One document matched: draft-cui-mpls-tp-on-demand-cv-id-00.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd" [ <!ENTITY rfc2119 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.2119.xml"> <!ENTITY rfc6370 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.6370.xml"> <!ENTITY rfc6426 SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml/reference.RFC.6426.xml"> <!ENTITY I-D.ietf-mpls-tp-itu-t-identifiers SYSTEM "http://xml.resource.org/public/rfc/bibxml3/reference.I-D.draft-ietf-mpls-tp-itu-t-identifiers-02.xml"> ]> <rfc category="std" ipr="trust200902" docName="draft-cui-mpls-tp-on-demand-cv-id-00"> <?xml-stylesheet type='text/xsl' href='rfc2629.xslt' ?> <?rfc toc="yes"?> <?rfc strict="yes" ?> <?rfc tocompact="yes"?> <?rfc tocdepth="4"?> <?rfc tocindent="yes"?> <?rfc symrefs="yes"?> <?rfc sortrefs="yes"?> <?rfc comments="yes"?> <?rfc inline="yes"?> <?rfc compact="yes"?> <?rfc subcompact="no"?> <front> <title abbrev='On-demand CV ID'> Using ITU-T-based IDs for MPLS-TP On-demand Connectivity Verification </title> <author initials='Z.' surname="Cui" fullname='Zhenlong Cui'> <organization>NEC</organization> <address> <email>c-sai@bx.jp.nec.com</email> </address> </author> <author initials='R.' surname="Winter" fullname='Rolf Winter'> <organization>NEC</organization> <address> <email>Rolf.Winter@neclab.eu</email> </address> </author> <date/> <abstract> <t>This document defines how to use ICC-based MPLS-TP identifiers for on-demand connectivity verification (CV) analogous to RFC 6426. New TLVs are defined to support on-demand CV based on identifiers following ITU-T conventions.</t> </abstract> </front> <middle> <!-- start of section 1 --> <section anchor="intro" title="Introduction"> <t>MPLS On-Demand Connectivity Verification (CV) and Route Tracing <xref target="RFC6426"/> is an on-demand monitoring mechanism for the MPLS Transport Profile (MPLS-TP). <xref target="RFC6426"/> defines a set of Global_ID-based TLVs to support on-demand CV and route tracing for MPLS-TP LSPs, including PWs and Sections which follow the IP/MPLS conventions.</t> <t>In transport networks however, the ITU Carrier Code (ICC) is traditionally used to identify a carrier/service provider. Instead of using the Global_ID, which is derived from the AS number of the service provider, this document defines source/destination TLVs and static LSP/PW Sub-TLVs based on the ICC_Operator_ID as specified in <xref target="I-D.ietf-mpls-tp-itu-t-identifiers"/> for use in CV.</t> </section> <!-- start of section 2 --> <section anchor='req_notation' title="Requirements notation"> <t>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 <xref target="RFC2119"/>.</t> </section> <!-- start of section 3 --> <section anchor='New_ICC_Based_TLV' title="ICC_Operator_ID-based TLV Definitions"> <t>In ICC-based transport network, the Global_ID might not be available for on-demand CV and route tracing. In such environments it might be necessary to perform CV and route tracing using the ICC_Operator_ID as specified in <xref target="I-D.ietf-mpls-tp-itu-t-identifiers"/>.</t> <t>The ICC_Operator_ID consists of the Country Code (CC) followed by the ITU carrier code (ICC). The Country Code (alpha-2) is a string of two alphabetic characters, and the ICC itself is a string of one to six left-justified characters, each character being either alphabetic (i.e. A-Z) or numeric (i.e. 0-9). </t> <t>This section provides the definition for a number of ICC_Operator_ID-based TLV objects. In order to simplify implementations, the length of ICC_Operator_ID field has a fixed length independent of the ICC length. Therefore, zero padding will be used in cases where the ICC length is less than 6 octets long. The total length of the ICC_Operator_ID therefore amounts to 8 octets as shown in <xref target="figure_1"/>.</t> <figure anchor='figure_1' title="ICC_Operator_ID Format"> <artwork> 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | CC (2 Octets) | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ + | ICC (fixed to 6 octets ) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ </artwork> </figure> <!-- start of section 3.1 --> <section anchor='ICC_Identifier_TLV_Format' title="ICC_Operator_ID-based Source/Destination Identifier TLVs"> <t>The Source and Destination Identifier TLVs follow the same format their only difference being the type. The format is shown below.</t> <figure anchor='figure_2' title="ICC_Operator_ID-based Source/Destination Identifier TLV Format"> <artwork> 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 | Length = 16 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | + ICC_Operator_ID (8 Octets) + | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Node_ID (4 Octets) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ </artwork> </figure> <t>The format of the ICC_Operator_ID is defined in <xref target="I-D.ietf-mpls-tp-itu-t-identifiers"/>. The encoding of the ID is depicted in <xref target="figure_1"/>.</t> <t>The format of the Node_ID is defined in <xref target="RFC6370"/>.</t> <t>Type will be one of either TBD-SRC or TBD-DST. The TLV structure is therefore as follows:</t> <figure anchor='figure_3' title="ICC_Operator_ID-based Source/Destination Identifier types"> <artwork> Type # Length Value Field ------ ------ ----------- TBD-SRC 16 ICC_Operator_ID-based Source Identifier TLV TBD-DST 16 ICC_Operator_ID-based Destination Identifier TLV </artwork> </figure> </section> <!-- start of section 3.2 --> <section anchor='ICC_Static_LSP_Sub_TLV' title="ICC_Operator_ID-based Static LSP/PW Sub-TLV"> <t> The new sub-TLVs are assigned sub-type identifiers as follows, and are described in the following sections.</t> <figure anchor='figure_4' title="ICC_Operator_ID-based Static LSP/PW Sub-types"> <artwork> Type # Sub-Type # Length Value Field ------ ---------- ------ ----------- 1 24 28 ICC_Operator_ID-based Static LSP 1 25 36 ICC_Operator_ID-based Static Pseudowire </artwork> </figure> <!-- start of section 3.2.1 --> <section anchor='ICC_Static_PW_Sub_TLV' title="ICC_Operator_ID-based Static LSP Sub-TLV"> <t>The format of the ICC_Operator_ID-based Static LSP Sub-TLV is specified in the following figure. The value fields are taken from <xref target="I-D.ietf-mpls-tp-itu-t-identifiers"/>.</t> <figure anchor='figure_5' title="ICC_Operator_ID-based Static LSP Sub-TLV Format"> <artwork> 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | + Source ICC_Operator_ID + | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Source Node ID | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Source Tunnel Number | LSP Number | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | + Destination ICC_Operator_ID + | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Destination Node ID | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Destination Tunnel Number | Must be Zero | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ </artwork> </figure> <t>The ICC_Operator_ID MAY be set to zero. Note however that such use is limited to entities contained within a single operator and MUST NOT be used across an NNI. However, the other fields without the padding field MUST be set to non-zero values.</t> </section> <!-- start of section 3.2.2 --> <section anchor='Static_Sub_TLV' title="ICC_Operator_ID-based Static PW Sub-TLV"> <t>The format of the ICC_Operator_ID-based Static PW Sub-TLV is specified in the following figure. The value fields are taken from <xref target="I-D.ietf-mpls-tp-itu-t-identifiers"/>.</t> <figure anchor='figure_6' title="ICC_Operator_ID-based Static PW Sub-TLV Format"> <artwork> 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | + Service Identifier + | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | + Source ICC_Operator_ID + | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Source Node ID | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Source AC-ID | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | + Destination ICC_Operator_ID + | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Destination Node ID | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Destination AC-ID | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ </artwork> </figure> <t>The ICC_Operator_ID MAY be set to zero. Note that such use is limited to entities contained within a single operator and MUST NOT be used across an NNI. However, The other fields MUST be set to non-zero values.</t> </section> </section> </section> <section title="Security Considerations"> <t>TBD</t> </section> <section title="IANA Considerations"> <t>TBD</t> </section> <!--<section title="Acknowledgments"> <t>TBD</t> </section>--> </middle> <back> <references title='Normative References'> &rfc6426; &rfc6370; &rfc2119; &I-D.ietf-mpls-tp-itu-t-identifiers; </references> </back> </rfc>
| PAFTECH AB 2003-2026 | 2026-04-24 09:52:09 |