Internet DRAFT - draft-cui-mpls-tp-on-demand-cv-id
draft-cui-mpls-tp-on-demand-cv-id
Network Working Group Z. Cui
Internet-Draft R. Winter
Intended status: Standards Track NEC
Expires: August 27, 2012 February 24, 2012
Using ITU-T-based IDs for MPLS-TP On-demand Connectivity Verification
draft-cui-mpls-tp-on-demand-cv-id-00
Abstract
This document defines how to use ICC-based MPLS-TP identifiers for
on-demand connectivity verification (CV) analogous to RFC 6426. New
TLVs are defined to support on-demand CV based on identifiers
following ITU-T conventions.
Status of this Memo
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 August 27, 2012.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2012 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.
Cui & Winter Expires August 27, 2012 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft On-demand CV ID February 2012
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Requirements notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. ICC_Operator_ID-based TLV Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1. ICC_Operator_ID-based Source/Destination Identifier
TLVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.2. ICC_Operator_ID-based Static LSP/PW Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . 5
3.2.1. ICC_Operator_ID-based Static LSP Sub-TLV . . . . . . . 5
3.2.2. ICC_Operator_ID-based Static PW Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . 6
4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Cui & Winter Expires August 27, 2012 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft On-demand CV ID February 2012
1. Introduction
MPLS On-Demand Connectivity Verification (CV) and Route Tracing
[RFC6426] is an on-demand monitoring mechanism for the MPLS Transport
Profile (MPLS-TP). [RFC6426] defines a set of Global_ID-based TLVs
to support on-demand CV and route tracing for MPLS-TP LSPs, including
PWs and Sections which follow the IP/MPLS conventions.
In transport networks however, the ITU Carrier Code (ICC) is
traditionally used to identify a carrier/service provider. Instead
of using the Global_ID, which is derived from the AS number of the
service provider, this document defines source/destination TLVs and
static LSP/PW Sub-TLVs based on the ICC_Operator_ID as specified in
[I-D.ietf-mpls-tp-itu-t-identifiers] for use in CV.
2. Requirements notation
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].
3. ICC_Operator_ID-based TLV Definitions
In ICC-based transport network, the Global_ID might not be available
for on-demand CV and route tracing. In such environments it might be
necessary to perform CV and route tracing using the ICC_Operator_ID
as specified in [I-D.ietf-mpls-tp-itu-t-identifiers].
The ICC_Operator_ID consists of the Country Code (CC) followed by the
ITU carrier code (ICC). The Country Code (alpha-2) is a string of
two alphabetic characters, and the ICC itself is a string of one to
six left-justified characters, each character being either alphabetic
(i.e. A-Z) or numeric (i.e. 0-9).
This section provides the definition for a number of ICC_Operator_ID-
based TLV objects. In order to simplify implementations, the length
of ICC_Operator_ID field has a fixed length independent of the ICC
length. Therefore, zero padding will be used in cases where the ICC
length is less than 6 octets long. The total length of the
ICC_Operator_ID therefore amounts to 8 octets as shown in Figure 1.
Cui & Winter Expires August 27, 2012 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft On-demand CV ID February 2012
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| CC (2 Octets) | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +
| ICC (fixed to 6 octets ) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 1: ICC_Operator_ID Format
3.1. ICC_Operator_ID-based Source/Destination Identifier TLVs
The Source and Destination Identifier TLVs follow the same format
their only difference being the type. The format is shown below.
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length = 16 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
+ ICC_Operator_ID (8 Octets) +
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Node_ID (4 Octets) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 2: ICC_Operator_ID-based Source/Destination Identifier TLV
Format
The format of the ICC_Operator_ID is defined in
[I-D.ietf-mpls-tp-itu-t-identifiers]. The encoding of the ID is
depicted in Figure 1.
The format of the Node_ID is defined in [RFC6370].
Type will be one of either TBD-SRC or TBD-DST. The TLV structure is
therefore as follows:
Type # Length Value Field
------ ------ -----------
TBD-SRC 16 ICC_Operator_ID-based Source Identifier TLV
TBD-DST 16 ICC_Operator_ID-based Destination Identifier TLV
Figure 3: ICC_Operator_ID-based Source/Destination Identifier types
Cui & Winter Expires August 27, 2012 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft On-demand CV ID February 2012
3.2. ICC_Operator_ID-based Static LSP/PW Sub-TLV
The new sub-TLVs are assigned sub-type identifiers as follows, and
are described in the following sections.
Type # Sub-Type # Length Value Field
------ ---------- ------ -----------
1 24 28 ICC_Operator_ID-based Static LSP
1 25 36 ICC_Operator_ID-based Static Pseudowire
Figure 4: ICC_Operator_ID-based Static LSP/PW Sub-types
3.2.1. ICC_Operator_ID-based Static LSP Sub-TLV
The format of the ICC_Operator_ID-based Static LSP Sub-TLV is
specified in the following figure. The value fields are taken from
[I-D.ietf-mpls-tp-itu-t-identifiers].
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
+ Source ICC_Operator_ID +
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Source Node ID |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Source Tunnel Number | LSP Number |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
+ Destination ICC_Operator_ID +
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Destination Node ID |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Destination Tunnel Number | Must be Zero |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 5: ICC_Operator_ID-based Static LSP Sub-TLV Format
The ICC_Operator_ID MAY be set to zero. Note however that such use
is limited to entities contained within a single operator and MUST
NOT be used across an NNI. However, the other fields without the
padding field MUST be set to non-zero values.
Cui & Winter Expires August 27, 2012 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft On-demand CV ID February 2012
3.2.2. ICC_Operator_ID-based Static PW Sub-TLV
The format of the ICC_Operator_ID-based Static PW Sub-TLV is
specified in the following figure. The value fields are taken from
[I-D.ietf-mpls-tp-itu-t-identifiers].
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
+ Service Identifier +
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
+ Source ICC_Operator_ID +
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Source Node ID |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Source AC-ID |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
+ Destination ICC_Operator_ID +
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Destination Node ID |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Destination AC-ID |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 6: ICC_Operator_ID-based Static PW Sub-TLV Format
The ICC_Operator_ID MAY be set to zero. Note that such use is
limited to entities contained within a single operator and MUST NOT
be used across an NNI. However, The other fields MUST be set to non-
zero values.
4. Security Considerations
TBD
5. IANA Considerations
TBD
Cui & Winter Expires August 27, 2012 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft On-demand CV ID February 2012
6. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-mpls-tp-itu-t-identifiers]
Winter, R., Gray, E., Helvoort, H., and M. Betts, "MPLS-TP
Identifiers Following ITU-T Conventions",
draft-ietf-mpls-tp-itu-t-identifiers-02 (work in
progress), October 2011.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC6370] Bocci, M., Swallow, G., and E. Gray, "MPLS Transport
Profile (MPLS-TP) Identifiers", RFC 6370, September 2011.
[RFC6426] Gray, E., Bahadur, N., Boutros, S., and R. Aggarwal, "MPLS
On-Demand Connectivity Verification and Route Tracing",
RFC 6426, November 2011.
Authors' Addresses
Zhenlong Cui
NEC
Email: c-sai@bx.jp.nec.com
Rolf Winter
NEC
Email: Rolf.Winter@neclab.eu
Cui & Winter Expires August 27, 2012 [Page 7]
