One document matched: draft-ietf-pwe3-satop-01.txt

Differences from draft-ietf-pwe3-satop-00.txt


  
    Network Working Group               A. Vainshtein (Axerra Networks)
                                     Y. Stein (RAD Data Communications)
    Internet Draft                                              Editors
                                                                       
    Expiration Date:                                                   
    June 2004                                                         
                                                                       
                                                          December 2003
 
               Structure-Agnostic TDM over Packet (SAToP) 
 
                      draft-ietf-pwe3-satop-01.txt 
 
Status of this Memo 
 
This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with all 
provisions of section 10 of RFC 2026.  
 
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. 
 
Abstract 
 
This document describes a pseudowire encapsulation for TDM (T1, E1, T3, 
E3) bit-streams that disregards any structure that may be imposed on 
these streams, in particular the structure imposed by the standard TDM 
framing [G.704].  
 
Co-Authors 
 
The following are co-authors of this document: 
 
Motty Anavi                         RAD Data Communications 
Tim Frost                           Zarlink Semiconductors 
Eduard Metz                         TNO Telecom 
Prayson Pate                        Overture Networks 
Akiva Sadovski                      Axerra Networks 
Israel Sasson                       Axerra Networks 
Ronen Shashoua                      RAD Data Communications 
 
 





   Vainshtein & Stein        Standards Track                   [Page 1]
 
   Structure-Agnostic TDM over Packet                    December 2003 
          
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
 
1. Introduction......................................................2 
2. Terminology and Reference Models..................................3 
  2.1. Terminology...................................................3 
  2.2. Reference Models..............................................3 
3. Emulated Services.................................................3 
4. SAToP Encapsulation Layer.........................................4 
  4.1. SAToP Packet Format...........................................4 
  4.2. PSN and Multiplexing Layer Headers............................4 
  4.3. SAToP Header..................................................4 
    4.3.1. Usage and Structure of the Control Word...................5 
    4.3.2. Usage of RTP Header.......................................6 
5. SAToP Payload Layer...............................................7 
  5.1. General Payloads..............................................7 
  5.2. Octet-aligned T1..............................................8 
6. SAToP Operation...................................................9 
  6.1. Common Considerations.........................................9 
  6.2. IWF operation.................................................9 
    6.2.1. PSN-bound Direction.......................................9 
    6.2.2. CE-bound Direction.......................................10 
  6.3. SAToP Defects................................................11 
  6.4. SAToP PW Performance Monitoring..............................12 
7. QoS Issues.......................................................12 
8. Congestion Control...............................................13 
9. Security Considerations..........................................13 
10. Applicability Statement.........................................13 
11. IANA Considerations.............................................14 
12. Intellectual Property Disclaimer................................14 
 
 
1. Introduction 
 
This document describes a method for encapsulating TDM bit-streams (T1, 
E1, T3, E3) as pseudo-wires over packet-switching networks (PSN). It 
addresses only structure-agnostic transport, i.e., the protocol 
completely disregards any structure that may possibly be imposed on 
these signals, in particular the structure imposed by standard TDM 
framing [G.704]. This emulation is referred to as "emulation of 
unstructured TDM circuits" in [PWE3-TDM-REQ] and suits applications 
where the PEs have no need to interpret TDM data or to participate in 
the TDM signaling.  
 
The SAToP solution presented in this document conforms to the PWE3 
architecture described in [PWE3-ARCH] and satisfies both the relevant 
general requirements put forward in [PWE3-REQ] and specific 
requirements for unstructured TDM signals presented in [PWE3-TDM-REQ].  
 
 





   Vainshtein & Stein        Expires   June 2004               [Page 2]
 
   Structure-Agnostic TDM over Packet                    December 2003 
          
2. Terminology and Reference Models  
 
   2.1. Terminology 
 
"MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",    "SHOULD", 
"SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this    document 
are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. 
 
In addition to terms defined in [PWE3-ARCH], the following TDM specific 
terms are needed: 
 
     o  Loss of Signal (LOS) - a condition of the TDM attachment 
         circuit wherein the incoming signal cannot be detected. 
         Criteria for entering and leaving the LOS condition can be 
         found in [G.775] 
     o  Alarm Indication Signal (AIS) - a special bit pattern (e.g. as 
         described in [G.775]) in the TDM bit stream that indicates 
         presence of an upstream circuit outage. For E1, T1 and E3 
         circuits the AIS pattern is a sequence of binary "1" values of 
         appropriate duration (the "all ones" pattern).  
 
   2.2. Reference Models 
 
The generic models defined in Sections 4.1, 4.2 and 4.4 of [PWE3-ARCH] 
fully apply to SAToP. 
 
The native service addressed in this document is a special case of the 
bit stream payload type defined in Section 3.3.3 of [PWE3-ARCH]. 
 
 
The Network Synchronization reference model and deployment scenarios 
for emulation of TDM services are described in [PWE3-TDM-REQ], Section 
4.2. 
 
3. Emulated Services 
 
This specification describes edge-to-edge emulation of the following 
TDM services described in [G.702]: 
 
     1. E1 (2048 kbit/s)  
     2. T1 (1544 kbit/s) This service is also known as DS1 
     3. E3 (34368 kbit/s) 
     4. T3 (44736 kbit/s) This service is also known as DS3. 
 
The protocol used for emulation of these services does not depend on 
the method in which attachment circuits are delivered to the PEs. For 
example, a T1 attachment circuit is treated in the same way regardless 
of whether it is delivered to the PE on copper [G.703], multiplexed in 
a T3 circuit [T.107], mapped into a virtual tributary of a SONET/SDH 
circuit [G.707] or carried over an ATM network using unstructured ATM-
CES [ATM-CES]. Termination of any specific "carrier layers" used 
between the PE and CE is performed by an appropriate NSP. 
 
 
   Vainshtein & Stein        Expires   June 2004               [Page 3]
 
   Structure-Agnostic TDM over Packet                    December 2003 
          
4. SAToP Encapsulation Layer 
   4.1. SAToP Packet Format  
 
The basic format of SAToP packets is shown in Fig. 1 below.  
 
 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  
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
|                           ...                                 | 
|              PSN and multiplexing layer headers               | 
|                           ...                                 | 
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ 
|                         ...                                   | 
+--                                                           --+ 
|                   SAToP Encapsulation Header                  | 
+--                                                           --+ 
|                         ...                                   | 
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ 
 
|                   Packetized TDM data (Payload)               | 
|                            ...                                | 
|                            ...                                | 
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
 
           Figure 1. Basic SAToP Packet Format 
 
   4.2. PSN and Multiplexing Layer Headers 
 
The total size of a SAToP packet for a specific PW MUST NOT exceed path 
MTU between the pair of PEs terminating this PW. SAToP implementations 
using IPv4 PSN MUST mark the IPv4 datagrams they generate as "Don't 
Fragment" [RFC791]. 
 
 
   4.3. SAToP Header 
 
The SAToP header MUST contain the SAToP Control Word (4 bytes) and MAY 
also contain a fixed RTP header [RFC3550]. If the RTP header is 
included in the SAToP header, it MUST immediately precede the SAToP 
control word in case of an IPv4 or IPv6 PSN, and MUST immediately 
follow it in the case of an MPLS PSN (see Fig. 2a and Fig. 2b below). 
 
Note: Such an arrangement complies with the traditional usage of RTP 
for the IPv4/IPv6 PSN while making SAToP PWs ECMP-safe for the MPLS PSN 
(see [PWE3-ARCH], Section 5.4.4). 
 
Both UDP and L2TPv3 can provide the multiplexing mechanisms for SAToP 
PWs over an IPv4/IPv6 PSN. The PW label provides the multiplexing 
mechanism over an MPLS PSN as described in Section 5.4.2 of [PWE3-
ARCH]. 
 
 


   Vainshtein & Stein        Expires   June 2004               [Page 4]
 
   Structure-Agnostic TDM over Packet                    December 2003 
          
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  
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
|                           ...                                 | 
|              IPv4/IPv6 and multiplexing layer headers         | 
|                           ...                                 | 
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ 
|                       OPTIONAL                                | 
+--                                                           --+ 
|                                                               | 
+--                                                           --+ 
|                 Fixed RTP Header (see [RFC3550])              | 
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ 
|                  SAToP Control Word                           | 
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ 
|                   Packetized TDM data (Payload)               | 
|                            ...                                | 
|                            ...                                | 
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
 
     Figure 2a. SAToP Packet Format for an IPv4/IPv6 PSN 
 
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  
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
|                           ...                                 | 
|              MPLS Label Stack                                 | 
|                           ...                                 | 
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ 
|                  SAToP Control Word                           | 
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ 
|                       OPTIONAL                                | 
+--                                                           --+ 
|                                                               | 
+--                                                           --+ 
|                 Fixed RTP Header (see [RFC3550])              | 
+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ 
|                   Packetized TDM data (Payload)               | 
|                            ...                                | 
|                            ...                                | 
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
 
  Figure 2b. SAToP Packet Format for an MPLS PSN 
 
 
     4.3.1. Usage and Structure of the Control Word 
 
Usage of the SAToP control word allows: 
 
     1. Detection of packet loss or mis-ordering 
     2. Differentiation between the PSN and attachment circuit 
         problems as causes for the outage of the emulated service 
 

   Vainshtein & Stein        Expires   June 2004               [Page 5]
 
   Structure-Agnostic TDM over Packet                    December 2003 
          
     3. PSN bandwidth conservation by not transferring invalid data 
         (AIS) 
     4. Signaling of faults detected at the PW egress to the PW 
         ingress. 
 
The structure of the SAToP Control Word is shown in Fig. 3 below. 
 
    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|L|R|RSV|FRG|   LEN     |       Sequence number         | 
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
 
              Figure 3. Structure of the SAToP Control Word 
 
Bits 0 to 3 MUST be set to 0 as described in [PWE3-ARCH], Section 5.4.4 
 
L - if set, indicates that TDM data carried in the payload is invalid 
    due an attachment circuit fault.  When the L bit is set the payload 
    MAY be omitted in order to conserve bandwidth. The CE-bound IWF 
    MUST play out an appropriate amount of filler data regardless of 
    the payload size. Once set, if the fault is rectified the L bit 
    MUST be cleared. 
      
Note: This document does not specify which TDM fault conditions are 
treated as invalidating the data carried in the SAToP packets. Possible 
examples include, but are not limited to LOS and AIS. 
 
R - if set by the PSN-bound IWF, indicates that its local CE-bound IWF 
    is in the packet loss state, i.e. has lost a preconfigured number 
    of consecutive packets. The R bit MUST be cleared by the PSN-bound 
    IWF once its local CE-bound IWF has exited the packet loss state, 
    i.e. has received a preconfigured number of consecutive packets. 
 
RSV (reserved) and FRG (fragmentation) bits (6 to 10) - MUST be set to 
0 by the PSN-bound IWF and MUST be ignored by the CE-bound IWF. 
 
LEN (bits (10 to 15) MAY be used to carry the length of the SAToP 
packet (defined as the size of the SAToP header + the payload size) if 
it is less than 64 bytes, and MUST be set to zero otherwise. When the 
LEN field is set to 0, the preconfigured size of the SAToP packet 
payload MUST be assumed, and if the actual packet size is inconsistent 
with this length, the packet MUST be considered to be malformed. 
 
Sequence number provides the common PW sequencing function and allows 
detection of lost packets. It MUST be generated in accordance with the 
rules defined in [RFC3550], Section 5 for the RTP sequence number.  
 
     4.3.2. Usage of RTP Header 
 
When RTP is used, SAToP requires the fields of the fixed RTP header 
(see [RFC3550], Section 5.1) with P (padding), X (header extension), CC 
(CSRC count), and M fields (marker) to be set to zero.  
 
   Vainshtein & Stein        Expires   June 2004               [Page 6]
 
   Structure-Agnostic TDM over Packet                    December 2003 
          
 
The PT (payload type) field is used as following: 
     1. One PT value MUST be allocated from the range of dynamic 
         values (see [RTP-TYPES]) for each direction of the PW. The 
         same PT value MAY be reused for both directions of the PW and 
         also reused between different PWs 
     2. The PSN-bound IWF MUST set the PT field in the RTP header to 
         the allocated value  
     3. The CE-bound IWF MAY use the received value to detect 
         malformed packets 
 
The sequence number field MAY be used to provide the common PW 
sequencing function as well as detection of lost packets. It MUST be 
generated in accordance with the rules established in [RFC3550] and 
MUST be the same as the sequence number in the SAToP control word.  
 
Timestamps are used for carrying timing information over the network. 
Their values are generated in accordance with the rules established in 
[RFC3550].  
 
The frequency of the clock used for generating timestamps MUST be an 
integer multiple of 8 kHz. All implementations of SAToP MUST support 
the 8 kHz clock. Other multiples of 8 kHz MAY be used. 
 
The SSRC (synchronization source) value in the RTP header MAY be used 
for detection of misconnections. 
 
Timestamp generation MAY be used in the following modes:  
 
     1. Absolute mode: the PSN-bound IWF sets timestamps using the 
         clock recovered from the incoming TDM attachment circuit. As a 
         consequence, the timestamps are closely correlated with the 
         sequence numbers. All SAToP implementations that support usage 
         of the RTP header MUST support this mode. 
     2. Differential mode: Both IWFs have access to a common high-
         quality timing source, and this source is used for timestamp 
         generation. Support of this mode is OPTIONAL. 
 
Usage of the fixed RTP header in a SAToP PW and all the options 
associated with its usage (the time-stamping clock frequency, the time-
stamping mode, selected PT and SSRC values) MUST be agreed upon between 
the two SAToP IWFs at the PW setup. 
                             
5. SAToP Payload Layer 
   5.1. General Payloads 
 
In order to facilitate handling of packet loss in the PSN, SAToP 
REQUIRES all packets belonging to a given SAToP PW to carry a fixed 
number of bytes filled with TDM data received from the attachment 
circuit. The packet payload size MUST be defined during the PW setup, 
MUST be the same for both directions of the PW and MUST remain 
unchanged for the lifetime of the PW.  
 
 
   Vainshtein & Stein        Expires   June 2004               [Page 7]
 
   Structure-Agnostic TDM over Packet                    December 2003 
          
The CE-bound and PSN-bound IWFs MUST agree on SAToP packet payload size 
at the PW setup  (default payload size values defined below guarantee 
that such an agreement is always possible). The SAToP packet payload 
size can be exchanged over the PWE3 control protocol ([PWE3-CONTROL]) 
by using the CEP Payload Bytes interface parameter ([PWE3-IANA]). 
 
SAToP uses the following ordering for packetization of the TDM data: 
     o  The order of the payload bytes corresponds to their order on 
         the attachment circuit 
     o  Consecutive bits coming from the attachment circuit fill each 
         payload byte starting from most significant bit to least 
         significant. 
 
All SAToP implementations MUST be capable of supporting the following 
payload sizes: 
 
     o  E1 - 256 bytes 
     o  T1 - 192 bytes 
     o  E3 and T3 - 1024 bytes. 
 
Notes:  
     1. Whatever the selected payload size, SAToP does not assume 
         alignment to any underlying structure imposed by TDM framing 
         (byte, frame or multiframe alignment). 
     2. When the L bit in the SAToP control word is set, SAToP packets 
         MAY omit invalid TDM data in order to conserve PSN bandwidth. 
     3. Payload sizes that are multiples of 47 bytes MAY be used in 
         conjunction with unstructured ATM-CES [ATM-CES].  
      
   5.2. Octet-aligned T1 
 
An unstructured T1 attachment circuit is sometimes provided already 
padded to an integer number of bytes, as described in Annex B of 
[G.802]. This occurs when the T1 is de-mapped from a SONET/SDH virtual 
tributary/container, or when it is deframed by a dual-mode E1/T1 
framer. 
 
In order to facilitate operation in such cases, SAToP defines a special 
"octet-aligned T1" transport mode. When operating in this mode, the 
SAToP payload consists of a number of 25-byte subframes, each subframe 
carrying 193 bits of TDM data and 7 bits of padding. This mode is 
depicted in Fig. 4 below. 
 
 










   Vainshtein & Stein        Expires   June 2004               [Page 8]
 
   Structure-Agnostic TDM over Packet                    December 2003 
          
   |     1         |        2      | ...   |      25       | 
   |0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7|0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7| ...   |0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7| 
   |=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ 
   |           TDM Data                      |  padding    | 
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
   |            .................................          | 
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
   |           TDM Data                      |  padding    | 
   +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+ 
  
Figure 4. SAToP Payload Format for Octet-Aligned T1 Transport 
 
Notes: 
 
1. No alignment with the framing structure that may be imposed on the 
    T1 bit-stream is implied. 
2. An additional advantage of the octet-aligned T1 transport mode is 
    ability to select the SAToP packetization latency as an arbitrary 
    integer multiple of 125 microseconds. 
 
Support of the octet-aligned T1 transport mode is OPTIONAL. An octet-
aligned T1 SAToP PW is not interoperable with a T1 SAToP PW that 
carries a non-aligned bit-stream, as described in the previous section. 
 
Implementations supporting octet-aligned T1 transport mode MUST be 
capable of supporting a payload size of 200 bytes (i.e., a payload of 
eight 25-byte subframes) corresponding to precisely 1 millisecond of 
TDM data. 
 
6. SAToP Operation 
   6.1. Common Considerations 
 
Edge-to-edge emulation of a TDM service using SAToP is only possible 
when the two PW attachment circuits are of the same type (T1, E1, T3, 
E3). The service type is exchanged at PW setup as described in [PWE3-
CONTROL]. 
 
 
   6.2. IWF operation  
 
     6.2.1. PSN-bound Direction 
 
Once the PW is set up, the PSN-bound SAToP IWF operates as follows: 
 
TDM data is packetized using the configured number of payload bytes per 
packet. 
  
Sequence numbers, flags, and timestamps (if the RTP header is used) are 
inserted in the SAToP headers. 
 
SAToP, multiplexing layer and PSN headers are prepended to the 
packetized service data. 
 
 
   Vainshtein & Stein        Expires   June 2004               [Page 9]
 
   Structure-Agnostic TDM over Packet                    December 2003 
          
The resulting packets are transmitted over the PSN. 
 
 
     6.2.2. CE-bound Direction 
 
The CE-bound SAToP IWF SHOULD include a jitter buffer where payload of 
the received SAToP packets is stored prior to play-out to the local TDM 
attachment circuit. The size of this buffer SHOULD be locally 
configurable to allow accommodation to the PSN-specific packet delay 
variation. 
 
The CE-bound SAToP IWF SHOULD use the sequence number in the control 
word for detection of lost and mis-ordered packets. If the RTP header 
is used, the RTP sequence numbers MAY be used for the same purposes.  
 
The CE-bound SAToP IWF MAY re-order mis-ordered packets. Mis-ordered 
packets that cannot be reordered MUST be discarded and treated as lost. 
 
The payload of the received SAToP packets marked with the L bit set 
SHOULD be replaced by the equivalent amount of the "all ones" pattern 
even if it has not been omitted.  
 
The payload of each lost SAToP packet MUST be replaced with the 
equivalent amount of the replacement data. The contents of the 
replacement data are implementation-specific and MAY be locally 
configurable.  By default, all SAToP implementations MUST support 
generation of the "all ones" pattern as the replacement data.  
Before a PW has been set up and after a PW has been torn down, the IWF 
MUST play out the "all ones" pattern to its TDM attachment circuit. 
 
Once the PW has been set up, the CE-bound IWF begins to receive SAToP 
packets and to store their payload in the jitter buffer but continues 
to play out the "all ones" pattern to its TDM attachment circuit. This 
intermediate state persists until a preconfigured amount of TDM data 
(usually half of the jitter buffer) has been received in consecutive 
SAToP packets or until a preconfigured intermediate state timer 
expires.  
 
Once the preconfigured amount of the TDM data has been received, the 
CE-bound SAToP IWF enters its normal operation state where it continues 
to receive SAToP packets and to store their payload in the jitter 
buffer while playing out the contents of the jitter buffer in 
accordance with the required clock. In this state the CE-bound IWF 
performs clock recovery, MAY monitor PW defects, and MAY collect PW 
performance monitoring data.  
 
If the CE-bound SAToP IWF detects loss of a preconfigured number of 
consecutive packets or if the intermediate state timer expires before 
the required amount of TDM data has been received, it enters its packet 
loss state. While in this state, the local PSN-bound SAToP IWF SHOULD 
mark every packet it transmits with the R bit set. The CE-bound SAToP 
IWF leaves this state and transits to the normal one once a 
preconfigured number of consecutive SAToP packets have been received. 
 
   Vainshtein & Stein        Expires   June 2004              [Page 10]
 
   Structure-Agnostic TDM over Packet                    December 2003 
          
 
The CE-bound SAToP IWF MUST provide an indication of TDM data validity 
to the CE. This can be done by transporting or by generating the native 
AIS indication. T3 AIS cannot be detected or generated by structure-
agnostic means and hence a structure-aware NSP MUST be used when 
generating a valid AIS pattern.  
 
 
   6.3. SAToP Defects 
 
 
In addition to the packet loss state of the CE-bound SAToP IWF defined 
above, it MAY detect the following defects: 
 
     o  Stray packets 
     o  Malformed packets 
     o  Excessive packet loss rate 
     o  Buffer overrun 
     o  Remote packet loss. 
      
Corresponding to each defect is a defect state of the IWF, a detection 
criterion that triggers transition from the normal operation state to 
the appropriate defect state, and an alarm that MAY be reported to the 
management system and thereafter cleared. Alarms are only reported when 
the defect state persists for a preconfigured amount of time (typically 
2.5 seconds) and MUST be cleared after the corresponding defect is 
undetected for a second preconfigured amount of time (typically 10 
seconds). The trigger and release times for the various alarms may be 
independent. 
 
Stray packets MAY be detected by the PSN and multiplexing layers. When 
RTP is used, the SSRC field in the RTP header MAY be used for this 
purpose as well. Stray packets MUST be discarded by the CE-bound IWF 
and their detection MUST NOT affect mechanisms for detection of packet 
loss. 
 
Malformed packets are detected by mismatch between the expected packet 
size (taking the value of the L bit into account) and the actual packet 
size inferred from the PSN and multiplexing layers. When RTP is used, 
lack of correspondence between the PT value and that allocated for this 
direction of the PW MAT also be used for this purpose. Malformed in-
order packets MUST be discarded by the CE-bound IWF and replacement 
data generated as for lost packets. 
 
Excessive packet loss rate is detected by computing the average packet 
loss rate over a configurable amount of times and comparing it with a 
preconfigured threshold. 
 
Buffer overrun is detected in the normal operation state when the CE 
bound IWF's jitter buffer cannot accommodate newly arrived SAToP 
packets.  
 
 

   Vainshtein & Stein        Expires   June 2004              [Page 11]
 
   Structure-Agnostic TDM over Packet                    December 2003 
          
Remote packet loss is indicated by reception of packets with their R 
bit set.  
 
   6.4. SAToP PW Performance Monitoring  
 
Performance monitoring (PM) parameters are routinely collected for TDM 
services and provide an important maintenance mechanism in TDM 
networks. Ability to collect compatible PM parameters for SAToP PWs 
enhances their maintenance capabilities. 
 
Collection of the SAToP PW performance monitoring parameters is 
OPTIONAL, and if implemented, is only performed after the CE-bound IWF 
has exited its intermediate state. 
 
SAToP defines error events, errored blocks and defects as follows: 
 
     o  A SAToP error event is defined as insertion of a single 
         replacement packet into the jitter buffer (replacement of 
         payload of SAToP packets with the L bit set is not considered 
         as insertion of a replacement packet) 
     o  A SAToP errored data block is defined as a block of data 
         played out to the TDM attachment circuit and of size defined 
         in accordance with the [G.826] rules for the corresponding TDM 
         service that has experienced at least one SAToP error event  
     o  A SAToP defect is defined as the packet loss state of the CE-
         bound SAToP IWF. 
  
The SAToP PW PM parameters (Errored, Severely Errored and Unavailable 
Seconds) are derived from these definitions in accordance with [G.826].  
 
7. QoS Issues 
 
SAToP can benefit from QoS capabilities of the underlying PSN.  
 
If the PSN providing connectivity between PE devices is Diffserv- 
enabled and provides a PDB [RFC3086] that guarantees low-jitter and  
low-loss, the SAToP PW SHOULD use this PDB in compliance with the 
admission and allocation rules the PSN has put in place for that PDB  
(e.g., marking packets as directed by the PSN).  
 
If the PSN is Intserv-enabled, then GS (Guaranteed Service) [RFC 2212] 
with the appropriate bandwidth reservation shall be used in order to 
provide a bandwidth guarantee equal or greater than that of the 
aggregate TDM traffic. The delay introduced by the PSN should be 
measured prior to traffic flow, to ensure its compliance with the 
latency requirement. 
 
 






   Vainshtein & Stein        Expires   June 2004              [Page 12]
 
   Structure-Agnostic TDM over Packet                    December 2003 
          
8.  Congestion Control   
 
SAToP PWs represent a special case of PWs carrying constant bit rate 
(CBR) services across the PSN. These services cannot behave in a TCP-
friendly manner prescribed by [RFC2914] under congestion.  
 
SAToP will use the generic PWE3 approach for handling congestion in PWs 
carrying CBR services when such an approach has been specified.  
 
 
9. Security Considerations 
 
SAToP does not enhance or detract from the security performance of the 
underlying PSN, rather it relies upon the PSN mechanisms for 
encryption, integrity, and authentication whenever required.  
 
Misconnection detection capabilities of SAToP increase its resilience 
to misconfiguration and some types of DoS attacks. 
 
Random initialization of sequence numbers defined in [RFC3550] makes 
known-plaintext attacks on encryption more difficult. 
 
10. Applicability Statement 
 
SAToP is an encapsulation layer intended for carrying TDM circuits 
(E1/T1/E3/T3) over PSN in a structure-agnostic fashion.  
 
SAToP fully complies with the principle of minimal intervention, thus 
minimizing overhead and computational power required for encapsulation.  
 
SAToP provides sequencing and synchronization functions needed for 
emulation of TDM bit-streams, including detection of lost or mis-
ordered packets and appropriate compensation. 
 
SAToP carries TDM streams over PSN in their entirety including any TDM 
signaling contained within the data. Consequently the emulated TDM 
services are sensitive to the PSN packet loss. Appropriate generation 
of replacement data can be used to prevent shutting down the CE TDM 
interface due to occasional packet loss. Other effects of packet loss 
on this interface (e.g., errored blocks) cannot be prevented. 
 
Note: Structure-aware TDM emulation (see [CESoPSN] or [TDMoIP]) 
completely hides effects of the PSN packet loss on the CE TDM interface 
(because framing and CRCs are generated locally) and allows usage of 
application-specific packet loss concealment methods [PACKETLOSS] to 
minimize effects on the applications using the emulated TDM service. 
 
SAToP can be used in conjunction with various clock recovery techniques 
and does not presume availability of a global synchronous clock at the 
ends of a PW. However, if the global synchronous clock is available at 
both ends of a SAToP PW, using RTP and differential timestamp 
generation may improve the quality of the recovered clock. 
 
 
   Vainshtein & Stein        Expires   June 2004              [Page 13]
 
   Structure-Agnostic TDM over Packet                    December 2003 
          
SAToP provides for effective fault isolation by carrying the local 
attachment circuit failure indications.  
 
The option not to carry invalid TDM data enables PSN bandwidth 
conservation. 
 
SAToP allows collection of TDM-like faults and performance monitoring 
parameters hence emulating 'classic' carrier services of TDM.  
 
SAToP provides for a carrier-independent ability to detect 
misconnections and malformed packets. This feature increases resilience 
of the emulated service to misconfiguration and DoS attacks. 
 
Being a constant bit rate (CBR) service, SAToP cannot provide TCP-
friendly behavior under network congestion.  
 
Faithfulness of a SAToP PW may be increased by exploiting QoS features 
of the underlying PSN. 
 
SAToP does not provide any mechanisms for protection against PSN 
outages, and hence its resilience to such outages is limited. However, 
lost-packet replacement and packet reordering mechanisms increase 
resilience of the emulated service to fast PSN rerouting events. 
 
11. IANA Considerations 
 
This specification requires assignment of new PW Types services listed 
in Section 3. 
 
12. Intellectual Property Disclaimer 
 
This document is being submitted for use in IETF standards discussions. 
 
Axerra Networks Inc. (and/or any of its affiliates) has filed one or 
more patent applications and/or is the holder of one or more issued 
patents that it believes may be relevant to the subject matter 
described in the present document ("IPR"). Should the implementation of 
SAToP require the use of technologies underlying the aforementioned 
patents or patent applications, Axerra is prepared to grant non-
exclusive royalty-free licenses on reasonable and non-discriminatory 
terms to implementers who register at Axerra's web site and who agree 
to all of Axerra's license terms. 
  
Axerra's willingness to grant such licenses is conditioned upon 
the acceptance of SAToP by the IETF, and upon the prospective licensee 
granting reciprocal licenses to Axerra under any patents that it has to 
any technology required for the implementation of SAToP. Any claim of 
patent infringement by licensee or its affiliates against Axerra or its 
affiliates, distributors or customers will immediately terminate any 
license given by Axerra to the implementer. 
 
RAD Data Communications, Ltd. (and/or any of its affiliates) has filed 
one or more patent applications and/or is the holder of one or more 
 
   Vainshtein & Stein        Expires   June 2004              [Page 14]
 
   Structure-Agnostic TDM over Packet                    December 2003 
          
issued patents that it believes may be relevant to the subject matter 
described in the present document ("IPR"). Should the implementation of 
SAToP require the use of technologies underlying the aforementioned 
patents or patent applications, RAD is prepared to grant non-exclusive 
royalty-free licenses on reasonable and non-discriminatory terms to 
implementers who register at RAD's web site and who agree to all of 
RAD's license terms. 
  
RAD's willingness to grant such licenses is conditioned upon 
the acceptance of SAToP by the IETF, and upon the prospective licensee 
granting reciprocal licenses to RAD under any patents that it has to 
any technology required for the implementation of SAToP. Any claim of 
patent infringement by licensee or its affiliates against RAD or its 
affiliates, distributors or customers will immediately terminate any 
license given by RAD to the implementer. 
 
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 
 
We acknowledge the work of Gil Biran and Hugo Silberman who implemented 
TDM transport over IP in 1998.  
 
We would like to thank Alik Shimelmits for many productive discussions 
and Ron Insler for his assistance in deploying TDM over PSN. 
 
We express deep gratitude to Stephen Casner who has reviewed in detail 
one of the predecessors of this document and provided valuable feedback 
regarding various aspects of RTP usage, and to Kathleen Nichols who has 
provided the current text of the QoS section considering Diffserv-
enabled PSN. 
 
We thank William Bartholomay, Robert Biksner, Stewart Bryant, Rao 
Cherukuri, Ron Cohen, Alex Conta, Shahram Davari, Tom Johnson, Sim 
Narasimha, Yaron Raz, and Maximilian Riegel for their valuable 
feedback. 
 
 
NORMATIVE REFERENCES 
 
[RFC791] J. Postel (ed), Internet Protocol, RFC 791, IETF, 1981 
 
[RFC1122] R. Braden (ed.), Requirements for Internet Hosts -- 
Communication Layers, RFC 1122, IETF, 1989  
 
[RFC2119] S.Bradner, Key Words in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels, 
RFC 2119, IETF, 1997 
 
[RFC2112] S. Shenker et al, Specification of Guaranteed Quality of 
Service, IETF, RFC 2212, 1997 
 
[RFC2914] S. Floyd, Congestion Control Principles, RFC 2914, IETF, 2000 
 
 



   Vainshtein & Stein        Expires   June 2004              [Page 15]
 
   Structure-Agnostic TDM over Packet                    December 2003 
          
[RFC3086] K. Nichols, B. Carpenter, Definition of Differentiated 
Services Per Domain Behaviors and Rules for their Specification, RFC 
3086, IETF, 2001  
 
[RFC3550] H. Schulzrinne et al, RTP: A Transport Protocol for Real-Time 
Applications, RFC 3550, IETF, 2003 
 
[RTP-TYPES] RTP PARAMETERS, http://www.iana.org/assignments/rtp-
parameters 
 
[G.702] ITU-T Recommendation G.702 (11/88) - Digital Hierarchy Bit 
Rates 
 
[G.703] ITU-T Recommendation G.703 (10/98) - Physical/Electrical 
Characteristics of Hierarchical Digital Interfaces 
 
[G.704] ITU-T Recommendation G.704 (10/98) - Synchronous frame 
structures used at 1544, 6312, 2048, 8448 and 44 736 Kbit/s 
hierarchical levels 
 
[G.707] ITU-T Recommendation G.707 (03/96) - Network Node Interface for 
the Synchronous Digital Hierarchy (SDH)  
 
[G.751] ITU-T Recommendation G.751 (11/88) - Digital Multiplex 
Equipments Operating at the Third Order Bit Rate of 34368 kbit/s and 
the Fourth Order Bit Rate of 139264 kbit/s and Using Positive 
Justification 
 
[G.775] ITU-T Recommendation G.775 (10/98) - Loss of Signal (LOS), 
Alarm Indication Signal (AIS) and Remote Defect Indication (RDI) Defect 
Detection and Clearance Criteria for PDH Signals 
 
[G.802] ITU-T Recommendation G.802 (11/88) - Interworking between 
Networks Based on Different Digital Hierarchies and Speech Encoding 
Laws 
 
[G.826] ITU-T Recommendation G.826 (02/99) - Error performance 
parameters and objectives for international, constant bit rate digital 
paths at or above the primary rate 
 
[T1.107] American National Standard for Telecommunications - Digital 
Hierarchy - Format Specifications, ANSI T1.107-1988 
 
INFORMATIONAL REFERENCES 
 
[PWE3-REQ] XiPeng Xiao et al, Requirements for Pseudo Wire Emulation 
Edge-to-Edge (PWE3), Work in Progress, October 2003, draft-ietf-pwe3-
requirements-07.txt 
 
[PWE3-TDM-REQ] Maximilian Riegel, Requirements for Edge-to-Edge 
Emulation of TDM Circuits over Packet Switching Networks (PSN), Work in 
Progress, December 2003, draft-ietf-pwe3-tdm-requirements-03.txt 
 
    Vainshtein & Stein        Expires   June 2004              [Page 16]
 
   Structure-Agnostic TDM over Packet                    December 2003 
          
[PWE3-ARCH] S. Bryant, P. Pate, PWE3 Architecture, Work in progress, 
October 2003, draft-ietf-pwe3-framework-06.txt 
 
[PWE3-CONTROL] L. Martini et al, Pseudowire Setup and Maintenance using 
LDP, Work in progress, October 2003, draft-ietf-pwe3-control-protocol-
04.txt  
 
[PWE3-IANA] L. Martini, M. Townsley, IANA Allocations for pseudo Wire 
Edge to Edge Emulation (PWE3), Work in progress, October 2003, draft-
ietf-pwe3-iana-allocation-02.txt  
 
[ATM-CES] ATM forum specification af-vtoa-0078 (CES 2.0) 
Circuit Emulation Service Interoperability Specification Ver. 2.0 
 
[CESoPSN] A.Vainshtein et al, TDM Circuit Emulation Service over Packet 
Switched Network (CESoPSN), Work in Progress, October 2003, draft-
vainshtein-cesopsn-07.txt 
 
[TDMoIP] Y. Stein, TDMoIP, Work in Progress, October 2003, draft-anavi-
tdmoip-06.txt 
 
[PACKETLOSS] Y. Stein, I Druker, The Effect of Packet Loss on Voice 
Quality for TDM over Pseudowires, Work in Progress, October 2003, 
draft-stein-pwe3-tdm-packetloss-01.txt 
 
Editors' Addresses 
 
Alexander ("Sasha") Vainshtein 
Axerra Networks 
24 Raoul Wallenberg St.,  
Tel Aviv 69719, Israel 
email: sasha@axerra.com 
 
Yaakov (Jonathan) Stein 
RAD Data Communications 
24 Raoul Wallenberg St., Bldg C 
Tel Aviv 69719, Israel 
Email: yaakov_s@rad.com 
 
 














   Vainshtein & Stein        Expires   June 2004              [Page 17]

PAFTECH AB 2003-20262026-04-20 05:47:34