One document matched: draft-dhody-pce-association-attr-01.xml


<?xml version="1.0" encoding="us-ascii"?>
<!DOCTYPE rfc SYSTEM "rfc2629.dtd"[]>
<?rfc toc="yes" ?>
<?rfc tocompact="yes"?>
<?rfc tocdepth="4"?>
<?rfc tocindent="yes"?>
<?rfc symrefs="yes" ?>
<?rfc sortrefs="no"?>
<?rfc rfcedstyle="yes"?>
<?rfc subcompact="no"?>
<?rfc compact="yes" ?>
<?rfc iprnotified="Yes" ?>
<?rfc strict="no" ?>
<rfc ipr="trust200902" category="std" docName="draft-dhody-pce-association-attr-01" obsoletes="" updates="" submissionType="IETF" xml:lang="en">
  <front>
    <title abbrev="ASSOC-ATTR">Path Computation Element communication 
    Protocol extension for relationship between LSPs and Attributes</title>
    <author initials="D" surname="Dhody" fullname="Dhruv Dhody">
      <organization>Huawei Technologies</organization>
      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>Leela Palace</street>
          <city>Bangalore</city>
          <region>Karnataka</region>
          <code>560008</code>
          <country>INDIA</country>
        </postal>
        <email>dhruv.ietf@gmail.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>
    <author fullname="Qin Wu" initials="Q." surname="Wu">
      <organization>Huawei Technologies</organization>

      <address>
        <postal>
          <street>101 Software Avenue, Yuhua District</street>

          <city>Nanjing</city>

          <region>Jiangsu</region>

          <code>210012</code>

          <country>China</country>
        </postal>

        <email>sunseawq@huawei.com</email>
      </address>
    </author>    
    <date month="July" year="2014" />
    <area>Routing</area>
    <workgroup>PCE Working Group</workgroup>
    <abstract>
   <t> 
   The Path Computation Element (PCE) provides functions of path
   computation in support of traffic engineering in networks controlled
   by Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) and Generalized MPLS
   (GMPLS).
   </t>
   <t>
   This document defines a mechanism to create associations between a 
   set of LSPs and a set of attributes (such as configuration 
   parameters, policy or behaviors).
   </t>
   </abstract>
  </front>
  <middle>
   <section title="Introduction" toc="default">
   <t><xref target="RFC5440"/> describes the Path Computation Element 
   communication Protocol (PCEP) which enables the communication between
   a Path Computation Client (PCC) and a Path Control Element (PCE), 
   or between two PCEs based on the PCE architecture 
   <xref target="RFC4655"/>.</t>

   <t><xref target='I-D.minei-pce-association-group'/> introduces a generic 
   mechanism to create a grouping of LSPs which can then be used to 
   define associations between a set of LSPs and a set of attributes (such
   as configuration parameters or behaviors).</t>    
   
   <t>This document specifies a PCEP extension to associate one or
   more LSPs with a set of attributes, which includes, but not limited 
   to - </t>
   <t>
   <list style="symbols">
   <t>Configured Parameters</t>
   <t>Policies</t>
   <t>Behaviour</t>
   </list>
   </t>
    <section title="Requirements Language" toc="default">
        <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>    
    </section>
	  
    <section title="Terminology" toc="default">
      <t>The following terminology is used in this document.</t>
      <t>
        <list style="hanging"> 
        
          <t hangText="AGID:">Association Group ID.</t>
          <t hangText="LSR:">Label Switch Router.</t>
          <t hangText="MPLS:">Multiprotocol Label Switching.</t>
          <t hangText="PCC:">Path Computation Client. Any client application requesting a
            path computation to be performed by a Path Computation Element.</t>  
          <t hangText="PCE:">Path Computation Element.  An entity (component, application, 
            or network node) that is capable of computing a network path or route based on a network graph and applying computational constraints.</t>
          <t hangText="PCEP:">Path Computation Element Communication Protocol.</t>          
        </list>
      </t>
    </section>
    <section title="Motivation" toc="default">
    <t>This section discusses in more detail the motivation and use cases
    for such an association including but not limited to - </t>
    <section title="Opaque Identifier" toc="default">
    <t>An opaque identifier may represent attributes such as 
    configured parameters or constraints that a PCEP speaker may 
    invoke on a peer.  Thus a PCEP speaker may only need an opaque identifier 
     to invoke these attributes (parameters or constraints).</t>
    </section>
    <section title="Policy based Constraints" toc="default">
    <t>In the context of policy-enabled path computation 
    <xref target="RFC5394"/>, path computation policies may be applied 
    at both a PCC and a PCE. Consider an Label Switch Router (LSR) with 
    a policy enabled PCC, it receives a service request via signaling,
    including over a Network-Network Interface (NNI) or User Network
    Interface (UNI) reference point, or receives a configuration request
    over a management interface to establish a service. The PCC may also
    apply user- or service-specific policies to decide how the path
    selection process should be constrained, that is, which constraints,
    diversities, optimization criterion, and constraint relaxation
    strategies should be applied in order for the service LSP(s) to have
    a likelihood to be successfully established and provide necessary 
    QoS and resilience against network failures. The user- or 
    service-specific policies applied to PCC and are then passed to 
    the PCE along with the Path computation request, in the form of 
    constraints <xref target="RFC5394"/>. </t>
    
    <t>PCEP speaker can use the generic mechanism as per 
    <xref target='I-D.minei-pce-association-group'/> to associate a set 
    of LSPs with policy and its resulting path computation constraints.
    This way simplifying the path computation message exchanges.</t>
    </section>
    <section title="Bundled requests" toc="default">
    <t>In some scenarios(e.g.,the topology example described in 
    Section 4.6 of <xref target="RFC6805"/>), there is a need to send 
    multiple requests with the same constraints and attributes to the 
    PCE.  Currently these requests are either sent in a separate path 
    computation request (PCReq) messages or bundled together in one 
    (or more) PCReq messages.  In either case, the constraints and 
    attributes need to be encoded separately for each request even 
    though they are exactly identical.</t>
    <t>If a association is used to identify these constraints and 
    attributes shared by multiple requests, thus simplifying the path 
    computation message exchanges.</t>         
    </section>
    </section>
    <section title="Overview" toc="default">
     <t>As per <xref target='I-D.minei-pce-association-group'/>, LSPs 
     are associated with other LSPs with which they interact by adding 
     them to a common association group. This document uses the same 
     association for attributes, called Attribute Association 
     Group (AAG) based on the generic Association object. This document
     defines a new association type called "Attribute Association
     Type" of value TBD.  An AAG can have one or more LSPs and its 
     associated attributes. The scope and handling of AAG identifier 
     is similar to the generic association identifier defined in 
     <xref target='I-D.minei-pce-association-group'/>.</t>
     
     <t>One or more LSP are grouped via a common group identifier in the same 
     way as <xref target='I-D.minei-pce-association-group'/>. The 
     attributes that may be associated with this set of LSPs may either are -</t>
     <t>
     <list style="symbols">
     <t>known to the PCEP peers via some external means like 
     configuration, policy enforcement etc (can be considered as 
     'out-of-band'). PCEP speaker simply use the AAG identifier in the
     PCEP message and the peer is supposed to be aware of the associated 
     attributes.</t>
     <t>or communicated to the PCEP peer via PCEP itself on first
     use (can be considered as 'in-band'). PCEP speaker creates a new
     AAG by using a new identifier and the associated attributes are
     communicated via TLVs in association object.</t>
     </list>
     </t>
     <t>Error handling would be taken up in future revision.</t>
    </section>
    <section title="Attribute Association Group" toc="default">
    <t>The format of the Association object used for AAG is shown in
    <xref target='FIG1'/>:</t>
        <figure align="left" alt="" height="" suppress-title="false"
                title="The Association Object format" width="" anchor="FIG1">
          <artwork align="left" alt="" height="" name="" type="" width=""
                   xml:space="preserve">
 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   |  Generic flags    |R| Type-specific flags             |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|             Association group id                              |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
//            Optional TLVs                                    //
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

</artwork>
</figure>                  

   <t>Type - TBD for the Attribute Association Type.</t>
   <t>This document does not have any new type-specific flags.</t>
   <t>AAG may carry optional TLVs including but not limited to -</t>	
      <t>
     <list style="symbols">
     <t>ATTRIBUTE-OBJECT-TLV: Used to communicate associated attributes
     in form of PCEP objects, described in this document.</t>
     <t>VENDOR-INFORMATION-TLV: Used to communicate arbitrary behavioral 
     information, described in <xref target="RFC7150"/>.</t>
     </list>
     </t>
     
     <section title="ATTRIBUTE-OBJECT-TLV" toc="default">
     <t>The ATTRIBUTE-OBJECT-TLV maybe included in AAG object to 
     associate attributes encoded in PCEP objects.</t>
     <t>The format of the ATTRIBUTE-OBJECT-TLV is shown in the
   following figure:</t>
        <figure align="left" alt="" height="" suppress-title="false"
                title="ATTRIBUTE-OBJECT-TLV format" width="" anchor="FIG2">
          <artwork align="left" alt="" height="" name="" type="" width=""
                   xml:space="preserve">   
 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=[TBD]          |           Length              |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Object-Class  |   OT  |Res|P|I|   Object Length (bytes)       |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Object-Class  |   OT  |Res|P|I|   Object Length (bytes)       |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
~                              ...                              ~
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Object-Class  |   OT  |Res|P|I|   Object Length (bytes)       |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
    </artwork>
</figure>
<t>The type of the TLV is [TBD] and it has a variable length. The value
part consist of the PCEP object header <xref target="RFC5440"/> 
identifying the objects that are
associated with this AAG. Thus this TLV identify the attributes 
present in the PCEP message that are associated with this group. 
Future PCEP messages may only carry the AAG. </t>
     </section>
</section>

   

    <section title="Security Considerations" toc="default">
      <t>TBD</t>
    </section>
      
    <section title="IANA Considerations" toc="default">
    <t>TBD</t>
    </section>
    
    <section title="Acknowledgments" toc="default">
      <t>A special thanks to author of 
      <xref target='I-D.minei-pce-association-group'/>, this document borrow
      some of the text from it.</t>
    </section>    
  </middle>
  <back>
    <references title="Normative References">
    <?rfc include="reference.RFC.2119.xml" ?>
	<?rfc include="reference.RFC.4655.xml" ?>
    <?rfc include="reference.RFC.5440.xml" ?>
    <?rfc include="reference.I-D.minei-pce-association-group"?>
    </references>
    <references title="Informative References">
     <?rfc include="reference.RFC.5394.xml" ?>
     <?rfc include="reference.RFC.6805.xml" ?>
     <?rfc include="reference.RFC.7150.xml" ?>
      

    </references>
<section title="Contributor Addresses" toc="default">
    <t>
    <figure title="" suppress-title="false" align="left" alt="" width="" height="">
          <artwork xml:space="preserve" name="" type="" align="left" alt="" width="" height=""><![CDATA[
Xian Zhang
Huawei Technologies
Bantian, Longgang District
Shenzhen  518129
P.R.China

EMail: zhang.xian@huawei.com
             
Udayasree Palle
Huawei Technologies
Leela Palace
Bangalore, Karnataka  560008
INDIA

EMail: udayasree.palle@huawei.com

        ]]></artwork>
        </figure>
      </t>
    </section>   

  </back>
</rfc>

PAFTECH AB 2003-20262026-04-24 12:24:06