinated | 0x04 | 0x08 |
| Mode | | |
+---------------+-------------------+-------------------------------+
Table 1: Bitmask Values for MPLS-TP CV Types
Mirsky Expires March 24, 2014 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft VCCV MPLS-TP CV September 2013
2.3. MPLS-TP CC-CV Type Operation
Connectivity verification according to [RFC6428] is part of MPLS-TP
CC/CV operation that can be used with VCCV Control Channel Type 1
[RFC5085] . If VCCV CC Type 1 selected, then PEs might select one of
MPLS-TP CC-CV types as VCCV CV mechanism to be used for this PW.
2.4. CV Type Selection
CV selection rules that have been defined in Section 7 of [RFC5085]
and updated Section 4 of [RFC5885] are augmented in this document.
If VCCV Control Channel Type 1 is chosen according to Section 7
[RFC5085] and common set of proactive CV types advertized by both PEs
includes MPLS-TP CC-CV types and some BFD CV types, then MPLS-TP
CC-CV takes precedence over any type of BFD CV. If multiple MPLS-TP
CV types advertised by both PEs, then following list sorted in
descending priority order is used:
1. 0x08 - coordinated mode for PW Fault Detection and AC/PW Fault
Status Signaling
2. 0x04 - coordinated mode for PW Fault Detection only
3. 0x02 - independent mode for PW Fault Detection and AC/PW Fault
Status Signaling
4. 0x01 - independent mode for PW Fault Detection only
3. IANA Considerations
The PW Interface Parameters Sub-TLV registry defined in [RFC4446].
s/registry defined/registry is defined/
IANA is requested to reserve a new PW Interface Parameters Sub-TLV
type as follows:
+-------------+--------+----------------------------+---------------+
| Parameter | Length | Description | Reference |
| ID | | | |
+-------------+--------+----------------------------+---------------+
| 0x19 | 4 | VCCV Extended CV Parameter | This document |
+-------------+--------+----------------------------+---------------+
Table 2: New PW Interface Parameters Sub-TLV
Mirsky Expires March 24, 2014 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft VCCV MPLS-TP CV September 2013
3.1. VCCV Extended CV Types
IANA is requested to set up a registry of ?VCCV Extended CV Types?.
s/?// (twice)
These are 8 bitfield values. Extended CV Type values 0x01, 0x02,
s/bitfield/bit/
0x04 and 0x08 are specified in Section 2.2 of this document. The
remaining bitfield values (0x10 through 0x80) are to be assigned by
s/bitfield//
IANA using the "IETF Consensus" policy defined in [RFC2434]. A VCCV
Extended Control Verification Type description and a reference to an
RFC approved by the IESG are required for any assignment from this
registry.
+--------------+----------------------------------------------------+
| Bit(Value) | Description |
+--------------+----------------------------------------------------+
| Bit 0 (0x01) | Independent mode for PW Fault Detection only |
| Bit 1 (0x02) | Independent mode for PW Fault Detection and AC/PW |
| | Fault Status Signaling |
| Bit 2 (0x04) | Coordinated mode for PW Fault Detection only |
| Bit 3 (0x08) | Coordinated mode for PW Fault Detection and AC/PW |
| | Fault Status Signaling |
| Bit 4 (0x10) | Reserved |
| Bit 5 (0x20) | Reserved |
| Bit 6 (0x40) | Reserved |
| Bit 7 (0x80) | Reserved |
+--------------+----------------------------------------------------+
Table 3: MPLS Connectivity Verification (CV) Types
--- Begin Message ---A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Pseudowire Emulation Edge to Edge Working Group of the IETF. Title : VCCV MPLS-TP Connectivity Verification (CV) Capability Advertisement Author(s) : Greg Mirsky Filename : draft-ietf-pwe3-mpls-tp-cv-adv-02.txt Pages : 7 Date : 2013-11-11 Abstract: This document specifies how use of proactive Connectivity Verification, Continuity Check, and Remote Defect Indication for the MPLS Transport Profile [RFC6428] affects operation and management function election for PW VCCV [RFC5085], [RFC5885]. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-pwe3-mpls-tp-cv-adv There's also a htmlized version available at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-pwe3-mpls-tp-cv-adv-02 A diff from the previous version is available at: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-pwe3-mpls-tp-cv-adv-02 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ _______________________________________________ pwe3 mailing list pwe3@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/pwe3--- End Message ---
- [PWE3] Shepherd's review of draft-ietf-pwe3-mpls-… Andrew G. Malis
- Re: [PWE3] Shepherd's review of draft-ietf-pwe3-m… Gregory Mirsky
- Re: [PWE3] Shepherd's review of draft-ietf-pwe3-m… Andrew G. Malis
- Re: [PWE3] Shepherd's review of draft-ietf-pwe3-m… Gregory Mirsky