One document matched: draft-fedyk-gmpls-ethernet-pbt-00.txt
Network Working Group Don Fedyk, David Allan, Nortel
Internet Draft Greg Sunderwood, Bell Canada
Category: Standards Track Himanshu Shah, Ciena
June 2006
GMPLS control of Ethernet
draft-fedyk-gmpls-ethernet-pbt-00.txt
(was: GMPLS Control of Ethernet IVL Switches)
Status of this Memo
By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.
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 in December 2006.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006).
Abstract
This memo describes how GMPLS signaling may be applied to Provider
Backbone Transport (PBT) or configured Ethernet switches in order to
establish Ethernet P2P and P2MP MAC switched paths and P2MP VID based
trees. This utilizes a domain wide label for maintaining unique
Ethernet capabilities combined with GMPLS control.
Fedyk et.al Expires December 2006 Page 1
Internet Draft draft-fedyk-gmpls-ethernet-pbt-00.txt
Table of Contents
1. Introduction...................................................4
2. Terminology....................................................4
3. Aspects of configuring Ethernet Forwarding.....................4
4. Overview of configuration of VID/MAC tuples....................7
5. Overview of configuration of VID port membership..............10
6. OAM Aspects...................................................10
7. QOS Aspects...................................................11
8. Resiliency Aspects............................................11
8.1 E2E Path protection.........................................11
8.2 Local Repair................................................11
9. Deployment Scenarios..........................................12
10. Path creation and maintenance...............................12
10.1.1 Using a GMPLS Control Plane for Ethernet.................12
10.1.2 Control Plane Network....................................13
10.1.3 Signaling................................................13
10.1.4 Ethernet Label...........................................15
10.1.5 Ethernet Service.........................................16
10.1.6 GMPLS Routing............................................16
10.1.7 Path Computation.........................................17
10.1.8 Combinations of GMPLS Features...........................17
10.2 Addresses, Interfaces, and Labels..........................18
11. Specific Procedures.........................................19
11.1 PT to PT connections.......................................19
11.2 P2P connections with shared forwarding.....................19
11.2.1 Dynamic P2P symmetry with shared forwarding..............20
11.2.2 Planned P2P symmetry.....................................20
11.2.3 Path Maintenance.........................................20
11.3 P2MP VID/MAC Connections...................................21
11.3.1 Setup procedures.........................................21
11.3.2 Maintenance Procedures...................................21
11.4 P2MP VID Trees.............................................21
11.4.1 Setup Procedures.........................................21
11.4.2 Maintenance procedures...................................22
11.5 OAM MEP ID and MA ID synchronization.......................22
11.6 Protection Paths...........................................23
12. Error conditions............................................23
12.1 Invalid VID value for configured VID/MAC range.............23
12.2 Invalid VID value for configured VID range.................23
12.3 Invalid MAC Address........................................23
12.4 Invalid ERO for Upstream Label Object......................23
12.5 Invalid ERO for Suggested Label Object.....................23
12.6 Switch is not IVL capable..................................23
12.7 Switch is not SVL capable..................................23
12.8 Switch is not Asymmetric VID capable.......................23
12.9 Invalid VID in upstream label object.......................24
13. Security Considerations.....................................24
14. IANA Considerations.........................................24
15. References..................................................24
Fedyk et al. Expires December 2006 Page 2
Internet Draft draft-fedyk-gmpls-ethernet-pbt-00.txt
15.1 Normative References.......................................24
15.2 Informative References.....................................24
16. Author's Address............................................25
17. Intellectual Property Statement.............................26
18. Disclaimer of Validity......................................26
19. Copyright Statement.........................................27
20. Acknowledgments.............................................27
Fedyk et al. Expires December 2006 Page 3
Internet Draft draft-fedyk-gmpls-ethernet-pbt-00.txt
1. Introduction
Ethernet switches are increasing in capability. As a consequence the
role of Ethernet is rapidly expanding in networks that were the
domain of other technologies such as SONET/SDH TDM and ATM. The
question of how Ethernet will evolve and what capabilities it can
offer in these areas is still under development.
This document explores some unique capabilities that Ethernet has and
blends them with some of the values of control planes developed in
the IETF.
Some of the techniques for repurposing Ethernet switching outlined
in this document have been introduced elsewhere as a complement to
IEEE 802.1ah Provider Backbone Bridging under the title "Provider
Backbone Transport"(PBT). PBT is simply the data plane of Ethernet
(802.1Q, 802.1ah) without a Spanning tree control plane. This
document applies to PBT and is applicable to 802.1 when used for a
suitable Pseudo wire service as described in this document.
2. Terminology
In addition to well understood GMPLS terms, this memo uses
terminology from IEEE 802.1 and introduces a few new terms:
B-MAC Backbone MAC
B-VID Backbone VLAN ID
B-VLAN Backbone VLAN
COS Class of Service
C-MAC Customer MAC
C-VID Customer VLAN ID
C-VLAN Customer VLAN
DMAC Destination MAC Address
IVL Independent VLAN Learning
MAC Media Access Control
MP2MP Multipoint to multipoint
PBB Provider Backbone Bridge
PBT Provider Backbone Transport
P2P Point to Point
P2MP Point to Multipoint
QOS Quality of Service
SMAC Source MAC Address
S-VID Service VLAN ID
VID VLAN ID
VLAN Virtual LAN
3. Aspects of configuring Ethernet Forwarding
Ethernet as specified today is a complete system consisting of a
data plane and a number of control plane functions. Spanning tree,
data plane flooding and MAC learning combine to populate forwarding
Fedyk et al. Expires December 2006 Page 4
Internet Draft draft-fedyk-gmpls-ethernet-pbt-00.txt
tables and produce resilient any-to-any behavior in a bridged
network.
Ethernet consists of a very simple and reliable data plane that has
been optimized and mass produced. By simply disabling some Ethernet
control plane functionality, it is possible to employ alternative
control planes and obtain different forwarding behaviors.
Customer Provider Provider
Bridge/ Bridge Backbone
Bridge
C-MAC/C-VID------------------802.1Q -------------------C-MAC-CVID
S-VID-----------802.1ad------------S-VID
B-MAC---802.1ah---B-MAC
B-VID---802.1ah---B-VID
Figure 1 802.1 MAC/VLAN Hierarchy
Recent works in IETF Pseudo Wire Emulation [PWE] and IEEE 802 are
defining a separation of Ethernet functions permitting an increasing
degree of provider control. The result is that the Ethernet service
to the customer appears the same, yet the provider components and
behaviors have become decoupled from the customer presentation and
the provider has gained control of all MAC endpoints.
One example of this is the 802.1ah work in hierarchical bridging
whereby customer Ethernet frames are fully encapsulated into a
provider Ethernet frame, isolating the customer MAC space from the
provider MAC space. Another example would be the direct transport of
pseudo wires PWs ["Dry Martini" or PW over layer 2] where the
Ethernet network fulfills the role of the PSN in the PWE
architecture. In both cases the behavior of the provider's network
is as per 802.1Q.
The Ethernet data plane provides protocol multiplexing via the ether
type field which allows encapsulation of different protocols
supporting various applications. More recently, the Carrier Ethernet
effort has created provider and customer separation that enables
another level of multiplexing. This in effect creates provider MAC
endpoints in the Ethernet sub-network controlled by the provider. In
this document we concentrate on the provider solutions and therefore
subsequent references to VLAN, VID and MAC refer to those under
provider control, be it in the backbone layer of 802.1ah or the PSN
layer of "Dry Martini". Also in the case where the Customer service
is Ethernet, the Customer Ethernet service is the same native
Ethernet service with functions such as bridging, learning and
spanning trees all functioning over the provider infrastructure.
With the provider in exclusive control of their Ethernet sub-network
and all customer specific state pushed to the edges of that sub-
network, the ability of the provider to exploit latent Ethernet
behavior is facilitated. One key capability sought is to overcome
Fedyk et al. Expires December 2006 Page 5
Internet Draft draft-fedyk-gmpls-ethernet-pbt-00.txt
limitations, such as single spanning tree path for all traffic
within a VLAN, imposed by bridging (see [MYERS] for a discussion).
Bridging offers a simple solution for any-to-any connectivity within
a VLAN partition via the Spanning tree. Spanning tree provides
unnecessary capability for point to point services and since the
Spanning tree must interconnect all MACs with the same VLAN IDs it
consumes a scarce resource (VIDS). It is easier to modify Ethernet
to scale engineered P2P services and this is the approach we take
with PBT and PW over Ethernet. (The number of usable VLANs IDs in
conventional Ethernet bridging is constrained to 4094, therefore the
use of VLAN only configuration for all forwarding could be limited
for some applications where large number of point to point
connections are required.) This is because in Ethernet, each
Spanning trees is associated with one or more VLAN IDs. Also Port
membership in a VLAN is configured which controls the connectivity
of all MAC interfaces participating in the VLAN.
The roots for PBT capability exist in the Ethernet management plane.
The management of Ethernet switches provides for static
configuration of Ethernet forwarding. The Ethernet Control plane
allows for forwarding entries that are statically provisioned or
configured. In this document we are expanding the meaning of
"configured" from an Ethernet Control plane sense to mean either
provisioned or controlled by GMPLS. The connectivity aspects of
Ethernet forwarding is based upon VLANs and MAC addresses. In other
words the VLAN + DMAC are an Ethernet Label that can be looked up at
each switch to determine the egress link (or links in the case of
link aggregation).
In this document, we discuss, point to point (P2P) and point to
multipoint (P2MP) connections via static configuration of VLAN/MAC
tuples. (MAC-only configuration is considered a degenerate case
corresponding to VLAN zero).
This is a finer granularity than traditional VLAN networks since
each P2P connection is independent. By provisioning MAC addresses
independent of Spanning tree in a domain, both the VLAN and the
VLAN/MAC configured forwarding can be exploited. This greatly
extends the scalability of what can be achieved in a pure Ethernet
bridged sub network.
For compatibility and flexibility with existing Ethernet hardware,
we preserve the global/domain wide uniqueness and semantics of MAC
addresses as interface names or multicast group addresses. We then
redefine the semantics associated with administration and uses of
VLAN values for the case of explicit forwarding such as you get with
IVL.
The result is a new architecture where configured VID + DMAC provide
a forwarding table that is consistent with existing Ethernet
switching. At the same time it provides domain wide labels that can
be controlled by a common GMPLS control plane. This makes GMPLS
Fedyk et al. Expires December 2006 Page 6
Internet Draft draft-fedyk-gmpls-ethernet-pbt-00.txt
control and resource management procedures ideal to create paths.
The outcome is that the GMPLS control plane can be utilized to set
up the following atomic modes of connectivity:
1) P2P connectivity and MP2P multiplexed connectivity based
on configuration of unicast MAC addresses in conjunction
with a VID from a set of pre-configured VIDs.
2) P2MP connectivity based on configuration of multicast MAC
address in conjunction with a VID from a set of pre-
configured VIDs. This corresponds to (Source, Group) or
(S,G) multicast.
3) P2MP connectivity based on configuration of VID port
membership. This corresponds to (S,*) or (*,*) multicast
(where * represents the extent of the VLAN Tree).
4) MP2MP connectivity based on configuration of VID port
membership (P2MP trees in which leaves are permitted to
communicate). Although, we caution that this approach
poses resilience issues (discussed in section 5) and hence
is not recommended.
Items 1 and 2 above are restricted to "Independent VLAN Learning"
capable Ethernet switches [802.1Q].
The modes above are not completely distinct. Some modes involve
combinations of P2P connections in one direction and MP connectivity
in the other direction. Also, more than one mode may be combined in
a single GMPLS transaction. One example is the incremental addition
of a leaf to a P2MP tree with a corresponding MP2P return path
(analogous to a root initiated join).
In order to realize the above connectivity modes, a partition of the
VLAN IDs from traditional Ethernet needs to be established. The
partition allows for a pool of Ethernet labels for manual
configuration and/or for GMPLS control plane usage. The VID
partition actually consists of a "configured VID/MAC range" and
"configured VID range" since in some instances the label is a
VID/DMAC and sometimes the label is a VID/Mulitcast DMAC.
4. Overview of configuration of VID/MAC tuples
Existing Ethernet Switches may perform Independent VLAN Learning
(IVL) based forwarding on the basis of a VID/DMAC tuple as described
in 802.1Q. This means the forwarding hardware performs a full 60 bit
lookup (VID (12) + DMAC(48)), only requiring uniqueness of the full
60 bits for forwarding to resolve correctly. We can call this an
Ethernet domain wide label.
The label becomes unique MAC address in the domain per VLAN. We have
complete route freedom for each label (60 bit VLAN/MAC tuple) and
the ability to define multiple connectivity instances or paths per
MAC for each of the VIDs in the "configured VID/MAC range".
Fedyk et al. Expires December 2006 Page 7
Internet Draft draft-fedyk-gmpls-ethernet-pbt-00.txt
We have preserved the semantics of MAC addresses, and simply broaden
the potential interpretations of VLAN ID from spanning tree
identifier to topology instance identifier. Therefore, we can
concurrently operate both standard bridging and configured
unicast/multicast operation side by side. We partition the VID space
and allocate a range of VIDs (say 'n' VIDs) as only significant when
combined with a configured MAC address (the aforementioned
"configured VID/MAC range" of VIDs). We can then consider a VID in
that range as an individual connectivity instance identifier for a
configured P2P path terminating at the associated destination MAC
address. Or in the case of P2MP, a P2MP multicast tree corresponding
to the destination multicast group address. Note that this is
destination based forwarding consistent with how Ethernet works
today. The only thing changed is the mechanism of populating the
forwarding tables.
Ethernet MAC addresses are typically globally unique since the 48
bits consists of 24 bit Organizational Unique Identifier and a 24
bit serial number. There is also a bit set aside for Multicast and
for local addresses out OUI field. We define domain wide as within a
single organization, or more strictly within a single network within
an organization. For provider MAC addresses that will only be used
in a domain wide sense we can define MAC addresses out of a either
the local space or the global space since they both have the domain
wide unique property. When used in the context of GMPLS is useful to
think of a domain wide pool of labels where switches are assigned a
set of MAC addresses. These labels are assigned traffic that
terminates on the respective switches.
It is also worth noting that unique identification of source in the
form of the SMAC is carried e2e in the MAC header. So although we
have a 60 bit domain wide unique label, it may be shared by multiple
sources and the full connection identifier for an individual P2P
instance is 108 bits (SMAC, VID and DMAC). The SMAC is not
referenced in forwarding operations but it would allow additional
context for tracing or other operations at the end of the path.
GMPLS signaling procedures can be designed to create the bi-
directional path delegating label allocation of the combined MAC/VID
Label to the destination/source associated with the MACs for each
direction of unicast forwarding. Creating P2P path is a well
understood control plane requirement.
For multicast group addresses, the VID/MAC concatenated label can be
distributed by the source but label assignment (as it encodes global
multicast group information) requires coordination within the GMPLS
controlled domain.
As mentioned earlier, this technique results in a single unique and
invariant identifier, in our case a VID/MAC label associated with
the path termination or the multicast group. There can be up to
4094 labels to any one MAC address. This is a large number for P2P
Fedyk et al. Expires December 2006 Page 8
Internet Draft draft-fedyk-gmpls-ethernet-pbt-00.txt
applications and extremely large when shared or multiplexed
forwarding is leveraged. In practice, most network scaling
requirements may be met via allocation of only a small portion of
the VID space, to the configured VID/MAC range. The result is
minimal impact on the number of remaining bridging VLANs that can be
concurrently supported.
In order to use this unique 60 bit label, we disable the normal
mechanisms by which Ethernet populates the forwarding table for the
allocated range of VIDs. We use GMPLS signaling to create paths and
assign labels to the forwarding table. When a path is setup, for a
specific label across a contiguous sequence of Ethernet switches, a
unidirectional connection is the functional building block for an
Ethernet Label Switched path (Eth-LSP).
In P2P mode a bi-directional path is composed of two unidirectional
paths that are created with a single RSVP-TE session. The technique
does not require the VID to be common in both directions. However,
keeping in line with regular Ethernet these paths are symmetrical
such that a single bi-directional connection is composed of two
unidirectional paths that have common routing (i.e. traverse the
same switches and links) in the network and hence share the same
fate. One departure from current GMPLS signaling is there needs to
be a provision for asymmetrical bandwidth reservations.
In P2MP mode a bi-directional path is composed of a unidirectional
tree and a number of P2P paths from the leaves of the tree to the
root. Similarly these paths may have bandwidth and must have common
routing as in the P2P case.
There are a few modifications required to standard Ethernet to make
this approach robust:
1. In Standard Ethernet, discontinuities in forwarding table
configuration in the path of a connection will normally result in
packets being flooded as "unknown". For configured operation (e.g.
PBT), unknown addresses are indicative of a fault or configuration
error and the flooding of these is undesirable in meshed topologies.
Therefore flooding of "unknown" unicast/multicast MAC addresses must
be disabled for the "configured VID/MAC range".
2. MAC learning is not required, and although it will not interfere
with management/control population of the forwarding tables, since
static entries are not overridden, it appears prudent to explicitly
disable MAC learning for the configured VID/MAC and VID range.
3. Spanning tree is disabled for the allocated VID/MAC and VID range
and port blocking must be disabled to achieve complete configured
route freedom. As noted earlier, it is a control plane requirement
to ensure configured paths are loop free.
Fedyk et al. Expires December 2006 Page 9
Internet Draft draft-fedyk-gmpls-ethernet-pbt-00.txt
All three modifications described above are within the scope of
acceptable configuration options defined in IEEE802.1Q
specification.
5. Overview of configuration of VID port membership
Procedures almost identical to that for configuration of P2P VID/MAC
tuples can also be used for the incremental configuration of P2MP
VID trees. For the replication of forwarding in this case the label
is common for the multipoint destinations. The MAC field is set to
multicast address and is common to the multicast community. The VID
is a distinguisher common to the multicast community. The signaling
procedures are as per that for [MPLS-P2MP].
Since VID translation is relatively new and is not a ubiquitously
deployed capability, we consider a VID to be a domain global value.
Therefore, the VID value to be used by the originating switch may be
assigned by management and nominally is required to be invariant
across the network. The ability to indicate permissibility of
translation will be addressed in a future version of the document.
A procedure known as "asymmetrical VID" may be employed to constrain
connectivity (root to leaves, and leaves to root only) when switches
also support shared VLAN learning (or SVL). This would be consistent
with the root as a point of failure.
6. OAM Aspects
Robustness is enhanced with the addition of data plane OAM to
provide both fault and performance management.
For the configured VID/MAC unicast mode of behavior, the hardware
performs unicast packet forwarding of known MAC addresses exactly as
Ethernet currently operates The OAM currently defined,[802.1ag,
Y.1731] can also be reused without modification of the protocols.
An additional benefit of domain wide path identifiers for data plane
forwarding, is the tight coupling of the 60 bit unique connection ID
(VID + DMAC ) and the associated OAM packets. It is a simple matter
to determine a broken path or misdirected packet since the unique
connection ID cannot be altered on the Eth-LSP. This is in fact one
of the most powerful and unique aspects of the domain wide label for
any type of rapid diagnosis of the data plane faults. It is also
independent of the control plane so it works equally well for
provisioned or GMPLS controlled paths.
Bi-directional transactions (e.g. ETH-LB) and reverse direction
transactions (e.g. ETH-AIS) will have a different VID for each
direction. Currently Y.1731 & 802.1ag makes no representations with
respect to this.
Fedyk et al. Expires December 2006 Page 10
Internet Draft draft-fedyk-gmpls-ethernet-pbt-00.txt
For configured multicast VID/MAC mode, the current versions of
802.1ag, Y.1731] make no representation as to how PDUs which are not
using unicast addresses or which use OAM reserved multicast
addresses are handled. Therefore this specification makes no
representation as to whether such trees can be instrumented.
For configured VID mode of operation, the OAM functions as defined
in the current versions of 802.1ag, Y.1731 can be used with no
restriction.
7. QOS Aspects
Ethernet VLAN tags include priority tagging in the form of the
802.1p priority bits. When combined with configuration of the paths
via management or control plane, priority tagging produces the
Ethernet equivalent of an MPLS TE E-LSPs [MPLS-DS]. Priority tagged
Ethernet PDUs self-identify the required queuing discipline
independent of the configured connectivity.
It should be noted that the consequence of this is that there is a
common COS model across the different modes of configured operation
specified in this document.
The actual QOS objects required for signaling will be in a future
version of this memo.
8. Resiliency Aspects
8.1 E2E Path protection
1:1 and 1+1 path protection strategies are supported. Such schemes
offer:
1) Engineered disjoint protection paths that can protect both
directions of traffic.
2) Fast switchover due to tunable OAM mechanisms.
3) Revertive path capability when primary paths are restored.
4) Option for redialing paths under failure.
Specific procedures for establishment of protection paths and
associating paths into "protection groups" are described later in
this document.
Note that E2E path protection is able to respond to failures with a
number of configurable intervals. The loss of CCM OAM cells or ETH-
AIS cells in the data plane can trigger paths to switch. In the case
of CCM OAM cells the detection time is a typically 3.5 the CCM
interval + the propagation delay from the fault.
8.2 Local Repair
At this time local repair such as IPFRR with detours or bypass
tunnels is not considered as there are obstacles both with Ethernet
and the labeling techniques described in this document. Alternate
Fedyk et al. Expires December 2006 Page 11
Internet Draft draft-fedyk-gmpls-ethernet-pbt-00.txt
path techniques such as warm standby and hot standby work well since
data path OAM is able to provide configurable response time as
mentioned earlier.
9. Deployment Scenarios
This technique of GMPLS controlled Ethernet switching is applicable
to all deployment scenarios considered by the design team [CCAMP-
ETHERNET].
10. Path creation and maintenance
One simple mode of path creation described earlier is configuration.
Switch by switch a path can be created by simple configuration and
assignment of labels or by a set of commands originating from a
management system. When configuring a PBT path the label VID + DMAC
is assigned hop by hop invariant and it is intuitive to associate
the label with the path. While this property is a desirable
attribute, to be consistent with GMPLS terminology, and more
accurate, paths are created first as an ERO and labels are assigned
from the available label pool. In this case we use a domain wide
label.
One improvement to switch by switch configuration is to move to
single ended provisioning and signaling. Since signaling of explicit
paths is the domain of CCAMP and GMPLS we discuss the applicability
of GMPLS to this problem.
Several attributes may be associated with an Eth-LSP, including:
- bandwidth requirements of the path. This can be used, for example,
to request a fixed bandwidth path, where the committed information
rate and peak information rate of the path are equivalent.
- priority level;
- preemption characteristics;
- protection/resiliency requirements;
- routing policy, such as an explicit route;
- policing requirements
In addition to the above policies based on either under-subscription
or over-subscription can be supported.
10.1.1 Using a GMPLS Control Plane for Ethernet
GMPLS [GMPLS-ARCH] has been adapted to the control of optical
switches for the purpose of managing optical paths. GMPLS signaling
is well suited to setup paths with labels but it does require a
minimal IP control plane and IP connectivity, so it is suited to
certain scenarios where a large number of paths or dynamic path
management is required.
Fedyk et al. Expires December 2006 Page 12
Internet Draft draft-fedyk-gmpls-ethernet-pbt-00.txt
In many Ethernet deployment situations the addition of a complete
GMPLS control plane may be excessive for the switches or the
application. For discussion purposes we decompose the problem into
Signaling, Routing, Link discovery and Path management. While we
discuss the options it will become apparent that using all functions
of GMPLS is less of an operational overhead than any other
combination. Also, using only some components of GMPLS can lead to
more provisioned parameters than a purely static system (see
"Combinations of GMPLS Features").
Link discovery is one of the foundations of GMPLS. It is also a
capability that has been specified for Ethernet in IEEE 802.1AB. All
link discovery is optional but the benefits of running link
discovery in large systems are significant. It reduces configuration
and the possibility of errors in configuration. A recommendation is
that 802.1AB could be run with an extension to feed information into
an LMP [LMP] information model. See Figure 3.
+---------+ +---------+
| | | |
| LMP | ----------| LMP |
| +-------+ IP (opt) +-------+ |
| |802.1AB| ----------|802.1AB| |
+-+-------+ Ethernet +-------+-+
Figure 3 Link Discovery Hierarchy
10.1.2 Control Plane Network
In order to have a GMPLS control plane, an IP control plane
consisting of an IGP with TE extension needs to be established. This
IGP sees each hop as a terminated IP adjacency and should not be
interpreted as a distinct routed subnet for the purpose of carrying
IP bearer traffic.
This IP control plane can be provided as a separate independent
network (out of band) or integrated with the Ethernet switches.
If the IP control plane is a separate network, it may be provided as
a Layer 2 connected VLAN where the Ethernet switches are connected
via a bridged network or HUB. It may also be provided by an
external network that provides IP connectivity but the
GMPLS/Ethernet switches are not immediately adjacent to each other.
If the IP control plane is integrated with the switches it may be
provided by a bridged VLAN that uses the Data bearing channels of
the network between adjacent nodes. This ties the fate of the
controlled paths and the IP control plane links, but it is likely
the same Ethernet hardware is already using shared network resources
with other networks.
10.1.3 Signaling
Fedyk et al. Expires December 2006 Page 13
Internet Draft draft-fedyk-gmpls-ethernet-pbt-00.txt
GMPLS signaling is well suited to the set up of PBT on Ethernet
switches. GMPLS signaling uses either numbered or unnumbered links
where the link is either explicitly IP addressed or associated with
a switch loopback address. If LMP [LMP] is used, the creation of
these unnumbered interfaces can be automated. If LMP is not used
there is an additional provisioning requirement to add GMPLS link
identifiers. For large-scale implementations LMP would be
beneficial. As mentioned earlier the primary benefit of signaling is
the control of a path from an endpoint. GMPLS can be used to create
bi-directional or unidirectional paths, bi-directional paths being
the preferred mode of operation for numerous reasons (OAM
consistency etc.). In this document we only consider bidirectional
paths both for P2P and P2MP services.
Signaling enables the ability to dynamically establish a path and to
adjust the path in a coordinated fashion after the path has been
established. Signaling also allows multi-vendor interoperability
since the signaling is based on GMPLS signaling protocols. This
allows the network to adapt to changing conditions or failures with
a single mechanism. Signaling can be used for pure static paths as
well.
To use GMPLS RSVP-TE for signaling, a new label is defined that
contains the VID/DMAC tuple, which is 60 bits. On the initiating
and terminating nodes, a function administers the VIDs associated
with the MAC SMAC and DMAC respectively.
To initiate a bi-directional VID/MAC P2P or P2MP path, the initiator
of the PATH message uses procedures outlined in [GMPLS-SIGNALING]
possibly augmented with [MPLS-P2MP], it:
1) Sets the LSP encoding type to Ethernet.
2) Sets the LSP switching type to MAC [IANA to define].
3) Sets the GPID to Unknown (1) or Ethernet Multiplexed [IANA to
define].
4) Sets the UPSTREAM_LABEL to the VID/SMAC tuple where the VID is
administered from the configured VID/MAC range. Downstream switches
must use the suggested label or return a path Error condition
indicating why the label could not be used.
At intermediate switches the UPSTREAM_LABEL object and value is
passed unmodified. The VID/SMAC tuple is installed in the
forwarding table at each hop for the upstream direction.
Note that shared forwarding happens opportunistically when
conditions are met as a local decision. To achieve shared
forwarding, a Path computation engine must ensure the ERO is
consistent with an existing path for the shared segments. The only
other criterion is the paths cannot separate and cross. If no
existing path has this behavior the path will be created unshared.
Fedyk et al. Expires December 2006 Page 14
Internet Draft draft-fedyk-gmpls-ethernet-pbt-00.txt
In other words shared forward happens when paths share segments from
the source and when the Upstream label is chosen to be the same as
the existing path. Similarly for the downstream path shared
forwarding happens when, an existing path that shares segments with
the new paths ERO, viewed from the destination switch and when the
downstream label is chosen to be the same and the existing path.
In this manner shared forwarding is a function that is controlled
primarily by path calculation and in combination with the local
label allocation at the end points of the path.
At the destination, a VID is allocated in the local MAC range for
the DMAC and the VID/DMAC tuple is passed in the GENERALIZED_LABEL
in the RESV message. As with the UPSTREAM_LABEL, intermediate
switches use the GENERALIZED_LABEL object and pass it on unchanged,
upstream. The VID/DMAC tuple is installed in the forwarding table
at each hop. This creates a bi-directional path as the PATH and RESV
messages follow the same path.
To initiate a P2MP VID path the initiator of the PATH message uses
procedures outlined in [GMPLS-SIGNALING] and [MPLS-P2MP]. A P2MP
tree consists of a VID tree in the forward direction (from root to
leaves) and a set of P2P paths running on identical paths from Tree
to root in the reverse direction. VID labels with common MAC
addresses are allocated in the forward direction and a single
VID/MAC label in the reverse direction:
1) Sets the LSP encoding type to Ethernet.
2) Sets the LSP switching type to L2SC.
3) Sets the GPID to unknown.
4) Set the technology specific information in the TSPEC to indicate
domain-wide label.
5) Sets the UPSTREAM LABEL specified as a single VID/MAC from the
configured VID range.
6) VID translation may optionally be permitted on a local basis
between two switches by a downstream switch replying with a VID/MAC
other than the SUGGESTED LABEL. The upstream switch then sets a VID
translation on the port associated with the label to allow VID
translation. This flexibility allows the tree to be constructed with
out having to worry about colliding with another tree using the same
VID.
10.1.4 Ethernet Label
The Ethernet label is a new generalized label with a suggested
format of:
Fedyk et al. Expires December 2006 Page 15
Internet Draft draft-fedyk-gmpls-ethernet-pbt-00.txt
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|0 0 0 0| VLAN ID | MAC (highest 2 bytes) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| MAC Address |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Note that there is no syntax in signaling to force the label in the
UPSTREAM_LABEL and GENERALIZED_LABEL objects to be passed unchanged
(which needs to be addressed).
The semantics of the new label type for a non-zero MAC address is
that that the label is passed unchanged. This label is a domain wide
label. This has similarity to the way in which a wavelength label
is handled at an intermediate switch that cannot perform wavelength
conversion, and is described in [GMPLS-RSVP].
These domain wide labels are allocated to switches that control the
assignment of labels. This label space does not have to be globally
unique because the labels are only valid within a single provider.
When using configuration, a tool would have to perform a consistency
check to make sure that label terminations were unique. When using
GMPLS signaling it is assumed a unique pool of labels would be
assigned to each switch. The DMAC addresses are domain wide unique
and so is the combination of VID/DMAC. Should an error occur and a
duplicate label be assigned to one or more switches GMPLS signaling
procedures would allow the first assignment of the label and prevent
duplicate label from colliding. If a collision occurs an alarm would
be generated. In fact some of these procedures have been defined in
GMPLS control of photonic networks where a lambda may exist as a
form of domain wide label.
10.1.5 Ethernet Service
Ethernet Switched Paths that are setup either by configuration or
signaling can be used to provide an Ethernet service to customers of
the Ethernet network. The Metro Ethernet Forum has defined some
services in MEF.6 (e.g., Ethernet Private Line), and these are also
aligned with ITU-T G.8011-x Recommendations. Of particular interest
are the bandwidth profile parameters in MEF.10 and whose associated
bandwidth profile algorithm are based on [DS-COLOR][MPLS-DS].
Consideration should be given to supporting these in any signaling
extensions for Ethernet LSPs. This will be addressed in a future
version of this specification.
10.1.6 GMPLS Routing
Fedyk et al. Expires December 2006 Page 16
Internet Draft draft-fedyk-gmpls-ethernet-pbt-00.txt
GMPLS routing [GMPLS-ROUTING] is IP routing with the TLV extensions
for the purpose of carrying around GMPLS TE information. The TE
information is populated with TE resources from LMP or from
configuration if LMP is not available. GMPLS Routing is an optional
piece but it is highly valuable in maintaining topology for path
management and dynamic path computation.
10.1.7 Path Computation
There has been a lot of recent activity in the area of path
computation [PATH-COMP]. Originally MPLS path computation was
performed locally in a TE database on a router. While this is non-
optimal for situations where bandwidth is highly managed, it was
acceptable when a few paths are required in a primarily
connectionless environment; if a large number of coordinated paths
are required, it is advantageous to have a more sophisticated path
computation engine capable of optimizing the path routing of a sub
network. The path computation could take the form of paths being
computed either on a management station with local computation for
rerouting or more sophisticated Path computation servers.
Path computation in GMPLS generates explicit route objects (EROs)
that can be used directly by GMPLS signaling. The implication is
that the TE database and path computation engine may not be co-
located with the Ethernet LSR.
10.1.8 Combinations of GMPLS Features
The combinations of LMP, Routing, Signaling and Path computation can
be all supported on a switch or a subset of GMPLS features can be
supported.
Signaling is the minimal function that might be supported on a small
switch. The ability to process Signaling messages with an ERO may be
all that is desired on an end point. In this case the path
computation would be performed off network.
Routing for GMPLS is the next important function since it provides
the forwarding of signaling functions and transport of TE
information. There is no requirement to provide full IP routing for
data traffic, only hop by hop routing for the control plane. However
it is possible to design switches without routing that could proxy
their routing to other larger switches. In the proxied case, there
would be little difference in the routing database but the small
switches would not have to perform routing operations. The
information for the proxied routing might be configured or it might
be data filled by an automated procedure. No new protocols are
envisioned for the case where routing is proxied.
LMP is optional as mentioned earlier. The primary benefit of LMP in
addition to 802.1AB is LMP's capability to optimize routing
information for the purpose of link bundling on large switches. LMP
has the capability to compress the information required to represent
Fedyk et al. Expires December 2006 Page 17
Internet Draft draft-fedyk-gmpls-ethernet-pbt-00.txt
a large number of parallel resources automatically and reduce the
amount of configuration.
10.2 Addresses, Interfaces, and Labels
This specification uses an addressing scheme and a label space for
the ingress/egress connection; the hierarchical GMPLS Switch
Address/Port ID and the Ethernet VID/DMAC tuple or VID/Multicast MAC
as a label space.
GMPLS Switch Address
|
V N=named port
+----+ +-----+ <port index>
| | label=VLAN/MAC | | <MAC>
| PB | label=VID/MMAC | | <string>
-----N N----------------------------N PBB N----------
| | |(MAC)| \
| | / | Externally
+----+ /+-----+ Facing
PBT Transit Provider Egress MAC/ PBT edge Ports
Switch (Label) Switch
Figure 4 Ethernet/GMPLS Addressing & Label Space
Depending on how the service is defined and set up one or more of
these identifiers may be used for actual setup. Also note that
although it is possible for a terminating switch to offer any 60 bit
label value that can be guaranteed to be domain wide unique, the
convention of using MAC addresses to name specific ports is retained.
An Ethernet port name is common to both configured MAC/VID,
configured VID and bridging modes of operation. One implication of
this is that a port index and a MAC address of a port on the switch
may be effectively interchangeable for signaling purposes.
For a GMPLS based system, the GMPLS Switch Address/logical port is
the logical signaling identifier for the control plane via which
Ethernet layer label bindings are solicited. In order to create a
point to point path an association must be made between the ingress
and egress node. But the actual label distributed via signaling and
instantiated in the switch forwarding tables identifies the egress
MAC of the PBT tunnel (see Figure 4). This label may be the same as
the externally facing port if global labels are used or it may be an
internal provider hidden domain wide label.
GMPLS uses identifiers in the form of 32 bit numbers which are in the
IP address notation but these are not IP addresses. An IP routing
control plane for the propagation of TE information may be supported.
The provider MAC addresses are exchanged by the LLDP and by LMP if
supported. Actual label assignment is performed by the signaling
initiator and terminator.
Fedyk et al. Expires December 2006 Page 18
Internet Draft draft-fedyk-gmpls-ethernet-pbt-00.txt
A particular port on a provider network switch would have:
- A MAC
- A 32 bit IPv4 Switch address or 128 bit IPv6 address plus 32 bit
port Identifier
- One (or more) Mnemonic String Identifiers
This multiple naming convention leaves the issue of resolving the set
given one of the port identifiers. On a particular node, mapping is
relatively straight forward. The preferred solution to this is to
use the GMPLS IP switch address for signaling resolution. In so
doing, the problem of setting up a path is reduced to figuring out
what switch supports a egress MAC address and then finding the
corresponding GMPLS IP switch address and performing all signaling
and routing with respect to the GMPLS switch address.
There are several options to achieve this:
- Provisioning
- Auto discovery protocols that carry MAC address
- Augmenting Routing TE with MAC Addresses
- Name Servers with identifier/address registration
This will be clarified in a subsequent version of this document.
11. Specific Procedures
11.1 PT to PT connections
The Data Plane for IVL has three key fields: VID, DMAC and SMAC. A
connection instance is uniquely identified by the DMAC, the VID and
the SMAC for the purpose of the provider network terminations. The
VID and DMAC tuple identifies the forwarding multiplex at transit
switches and a simple degenerate form of the multiplex is P2P (only
one SMAC/VID/DMAC connection uses the VID/DMAC tuple).
This results in unique labels end to end and no merging or
multiplexing of tunnels. The data streams may merge but the
forwarding entries are unique allowing the connection to be de-
multiplexed downstream.
11.2 P2P connections with shared forwarding
The VID/DMAC can be considered to be a shared forwarding identifier
or label for a multiplex consisting of some number of P2P connections
distinctly identified by the MAC SMAC/VID/DMAC tuple. The reason for
using a shared forwarding entry is it reuses existing labels.
VLAN tagged Ethernet packets include priority marking. Priority bits
can be used to indicate class of Service (COS) and drop priority.
Thus, traffic from multiple COSs could be multiplexed on the same ESP
(i.e., similar to E-LSPs) and queuing and drop decisions are made
based on the p-bits. This means that the queue selection can be done
Fedyk et al. Expires December 2006 Page 19
Internet Draft draft-fedyk-gmpls-ethernet-pbt-00.txt
based on a per flow (i.e., ESP + priority) basis and is decoupled
from the actual steering of the packet at any given node.
A terminating switch will frequently have more than one suitable
candidate path may choose to share a forwarding entry.(common
VID/DMAC , unique SMAC). It is a local decision of how this is
performed but the best choice is a path that maximizes the shared
forwarding.
The concept of bandwidth management still applies with equally well
with shared forwarding. As an example consider a PBT edge switch that
terminates an Ethernet LSP with the following attributes: bandwidth
B1, DMAC D, SMAC S1, VID V. A request to establish an additional
Ethernet LSP with attributes (bandwidth B2, DMAC D, SMAC S2, VID V)
can be accepted provided there is sufficient link capacity remaining.
11.2.1 Dynamic P2P symmetry with shared forwarding
Similar to how a destination switch may select a VID/DMAC from the
set of existing shared forwarding multiplexes rooted at the
destination node, the originating switch may also do so for the
reverse path. Once the initial ERO has been computed and the set of
existing Ethernet LSPs that include the target DMAC have been pruned,
the originating switch may select the optimal (by whatever criteria)
existing shared forwarding multiplex for the new destination to merge
with and offer its own VID/DMAC tuple for itself as a destination.
This is identified via use of the UPSTREAM LABEL object.
11.2.2 Planned P2P symmetry
Normally the originating switch will not have knowledge of the set of
shared forwarding paths rooted on the destination node.
Use of a Path Computation Server or other planning style of tool with
more complete knowledge of the network configuration may wish to
impose pre-selection of shared forwarding multiplexes to use for both
directions (Dave: Does this correct the typo). In this scenario the
originating switch uses the SUGGESTED LABEL and UPSTREAM LABEL
objects to indicate complete selection of the shared forwarding
multiplexes at both ends. This may also result in the establishment
of a new VID/DMAC path as the SUGGESTED LABEL object may legitimately
refer to a path that does not yet exist.
11.2.3 Path Maintenance
Make before break procedures can be employed to modify the
characteristics of a P2P Ethernet LSP. As described in [RSVP-TE],
the LSP ID in the sender template is updated as the new path is
signaled. The procedures (including those for shared forwarding) are
identical to those employed in establishing a new LSP, with the
extended tunnel ID in the signaling exchange ensuring that double
booking of the associated resources does not occur.
Fedyk et al. Expires December 2006 Page 20
Internet Draft draft-fedyk-gmpls-ethernet-pbt-00.txt
Where individual paths in a protection group are modified, signaling
procedures may be combined with PS coordination to administratively
force PS switching operations such that modifications are only ever
performed on the protection path.
11.3 P2MP VID/MAC Connections
11.3.1 Setup procedures
The multicast DMAC is administered from a central pool of multicast
addresses and the VLAN selected from the configured VID/MAC range.
The P2MP tree is constructed via incremental addition of leaves to
the tree in signaling exchange where the root is the originating
switch (as per (MPLS-P2MP). The multicast DMAC and VID are encoded in
the suggested label object using the Ethernet label encoding.
Where a return path is required the unicast MAC corresponding to the
originating interface and a VID selected from the configured VID/MAC
range is encoded as an Ethernet label in the upstream label object.
11.3.2 Maintenance Procedures
Maintenance and modification to a P2MP tree can be achieved by a
number of means. The preferred technique being to modify existing
VLAN configuration vs. assignment of a new label and completely
constructing a new tree.
Make before break on a live tree reusing existing label assignments
requires a 1:1 or 1+1 construct. The protection switch state of the
traffic is forced on the working tree and locked (PS not allowed)
while the backup tree is modified. Explicit path tear of leaves to
be modified is required to ensure no loops are left behind as
artifacts of tree modification. Once modifications are complete, a
forced switch to the backup tree occurs and the original tree may be
similarly modified. This also suggests that 1+1 or 1:1 resilience
can be achieved for P2MP trees for any single failure (switch on any
failure and use restoration techniques to repair the failed tree).
11.4 P2MP VID Trees
11.4.1 Setup Procedures
The VID is administered from the central pool of VLAN IDs
corresponding to the configured VID range. The P2MP VID tree is
constructed via incremental addition of leaves to the tree in
signaling exchange where the root is the originating switch as per
[MPLS-P2MP].
Where (*,*) connectivity is to be configured a single VID is employed
and encoded as an Ethernet label in the suggested label object with
MAC address set to zero.
Fedyk et al. Expires December 2006 Page 21
Internet Draft draft-fedyk-gmpls-ethernet-pbt-00.txt
Where communication is to be constrained to root to leaves and leaves
to root only, asymmetrical VID configuration is used with the
suggested label object encoding the root to leaf VID and the upstream
label object encoding the leaf to root VID.
11.4.2 Maintenance procedures
Maintenance and modification to a P2MP VID tree can be achieved by a
number of means. The preferred technique being to move traffic off
the tree, modify the tree and then shift traffic back to the tree.
This ensures that there are no transient loops in the tree that are
artifacts of interactions of the GMPLS control plane, soft state and
the Ethernet data plane.
Make before break on a live tree requires a 1:1 or 1+1 construct.
The protection switch state of the traffic is forced on the working
tree and locked (PS not allowed) while the backup tree is modified.
Explicit path tear of leaves to be modified is required to ensure no
loops are left behind as artifacts of tree modification. Once
modifications are complete, a forced switch to the backup tree
occurs and the original tree may be similarly modified. This also
suggests that 1+1 or 1:1 resilience can be achieved for P2MP trees
for any single failure (switch on any failure and use restoration
techniques to repair the failed tree).
11.5 OAM MEP ID and MA ID synchronization
The Maintenance end point IDs (MEP IDs) and maintenance association
IDs for the switched path endpoints can be synchronized using the
ETH-MCC (maintenance communication channel) transaction set once the
switched path has been established.
MEPs are located at the endpoints of the Ethernet LSP. Typical
configuration associated with a MEP is Maintenance Domain Name,
Short Maintenance Association Name, and MA Level, MEP ID, and CCM
transmission rate (when ETH-CC functionality is desired). As part of
the synchronization, it is verified that the Maintenance Domain
Name, Short Maintenance Association Name, MA Level, and CCM
transmission rate are the same. It is also determined that MEP IDs
are unique for each MEP.
Server MEPs can be considered at the intermediate points of the PBT
network. Upon network failures (e.g. physical link failures), the
Server MEPs can initiate the unicast AIS frames for each Ethernet
LSP end-point that is present in the forwarding table. The only
configuration required at the Server MEPs is the MA Level which
should be the same as the MA Level configured at the Ethernet LSP
MEPs.
Besides the unicast CCM and AIS functionality, the PBT MEPs can also
offer the LBM/LBR and LMM/LMR functionalities for on-demand
connectivity verification and loss measurement purposes.
Fedyk et al. Expires December 2006 Page 22
Internet Draft draft-fedyk-gmpls-ethernet-pbt-00.txt
11.6 Protection Paths
When protection is used for path recovery it is required to
associate the working and protection paths into a protection group.
This is achieved as defined in [RECOVERY_SIG] using the ASSOCIATION
and PROTECTION objects. Protection may be used for P2P VID/MAC, P2MP
VID/MAC and P2MP VID configured modes of operation. The 'P' bit in
the protection object indicates the role (working or protection) of
the LSP currently being signaled.
If the initiating switch wishes to use G.8031 [G-8031] data plane
protection switching coordination (vs. control plane notifications),
it sets the N bit to 1 in the protection object. This must be
consistently applied for all paths associated as a protection group.
If the terminating switch does not support G.8031, the error
"Admission Control Failure/Unsupported Notification Type" is used.
12. Error conditions
The following errors have been identified as being unique to these
procedures and in addition to those already defined. This will be
addressed in a proper IANA considerations section in a future
version of the document:
12.1 Invalid VID value for configured VID/MAC range
The originator of the error is not configured to use the VID value
in conjunction with GMPLS signaling of VID/MAC tuples. This may be
any switch along the path.
12.2 Invalid VID value for configured VID range
12.3 Invalid MAC Address
12.4 Invalid ERO for Upstream Label Object
The ERO offered has discontinuities with the identified VID/MAC
path in the UPSTREAM LABEL object.
12.5 Invalid ERO for Suggested Label Object
The ERO offered has discontinuities with the identified VID/MAC path
in the SUGGESTED LABEL object.
12.6 Switch is not IVL capable
12.7 Switch is not SVL capable
12.8 Switch is not Asymmetric VID capable
Fedyk et al. Expires December 2006 Page 23
Internet Draft draft-fedyk-gmpls-ethernet-pbt-00.txt
12.9 Invalid VID in upstream label object
The VID in the upstream label object for the "asymmetrical VID"
P2MP tree did not correspond to the VID used in previous
transactions.
13.
Security Considerations
The architecture assumes that the GMPLS controlled Ethernet subnet
consists of trusted devices and that the UNI ports to the domain are
untrusted. Care is required to ensure untrusted access to the trusted
domain does not occur. Where GMPLS is applied to the control of VLAN
only, the commonly known techniques for mitigation of Ethernet DOS
attacks may be required on UNI ports.
14. IANA Considerations
New values are required for signaling and error codes as indicated.
This section will be completed in a later version.
15. References
15.1 Normative References
[CCAMP-ETHERNET] Papadimitriou, D. et.al, "A Framework for
Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Ethernet", internet draft, draft-
papadimitriou-ccamp-gmpls-ethernet-framework-00.txt , June 2005
[GMPLS-SIGNALING] Berger, L. (editor), "Generalized MPLS -Signaling
Functional Description", January 2003, RFC3471.
[GMPLS-ROUTING] Kompella, K., Rekhter, Y., "Routing Extensions in
Support of Generalized MPLS", RFC 4202, October 2005
[GMPLS-RSVP] Berger, L. et.al., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label
Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Resource ReserVation Protocol-Traffic
Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions", IETF RFC 3473, January 2003.
15.2 Informative References
[DS-COLOR] Aboul-Magd, O. et.al. "A Differentiated Service Two-Rate,
Three-Color Marker with Efficient Handling of in-Profile Traffic",
IETF RFC 4115, July 2005
[G-8031] ITU-T Draft Recommendation G.8031, Ethernet Protection
Switching.
[GMPLS-ARCH] E. Mannie, Ed., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label
Switching (GMPLS) Architecture", RFC 3495.
[IEEE 802.1ab] "IEEE Draft Standard for Local and Metropolitan Area
Networks, Station and Media Access Control Connectivity
Discovery".
Fedyk et al. Expires December 2006 Page 24
Internet Draft draft-fedyk-gmpls-ethernet-pbt-00.txt
[IEEE 802.1ag] "IEEE standard for Connectivity Fault Management",
work in progress.
[IEEE 802.1ah] "IEEE standard for Provider Backbone Bridges", work in
progress.
[LMP] Lang. J. Editor, "Link Management Protocol (LMP)" work in
progress.
[MEF.6] The Metro Ethernet Forum MEF 6 (2004), "Ethernet Services
Definitions - Phase I".
[MEF.10] The Metro Ethernet Forum MEF 10 (2004), "Ethernet Services
Attributes Phase 1".
[MPLS-DS] Le Faucheur, F. et.al., "Multi-Protocol Label Switching
(MPLS) Support of Differentiated Services" IETF RFC 3270, May
2002.
[MPLS-P2MP] Aggarwal, R. Ed., "Extensions to RSVP-TE for Point to
Multipoint TE LSPs", work in progress.
[MYERS] Myers et.al. "Rethinking the service model, scaling Ethernet
to a million nodes", http://100x100network.org/papers/myers-
hotnets2004.pdf.
[PATH-COMP] Farrel, A. et.al., "Path Computation Element (PCE)
Architecture", work in progress.
[PWoPBT] Allan et.al., "Pseudo Wires over Provider Backbone
Transport", draft-allan-pw-o-pbt-00.txt, work in progress.
[PWE] Bryant, S., Pate, P. et al., "Pseudo Wire Emulation Edge-to
Edge (PWE3) Architecture", IETF RFC 3985, March 2005.
[RECOVERY_SIG] Lang et.al., "RSVP-TE Extensions in support of End-
to-End Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)-based
Recovery ", work in progress.
[RSVP-TE] Awduche et.al., "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP
Tunnels, IETF RFC 3209, December 2001.
[Y.1731] ITU-T Draft Recommendation Y.1731(ethoam), " OAM Functions
and Mechanisms for Ethernet based Networks ", work in progress.
16. Author's Address
Don Fedyk
Nortel Networks
600 Technology Park Drive Phone: +1-978-288-3041
Billerica, MA, 01821 Email: dwfedyk@nortel.com
Fedyk et al. Expires December 2006 Page 25
Internet Draft draft-fedyk-gmpls-ethernet-pbt-00.txt
David Allan
Nortel Networks Phone: +1-613-763-6362
3500 Carling Ave. Email: dallan@nortel.com
Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA
Greg Sunderwood
Bell Canada Phone: +1-604-648-7770
Suite 1500, Email: greg.sunderwood@gt.ca
1066 West Hastings Street
Vancouver, BC, CANADA
V6E 2X1
Himanshu Shah
Ciena Phone: 978-489-2196
35 Nagog Park, Email: hshah@ciena.com
Acton, MA 01720
17. Intellectual Property Statement
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
Intellectual Property Rights 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; nor does it represent that it has
made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat 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 implementers or users of this
specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at
ietf-ipr@ietf.org.
18. Disclaimer of Validity
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
Fedyk et al. Expires December 2006 Page 26
Internet Draft draft-fedyk-gmpls-ethernet-pbt-00.txt
19. Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2006). This document is subject
to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and
except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.
20. Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Dinesh Mohan, Nigel Bragg, Stephen
Shew and Sandra Ballarte for their extensive contributions to this
document.
Fedyk et al. Expires December 2006 Page 27
| PAFTECH AB 2003-2026 | 2026-04-23 01:38:58 |