ANCP | F. Le Faucheur |
Internet-Draft | Cisco |
Updates: 6320 (if approved) | R. Maglione |
Intended status: Standards Track | Cisco Systems |
Expires: July 12, 2014 | T. Taylor |
Huawei | |
January 08, 2014 |
Multicast Control Extensions for ANCP
draft-ietf-ancp-mc-extensions-14.txt
This document specifies the extensions to the Access Node Control Protocol required for support of the multicast use cases defined in the Access Node Control Protocol framework document and one additional use case described in this document. These use cases are organized into the following ANCP capabilities:
These capabilities may be combined according to the rules given in this specification.
This document updates RFC 6320 by assigning capability type 3 to a capability specified in this document and by changing the starting point for IANA allocation of result codes determined by IETF Consensus from 0x100 to 0x64.
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
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."
This Internet-Draft will expire on July 12, 2014.
Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.
[RFC5851] defines a framework and requirements for an Access Node control mechanism between a Network Access Server (NAS) and an Access Node (e.g. a Digital Subscriber Line Access Multiplexer (DSLAM)) in a multi-service reference architecture in order to perform QoS-related, service-related and subscriber-related operations. [RFC6320] specifies a protocol for Access Node Control in broadband networks in line with this framework.
[RFC6320] supports three use cases defined in [RFC5851], specifically for DSL access: the DSL Topology Discovery use case, the DSL Line Configuration use case and the DSL Remote Connectivity Test use case. However, it does not support the multicast use cases defined in [RFC5851]. The present document specifies the extensions to the Access Node Control Protocol required for support of these multicast use cases. In addition, it supports the Committed Bandwidth Reporting use case, described below. In terms of the ANCP protocol, these use cases are organized into five capabilities:
NAS-initiated multicast replication assumes that multicast "join" and "leave" requests are terminated on the NAS, or that the NAS receives requests to establish multicast sessions through other means (e.g., application-level signalling). The NAS sends commands to the AN to start or stop replication of specific multicast flows on specific subscriber ports. This use case is described briefly in the next-to-last paragraph of Section 3.4 of [RFC5851].
Conditional access is described in Section 3.4.1 and Section 3.4.2.3 of [RFC5851], with the latter section particularly applicable to operation with white and black lists only. In case of "conditional access with white and black lists", multicast join and leave requests are terminated at the AN and accepted or ignored in accordance with the direction provided by white and black lists respectively. The white and black lists are provisioned per port at startup time and may be modified thereafter. The NAS may enable admission control of white-listed flows by appropriate provisioning.
Conditional access with grey lists is similar to conditional access with white lists, except that before accepting any request matching a grey list entry, the AN sends a request to the NAS for permission to replicate the flow. Again, the NAS can enable admission control of grey-listed flows at the AN.
Bandwidth delegation is described in Section 3.4.2.1 of [RFC5851]. It allows flexible sharing of total video bandwidth on an access line between the AN and the NAS. One application of such bandwidth sharing is where the AN does multicast admission control, while the NAS or Policy Server does unicast admission control. In that case, bandwidth delegation allows dynamic sharing of bandwidth between unicast and multicast video traffic on each access line.
Committed bandwidth reporting is described below, in Section 3.4. The AN reports the amount of multicast bandwidth it has granted to a given access line each time that value changes. These reports may be buffered for a NAS-provisionable interval so that reports for multiple access lines can be bundled into the same message.
The formal specification of the behaviours associated with each of these capabilities, singly and in combination, is given in Section 6.
In addition to the multicast service processing behaviour just sketched, the definition of each capability includes support for the multicast accounting and reporting services described in Section 3.4.3 of [RFC5851]. Because of this common content and because of other protocol overlaps between the different capabilities, the protocol descriptions for the multicast extensions specified in this document are merged into a single non-redundant narrative. Tables in Section 6 then indicate the specific sub-sections of the protocol description that have to be implemented to support each capability.
This document updates RFC 6320 by assigning capability type 3 to the NAS-initiated multicast replication capability and by changing the starting point for IANA allocation of result codes determined by IETF Consensus from 0x100 to 0x64.
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
Within this document, the term "conditional access and admission control (CAC)" refers to the complete decision process for allowing or disallowing a subscriber request for a new flow. This process consists of two parts: policy-based admission control and resource-based admission control. The NAS can delegate policy-based admission control to the Access Node if both devices support conditional access with white and black lists. It can delegate resource-based admission control to the Access Node if both devices support any of the capabilities described in this document besides or other than committed bandwidth reporting. The delegation is performed on a per-subscriber basis using the Provisioning (Section 4.1) and Port Management (Section 4.2) messages.
The expression "delegated bandwidth" is used as a shorter way of saying: "the total amount of video bandwidth delegated to the AN for multicast resource-based admission control".
Quoting from [RFC5851]:
"... the Access Node, aggregation node(s) and the NAS must all be involved in the multicast replication process. This avoids that several copies of the same stream are sent within the access/aggregation network. In case of an Ethernet-based access/aggregation network, this may, for example, be achieved by means of IGMP snooping or IGMP proxy in the Access Node and aggregation node(s). By introducing IGMP processing in the access/aggregation nodes, the multicast replication process is now divided between the NAS, the aggregation node(s) and Access Nodes. In order to ensure backward compatibility with the ATM-based model, the NAS, aggregation node and Access Node need to behave as a single logical device. This logical device must have exactly the same functionality as the NAS in the ATM access/aggregation network. The Access Node Control Mechanism can be used to make sure that this logical/functional equivalence is achieved by exchanging the necessary information between the Access Node and the NAS."
[RFC5851] describes the use cases for ANCP associated with such multicast operations, and identifies the associated ANCP requirements. The present section describes a subset of these use cases as background to facilitate reading of this document, but the reader is referred to [RFC5851] for a more exhaustive description of the ANCP multicast use cases. Detailed example message flows can also be found in Appendix A.
One option for multicast handling is for the subscriber to communicate the "join/leave" information to the NAS. This can be done for instance by terminating all subscriber IGMP ([RFC3376]) or MLD ([RFC2710], [RFC3810]) signaling on the NAS. Another example could be a subscriber using some form of application level signaling, which is redirected to the NAS. In any case, this option is transparent to the access and aggregation network. In this scenario, the NAS uses ANCP to create and remove replication state in the AN for efficient multicast replication. Thus, the NAS only sends a single copy of the multicast stream towards the AN, which in turn performs replication to multiple subscribers as instructed by the NAS via ANCP. The NAS performs conditional access and admission control when processing multicast join requests, and only creates replication state in the AN if admission succeeds.
With the NAS-initiated use case, a Multicast Replication Control Message is sent by the NAS to the AN with a directive to either join or leave one (or more) multicast flow(s). In the example message flow, the AN uses a Generic Response message to convey the outcome of the directive. Figure 1 illustrates such an ANCP message exchange as well as the associated AN behavior.
+----------+ +-------+ +-----+ ANCP +-----+ |Subscriber| | Home | | AN |<-------------------->| NAS | +----------+ |Gateway| +-----+ +-----+ | +-------+ | | | | | (*) | | | Multicast-Replication-Ctl | | | | (Target,add, Flow 1) | | | |<--------------------------| | Mcast Flow 1 | | |<==========================+ | | | | Generic Response | | | |-------------------------->| | | | | | | | | ~ ~ ~ ~ | | | | | | | Multicast-Replication-Ctl | | | | (Target,delete, Flow 1) | | | |<--------------------------| | | | | | <Stop Replication of X | | Mcast Flow 1> | Generic Response | | | |-------------------------->| (*) The NAS may optionally seek direction from an external Authorization/Policy Server before admitting the flow.
Figure 1: NAS Initiated Multicast Replication Control
One option for multicast handling is for the access/aggregation nodes to participate in IGMP/MLD processing (e.g. via IGMP/MLD snooping). In this scenario, on detecting a join/leave request from an end user for a multicast flow (in the grey list), the AN uses ANCP to request a conditional access and admission control decision from the NAS. In turn, after conditional access and admission control checks, the NAS uses ANCP to instruct the AN to change the replication states accordingly.
For support of the conditional access and admission control use case, on detection of an IGMP/MLD Join, the AN sends an Admission Control message to the NAS to request a conditional access and admission control check. In the case of a positive outcome, the NAS sends a Multicast Replication Control Message to the AN with a directive to replicate the multicast flow to the corresponding user. Similarly on detection of an IGMP/MLD leave, an Admission Control message is sent by the AN to the NAS to keep the NAS aware of user departure for the flow. This message flow is illustrated in Figure 2.
+----------+ +-------+ +-----+ ANCP +-----+ |Subscriber| | Home | | AN |<------------------->| NAS | +----------+ |Gateway| +-----+ +-----+ | +-------+ | | | | | | | Join(Gr-Flow1) | Admission-Control | |------------+---------->| (Target,add,Gr-Flow1) | | | |-------------------------->| | | | (*) | | | Multicast-Replication-Crl | | | | (Target,add,Gr-Flow1) | | | |<--------------------------| | Mcast Gr-Flow1 | | |<=======================+ | | | | | ~ ~ ~ ~ | | | | | Leave(Gr-Flow1) | Admission-Control | |------------+---------->| (Target,delete,Gr-Flow1) | | | |-------------------------->| | <Stop Replication of X | | Mcast Gr-Flow1> | | | | | | Gr-Flow1: a multicast flow matching the grey list for that port (*) The NAS may optionally seek direction from an external Authorization/Policy Server before admitting the flow.
Figure 2: Multicast Conditional Access and Admission Control
The Multicast flow reporting use case allows the NAS to asynchronously query the AN to obtain an instantaneous status report related to multicast flows currently replicated by the AN.
The NAS sends a Multicast Flow Query Request message to the AN in order to query the AN about information such as which multicast flows are currently active on a given AN port or which ports are currently replicating a given multicast flow. The AN conveys the requested information to the NAS in a Multicast Flow Query Response message. This message flow is illustrated in Figure 3.
+----------+ +-------+ +-----+ ANCP +-----+ |Subscriber| | Home | | AN |<---------->| NAS | +----------+ |Gateway| +-----+ +-----+ | +-------+ | | | | | Multicast Flow | | | | Query Request | | | |<------------------| | | | | | | | Multicast Flow | | | | Query Response | | | |------------------>| | | | | | | | |
Figure 3: Multicast Flow Reporting
The committed bandwidth reporting use case allows the NAS to maintain current awareness of how much multicast bandwidth the AN has committed to a given access line, so that the NAS can adjust its forwarding scheduler to ensure the associated QoS. Note that this involves a finer level of detail than provided by bandwidth delegation, since the amount of delegated bandwidth is an upper limit on the amount of bandwidth committed rather than an actual value. To reduce the volume of messaging, reports from the AN may be buffered so that one message reports on changes for multiple access lines.
The message flow associated with this use case is shown in Figure 4. The figure assumes that a non-zero buffering interval was previously provisioned on the AN.
+-----+ +-------+ +-----+ ANCP +-----+ |Subs |+ | Home |+ | AN |<---------->| NAS | |1,2 || |GW 1,2 || +-----+ +-----+ +-----+| +-------+| | | +|----+ +|------+ | | | | | | | | | |Join(Subs1, Ch1) | | |----------+--------------->| Start buffering | | | | Multicast flow | timer. Create | |<==========================| message with | | | | | | initial contents | | | | | | reporting new | | | | | | Subs1 bandwidth. | | | Join(Subs2, Ch2) | | | |----------+------------->| Add report for | | | | Multicast flow | new Subs2 b/w. | | |<========================| | | | | | | | | |Leave(Subs1, Ch1) | | |----------+--------------->| Replace report | | | | | | for Subs1 with | | | Stop replication X new value (which | | | | | | happens to be | | | | | | the same as the | | | | | | starting value. | | | | | | | | | | | >|< TIMER expires | | | | | | | | | | | |Committed | | | | | | Bandwidth Report | | | | | |------------------>| | | | | | (for latest | | | | | | Subs1 and Subs2 | | | | | | bandwidth) | | | | | | |
Figure 4: Message Flow For Committed Bandwidth Reporting
This section defines new ANCP messages and new usage of existing ANCP messages as well as procedures associated with the use of these messages.
Unless stated otherwise, receivers MUST ignore message contents that are not supported by the set of capabilities negotiated between the NAS and the Access Node.
Section 4.1 of [RFC6320] defines the Provisioning message that is sent by the NAS to the AN to provision information in the AN.
The present document specifies that the Provisioning message MAY be used by the NAS to provision multicast-related information (e.g., multicast service profiles). The ANCP Provisioning message payload MAY contain: Section 6 for information on which multicast capabilities require support of these TLVs in the Provisioning message.
See
When directed by the Policy Server or by management action, the NAS sends the Provisioning message to initially provision or to update the white, black, and/or grey multicast channel lists associated with a set of named multicast service profiles, or to direct the AN to perform resource-based admission control for specific classes of flows.
To provision or update a multicast service profile, the NAS MUST include within the message one or more instances of the Multicast-Service-Profile TLV specifying the content to be provisioned or updated. The NAS SHOULD NOT include any list type (white, black, or grey) that is not supported by the set of multicast capabilities negotiated between the NAS and the AN. The NAS MUST NOT use the Provisioning message to send instances of the Multicast-Service-Profile TLV to the AN unless the Multicast-Service-Profile TLV is supported by the set of multicast capabilities negotiated between the NAS and the AN.
To require resource-based admission control to be performed at the AN on white-listed flows, the NAS MUST include a copy of the White-List-CAC TLV in the Provisioning message. The White-List-CAC TLV MUST NOT be provided unless the negotiated set of capabilities includes conditional access with white and black lists.
To require resource-based admission control to be performed at the AN on grey-listed flows or on NAS-initiated flows, the NAS MUST include a copy of the MRepCtl-CAC TLV in the Provisioning message. The MRepCtl-CAC TLV MUST NOT be provided unless the negotiated set of capabilities includes NAS-initiated replication control or conditional access with grey lists.
To require buffering of Committed Bandwidth Report messages so that reports for multiple access lines can be included in the same message, the NAS MUST include a copy of the Report-Buffering-Time TLV containing a non-zero time value in a Provisioning message sent to the AN. The Report-Buffering-Time TLV MUST NOT be provided unless the negotiated set of capabilities includes committed bandwidth reporting.
The receiving AN provisions/updates the white, black, and/or grey lists associated with the multicast service profile names contained in the Multicast-Service-Profile TLV instances within the message according to the contents of the associated List-Action TLVs. The AN MUST process List-Action TLVs in the order in which they appear within the message. In keeping with the general rule stated in Section 4, the AN MUST ignore instances of the List-Action TLV referring to any list type (white, black, or grey) that is not supported by the set of multicast capabilities negotiated between the NAS and the AN.
When a new multicast service profile is identified by a Multicast-Service-Profile TLV, the initial state of all lists associated with that profile according to the negotiated set of multicast capabilities is empty until changed by the contents of Multicast-Service-Profile TLVs.
The receipt of a Provisioning message containing updates to an existing multicast service profile subsequent to startup will cause the AN to review the status of active flows on all ports to which that profile has been assigned. For further details, see Section 6.
If the White-List-CAC and/or MRepCtl-CAC TLV is present in the Provisioning message and the respective associated capabilities have been negotiated, the AN prepares (or continues) to do resource-based admission control on the indicated class(es) of flow. If one or both of these TLVs was present in an earlier Provisioning message but is absent in the latest message received, the AN ceases to do resource-based admission control on the indicated class(es) of flow.
The buffering time specified in an instance of the Report-Buffering-Time TLV applies only to Committed Bandwidth Report messages initiated after the new buffering time is received at the AN, not to any message already in the process of accumulation.
As indicated in [RFC6320], the AN MUST NOT reply to the Provisioning message if it processed it successfully. If an error prevents successful processing of the message content, the AN MUST return a Generic Response message as defined in [RFC6320], containing a Status-Info TLV with the appropriate content describing the error. For this purpose, the presence of a list type in a Multicast-Service-Profile TLV which was ignored because it was not supported by the negotiated set of capabilities is not considered to be an error.
As specified in [RFC6320], the NAS may send DSL line configuration information to the AN ("ANCP based DSL Line Configuration" use case) using ANCP Port Management messages. See Section 7.3 of [RFC6320] for the format of the Port Management message in that usage.
This document specifies that the Port Management message MAY be used to convey either or both of the following TLVs:
When the Port Management message is used for this purpose:
The NAS sends the Port Management message at startup time to initialize parameters associated with the access line specified in the message and with the multicast capabilities negotiated between the NAS and the AN. The NAS MAY send additional Port Management messages subsequent to startup, to update or, in the case of the Bandwidth-Allocation TLV, reset these parameters. If the NAS includes a Multicast-Service-Profile-Name TLV in the Port Management message, the name MUST match a profile name provided in a Multicast-Service-Profile TLV in a prior Provisioning message. The NAS MUST NOT include a TLV unless it is supported by the set of multicast capabilities negotiated between the NAS and the AN. See Section 6 for further information.
If the Port Management message contains a Multicast-Service-Profile-Name TLV, the AN associates the named profile with the specified access line. This association replaces any previous association. That is, a given access line is associated with at most one multicast service profile. The replacement of one multicast service profile with another will cause the AN to review the status of all active flows on the target port. For further details see Section 6.
If the Port Management message contains a Bandwidth-Allocation TLV, the AN adopts this as the current value of its total multicast bandwidth limit for the target port. If the AN has already committed multicast bandwidth exceeding the amount given in the Bandwidth-Allocation TLV, the AN SHOULD NOT discontinue any multicast streams in order to bring bandwidth down to within the new limit, unless such action is required by local policy. However, the AN MUST NOT admit new multicast streams that are subject to admission control until it can do so within the limit specified by the Bandwidth-Allocation TLV.
If the Port Management request cannot be processed due to error and the Result field of the request is Nack (0x1) or AckAll (0x2), the AN SHOULD add a Status-Info TLV to the Extension Value field in its reply if this will provide useful information beyond what is provided by the Result Code value returned in the response header. In particular, if the name within the Multicast-Service-Profile-Name TLV does not match a profile name given in a prior Provisioning message, the AN SHOULD return a reply where the Result Code field in the header indicates 0x55, "Invalid TLV contents", the Error Message field in the Status-Info TLV contains the text "Multicast profile name not provisioned", and the Status-Info TLV contains a copy of the Multicast-Service-Profile-Name TLV.
This section defines a new message called the Multicast Replication Control message. The Multicast Replication Control message is sent by the NAS to the AN with one or more directives to add (join) or delete (leave) a multicast flow on a target object identified in the content of the message.
The Message Type for the Multicast Replication Control message is 144.
The ANCP Multicast Replication Control message payload contains the following TLVs:
As [RFC6320] indicates, the contents of the Command Info field within the Command TLV are specific to the message in which the TLV occurs. For the Multicast Replication Control Message, these contents consist of: Figure 5 illustrates the complete Command TLV with the contents specific to the Multicast Replication Control message.
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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | TLV Type = Command 0x0011 | Command TLV Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |Command Code | Accounting | Reserved | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Multicast-Flow TLV | | ... | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Other embedded TLV Type | Other embedded TLV Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | ~ Other embedded TLV data ~ | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 5: Contents of the Command TLV in the Multicast Replication Control Message
Directives 4 through 6 are used as described in
Section 4.4.2.
The figure below is an example of a Multicast Replication Control message that would result in a swap from multicast Source-Specific Multicast (SSM) flows 2001:DB8::1, FF34::2, to 2001:DB8::2, FF34::3 on the Target identified by the “Access Loop Circuit ID”:
1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type (0x880C) | Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Version | MsgType=144 | Res=2 | Result Code = 0 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Partition ID | Transaction Identifier = 18 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |I| SubMessage Number | Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | TLV Type = Target 0x1000 | Target TLV Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Access-Loop-Circuit-ID 0x0001 | Circuit-ID Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | ~ Access Loop Circuit ID ~ | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | TLV Type = Command 0x0011 | Command TLV Length = 44 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Cmd Code = 2 | Acctg = 0 | Reserved = 0x0000 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type = Multicast-Flow 0x0019 | TLV Length = 36 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Flow Type = 2 | AddrFam = 2 | Reserved = 0x0000 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | ~ Multicast Group Address ~ | = FF34::2 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | ~ Source Address ~ | = 2001:DB8::1 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | TLV Type = Command 0x0011 | Command-TLV Length = 44 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Cmd Code = 1 | Acctg = 1 | Reserved = 0x0000 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type = Multicast-Flow 0x0019 | TLV Length = 36 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Flow Type = 2 | AddrFam = 2 | Reserved = 0x0000 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | ~ Multicast Group Address ~ | = FF34::3 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | ~ Source Address ~ | = 2001:DB8::2 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
The NAS MAY issue a Multicast Replication Control message to the AN to convey one or more directives to add (join) or delete (leave) one or more multicast flows.
The NAS MAY send this message on its own initiative to support the NAS initiated Multicast Control use case presented in [RFC5851] and summarized in Section 3.1. In that case, the NAS MUST set the Result field to AckAll (0x2) or Nack (0x1) according to its requirements.
The NAS MAY also send this message in response to a Multicast Admission Control message (defined in Section 4.4) received from the AN to support the conditional access and admission control use case presented in [RFC5851] and summarized in Section 3.2. In that case, the NAS MUST set the Result field to NAck (0x1).
In either case, the sender MUST populate the Result Code field with the value 0 and the ANCP Transaction Identifier field with a unique value, as described in Section 3.6.1.6 of [RFC6320].
Each Multicast Replication Control Message MUST contain one or more commands, each encapsulated in its own Command TLV. The sender MUST use a separate Command TLV for each distinct multicast flow.
When the order of processing of two commands does not matter, the commands MUST be transmitted in separate Multicast Replication Control messages.
When successive commands (in the same or different messages) relate to the same Target and multicast flow, the state of each feature controlled or affected by attributes received in the Multicast Replication Control message, SHALL be as set by the last command or message referring to that target and flow and containing the controlling attribute. As an example, successive Multicast Replication Control messages containing add commands for a given port and flow but differing only in the Accounting field, update the state of the accounting feature to what is set in the final command received, but all other features are unaffected by the second message.
If more than one Command TLV is present in a Multicast Replication Control message, the AN MUST act on the commands in the order in which they are presented in the message. The AN SHALL assign a sequence number to each command in a given Multicast Replication Control message, starting from 1 for the first command.
If a Command TLV adds a flow and the AN is performing resource-based admission control for Multicast Replication Control messages, then the AN MUST perform admission control before replicating the flow. If the admission control check fails, the AN MUST treat the failure as an error as described below. The appropriate Result Code value for the response is 0x13 "Out of resources".
If the AN processes the complete Multicast Replication Control message successfully and the Result field of the Multicast Replication Control message was set to AckAll (0x2), the AN MUST respond with a Generic Response message where the Result field is set to Success (0x3), the Result Code field is set to 0, and the Transaction Identifier field is copied from the Multicast Replication Control message. The body of the response MAY be empty or MAY be copied from the Multicast Replication Control message.
If the AN processes the complete Multicast Replication Control message successfully and the Result field of the Multicast Replication Control message was set to Nack (0x1), the AN MUST NOT respond to the message.
The processing/execution of multiple commands contained in a single Multicast Control message MUST be interrupted at the first error encountered, and the remaining commands in the Multicast Replication Control message discarded.
If the AN detects an error in a received Multicast Replication Control message and the Result field in that message was set to Nack (0x1) or AckAll(0x2), the AN MUST generate a Generic Response message providing error information to the NAS. This specification identifies the following new Result Code values beyond those specified in [RFC6320], which MAY be used in a Generic Response sent in reply to a Multicast Replication Control message:
A Generic Response message responding to the Multicast Replication Control message and containing one of the above Result Code values MUST include a Status-Info TLV which includes one or two embedded TLVs as follows:
This section defines a new message called the Multicast Admission Control message. The Multicast Admission Control message is sent by the AN to the NAS to request admission of a multicast flow, or to notify of the removal of a multicast flow, for a given target.
The Message Type for the Multicast Admission Control message is 145.
The ANCP Multicast Admission Control message payload contains two TLVs:
Note:
The Command TLV has the same contents as were described above for the Multicast Replication Control message, with the following additions:
Note that the Command TLV length includes the length of any embedded TLVs, including the embedded TLV headers.
The AN sending the Multicast Admission Control message MUST set the Result field to Ignore (0x0).
The AN MUST populate the ANCP Transaction Identifier field with a unique value, as described in Section 3.6.1.6 of [RFC6320].
The AN MUST encode the Command TLV as specified in Section 4.3 with the following additional rules:
The inclusion of Request-Source-IP or Request-Source-MAC in the Multicast Admission Control message is typically done to allow the application of policies applicable to specific devices within the customer's network. However, transmission of either of these fields beyond the AN introduces potential privacy issues. Instead of transmitting either of these identifiers, it is RECOMMENDED that the AN map the required identifier to a local value known to the AN and AAA but not to the NAS, as discussed in Section 7. The local identifier is transmitted using the Request-Source-Device-Id TLV.
On receipt of an Multicast Admission Control message, the NAS:
The Bandwidth Reallocation Request message is used when the bandwidth delegation capability is included in the negotiated set. It MAY be sent either by the NAS or by the AN to request an adjustment in the amount of delegated bandwidth. It will be sent by the NAS typically to reduce the multicast bandwidth allocated to the AN in order for the NAS to satisfy a request to add one or more flows. Conversely, the AN will send a Bandwidth Reallocation Request to obtain additional bandwidth to satisfy a request to add a multicast channel. In each case, the requestor has a minimum requirement for additional bandwidth, and MAY ask for additional bandwidth beyond this amount (e.g., to handle anticipated future requests).
The Bandwidth Reallocation Request message contains two TLVs:
The Message Type for the Bandwidth Reallocation Request message is 146.
The Result field in the header of the Bandwidth Reallocation Request message is not used and the sender MUST set it to Ignore (0x0).
The bandwidth values in the Bandwidth-Request TLV are expressed in terms of total multicast bandwidth allocated to the AN.
Because the values are totals rather than desired increments/decrements, the relationship between the required amount and the preferred amount will differ depending on whether the Bandwidth Reallocation Request message is issued by the NAS or the AN.
When the peer receives a valid Bandwidth Reallocation Request message, it SHOULD determine whether it can satisfy the request from its existing allocation of unused video bandwidth. If it decides that it can reallocate bandwidth to the peer, it MAY choose to return any amount between the required and the preferred amounts indicated in the Bandwidth Reallocation Request message.
The peer MUST return a Bandwidth Transfer message (Section 4.6) indicating its decision. If the request is met, the Result field of the Bandwidth Transfer message MUST be set to Success (0x3), the Result Code field MUST be set to 0x000, and the Bandwidth-Allocation TLV (Section 5.5) MUST contain the new value of total multicast bandwidth. This new value MUST lie between the required and preferred values, inclusive, from the request message. If the request is not met, the Result field of the Bandwidth Transfer message MUST be set to Failure (0x4), the Result Code field MUST be set to 0, and the Bandwidth Allocation TLV MUST contain the value of the currently allocated amount of delegated bandwidth as the responder views it.
The following cases indicate that the sender holds a different view of the amount of delegated bandwidth from the receiver:
If one of these cases occurs, the receiver with one exception MUST send a Bandwidth Transfer message indicating Success.
The exception is when the NAS receives a request while it has a request of its own outstanding. Handling of that case is described below.
To avoid deadlock due to race conditions, the following rules MUST be applied:
If the receiver is unable to process the Bandwidth Reallocation Request message due to an error, then the receiver MUST return a Bandwidth Transfer message where:
This specification provides three new Result Code values applicable specifically to the contents of the Bandwidth-Request TLV. These Result Code values by their nature MUST only be used when the error is being reported in a Bandwidth Transfer message rather than a Generic Response message.
The Bandwidth Transfer message is used to transfer video bandwidth from the sender to the peer for a specific access line. This message MAY be sent either from the AN or from the NAS. As described in the previous section, it is the required response to a valid Bandwidth Reallocation Request message.
The Bandwidth Transfer message MAY also be used to transfer bandwidth autonomously from one peer to another. One example of this usage is to release bandwidth borrowed earlier by means of the Bandwidth Reallocation Request message. When the message is used in this way, the Result field in the Bandwidth Transfer message MUST be set to Ignore (0x0).
The Message Type for the Bandwidth Transfer message is 147. The Bandwidth Transfer message contains the following TLVs:
When sending a Bandwidth Transfer message where the Result value is Ignore (0x0) or Success (0x3), the following relationships MUST hold:
Further sender behaviour is specified above, in Section 4.5.2.
If the amount of delegated bandwidth provided in the Bandwidth-Allocation TLV is not greater than the NAS's view of the current amount of delegated bandwidth, the NAS MUST update its view of the current amount of delegated bandwidth to the amount indicated in the Bandwidth Transfer message. This is required regardless of whether the Result field of that message indicates Success or Failure.
If the amount of delegated bandwidth provided in the Bandwidth-Allocation TLV is greater than the NAS's view of the current amount of delegated bandwidth, the NAS MAY accept the given value as its new value of delegated bandwidth. Alternatively, the NAS MAY force the AN to modify its view of the amount of delegated bandwidth to that held by the NAS, by sending a Port Management message for the target access line concerned, containing a Bandwidth-Allocation TLV with a value equal to the amount of delegated bandwidth the NAS wishes to enforce.
If the amount of delegated bandwidth provided in the Bandwidth-Allocation TLV of the Bandwidth Transfer message differs from the AN's view of the current amount of delegated bandwidth, the AN MUST update its view of the current amount of delegated bandwidth to the amount indicated in the Bandwidth Transfer message. This is required with the exception of a Bandwidth Transfer message with a Result field equal to Failure (0x4) and a Result Code field equal to 0x68 "Inconsistent views of delegated bandwidth amount" or 0x69 "Bandwidth request conflict". If Result Code value 0x68 is received, the AN MUST issue a Delegated Bandwidth Query Request message to determine the NAS's current view of the amount of delegated bandwidth. The AN MUST update its own view based on the value returned in the Delegated Bandwidth Query Response. If Result Code value 0x69 is received, the AN SHOULD carry out this procedure unless it can account for the discrepancy as a result of a transfer of bandwidth to the NAS that was carried out just before the incoming Bandwidth Transfer message was processed.
If as the result of the procedures just described the AN determines that it has over-committed multicast bandwidth, it MUST NOT terminate any currently-active programs, but MUST NOT honour any more "join" requests until it is possible to do so within the limit set by its current value of delegated bandwidth.
The Message Type for the Delegated Bandwidth Query Request (and Response) messages is 148.
The Delegated Bandwidth Query Request message MAY be sent either by the NAS or by the AN to retrieve the peer's view of the amount of delegated bandwidth. The request contains one TLV:
The sender MUST set the Result field in the header of the Delegated Bandwidth Query Request message to AckAll (0x2). The Result Code value MUST be set to 0. The sender MUST populate the ANCP Transaction Identifier field with a unique value, as described in Section 3.6.1.6 of [RFC6320].
If the AN or NAS receives a valid Delegated Bandwidth Query Request message, it MUST respond with a Delegated Bandwidth Query Response message. The Result field in the header of the response MUST be set to Success (0x3). The Result Code field MUST be set to 0. The Transaction-Id field MUST be copied from the request message. The body of the response MUST contain the Target TLV, copied from the request message. Finally, the body of the response MUST contain a Bandwidth-Allocation TLV, containing the current amount of delegated bandwidth from the point of view of the receiver of the request.
If the contents of the Delegated Bandwidth Query Request message are in error, the receiver MUST return a Delegated Bandwidth Query Response message with the Result field in the header set to Failure (0x3). The Result Code field MUST be set to the value that indicates the nature of the error (e.g., 0x500 "One or more of the specified ports do not exist"). The Transaction-Id field MUST be copied from the request. The body of the response MUST contain the Target TLV copied from the request. This MAY be followed by a Status-Info TLV giving further information about the error.
The Delegated Bandwidth Query Response message is sent in reply to a Delegated Bandwidth Query Request. The response to a valid request contains two TLVs:
The Message Type for the Delegated Bandwidth Query Response message is 148.
Sender behaviour for the Delegated Bandwidth Query Response message is specified in Section 4.7.2.
If the Delegated Bandwidth Query Response message indicates Success (0x3), the following actions apply.
If the amount of delegated bandwidth provided in the Bandwidth-Allocation TLV is less than the NAS's view of the current amount of delegated bandwidth, the NAS MUST update its view of the current amount of delegated bandwidth to the amount indicated in the Delegated Bandwidth Query Response message.
If the amount of delegated bandwidth provided in the Bandwidth-Allocation TLV is greater than the NAS's view of the current amount of delegated bandwidth, the NAS MAY accept the given value as its new value of delegated bandwidth. Alternatively, the NAS MAY force the AN to modify its view of the amount of delegated bandwidth to that held by the NAS, by sending a Port Management message for the target access line concerned, containing a Bandwidth-Allocation TLV with a value equal to the amount of delegated bandwidth the NAS wishes to enforce.
The AN SHOULD accept the value returned in the Bandwidth-Allocation TLV of the Delegated Bandwidth Query Response message as the correct value of the current amount of delegated bandwidth. If the AN has currently committed more than this amount to active programs, it MUST NOT cease replicating the flows concerned, but MUST NOT honour any more Join requests until possible to do so within the new limit.
This section defines two new messages called the Multicast Flow Query Request and Multicast Flow Query Response. The Multicast Flow Query Request is sent by the NAS to request information about the multicast flows that are active on the AN. The Multicast Flow Query Response is sent in response by the AN to provide the requested information to the NAS.
The Message Type for the Multicast Flow Query Request and Multicast Flow Query Response messages is 149.
The contents of the Multicast Flow Query Request and Response depend on the nature of the query, as described below.
The sender of a Multicast Flow Query Request message MUST set the Result field to AckAll (0x2). The Result Code field MUST be set to 0x000. The sender MUST populate the ANCP Transaction Identifier field with a unique value, as described in section 3.6.1.6 of [RFC6320].
The Multicast Flow Query Request MAY be used by the NAS to retrieve:
To retrieve the AN's view of which multicast flows are currently active on a given port of the AN, the NAS MUST include a Target TLV in the Multicast Flow Query Request payload identifying that port. The Target TLV is encoded as specified in [RFC6320].
To retrieve the AN's view of the ports currently receiving a given multicast flow, the NAS MUST include a Multicast-Flow TLV in the Multicast Flow Query Request payload identifying that flow. The Multicast-Flow TLV is encoded as specified in Section 5.12.
The NAS MAY include multiple Target TLVs or multiple Multicast-Flow TLVs in the Multicast Flow Query Request, but MUST NOT include both Target and Multicast-Flow TLVs in the same message.
To retrieve the AN's view of all of the multicast flows currently active on each port of the AN, the NAS MUST send a Multicast Flow Query Request which does not contain any instance of the Target TLV or the Multicast-Flow TLV.
The AN MUST respond to a Multicast Flow Query Request message that has a valid format and a valid content with a Multicast Flow Query Response message. The Result field in the response MUST be set to Success (0x3). The Result Code field MUST be set to 0. The Transaction-Id field MUST be copied from the request.
If the Multicast Flow Query Request contained one (or more) Target TLVs, the AN MUST include, for each of these Target TLVs, the following set of TLVs:
The Target TLVs MUST appear in the response from the AN in the same order as in the query from the NAS.
If the Multicast Flow Query Request contained one (or more) Multicast-Flow TLVs, the AN MUST include, for each of these Multicast-Flow TLVs, the following set of TLVs:
The Multicast-Flow TLVs MUST appear in the response from the AN in the same order as in the query from the NAS.
If the Multicast Flow Query Request contained no Target TLV and no Multicast Flow TLV, the AN MUST include, for each AN port currently receiving multicast flow(s), the following set of TLVs:
If the contents of the Multicast Flow Query Request are in error, the AN MUST reply with a Multicast Flow Query Response message with the Result field set to Failure (0x4) and the Result Code field set to indicate the nature of the error. If the request contained multiple instances of the Target TLV or the Multicast-Flow TLV and one of these is in error, the response message MUST contain the results for the preceding instances of the TLV as if there had been no error. These successful results MUST be followed by the TLV in error, copied from the request. The AN MUST NOT do further processing of the request. The AN MAY add a Status-Info TLV to provide further information on the nature of the error.
This section describes the Committed Bandwidth Report message, which is sent from the AN to the NAS to report the most recent amount of multicast bandwidth usage committed to one or more access lines.
The Message Type for the Committed Bandwidth Report message is 150.
The Committed Bandwidth Report message contains one or more instances of the Committed-Bandwidth TLV, as described in Section 5.14.
The sender of a Committed Bandwidth Report message MUST set the Result field to Ignore (0x0). The Result Code field MUST be set to 0x000. The sender MUST populate the ANCP Transaction Identifier field with a unique value, as described in section 3.6.1.6 of [RFC6320].
Each instance of the Committed-Bandwidth TLV included in the message MUST identify an access line for which the amount of committed multicast bandwidth has changed since the previous Committed Bandwidth Report message was sent and MUST report the latest amount of multicast bandwidth committed to that line. There MUST be only one instance of the Committed-Bandwidth TLV present in the message for any given access line. The message MUST include an instance of the Committed-Bandwidth TLV for every access line for which committed multicast bandwidth has changed since the previous Committed Bandwidth Report message was sent.
Further behaviour at the AN is specified in Section 6.2.2.
The usage of the contents of a Committed Bandwidth Report message received by the NAS is implementation-dependent. One example is that the NAS uses the reports of multicast bandwidth commitments to adjust its forwarding scheduler operation to provide the intended level of QoS.
The NAS MUST NOT reply to a valid Committed Bandwidth Report message. The NAS MAY send a Generic Response message indicating the nature of any errors detected in a Committed Bandwidth Report message that it has received.
This section defines new ANCP TLVs for the control of multicast flows.
This document defines the new Multicast-Service-Profile TLV.
The Multicast-Service-Profile TLV MAY be included in a Provisioning message as specified in Section 4.1.
The Multicast-Service-Profile TLV is illustrated in Figure 6. It consists of a TLV header encapsulating a single instance of the Multicast-Service-Profile-Name TLV and one or more instances of the List-Action TLV.
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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Mcast-Service-Profile 0x0013 | TLV Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Multicast-Service-Profile-Name TLV | | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | List-Action TLV | | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | ... | | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | List-Action TLV | | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 6: Multicast-Service-Profile TLV
The Multicast-Service-Profile TLV has the following fields:
The Multicast-Service-Profile-Name TLV carries the identifier of a multicast service profile provisioned on the AN. It is illustrated in Figure 7.
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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Mcast-Svc-Profile-Name 0x0018 | TLV Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Multicast service profile identifier | | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 7: Multicast-Service-Profile-Name TLV
The Multicast-Service-Profile-Name TLV has the following fields:
The List-Action TLV identifies multicast flows to be added to or removed from a list of white-, black-, or grey-listed flows. It is meaningful only in association with a Multicast-Service-Profile-Name TLV identifying the profile to which the List-Action TLV applies. Such an association can be achieved by placing both TLVs in the same base message payload or as embedded TLVs of another TLV such as the Multicast-Service-Profile. The List-Action TLV is shown in Figure 8.
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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | TLV Type = List-Action 0x0021 | TLV Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Operation | List Type | Reserved | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Address Family | Number of flow fields | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Multicast flow fields | ...... | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Address Family | Number of flow fields | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Multicast flow fields | ...... | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 8: List-Action TLV
The List-Action TLV contains the following fields:
Each multicast flow field refers either to a Source-Specific Multicast (SSM) channel or to an Any Source Multicast (ASM) group. The scope of the designation may be broadened to multiple channels or groups through use of prefix length values smaller than the total address length for the given address family. Multicast flow fields MUST be placed consecutively within the embedded TLV without intervening padding except to round out individual addresses to the nearest octet boundary.
A multicast flow field consists of two single-octet prefix lengths followed by zero to two prefix values as shown in Figure 9:
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Group PrefLen | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Source PrefLen| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Group Prefix (multicast) (0 to 16 octets) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Source Prefix (unicast, SSM only) (0 to 16 octets) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 9: Organization of a Single Multicast Flow Field
The prefix length has its usual meaning. It is the number of most-significant bits specified within the corresponding prefix. The prefix length MAY vary from 0 to 32 in the IPv4 sub-list, and from 0 to 128 in the IPv6 sub-list.
A value of 0 for either the Group PrefLen (prefix length) or the Source PrefLen indicates that any value of the corresponding address will match (wild card). If the value 0 is provided for a particular prefix length, the corresponding prefix MUST be omitted from the field contents.
The length of a Source or Group Prefix field is equal to (PrefLen + 7)/8 octets, truncated to the nearest integer. Unused bits at the end of the prefix MUST be set to zeroes.
The Sequence-Number TLV conveys a sequence number of some sort. The specific meaning of the sequence number is message-specific. Within this specification, the Sequence-Number TLV is used as a embedded TLV in a Status-Info TLV, in a Generic Response reporting a failed command in a Multicast Replication Control or Multicast Admission Request message. It identifies the sequence number within the message of the command that failed.
The Sequence-Number TLV has the format shown in Figure 10.
1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type = Sequence-Number 0x0022 | TLV Length = 4 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Sequence number | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 10: Sequence-Number TLV
The Sequence-Number TLV has the following fields:
The Bandwidth-Allocation TLV is used to indicate the total amount of video bandwidth delegated to the AN for multicast admission control for a given access line, in kilobits per second. The TLV has the format shown in Figure 11.
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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Bandwidth-Allocation 0x0015 | TLV Length = 4 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Delegated amount (kbits/s) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 11: The Bandwidth-Allocation TLV
The Bandwidth-Allocation TLV has the following fields:
The White-List-CAC TLV is used to indicate that the NAS wishes the AN to do admission control for white-listed flows. Details on when the White-List-CAC TLV may be provisioned are specified in Section 6. The White-List-CAC TLV is illustrated in Figure 12.
1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type = White-List-CAC 0x0024 | TLV Length = 0 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 12: White-List-CAC TLV
The White-List-CAC TLV contains the following fields:
The MRepCtl-CAC TLV is used to indicate that the NAS wishes the AN to do admission control for flows added by the Multicast Replication Control message. Details on when the MRepCtl-CAC TLV may be provisioned are specified in Section 6. The MRepCtl-CAC TLV is illustrated in Figure 13.
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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |TLV Type = MRepCtl-CAC 0x0025 | TLV Length = 0 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 13: MRepCtl-CAC TLV
The MRepCtl-CAC TLV contains the following fields:
The Bandwidth-Request TLV is used to request an adjustment of the total amount of video bandwidth allocated to the AN for multicast admission control for a given line. The "Required amount" field indicates the minimum adjustment required to meet the request. The "Preferred amount" field indicates the adjustment the requestor would prefer to have, if possible. Section 4.5 discusses the required relationships between the "Required amount", "Preferred amount", and current values of total bandwidth allocated to the AN.
The Bandwidth-Request TLV has the format shown in Figure 14.
1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type=Bandwidth-Request 0x0016 | TLV Length = 8 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Required amount (kbits/s) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Preferred amount (kbits/s) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 14: The Bandwidth-Request TLV
The Bandwidth-Request TLV has the following fields:
The Request-Source-IP TLV provides the IP address of the entity that originated a specific request to join or leave a multicast channel. The TLV is illustrated in Figure 15.
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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | TLV Type = Request-Source-IP | TLV length = 4 or 16 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Unicast Address | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 15: Request-Source-IP TLV
The Request-Source-IP TLV contains the following fields:
The Request-Source-MAC TLV provides the MAC address of the entity that originated a specific request to join or leave a multicast channel. The TLV is illustrated in Figure 16.
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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |TLV Type=Request-Source-MAC | TLV Length = 6 or 8 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | +-+-+- IEEE MAC Address +-+-+-+ | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 16: Request-Source-MAC TLV
The Request-Source-MAC TLV contains the following fields:
The Request-Source-Device-Id TLV provides a local identifier of the entity that originated a specific request to join or leave a multicast channel. The TLV is illustrated in Figure 17.
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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Request-Source-Device-Id | TLV length = 4 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Identifier value | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 17: Request-Source-Device-Id TLV
The Request-Source-Device-Id TLV contains the following fields:
The Multicast-Flow TLV specifies a multicast flow in terms of its multicast group address and, if applicable, its unicast source address. It is illustrated in Figure 18.
1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type = Multicast-Flow 0x0019 | TLV Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Flow Type | Addr Family | Reserved | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Multicast Group Address | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-++-+-+-+-+-+--+ | Unicast Source Address (for SSM flows only) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 18: Multicast-Flow TLV
The Multicast-Flow TLV has the following fields:
The Report-Buffering-Time TLV provides the time for which a Committed Bandwidth Report message must be held with the intention of accumulating multiple reports of changed committed multicast bandwidth in one report, to reduce the volume of messages sent to the NAS. For further information see Section 6.2.2. The TLV is illustrated in Figure 19.
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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Report-Buffering-Time 0x0094 | TLV Length = 4 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Buffering Time (ms) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 19: Report-Buffering-Time TLV
The Report-Buffering-Time TLV contains the following fields:
The Committed-Bandwidth TLV identifies an access line and provides the current amount of multicast bandwidth that the AN has committed to it. The TLV is illustrated in Figure 20.
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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Committed-Bandwidth 0x0095 | TLV Length (variable) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Committed Multicast Bandwidth (kbits/s) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | ~ Target TLV ~ | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 20: Committed-Bandwidth TLV
The Committed-Bandwidth TLV contains the following fields:
Section 3.5 of [RFC6320] defines a capability negotiation mechanism as well as a number of capabilities. This section defines five new capabilities in support of different modes of multicast operation:
The "Capability Data" field within the Capability TLV for all of these capabilities is empty. All of these capabilities are independent of the access technology.
The remainder of this section consists of three sub-sections. Section 6.1 specifies the protocol elements that must be implemented in order to support each capability. Section 6.2 specifies the procedures that apply to each capability on its own. Section 6.3 specifies how the capabilities interact if more than one multicast capability is included in the set of capabilities negotiated between the AN and the NAS.
This section specifies the protocol elements that MUST be implemented to support each of the four multicast capabilities. Support of multiple multicast capabilities requires implementation of the union of the sets of protocol elements applying to each of the individual capabilities in the supported set.
In addition to the elements listed below, implementation of the Target TLV (Section 4.3 of [RFC6320]) is REQUIRED for all of the capabilities specified in this document.
Table 1 specifies the protocol elements within Section 4 and Section 5 that MUST be implemented to support the NAS-initiated replication multicast capability. Additionally, implementation of the Multicast Replication Control message requires implementation of the Command TLV (Section 4.4 of [RFC6320] with additional details in Section 4.3 of this document).
Reference | Protocol Element |
---|---|
Section 4.1 | Provisioning message with MRepCtl-CAC TLV |
Section 4.2 | Port Management message with Bandwidth-Allocation TLV. |
Section 4.3 | Multicast Replication Control message |
Section 4.9 | Multicast Flow Query Request and Response messages |
Section 5.4 | Sequence Number TLV |
Section 5.5 | Bandwidth-Allocation TLV |
Section 5.7 | MRepCtl-CAC TLV |
Section 5.12 | Multicast-Flow TLV |
Table 2 specifies the protocol elements within Section 4 and Section 5 that MUST be implemented to support the committed multicast bandwidth reporting capability.
Reference | Protocol Element |
---|---|
Section 4.1 | Provisioning message with Report-Buffering-Time TLV |
Section 4.10 | Committed Bandwidth Report message |
Section 4.9 | Multicast Flow Query Request and Response messages |
Section 5.13 | Report-Buffering-Timer TLV |
Section 5.14 | Committed-Bandwidth TLV |
Section 5.12 | Multicast-Flow TLV |
Table 3 specifies the protocol elements within Section 4 and Section 5 that MUST be implemented to support the conditional access with white and black lists multicast capability.
Reference | Protocol Element |
---|---|
Section 4.1 | Provisioning message with Multicast-Service-Profile TLV, white and black lists only, and White-List-CAC TLV |
Section 4.2 | Port Management message with Multicast-Service-Profile-Name and Bandwidth-Allocation TLVs. |
Section 4.9 | Multicast Flow Query Request and Response messages |
Section 5.1 | Multicast-Service-Profile TLV |
Section 5.2 | Multicast-Service-Profile-Name TLV |
Section 5.3 | List-Action TLV, white and black lists only |
Section 5.5 | Bandwidth-Allocation TLV |
Section 5.6 | White-List-CAC TLV |
Section 5.12 | Multicast-Flow TLV |
Table 4 specifies the protocol elements within Section 4 and Section 5 that MUST be implemented to support the conditional access with grey lists multicast capability. Additionally, implementation of the Multicast Replication Control message requires implementation of the Command TLV (Section 4.4 of [RFC6320] with additional details in Section 4.3 of this document).
Reference | Protocol Element |
---|---|
Section 4.1 | Provisioning message with Multicast-Service-Profile TLV, grey lists only, and MRepCtl-CAC TLV |
Section 4.2 | Port Management message with Multicast-Service-Profile-Name and Bandwidth-Allocation TLVs. |
Section 4.3 | Multicast Replication Control message |
Section 4.4 | Multicast Admission Control Message |
Section 4.9 | Multicast Flow Query Request and Response messages |
Section 5.1 | Multicast-Service-Profile TLV, grey lists only |
Section 5.2 | Multicast-Service-Profile-Name TLV |
Section 5.3 | List-Action TLV, grey lists only |
Section 5.4 | Sequence Number TLV |
Section 5.5 | Bandwidth-Allocation TLV |
Section 5.7 | MRepCtl-CAC TLV |
Section 5.9 | Request-Source-IP TLV |
Section 5.10 | Request-Source-MAC TLV |
Section 5.11 | Request-Source-Device-Id TLV |
Section 5.12 | Multicast-Flow TLV |
Table 5 specifies the protocol elements within Section 4 and Section 5 that MUST be implemented to support the delegated bandwidth multicast capability.
Reference | Protocol Element |
---|---|
Section 4.2 | Port Management message with Bandwidth-Allocation TLV. |
Section 4.5 | Bandwidth Reallocation Request Message |
Section 4.6 | Bandwidth Transfer Message |
Section 4.7 | Delegated Bandwidth Query Request Message |
Section 4.8 | Delegated Bandwidth Query Response Message |
Section 4.9 | Multicast Flow Query Request and Response messages |
Section 5.5 | Bandwidth-Allocation TLV |
Section 5.8 | Bandwidth-Request TLV |
Section 5.12 | Multicast-Flow TLV |
This section describes multicast service procedures for each capability as if it were the only multicast capability within the negotiated set. Procedures involving combinations of multicast capabilities are described in Section 6.3.
The use of the Multicast Flow Query Request and Response messages to determine the association between multicast flows and ports is common to all multicast capabilities. No additional text is required here, beyond that already given in Section 4.9 to describe the use of those messages.
NAS-initiated replication may be negotiated to support a mode of operation where IGMP/MLD requests are terminated on the NAS. Alternatively, it may be negotiated to allow the NAS to respond to requests sent by other means (e.g., through application signalling) that require the replication of multicast channels to a given access line.
The NAS MAY perform resource-based admission control for NAS-initiated replication. In this case, it MUST NOT include the MRepCtl-CAC TLV in a Provisioning message sent to the AN. Alternatively, the NAS MAY enable resource-based admission control at the AN for NAS-initiated replication. To do this, it MUST include the MRepCtl-CAC TLV in a Provisioning message sent to the AN and it MUST also include a Bandwidth-Allocation TLV in a Port Management message for each access line.
The procedures associated with NAS-initiated replication are straightforward. To initiate replication, the NAS MUST send a Multicast Replication Control message to the AN, containing one or more commands adding flows, as described in Section 4.3.1. To terminate replication the NAS MUST send a Multicast Replication Control message where the commands delete instead of adding the flows. The AN acts upon these messages as specified in Section 4.3.2.
Committed bandwidth reporting may be negotiated if the NAS requires current knowledge of the amount of multicast bandwidth committed to each access line and cannot obtain this information by other means.
The default buffering time when committed bandwidth reporting is enabled is zero (immediate reporting). To change this, the NAS MAY send an instance of the Report-Buffering-Time TLV containing a non-zero time value to the AN in a Provisioning message. If the NAS subsequently wishes to change the buffering time again, it MAY do so in another Provisioning message.
If the buffering time for committed bandwidth reporting is zero, the AN MUST send a Committed Bandwidth Report message to the NAS each time the amount of multicast bandwidth committed to any access line under its control changes.
If a non-zero value is provided in the Report-Buffering-Time TLV, the AN at any given moment is in one of two states: not-buffering, or buffering. The AN enters buffering state if it is in not-buffering state and the multicast bandwidth amount committed to some access line changes. It leaves buffering state when the AN sends a Committed Bandwidth Report.
Upon entry to the buffering state, the AN MUST start a buffering timer and create a Committed Bandwidth Report message containing a Committed-Bandwidth TLV for the triggering access line, but MUST NOT send it. If a multicast bandwidth change occurs for another access line, the AN MUST add a new Committed-Bandwidth TLV to the message for that additional line. If a multicast bandwidth change occurs for a line for which a Committed-Bandwidth TLV is already present in the buffered report, the AN MUST update the corresponding Committed-Bandwidth TLV to contain the new bandwidth value, rather than adding another Committed-Bandwidth TLV for the same access line.
The buffering timer expires after the period provided by the Report-Buffering-Time TLV. When it expires, the AN MUST send the Committed Bandwidth Report message that it has been accumulating to the NAS. Exceptionally, the AN MAY choose to send the message before the timer expires, in which case it MUST clear the buffering timer when the message is sent. In either case, the AN enters the not-buffering state as a result.
The NAS provisions named multicast service profiles containing white and black lists on the AN using the Provisioning message containing one or more Multicast-Service-Profile TLVs. The NAS MAY update the contents of these profiles from time to time as required, by sending additional Provisioning messages with Multicast-Service-Profile TLVs containing incremental modifications to the existing white and black lists or replacements for them.
The NAS assigns a specific multicast service profile to an individual access line using the Port Management message containing a Multicast-Service-Profile-Name TLV. The NAS MAY change the multicast service profile for a given access line at any time by sending a Port Management message identifying a new multicast service profile.
The NAS MAY choose to enable resource-based admission control at the AN for white-listed flows. To do this, it MUST send a Provisioning message as described in Section 4.1, which includes the White-List-CAC TLV and it MUST provide a multicast bandwidth allocation for each access line by including a Bandwidth-Allocation TLV in a Port Management message.
The conditional access with white and black lists capability assumes that IGMP/MLD requests are terminated on the AN. When the AN receives a "join" request, it MUST check to see whether the requested flow is white-listed or black-listed as described below. Requests for black-listed flows MUST be discarded. If the NAS has enabled resource-based admission control on the AN as described in the previous section, but a white-listed flow would cause the amount of committed multicast bandwidth to exceed the provisioned limit, the request MUST be discarded. The AN replicates flows passing these checks to the access line.
To determine if a requested flow is white-listed, the AN searches for a best match to the flow in the applicable multicast service profile. Matching is done on the prefixes specified in the profile, ignoring the address bits of lower order than those in the prefix.
If the requested multicast flow matches multiple lists associated with the access line, then the most specific match will be considered by the AN. If the most specific match occurs in multiple lists, the black list entry takes precedence over the white list. In this context, the most specific match is defined as:
If the requested multicast flow is not part of any list, the join message SHOULD be discarded by the AN. This default behavior can easily be changed by means of a "catch-all" statement in the white list. For instance, adding (<S=*,G=*>) in the white List would make the default behavior to accept join messages for a multicast flow that has no other match on any list.
When the AN receives a "leave" request, it terminates replication of the multicast flow.
If the AN receives a Provisioning message which updates an existing multicast service profile, the AN MUST review the status of active flows on all ports to which the updated profile is currently assigned. Similarly, if a Port Management message assigns a new multicast service profile to a given port, the AN MUST review all active flows on that port. If the most specific match for any flow is a black list entry, the flow MUST be terminated immediately. If any of the remaining flows do not match an entry in the white list, they also MUST be terminated immediately. White listed flows MUST be allowed to continue.
The NAS provisions named multicast service profiles containing grey lists on the AN using the Provisioning message containing one or more Multicast-Service-Profile TLVs. The NAS MAY update the contents of these profiles from time to time as required, by sending additional Provisioning messages with Multicast-Service-Profile TLVs containing incremental modifications to the existing grey lists or replacements for them.
The NAS assigns a specific multicast service profile to an individual access line using the Port Management message containing a Multicast-Service-Profile-Name TLV. The NAS MAY change profiles on the line by sending a subsequent Port Management message identifying a new profile.
The NAS MAY perform resource-based admission control for grey-listed flows. In that case, the NAS MUST NOT include the MRepCtl-CAC TLV in a Provisioning message sent to the AN. Alternatively, the NAS MAY enable resource-based admission control at the AN for grey-listed flows. To do this, it MUST include the MRepCtl-CAC TLV in a Provisioning message sent to the AN and MUST also provide a Bandwidth-Allocation TLV in a Port Management message for each access line.
The conditional access with grey lists capability assumes that IGMP/MLD requests are terminated on the AN. When the AN receives a "join" request, it MUST determine whether there is a match to the requested flow in the grey list of the multicast service profile provisioned against the given access line. If there is no match, the request is discarded. Otherwise, the AN MUST send a Multicast Admission Control message to the NAS with content identifying the access line and the multicast flow to be added. As indicated in Section 4.4, the AN MAY add information identifying the requesting device.
If the NAS decides to enable the flow, it MUST send a Multicast Replication Control request to the AN to replicate the flow to the access line with the Result field set to Nack (0x1), as described in Section 4.3.1.
When the AN receives the Multicast Replication Control request, it performs resource-based admission control if that has been enabled as described in the previous section. If admitting the flow would cause the committed multicast bandwidth at the access line to exceed the provisioned limit, the AN reports an error to the NAS as described in Section 4.3.2. Otherwise it replicates the multicast flow as requested.
If the NAS decides not to permit the flow, it MAY send a Multicast Replication Control message in response to the Multicast Admission Control message to allow the AN to update its internal records. The content of this message is described in Section 4.4.2.
When the AN receives a "leave" request, it MUST terminate replication of the flow to the access line. It MUST then send a Multicast Admission Control message to the NAS indicating the deletion. The NAS updates its internal records but MUST NOT respond to the message.
If the AN receives a Provisioning message which updates an existing multicast service profile, the AN MUST review the status of active flows on all ports to which the updated profile has been assigned. Similarly, if a Port Management message that assigns a new profile to a given port, the AN MUST review all active flows on that port. In either case, if any flow does not match an entry in the grey list, it MUST be terminated immediately.
The NAS SHOULD provision an initial amount of delegated multicast bandwidth for each access line using the Port Management message containing the Bandwidth-Allocation TLV.
The NAS MAY at any time force an update of the amount of delegated bandwidth by the same means.
The delegated bandwidth capability assumes that IGMP/MLD requests are terminated on the AN. When the AN receives a "join" request, it checks whether it has sufficient remaining uncommitted multicast bandwidth on the access line to accommodate the new multicast flow. If not, it MAY send a request to the NAS for an increased allocation of delegated bandwidth, using the Bandwidth Reallocation Request message. The NAS MUST return a Bandwidth Transfer message indicating whether it has granted the request, and if so, what is the new amount of delegated bandwidth.
If the AN has sufficient uncommitted multicast capacity to admit the request, either originally or as the result of a successful request to the NAS, it replicates the requested flow to the access line. Otherwise it discards the request.
When the AN receives a "leave" request for an active flow, it ceases replication.
The NAS or AN MAY at some point detect that their respective views of the amount of delegated bandwidth are inconsistent. If so, they can recover using procedures described in Section 4.5 and Section 4.6. As a further aid to synchronization, either the NAS or the AN MAY from time to time check the peer's view of the amount of delegated bandwidth using the Delegated Bandwidth Query message.
The NAS or AN MAY at any time release bandwidth to the peer using an autonomous Bandwidth Transfer message. The contents of this message are described in Section 4.6.
If conditional access with white and black lists is combined with conditional access with grey lists, provisioning of the multicast service profiles is as described in Section 6.2.3.1 except that multicast service profiles will also include grey lists. Resource-based admission control is enabled independently on the AN for white lists by including the White-List-CAC TLV in the Provisioning message and for grey lists by including the MRepCtl-CAC TLV in the Provisioning message. The Bandwidth-Allocation TLV provisions an amount that applies to both white- and grey- listed flows if resource-based admission control is enabled for both.
With regard to multicast service procedures, one point of difference from the individual capabilities must be noted. This is an interaction during the profile matching procedure. The AN MUST seek the best match amongst multiple lists as described in Section 6.2.3.2. However, if there are multiple matches of equal precision, the order of priority is black list first, grey list second, and white list last.
Once profile matching has been completed, processing of a "join" request is as described in Section 6.2.3.2 for white or black listed flows or Section 6.2.4.2 for grey listed flows. Requests that do not match any list SHOULD be discarded.
When the AN receives a "leave" request, it MUST terminate replication of the flow to the access line. If the flow was grey-listed, the AN MUST then send a Multicast Admission Control message to the NAS indicating the deletion.
If the AN receives a Provisioning message which updates an existing multicast service profile, the AN MUST review the status of active flows on all ports to which the updated profile is currently assigned. Similarly, if a Port Management message assigns a new multicast service profile to a given port, the AN MUST review all active flows on that port. If any flow has its most specific match in a black list entry, it MUST be terminated immediately. If any of the remaining flows do not match an entry in the white or grey list, they MUST also be terminated immediately. Finally, if any remaining flows were originally admitted because they were white-listed, but after the change they are grey-listed, the AN MUST generate a Multicast Flow Query response message autonomously as if it were responding to a Multicast Flow Query request, listing all such flows. These flows MUST be allowed to continue until the NAS or the subscriber terminates them. Flows with their most specific match in the white list MUST be allowed to continue.
The autonomously-generated Multicast Flow Query response message MUST be formatted as if it were a successful response to a request containing no Target and no Multicast-Flow TLV, as described in Section 4.9.2, with the exception that the Transaction-Id MUST be set to all zeroes.
The provisioning and bandwidth management procedures of Section 6.2.5 apply in addition to the procedures in Section 6.2.3, Section 6.2.4, or Section 6.3.1 as applicable. Admission control follows the rules for conditional access in terms of matching flows against white and black and/or grey lists and performing or not performing bandwidth checks at the AN, but the amount of bandwidth used by the AN to perform resource-based admission control is negotiable as described in Section 6.2.5.2.
NAS-initiated replication can coexist with the other capabilities, but some means must exist to prevent double replication of flows. The simplest way to do this is to terminate all IGMP/MLD requests on the AN, so that NAS-initiated replication is stimulated only by signalling through other channels. Other arrangements are possible, but need not be discussed here.
Assuming the necessary separation of responsibilities, the only point of interaction between NAS-initiated replication and the other multicast capabilities is in the area of resource-based admission control. Specifically, if the AN is to do resource-based admission control for flows added by Multicast Replication Control messages, regardless of whether they are part of NAS-initiated replication or grey list multicast service processing, the NAS includes the MRepCtl-CAC TLV in a Provisioning message and the Bandwidth-Allocation TLV in a Port Management message. If instead the NAS will do resource-based admission control for flows added by Multicast Replication Control messages, regardless of whether they are part of NAS-initiated replication or grey list multicast service processing, it does not send the MRepCtl-CAC TLV in a Provisioning messages to the AN. The NAS can independently enable resource-based admission control for white flows on the AN by including the White-List-CAC TLV in the Provisioning message.
Committed bandwidth reporting can take place independently of which other multicast capabilities have been negotiated. However, some combinations do not make sense because of redundancy. In particular, the NAS obtains the same information that committed bandwidth reporting gives if the only other capabilities operating are NAS-initiated replication and/or conditional access with grey lists.
The security considerations of ANCP are discussed in [RFC6320] and in [RFC5713]. Multicast does not in principle introduce any new security considerations, although it does increase the attractiveness of the ANCP protocol as a means of denial of service (e.g., through direction of multicast streams onto the target) or theft of service.
As mentioned in Section 4.4, the inclusion of the Request-Source-MAC or Request-Source-IP TLV in the Multicast Admission Control message presents privacy issues. An attacker able to to get access to the contents of this message would, like the content provider, be able to track consumption of multicast content to the individual device and potentially to individual persons if they are associated with particular devices. To make the connection between devices and individuals, the attacker needs to get information from sources other than ANCP, of course, but let us assume that this has happened.
The protection specified for ANCP in [RFC6320] will apply to the transmission of the Multicast Admission Control message across the access network to the NAS. Hence the attacker's potential points of access are between the subscriber and the AN, at the AN and at the NAS. Moreover, if the MAC or IP address are transmitted onwards from the NAS to AAA in a request for policy, that whole onward path has to be examined for vulnerability.
The question is how many of these potential points of attack can be eliminated through operational practice. The segment from the subscriber through the AN itself seems out of scope of this discussion -- protection of this segment is basic to subscriber privacy in any event, and likely a business requirement. The segment from the AN to the NAS is covered by the basic ANCP protection specified in RFC 6320. This leaves the NAS and the path between the NAS and AAA for consideration.
The operator can eliminate the path between the NAS and AAA as a point where the attacker can access per-device information by downloading per- device policy to the NAS for all identified user devices for the particular subscriber. The NAS then selects the applicable policy based on the particular device identifier it has received. This is as opposed to the NAS sending the identifier of the device in question to AAA and getting policy just for that device.
This leaves the NAS itself as a point of attack. In theory the NAS could be eliminated if the AN remapped the requesting MAC or IP address to an identifier known to itself and AAA, but not the NAS. This would require local configuration on the AN, which may be possible under some circumstances. The Request-Source-Device-Id TLV specified in Section 5.11 is available to transmit such an identifier in place of the Request-Source-MAC or Request-Source-IP.
IANA NOTE: Please replace XXXX with the RFC number of this document.
This document defines the following additional values within the ANCP Message Type Name Space registry:
Message Type | Message Name | Reference |
---|---|---|
144 | Multicast Replication Control | RFC XXXX |
145 | Multicast Admission Control | RFC XXXX |
146 | Bandwidth Reallocation Request | RFC XXXX |
147 | Bandwidth Transfer | RFC XXXX |
148 | Delegated Bandwidth Query | RFC XXXX |
149 | Multicast Flow Query | RFC XXXX |
150 | Committed Bandwidth Report | RFC XXXX |
This document defines the following additional values for the ANCP Result Code registry. In support of these assignments, IANA is requested to change the lower limit of 0x100 specified by [RFC6320] for assignments by IETF Consensus to 0x64.
Result Code | One-Line Description | Reference |
---|---|---|
0x64 | Command error. | RFC XXXX |
0x65 | Invalid flow address. | RFC XXXX |
0x66 | Multicast flow does not exist. | RFC XXXX |
0x67 | Invalid preferred bandwidth amount. | RFC XXXX |
0x68 | Inconsistent views of delegated bandwidth amount. | RFC XXXX |
0x69 | Bandwidth request conflict. | RFC XXXX |
This document defines the following additional values for the ANCP Command Code registry:
Command Code Value | Command Code Directive Name | Reference |
---|---|---|
1 | Add | RFC XXXX |
2 | Delete | RFC XXXX |
3 | Delete All | RFC XXXX |
4 | Admission Control Reject | RFC XXXX |
5 | Conditional Access Reject | RFC XXXX |
6 | Admission Control and Conditional Access Reject | RFC XXXX |
This document defines the following additional values within the ANCP TLV Type Registry:
Type Code | TLV Name | Reference |
---|---|---|
0x0013 | Multicast-Service-Profile | RFC XXXX |
0x0015 | Bandwidth-Allocation | RFC XXXX |
0x0016 | Bandwidth-Request | RFC XXXX |
0x0018 | Multicast-Service-Profile-Name | RFC XXXX |
0x0019 | Multicast-Flow | RFC XXXX |
0x0021 | List-Action | RFC XXXX |
0x0022 | Sequence-Number | RFC XXXX |
0x0024 | White-List-CAC | RFC XXXX |
0x0025 | MRepCtl-CAC | RFC XXXX |
0x0092 | Request-Source-IP | RFC XXXX |
0x0093 | Request-Source-MAC | RFC XXXX |
0x0094 | Report-Buffering-Time | RFC XXXX |
0x0095 | Committed-Bandwidth | RFC XXXX |
0x0096 | Request-Source-Device-Id | RFC XXXX |
This document defines the following additional values for the ANCP Capability Type registry:
Value | Capability Type Name | Tech Type | Capability Data? | Reference |
---|---|---|---|---|
3 | NAS-Initiated Replication | 0 | No | RFC XXXX |
5 | Committed Bandwidth Reporting | 0 | No | RFC XXXX |
6 | Conditional Access With White and Black Lists | 0 | No | RFC XXXX |
7 | Conditional Access With Grey Lists | 0 | No | RFC XXXX |
8 | Bandwidth Delegation | 0 | No | RFC XXXX |
The authors would like to acknowledge Wojciech Dec for providing useful input to this document, Robert Rennison for his help in shaping the definition of the Multicast-Service-Profile TLV, Shridhar Rao for his comments and suggestions and Aniruddha A for his proposal that formed the base of the Multicast Flow Reporting solution. Philippe Champagne, Sanjay Wadhwa and Stefaan De Cnodder provided substantial contributions on the solution for the NAS initiated multicast control use case. Kristian Poscic provided the committed bandwidth reporting use case.
Thanks to the Document Shepherd, Matthew Bocci, and Area Director, Ted Lemon, for points raised by their reviews following Working Group Last Call.
[RFC2119] | Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. |
[RFC6320] | Wadhwa, S., Moisand, J., Haag, T., Voigt, N. and T. Taylor, "Protocol for Access Node Control Mechanism in Broadband Networks", RFC 6320, October 2011. |
[RFC3376] | Cain, B., Deering, S., Kouvelas, I., Fenner, B. and A. Thyagarajan, "Internet Group Management Protocol, Version 3", RFC 3376, October 2002. |
[RFC2710] | Deering, S., Fenner, W. and B. Haberman, "Multicast Listener Discovery (MLD) for IPv6", RFC 2710, October 1999. |
[RFC3810] | Vida, R. and L. Costa, "Multicast Listener Discovery Version 2 (MLDv2) for IPv6", RFC 3810, June 2004. |
[PIMreg] | IANA, "http://www.iana.org/assignments/pim-parameters/pim-parameters.xhtml", 2005. |
[RFC5713] | Moustafa, H., Tschofenig, H. and S. De Cnodder, "Security Threats and Security Requirements for the Access Node Control Protocol (ANCP)", RFC 5713, January 2010. |
[RFC5851] | Ooghe, S., Voigt, N., Platnic, M., Haag, T. and S. Wadhwa, "Framework and Requirements for an Access Node Control Mechanism in Broadband Multi-Service Networks", RFC 5851, May 2010. |
[RFC5384] | Boers, A., Wijnands, I. and E. Rosen, "The Protocol Independent Multicast (PIM) Join Attribute Format", RFC 5384, November 2008. |
[IEEE48] | IEEE, "http://standards.ieee.org/regauth/oui/tutorials/EUI48.html", 2010. |
[IEEE64] | IEEE, "http://standards.ieee.org/regauth/oui/tutorials/EUI64.html", 2010. |
This appendix provides an example in which most of the possible message flows for multicast control are illustrated. This appendix is for informational purposes only. In case of discrepancy with text of the body of this document, the text in the body of the document is to be considered as the normative text.
Assume the following, for a given access port:
The stated conditions require the use of four of the five capabilities specified in this memo.
Assume that capability negotiation has been completed between the AN and NAS and that the set of negotiated capabilities includes the following four multicast capabilities: NAS-initiated replication, conditional access with white and black list, conditional access with grey list, and bandwidth delegation. At this point, the NAS can provision the service profiles on the AN and enable admission control at the AN for white-listed flows. To do this, the NAS sends the AN a Provisioning message containing this information. An example message providing the profile for our assumed subscriber is shown in Figure 21. The message has the following contents:
1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type (0x880C) | Length = 132 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Version | Msg Type = 93 | Res=0 | Result Code = 0 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Partition ID | Transaction Identifier | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |I| SubMessage Number | Length = 132 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Mcast-Service-Profile 0x0013 | TLV Length = 112 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Mcast-Svc-Profile-Name 0x0018 | Embedded TLV Length = 20 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Multicast service profile name | ~ = "Cust 0127-53681-0003" ~ | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | TLV Type = List-Action 0x0021 | Embedded TLV Length = 28 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Operation = 1 | List Type = 1 | Reserved = 0x0000 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Address Family = 1 | List Length = 20 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | G Preflen = 29| S Preflen = 32| Group prefix = | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | 233.252.0.0 | Source prefix = | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | 192.0.2.15 | G Preflen = 29| S Preflen = 32| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Group prefix = 233.252.0.32 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Source prefix = 192.0.2.15 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | TLV Type = List-Action 0x0021 | Embedded TLV Length = 18 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Operation = 1 | List Type = 3 | Reserved = 0x0000 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Address Family = 1 | List Length = 10 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | G Preflen = 29| S Preflen = 32| Group prefix = / +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ / 233.252.0.64 | Source prefix = / +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ / 192.0.2.21 | Padding = 0x0000 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | TLV Type = List-Action 0x0021 | Embedded TLV Length = 28 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Operation = 1 | List Type = 2 | Reserved = 0x0000 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Address Family = 1 | List Length = 20 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | G Preflen = 32| S Preflen = 32| Group prefix = / +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ / 233.252.0.65 | Source prefix = / +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ / 192.0.2.21 | G Preflen = 32| S Preflen = 32| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Group prefix = 233.252.0.69 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Source prefix = 192.0.2.21 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type = White-List-CAC 0x0024 | TLV Length = 0 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 21: Example Provisioning Message
Note that the padding after the middle List-Action TLV is counted as part of length of the Multicast-Service-Profile TLV, but is not included in the length of that List-Action TLV. Note also that the Length field in the message header, unlike those in the TLVs, includes the message header itself, as required by [RFC6320]. Finally, note that the Provisioning message does not include a MRepCtl-CAC TLV since in our example resource-based admission control for grey listed flows and for NAS-initiated replication is performed by the NAS.
As soon as the AN port comes up, the AN sends an ANCP PORT_UP message to the NAS specifying the Access Loop Circuit ID. The NAS replies with an ANCP Port Management message that, together with the other parameters, includes the multicast service profile name to be associated to that port along with the initial amount of delegated bandwidth. The corresponding message flow is illustrated in Figure 22.
+----------+ +---------+ +-----+ +-----+ |Subscriber| | Home | | AN | | NAS | +----------+ | Gateway | +-----+ +-----+ | +---------+ | | | | | | | | | | | | DSL Synch. | | | |---------------->| | | | |(M1)PORT_UP(Port ID) | | | |-------------------->| | | | (*) | | |(M2) PORT_MNGT | | | | (Port ID, | | | |Mcast S Profile Name,| | | |Bandwidth Allocation)| | | |<--------------------| (*) The NAS may optionally seek direction from an external Autorization/Policy Server
Figure 22: Configuring an AN Port With Multicast Service Profile ID and Delegated Bandwidth Amount
The Port Management message will typically contain other TLVs but our example (Figure 23) just shows the Target, Multicast-Service-Profile-Name, and Bandwidth-Allocation TLVs. The Target TLV identifies the subscriber line, the Multicast-Service-Profile-Name TLV is identical to the one contained in the Provisioning message, and the Bandwidth-Allocation TLV provides just enough bandwidth (2000 kbits/s) for one channel to start with.
The following fields in the Port Management message header are shown with specific values either as directed by the base protocol document or for the sake of our example:
1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type (0x880C) | Length = 84 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Version | Msg Type = 32 | Res=1 | Result Code = 0 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Partition ID | Transaction Identifier | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |I| SubMessage Number | Length = 84 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Port = 0 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Port Session Number | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Event Sequence Number = 0 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |R|x|x|x|x|x|x|x| Duration = 0 | Function = 0x8| X-Function = 0| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Event Flags | Flow Control Flags | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |x|x|x|x|x|x|x|x| Msg Type = 32 | Tech Type=5 | Blk Len = 56 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | # of TLVs = 3 | Extension Block length = 44 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | TLV Type = Target 0x1000 | Target TLV Length = 8 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Access-Loop-Circuit-ID 0x0001 | Circuit-ID Length = 4 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Access Loop Circuit ID | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Mcast-Svc-Profile-Name 0x0018 | TLV Length = 20 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Multicast service profile name | ~ = "Cust 0127-53681-0003" ~ | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Bandwidth-Allocation 0x0015 | TLV Length = 4 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Bandwidth value = 2000 (kbits/s) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 23: Example Port Management Message
Suppose now that the subscriber chooses to watch the premium channel characterized by source 192.0.2.21, group 233.252.0.67. Upon receiving the Join request, the AN matches it against the multicast service profile for the port and determines that it is a grey-listed flow. Figure 24 illustrates the resulting ANCP message flow for the case of a simple join and leave, when resource-based admission control for grey-listed flows is not activated on the AN.
To start the flow, the AN sends a Multicast Admission Control request (M1) to the NAS. The NAS decides whether flow can be admitted, applying both policy and bandwidth criteria. It returns its decision (positive in this example) in a Multicast Replication Control message (M2). Later, when the subscriber leaves the flow, the AN informs the NAS by sending another Multicast Admission Control message.
+----------+ +-------+ +-----+ ANCP +-----+ |Subscriber| | Home | | AN |<---------->| NAS | +----------+ |Gateway| +-----+ +-----+ | +-------+ | | | | | Multicast | | Join(Grey-Fl) | Admission | |-----------+---------->| Control (M1) | | | |------------------>| | | | | (NAS performs | | | Multicast | admission | | | Replication (*) control) | | | Control (M2) | | Mcast Grey Flow |<------------------| |<======================+ | | | | | ~ ~ ~ ~ | | | Multicast | | Leave(Grey-Fl) | Admission | |-----------+---------->| Control (M3) | | | |------------------>| | | | | Grey-Fl : Multicast Flow matching an entry in grey List
(*) The NAS may optionally seek direction from an external Authorization/Policy Server
Figure 24: Successful Join/Leave Operations, Grey-Listed Flow
The Multicast Admission Control message M1 contains: Figure 25:
The Multicast Admission Control message M1 is illustrated in
1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type (0x880C) | Length = 98 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Version | Msg Type=145 | Res=0 | Result Code = 0 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Partition ID | Transaction Identifier | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |I| SubMessage Number | Length = 98 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | TLV Type = Target 0x1000 | Target TLV Length = 8 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Access-Loop-Circuit-ID 0x0001 | Circuit-ID Length = 4 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Access Loop Circuit ID | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | TLV Type = Command 0x0011 | TLV Length = 28 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Cmd Code = 1 | Acctg = 0 | Reserved = 0x0000 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type = Multicast-Flow 0x0019 | Embedded TLV Length = 12 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Flow Type = 2 | Addr Fam = 1 | Reserved = 0x0000 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Multicast Group Address = 233.252.0.67 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Unicast Source Address = 192.0.2.21 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-++-+-+-+-+-+--+ |Request-Source-Device-Id 0x0092| Embedded TLV length = 4 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Value = 5 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 25: Multicast Admission Control Message Seeking To Add A Flow
The Multicast Replication Control message M2 contains: Figure 26.
The Multicast Admission Control message M2 is illustrated in
1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type (0x880C) | Length = 48 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Version | Msg Type=144 | Res=1 | Result Code = 0 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Partition ID | Transaction Identifier | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |I| SubMessage Number | Length = 48 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Target Type = 0x1000 | Target TLV Length = 8 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Access-Loop-Circuit-ID 0x0001 | Circuit-ID Length = 4 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Access Loop Circuit ID | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | TLV Type = Command 0x0011 | TLV Length = 20 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Cmd Code = 1 | Acctg = 1 | Reserved = 0x0000 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type = Multicast-Flow 0x0019 | Embedded TLV Length = 12 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Flow Type = 2 | Addr Fam = 1 | Reserved = 0x0000 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Multicast Group Address = 233.252.0.67 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Unicast Source Address = 192.0.2.21 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 26: Multicast Replication Control Message Admitting A Flow
The Multicast Admission Control message M3 advising the NAS that the flow has been terminated contains: Figure 27.
The Multicast Admission Control message M3 is illustrated in
1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type (0x880C) | Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Version | Msg Type=145 | Res=0 | Result Code = 0 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Partition ID | Transaction Identifier | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |I| SubMessage Number | Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | TLV Type = Target 0x1000 | Target TLV Length = 8 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Access-Loop-Circuit-ID 0x0001 | Circuit-ID Length = 4 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Access Loop Circuit ID | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | TLV Type = Command 0x0011 | TLV Length = 28 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Cmd Code = 2 | Acctg = 0 | Reserved = 0x0000 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Multicast-Flow Type = 0x0019 | Embedded TLV Length = 12 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Flow Type = 2 | Addr Fam = 1 | Reserved = 0x0000 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Multicast Group Address = 233.252.0.67 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Unicast Source Address = 192.0.2.21 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |Request-Source-Device-Id 0x0092| Embedded TLV length = 4 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Value = 5 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 27: Multicast Admission Control Message Signalling Flow Termination
The NAS has enabled white list admission control on the AN, and the bandwidth delegation capability has been negotiated. White listed flows in themselves require no messages to the NAS, either upon admission or upon termination, but the AN may request an increase in the amount of delegated bandwidth if it needs the increase to admit a flow.
Consider an example where the AN has already admitted one white-listed flow, thereby using up the initially provisioned amount of delegated bandwidth (2000 kbits/s). A request is received to join a new flow in the white list range. The AN chooses to send a Bandwidth Reallocation Request message to the NAS, requesting that the delegated bandwidth allocation be increased to 4000 kbits/s at a minimum, and preferably to 6000 kbits/s.
In our example, the NAS is managing bandwidth tightly, as witnessed by its minimal initial allocation of just enough for one flow. It is willing to provide the minimum additional amount only, and therefore returns a Bandwidth Transfer message where the delegated bandwidth value is given as 4000 kbits/s. With this amount, the AN is able to admit the second white-listed flow. The AN could send a similar Bandwidth Transfer message back to the NAS bringing the delegated bandwidth amount back down to 2000 kbits/s when one of the flows is terminated, but this shows nothing new and is omitted.
As one more point of illustration, suppose that the NAS chooses to audit the current amount of delegated bandwidth to ensure it is synchronized with the AN. It sends a Delegated Bandwidth Query request message to the AN, and receives a Delegated Bandwidth Query response message with the current allocation as the AN sees it.
The complete message flow is shown in Figure 28.
+----------+ +-------+ +-----+ ANCP +-----+ |Subscriber| | Home | | AN |<---------->| NAS | +----------+ |Gateway| +-----+ +-----+ | +-------+ | | | | | | | Join(White-F1) | | |-----------+---------->| | | | |AN performs | | Mcast White Flow 1 | admission control | |<======================+ | | | | | | Join(White-F2) | | |-----------+---------->|No bandwidth left | | | | | | | |Bandwidth | | | | Reallocation Req | | | |------------------>|(M1) | | | | | | | (*) | | |Bandwidth Transfer | | AN can now |<------------------|(M2) | admit flow | | | Mcast White Flow 2 | | |<======================+ | | | | | ~ ~ ~ ~ | | |Delegated Bandwidth| | | | Query request | | | |<------------------|(M3) | | | | | | |Delegated Bandwidth| | | | Query response | | | |------------------>|(M4) | | | |
(*) The NAS may optionally seek direction from an external Authorization/Policy Server
Figure 28: Successful Join/Leave Operations, White-Listed Flow
The Bandwidth Reallocation Request message (M1) is shown in Figure 29. The contents require little explanation. The Message Type for the Bandwidth Reallocation Request is 146. The Result field is set to Ignore (0x0). Besides the Target, the message has one other TLV, the Bandwidth-Request, with a TLV Type of 0x0016. The TLV contains Required Amount and Preferred Amount fields, set to 4000 and 6000 kbits/s respectively.
1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type (0x880C) | Length = 36 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Version | Msg Type=146 | Res=0 | Result Code = 0 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Partition ID | Transaction Identifier | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |I| SubMessage Number | Length = 36 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | TLV Type = Target 0x1000 | Target TLV Length = 8 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Access-Loop-Circuit-ID 0x0001 | Circuit-ID Length = 4 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Access Loop Circuit ID | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Bandwidth-Request 0x0016 | TLV Length = 8 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Required Amount = 4000 (kbits/s) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Preferred Amount = 6000 (kbits/s) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 29: Bandwidth Reallocation Request Message
The Bandwidth Transfer message (M2) is shown in Figure 30. Again, the contents are easily understood. The Message Type for the Bandwidth Transfer message is 147. The Result field is set to Success (0x3). The message contains the Target TLV and the Bandwidth-Allocation TLV. The latter has a TLV Type of 0x0015 and contains a Delegated Amount field, set to 4000 kbits/s.
1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type (0x880C) | Length = 32 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Version | Msg Type=147 | Res=3 | Result Code = 0 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Partition ID | Transaction Identifier | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |I| SubMessage Number | Length = 32 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | TLV Type = Target 0x1000 | Target TLV Length = 8 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Access-Loop-Circuit-ID 0x0001 | Circuit-ID Length = 4 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Access Loop Circuit ID | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Bandwidth-Allocation 0x0015 | TLV Length = 4 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Delegated Amount = 4000 (kbits/s) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 30: NAS Response, Bandwidth Transfer Message
The Delegated Bandwidth Query request message (M3) is shown in Figure 31. The Message Type for the Delegated Bandwidth Query request message is 148. The Result field is set to AckAll (0x2). The message contains the Target TLV only.
1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type (0x880C) | Length = 24 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Version | Msg Type=148 | Res=2 | Result Code = 0 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Partition ID | Transaction Identifier | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |I| SubMessage Number | Length = 24 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | TLV Type = Target 0x1000 | Target TLV Length = 8 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Access-Loop-Circuit-ID 0x0001 | Circuit-ID Length = 4 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Access Loop Circuit ID | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 31: Delegated Bandwidth Query Request Message
Finally, the Delegated Bandwidth Query response message (M4) is shown in Figure 32. The Message Type for the Delegated Bandwidth Query response message is 148. The Result field is set to Success (0x3). The message contains the Target TLV and the Bandwidth-Allocation TLV with the Delegated Amount field set to 4000 kbits/s.
1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type (0x880C) | Length = 32 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Version | Msg Type=148 | Res=2 | Result Code = 0 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Partition ID | Transaction Identifier (copied from request) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |I| SubMessage Number | Length = 32 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | TLV Type = Target 0x1000 | Target TLV Length = 8 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Access-Loop-Circuit-ID 0x0001 | Circuit-ID Length = 4 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Access Loop Circuit ID | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Bandwidth-Allocation 0x0015 | TLV Length = 4 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Delegated Amount = 4000 (kbits/s) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 32: Delegated Bandwidth Query Response Message
This section introduces no new messages, since requests for flows in the black list are simply ignored. The one thing to point out is the overlap in our example between the set of flows in the grey list and the flows in the black list. This does not create any ambiguity, since not only does the black list have priority for equally good matches, but also the black list entries are more specific (group prefix lengths of 32 versus 29 in the grey list) than the grey list flow prefixes.
The final class of multicast control actions in our example allows the subscriber to enter and leave the on-line game. As described at the beginning of this example, the game uses Any Source Multicast (ASM). Subscriber signalling bypasses the AN, going directly to the NAS (e.g., through a web interface).
When the subscriber requests to join the game, the NAS (after applying policy and bandwidth checks) sends a Multicast Replication Control message to the AN to enable the flow on the port concerned. The AN knows not to apply admission control, since it has not received an MRepCtl-CAC TLV in the Provisioning message. When the subscriber leaves, the NAS sends another Multicast Replication Control message to delete the flow. This message sequence is shown in Figure 33.
It is possible that the NAS finds that there is not enough bandwidth available to accommodate the subscriber's request. In this case, the NAS could send a Bandwidth Reallocation Request message to the AN, asking it to release some of the bandwidth delegated to it. This is not shown in the present example, since the messages are the same as those already presented with the exception that the Preferred Amount in the request will be *less than* or equal to the Required amount, rather than *greater than* or equal to it.
+----------+ +-------+ +-----+ ANCP +-----+ |Subscriber| | Home | | AN |<---------->| NAS | +----------+ |Gateway| +-----+ +-----+ | +-------+ | | | | | | | Join game | | |-----------+------------------------------>| | | | Multicast | NAS performs | | | Replication (*) admission | | | Control (M1) | control | Mcast Game Flow |<------------------| |<=====================>+ | | | | | ~ ~ ~ ~ | | | | | Leave game | | |-----------+------------------------------>| | | | Multicast | | | | Replication | | | | Control (M2) | | Mcast Game Flow |<------------------| | discontinued | | | | | |
(*) The NAS may optionally seek direction from an external Authorization/Policy Server
Figure 33: NAS-Initiated Flows For On-Line Gaming
Multicast Replication Control message (M1) in Figure 34 looks like the message in Figure 26 with two exceptions. The first is that the NAS has the option to set the Result field to AckAll (0x02) if it needs positive reassurance that the flow has been enabled. This was not done here to save having to depict a response differing only in the Result field. The larger difference in this example is that the flow description in the Multicast-Flow embedded TLV is that of an ASM multicast group (Flow Type = 1) with IPv4 (1) group address 233.252.0.100.
1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type (0x880C) | Length = 44 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Version | Msg Type=144 | Res=1 | Result Code = 0 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Partition ID | Transaction Identifier | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |I| SubMessage Number | Length = 44 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | TLV Type = Target 0x1000 | Target TLV Length = 8 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Access-Loop-Circuit-ID 0x0001 | Circuit-ID Length = 4 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Access Loop Circuit ID | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | TLV Type = Command 0x0011 | TLV Length = 16 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Cmd Code = 1 | Acctg = 1 | Reserved = 0x0000 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type = Multicast-Flow 0x0019 | Embedded TLV Length = 12 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Flow Type = 1 | Addr Fam = 1 | Reserved = 0x0000 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Multicast Group Address = 233.252.0.100 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-++-+-+-+-+-+--+
Figure 34: Enabling The Subscriber To Join An On-Line Game
Message M2 terminating the flow when the subscriber leaves the game looks the same as the message in Figure 34 with two exceptions: the Command Code becomes "Delete" (2), and Accounting is set to "No" (0) to turn off flow accounting. Of course, the Transaction Identifier values will differ between the two messages.
The example in this section is independent of the example in the preceding sections.
Figure 35 illustrates a message flow in a case where the NAS queries the AN about which multicast flows are active on port 10, on port 11 and on port 20 of the AN.
+----------+ +-------+ +-----+ ANCP +-----+ |Subscriber| | Home | | AN |<---------->| NAS | +----------+ |Gateway| +-----+ +-----+ | +-------+ | | | | | Multicast Flow | | | | Query Request | | | | (M1) | | | |<------------------| | | | | | | | Multicast Flow | | | | Query Response | | | | (M2) | | | |------------------>| | | | | | | | |
Figure 35: Per-Port Multicast Flow Reporting
The Multicast Flow Query Request message (M1) is illustrated in Figure 36. The Message Type is 149. The Result field is set to AckAll (0x2). Three Target TLVs are present, identifying port 10, port 20, and port 11 respectively.
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type (0x880C) | Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Version | Msg Type = 149| Res=1 | Result Code = 0 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Partition ID | Transaction Identifier | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |I| SubMessage Number | Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | TLV Type = Target 0x1000 | Target TLV Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Access-Loop-Circuit-ID 0x0001 | Circuit-ID Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | ~ Access Loop Circuit ID (port10) ~ | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | TLV Type = Target 0x1000 | Target TLV Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Access-Loop-Circuit-ID 0x0001 | Circuit-ID Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | ~ Access Loop Circuit ID (port20) ~ | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | TLV Type = Target 0x1000 | Target TLV Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Access-Loop-Circuit-ID 0x0001 | Circuit-ID Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | ~ Access Loop Circuit ID (port11) ~ | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 36: Multicast Flow Query Request Message For Per-Port Multicast Flow Reporting
The Multicast Flow Query Response message (M2) is illustrated in Figure 37. It indicates that there is one active multicast flow [(192.0.2.1, 233.252.0.4)] on port 10, no active multicast flow on port 20 and two active multicast flows [(192.0.2.1, 233.252.0.4) and (192.0.2.2, 233.252.0.10)] on port 11.
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type (0x880C) | Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Version | Msg Type = 149|Rslt=3 | Result Code = 0 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Partition ID | Transaction Identifier | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |I| SubMessage Number | Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | TLV Type = Target 0x1000 | Target TLV Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Access-Loop-Circuit-ID 0x0001 | Circuit-ID Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | ~ Access Loop Circuit ID (port10) ~ | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type = Multicast-Flow 0x0019 | Embedded TLV Length = 12 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Flow Type = 2 | Addr Fam = 1 | Reserved = 0x0000 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Multicast Group Address = 233.252.0.4 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Unicast Source Address = 192.0.2.1 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-++-+-+-+-+-+--+ | TLV Type = Target 0x1000 | Target TLV Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Access-Loop-Circuit-ID 0x0001 | Circuit-ID Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | ~ Access Loop Circuit ID (port20) ~ | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | TLV Type = Target 0x1000 | Target TLV Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Access-Loop-Circuit-ID 0x0001 | Circuit-ID Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | ~ Access Loop Circuit ID (port11) ~ | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type = Multicast-Flow 0x0019 | Embedded TLV Length = 12 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Flow Type = 2 | Addr Fam = 1 | Reserved = 0x0000 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Multicast Group Address = 233.252.0.4 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Unicast Source Address = 192.0.2.1 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-++-+-+-+-+-+--+ | Type = Multicast-Flow 0x0019 | Embedded TLV Length = 12 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Flow Type = 2 | Addr Fam = 1 | Reserved = 0x0000 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Multicast Group Address: 233.252.0.10 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Unicast Source Address = 192.0.2.2 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-++-+-+-+-+-+--+
Figure 37: Multicast Flow Query Response message For Per-Port Multicast Flow Reporting