One document matched: draft-eriksson-ldp-convergence-term-00.txt


Network Working Group                                        T. Eriksson
Internet-Draft                                               TeliaSonera
Expires: August 9, 2004                                      S. Poretsky
                                                     Quarry Technologies
                                                              R. Papneja
                                                                 Isocore
                                                        February 9, 2004


        Terminology for Benchmarking LDP Data Plane Convergence
               draft-eriksson-ldp-convergence-term-00.txt

Status of this Memo

   This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with
   all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other
   groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://
   www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.

   This Internet-Draft will expire on August 9, 2004.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). All Rights Reserved.

Abstract

   This document defines new terms needed for benchmarking of LDP
   convergence. Usefull existing terminology is also referenced.










Eriksson, et al.         Expires August 9, 2004                 [Page 1]

Internet-Draft    Terminology for Benchmarking LDP Data Plane Convergence                               February 2004


Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3

   2.  Existing Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2.1 BMWG Convergence Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2.2 MPLS/LDP Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4

   3.  Term Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
   3.1 LDP Binding Table  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
   3.2 FEC Forwarding Table . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
   3.3 FEC Convergence Event  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
   3.4 FEC Forwarding Table Convergence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
   3.5 FEC Convergence  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   3.6 Multiple Next-Hop FEC  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
   3.7 Ingress LSR  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
   3.8 Egress LSR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8

   4.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9

   5.  Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9

       References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9

       Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9

       Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . 10
























Eriksson, et al.         Expires August 9, 2004                 [Page 2]

Internet-Draft    Terminology for Benchmarking LDP Data Plane Convergence                               February 2004


1. Introduction

   This draft describes the terminology for benchmarking LDP
   Convergence. An accompanying document describes the methodology for
   doing the benchmarking [TBD]. The main motivation for doing this work
   is the increased focus on lowering convergence time for LDP as an
   alternative to other solutions such as MPLS Fast Reroute.

   The purpose of this documents is to find existing terminology as well
   as define new terminology when needed terms are not available. The
   terminology will support the methodology that will be based on
   black-box testing of the LDP dataplane. The approach is very similar
   to the one found in [3] and [4].

2. Existing Terminology

2.1 BMWG Convergence Terms
   Route Convergence
      Defined in [3].

   Convergence Packet Loss
      Defined in [3].

   Convergence Event Instant
      Defined in [3].

   Convergence Recovery Instant
      Defined in [3].

   Rate-Derived Convergence Time
      Defined in [3].

   Convergence Event Transition
      Defined in [3].

   Convergence Recovery Transition
      Defined in [3].

   Loss-Derived Convergence Time
      Defined in [3].

   Restoration Convergence Time
      Defined in [3].

   Packet Sampling Interval
      Defined in [3].





Eriksson, et al.         Expires August 9, 2004                 [Page 3]

Internet-Draft    Terminology for Benchmarking LDP Data Plane Convergence                               February 2004


   Local Interface
      Defined in [3].

   Neighbor Interface
      Defined in [3].

   Remote Interface
      Defined in [3].

   Preferred Egress Interface
      Defined in [3].

   Next-Best Egress Interface
      Defined in [3].

   Stale Forwarding
      Defined in [3].


2.2 MPLS/LDP Terms
   Label
      Defined in [1].

   FEC
      Defined in [1].

   Label Withdraw
      Defined in [2].

   IGP update message
      Defined in TBD

   LSP
      Defined in [1].

   LSR
      Defined in [1].

   Per-Interface label space
      Defined in TBD.

   Per-Platform label space
      Defined in TBD

   MPLS Node
      Defined in [1].





Eriksson, et al.         Expires August 9, 2004                 [Page 4]

Internet-Draft    Terminology for Benchmarking LDP Data Plane Convergence                               February 2004


   MPLS Edge Node
      Defined in [1].

   MPLS Node
      Defined in [1].

   MPLS Edge Node
      Defined in [1].

   MPLS EgressNode
      Defined in [1].

   MPLS Ingress Node
      Defined in [1].

   Upstream LSR
      Defined in [1].

   Downstream LSR
      Defined in [1].


3. Term Definitions


3.1 LDP Binding Table

   Definition:
      Table in which the LSR maintains all learned labels.  It consists
      of the prefix and label information bound to a peer's LDP
      identifier and the list of sent and received bindings/peer.

   Discussion:
      None

   Measurement Units:
      N/A

   Issues:
      None

   See Also:
      FEC Forwarding Table

3.2 FEC Forwarding Table






Eriksson, et al.         Expires August 9, 2004                 [Page 5]

Internet-Draft    Terminology for Benchmarking LDP Data Plane Convergence                               February 2004


   Definition:
      Table n which the LSR maintains the next hop information for the
      particular FEC with the associated outgoing label and interface.
      It is used for setting up the FEC forwarding table is retrieved
      from the LIB entry.

   Discussion:
      None

   Measurement Units:
      N/A

   Issues:
      None

   See Also:
      LDP Binding Table

3.3 FEC Convergence Event
   Definition:
      The occurrence of a planned or unplanned action in the network
      that results in a change to an LSR's LDP next-hop forwarding.

   Discussion:
      Convergence Events include link loss, routing protocol session
      loss, router failure, and better next-hop.

   Measurement Units:
      N/A

   Issues:
      None

   See Also:
      FEC Forwarding Table Convergence
      FEC Convergence

3.4 FEC Forwarding Table Convergence

   Definition:
      Recovery from a change in the FEC Forwarding Table due to a FEC
      Convergence Event.

   Discussion:
      FEC Forwarding Table Convergence updates after the RIB and LDP
      Binding Table update due to a FECConvergence Event. FEC Forwarding
      Table Convergence can be observed externally by the rerouting of
      data Traffic to a new egress interface.



Eriksson, et al.         Expires August 9, 2004                 [Page 6]


   Measurement Units:
      N/A

   Issues:
      None

   See Also:
      FEC Forwarding Table
      FEC Convergence Event
      FEC Convergence

3.5 FEC Convergence

   Definition:
      A change in the LDP Binding Table due to a FEC Convergence Event.

   Discussion:
      FEC Convergence is a change in an LDP Binding of a prefix and
      label to a peer's LDP Identifier.  This change can be an update or
      recovery due to a FEC Convergence Event. FEC Convergence is an LSR
      action made prior to FEC Forwarding Table Convergence.  FEC
      Convergence is not an externally observable Black-Box measurement.

   Measurement Units:
      N/A

   Issues:
      Where is LDP Identifier defined?  Where is LDP Binding defined?

   See Also:
      LDP Binding Table
      FEC Convergence Event
      FEC Forwarding Table Convergence

3.6 Multiple Next-Hop FEC

   Definition:
      A FEC with more than one next-hop and associated outgoing label
      and interface.

   Discussion:
      A Multiple Next-Hop FEC can be verified from the FEC Forwarding
      Table and from externally observing traffic being forwarded to a
      FEC on one or more interfaces.

   Measurement Units:
      N/A






Eriksson, et al.         Expires August 9, 2004                 [Page 7]

Internet-Draft    Terminology for Benchmarking LDP Data Plane Convergence                               February 2004


   Issues:
      None

   See Also:
      FEC Forwarding Table

3.7 Ingress LSR

   Definition:
      An MPLS ingress node which is capable of forwarding native L3
      packets.

   Discussion:
      None

   Measurement Units:
      N/A

   Issues:
      None

   See Also:
      MPLS Node
      MPLS Edge Node
      MPLS Egress Node
      MPLS Ingress Node
      Label Switching Router (LSR)
      Egress LSR

3.8 Egress LSR

   Definition:
      An MPLS Egress node which is capable of forwarding native L3
      packets.

   Discussion:
      None

   Measurement Units:
      N/A

   Issues:
      None

   See Also:
      MPLS Node
      MPLS Edge Node
      MPLS Egress Node



Eriksson, et al.         Expires August 9, 2004                 [Page 8]

Internet-Draft    Terminology for Benchmarking LDP Data Plane Convergence                               February 2004


      MPLS Ingress Node
      Label Switching Router (LSR)
      Ingress LSR

4. Security Considerations

   TBD

5. Acknowledgements

References

   [1]  Rosen, E., Viswanathan, A. and R. Callon, "Multiprotocol Label
        Switching Architecture", RFC 3031, January 2001.

   [2]  Andersson, L., Doolan, P., Feldman, N., Fredette, A. and B.
        Thomas, "LDP Specification", RFC 3036, January 2001.

   [3]  Poretsky, S. and B. Imhoff, "Terminology for Benchmarking IGP
        Data Plane Route Convergence",
        draft-ietf-bmwg-igp-dataplane-conv-term-02.txt (work in
        progress), January 2004.

   [4]  Poretsky, S. and B. Imhoff, "Benchmarking Methodology for IGP
        Data Plane Route Convergence",
        draft-ietf-bmwg-igp-dataplane-conv-meth-01.txt (work in
        progress), October 2003.


Authors' Addresses

   Thomas Eriksson
   TeliaSonera

   EMail: thomas.a.eriksson(at)teliasonera.com


   Scott Poretsky
   Quarry Technologies

   EMail: sporetsky(at)quarrytech.com


   Rajiv Papneja
   Isocore

   EMail: rpapneja(at)isocore.com




Eriksson, et al.         Expires August 9, 2004                 [Page 9]

Internet-Draft    Terminology for Benchmarking LDP Data Plane Convergence                               February 2004


Intellectual Property Statement

   The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
   intellectual property or other rights that might be claimed to
   pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
   this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
   might or might not be available; neither does it represent that it
   has made any effort to identify any such rights. Information on the
   IETF's procedures with respect to rights in standards-track and
   standards-related documentation can be found in BCP-11. Copies of
   claims of rights made available for publication and any assurances of
   licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to
   obtain a general license or permission for the use of such
   proprietary rights by implementors or users of this specification can
   be obtained from the IETF Secretariat.

   The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
   copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
   rights which may cover technology that may be required to practice
   this standard. Please address the information to the IETF Executive
   Director.


Full Copyright Statement

   Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). All Rights Reserved.

   This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
   others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
   or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published
   and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
   kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
   included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
   document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
   the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
   Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
   developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
   copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
   followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
   English.

   The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
   revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assignees.

   This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
   "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
   TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
   BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION



Eriksson, et al.         Expires August 9, 2004                [Page 10]

Internet-Draft    Terminology for Benchmarking LDP Data Plane Convergence                               February 2004


   HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
   MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.


Acknowledgment

   Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
   Internet Society.











































Eriksson, et al.         Expires August 9, 2004                [Page 11]



PAFTECH AB 2003-20262026-04-24 13:34:03