Internet DRAFT - draft-li-lsr-isis-te-metric-lan-extensions
draft-li-lsr-isis-te-metric-lan-extensions
Network Working Group C. Li
Internet-Draft G. Xu
Intended status: Informational Z. Hu
Expires: 14 August 2023 Huawei
10 February 2023
IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric LAN Extensions
draft-li-lsr-isis-te-metric-lan-extensions-01
Abstract
In certain networks, network-performance criteria (e.g., latency) are
becoming as critical to data-path selection as other metrics. This
document describes extensions to IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE)
Metric Extensions (RFC 8570) for LAN subnetworks. These extensions
provide a way to distribute and collect network-performance
information in LAN subnetworks.
Requirements Language
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 BCP 14 [RFC2119]
[RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown
here.
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 https://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 14 August 2023.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2023 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
Li, et al. Expires 14 August 2023 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric LA February 2023
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://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 Revised BSD License text as
described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Sub-TLV Details . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. Unidirectional Link Delay LAN Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2. Min/Max Unidirectional Link Delay LAN Sub-TLV . . . . . . 4
2.3. Unidirectional Delay Variation LAN Sub-TLV . . . . . . . 5
2.4. Unidirectional Link Loss LAN Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.5. Unidirectional Residual Bandwidth LAN Sub-TLV . . . . . . 6
2.6. Unidirectional Available Bandwidth LAN Sub-TLV . . . . . 7
2.7. Unidirectional Utilized Bandwidth LAN Sub-TLV . . . . . . 8
3. Announcement Thresholds and Filters . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
4. Announcement Suppression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
5. Network Stability and Announcement Periodicity . . . . . . . 9
6. Enabling and Disabling Sub-TLVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
7. Compatibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
10. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
11. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
1. Introduction
In certain networks, network-performance criteria (e.g., latency) are
becoming as critical to data-path selection as other metrics. This
document describes extensions to IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE)
Metric Extensions (RFC 8570) for LAN subnetworks. These extensions
provide a way to distribute and collect network-performance
information in LAN subnetworks.
In LAN subnetworks, the Designated Intermediate System (DIS) is
elected and originates the Pseudonode LSP (PN LSP) including all
neighbors of the DIS. Since, on LANs, each router only advertises
one adjacency to the DIS (and doesn't advertise any other adjacency),
each router should advertise the TE metric for each of its neighbors.
Since the parent TLV is advertising an adjcacency to the DIS, it is
necessary to include the System ID of the physical neighbor in each
TE LAN Sub-TLV.
Li, et al. Expires 14 August 2023 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric LA February 2023
2. Sub-TLV Details
This document registers new IS-IS TE sub-TLVs in the "Sub-TLVs for
TLVs 22, 23, 141, 222, and 223" registry. These new sub-TLVs
provides ways to distribute network-performance information in LAN
subnetworks.
This document registers new sub-TLVs:
Type Description
----------------------------------------------------
TBD Unidirectional Link Delay LAN Sub-TLV
TBD Min/Max Unidirectional Link Delay LAN Sub-TLV
TBD Unidirectional Delay Variation LAN Sub-TLV
TBD Unidirectional Link Loss LAN Sub-TLV
TBD Unidirectional Residual Bandwidth LAN Sub-TLV
TBD Unidirectional Available Bandwidth LAN Sub-TLV
TBD Unidirectional Utilized Bandwidth LAN Sub-TLV
Figure 1: Figure 1
2.1. Unidirectional Link Delay LAN Sub-TLV
This sub-TLV advertises the average link delay between two real
connected IS-IS neighbors in LAN. Each router advertises the average
link delay for each of its neighbors inside a newly defined sub-TLV
that is a part of the TLV advertising the adjacency to the DIS (e.g.,
TLV-22). The format of this sub-TLV is shown in the following
diagram:
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 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Neighbor System-ID (ID length octets) |
+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+--+-+-+-+-+-+-+--+
|A| RESERVED | Delay |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+--+-+-+-+-+-+-+--+
Figure 2: Figure 2: Unidirectional Link Delay LAN Sub-TLV
Type: TBD (suggested value 41) is to be assigned by IANA.
Length: 4 + System-ID length.
Li, et al. Expires 14 August 2023 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric LA February 2023
Neighbor System-ID: IS-IS System-ID of length "ID Length" as defined
in [ISO10589].
The other fields are the same as defined in [RFC8570] for
Unidirectional Link Delay Sub-TLV.
This sub-TLV is optional. This sub-TLV SHOULD appear only once in
each parent TLV.
2.2. Min/Max Unidirectional Link Delay LAN Sub-TLV
This sub-TLV advertises the minimum and maximum delay values between
two real connected IS-IS neighbors in LAN. Each router advertises
the minimum and maximum delay for each of its neighbors inside a
newly defined sub-TLV that is a part of the TLV advertising the
adjacency to the DIS (e.g., TLV-22). The format of this sub-TLV is
shown in the following diagram:
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 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Neighbor System-ID (ID length octets) |
+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+--+-+-+-+-+-+-+--+
|A| RESERVED | Min Delay |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+--+-+-+-+-+-+-+--+
| RESERVED | Max Delay |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+--+-+-+-+-+-+-+--+
Figure 3: Figure 3: Min/Max Unidirectional Link Delay LAN Sub-TLV
Type: TBD (suggested value 42) is to be assigned by IANA.
Length: 8 + System-ID length.
Neighbor System-ID: IS-IS System-ID of length "ID Length" as defined
in [ISO10589].
The other fields are the same as defined in [RFC8570] for Min/Max
Unidirectional Link Delay Sub-TLV.
This sub-TLV is optional. This sub-TLV SHOULD appear only once in
each parent TLV.
Li, et al. Expires 14 August 2023 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric LA February 2023
2.3. Unidirectional Delay Variation LAN Sub-TLV
This sub-TLV advertises the average link delay variation between two
real connected IS-IS neighbors in LAN. Each router advertises
average link delay variation for each of its neighbors inside a newly
defined sub-TLV that is a part of the TLV advertising the adjacency
to the DIS (e.g., TLV-22). The format of this sub-TLV is shown in
the following diagram:
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 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Neighbor System-ID (ID length octets) |
+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+--+-+-+-+-+-+-+--+
|A| RESERVED | Delay Variation |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+--+-+-+-+-+-+-+--+
Figure 4: Figure 4: Unidirectional Delay Variation LAN Sub-TLV
Type: TBD (suggested value 43) is to be assigned by IANA.
Length: 4 + System-ID length.
Neighbor System-ID: IS-IS System-ID of length "ID Length" as defined
in [ISO10589].
The other fields are the same as defined in [RFC8570] for
Unidirectional Delay Variation Sub-TLV.
This sub-TLV is optional. This sub-TLV SHOULD appear only once in
each parent TLV.
2.4. Unidirectional Link Loss LAN Sub-TLV
This sub-TLV advertises the loss (as a packet percentage) between two
real connected IS-IS neighbors in LAN. Each router advertises the
link loss for each of its neighbors inside a newly defined sub-TLV
that is a part of the TLV advertising the adjacency to the DIS (e.g.,
TLV-22). The format of this sub-TLV is shown in the following
diagram:
Li, et al. Expires 14 August 2023 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric LA February 2023
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 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Neighbor System-ID (ID length octets) |
+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+--+-+-+-+-+-+-+--+
|A| RESERVED | Link Loss |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+--+-+-+-+-+-+-+--+
Figure 5: Figure 5: Unidirectional Link Loss LAN Sub-TLV
Type: TBD (suggested value 44) is to be assigned by IANA.
Length: 4 + System-ID length.
Neighbor System-ID: IS-IS System-ID of length "ID Length" as defined
in [ISO10589].
The other fields are the same as defined in [RFC8570] for
Unidirectional Link Loss Sub-TLV.
This sub-TLV is optional. This sub-TLV SHOULD appear only once in
each parent TLV.
2.5. Unidirectional Residual Bandwidth LAN Sub-TLV
This sub-TLV advertises the residual bandwidth between two real
connected IS-IS neighbors in LAN. Each router advertises the
residual bandwidth for each of its neighbors inside a newly defined
sub-TLV that is a part of the TLV advertising the adjacency to the
DIS (e.g., TLV-22). The format of this sub-TLV is shown in the
following diagram:
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 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Neighbor System-ID (ID length octets) |
+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+--+-+-+-+-+-+-+--+
| Residual Bandwidth |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+--+-+-+-+-+-+-+--+
Li, et al. Expires 14 August 2023 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric LA February 2023
Figure 6: Figure 6: Unidirectional Residual Bandwidth LAN Sub-TLV
Type: TBD (suggested value 45) is to be assigned by IANA.
Length: 4 + System-ID length.
Neighbor System-ID: IS-IS System-ID of length "ID Length" as defined
in [ISO10589].
The other fields are the same as defined in [RFC8570] for
Unidirectional Residual Bandwidth Sub-TLV.
This sub-TLV is optional. This sub-TLV SHOULD appear only once in
each parent TLV.
2.6. Unidirectional Available Bandwidth LAN Sub-TLV
This sub-TLV advertises the available bandwidth between two real
connected IS-IS neighbors in LAN. Each router advertises the
available bandwidth for each of its neighbors inside a newly defined
sub-TLV that is a part of the TLV advertising the adjacency to the
DIS (e.g., TLV-22). The format of this sub-TLV is shown in the
following diagram:
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 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Neighbor System-ID (ID length octets) |
+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+--+-+-+-+-+-+-+--+
| Available Bandwidth |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+--+-+-+-+-+-+-+--+
Figure 7: Figure 7: Unidirectional Available Bandwidth LAN Sub-TLV
Type: TBD (suggested value 46) is to be assigned by IANA.
Length: 4 + System-ID length.
Neighbor System-ID: IS-IS System-ID of length "ID Length" as defined
in [ISO10589].
The other fields are the same as defined in [RFC8570] for
Unidirectional Available Bandwidth Sub-TLV.
Li, et al. Expires 14 August 2023 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric LA February 2023
This sub-TLV is optional. This sub-TLV SHOULD appear only once in
each parent TLV.
2.7. Unidirectional Utilized Bandwidth LAN Sub-TLV
This sub-TLV advertises the bandwidth utilization between two real
connected IS-IS neighbors in LAN. Each router advertises the
bandwidth utilization (for each of its neighbors) inside a newly
defined sub-TLV that is a part of the TLV advertising the adjacency
to the DIS (e.g., TLV-22). The format of this sub-TLV is shown in
the following diagram:
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 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Neighbor System-ID (ID length octets) |
+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+--+-+-+-+-+-+-+--+
| Utilized Bandwidth |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+--+-+-+-+-+-+-+--+
Figure 8: Figure 8: Unidirectional Utilized Bandwidth LAN Sub-TLV
Type: TBD (suggested value 47) is to be assigned by IANA.
Length: 4 + System-ID length.
Neighbor System-ID: IS-IS System-ID of length "ID Length" as defined
in [ISO10589].
The other fields are the same as defined in [RFC8570] for
Unidirectional Utilized Bandwidth Sub-TLV.
This sub-TLV is optional. This sub-TLV SHOULD appear only once in
each parent TLV.
3. Announcement Thresholds and Filters
This document uses the same principle for announcement thresholds and
filters as described in RFC 8570.
4. Announcement Suppression
This document uses the same principle for announcement suppression as
described in RFC 8570.
Li, et al. Expires 14 August 2023 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric LA February 2023
5. Network Stability and Announcement Periodicity
This document uses the same principle for network stability and
announcement periodicity as described in RFC 8570.
6. Enabling and Disabling Sub-TLVs
Implementations MUST make it possible to enable or disable each sub-
TLV based on configuration.
7. Compatibility
Unrecognized sub-TLVs should be silently ignored.
8. Acknowledgements
TBD.
9. IANA Considerations
This document requests that IANA allocates new sub-TLV types from the
"Sub-TLVs for TLVs 22, 23, 25, 141, 222, and 223 (Extended IS
reachability, IS Neighbor Attribute, L2 Bundle Member Attributes,
inter-AS reachability information, MT-ISN, and MT IS Neighbor
Attribute TLVs)" registry as specified.
Value Description
---------------------------------------------------------------
TBD Unidirectional Link Delay LAN Sub-TLV
TBD Min/Max Unidirectional Link Delay LAN Sub-TLV
TBD Unidirectional Delay Variation LAN Sub-TLV
TBD Unidirectional Link Loss LAN Sub-TLV
TBD Unidirectional Residual Bandwidth LAN Sub-TLV
TBD Unidirectional Available Bandwidth LAN Sub-TLV
TBD Unidirectional Utilized Bandwidth LAN Sub-TLV
Figure 9: Figure 9
10. Security Considerations
These extensions to IS-IS do not add any new security issues to the
existing IGP.
11. References
[RFC5305] Li, T. and H. Smit, "IS-IS Extensions for Traffic
Engineering", RFC 5305, DOI 10.17487/RFC5305, October
2008, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5305>.
Li, et al. Expires 14 August 2023 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric LA February 2023
[RFC8570] Ginsberg, L., Ed., Previdi, S., Ed., Giacalone, S., Ward,
D., Drake, J., and Q. Wu, "IS-IS Traffic Engineering (TE)
Metric Extensions", RFC 8570, DOI 10.17487/RFC8570, March
2019, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8570>.
Authors' Addresses
Chenxi Li
Huawei
Huawei Bld., No.156 Beiqing Rd.
Beijing
100095
China
Email: lichenxi1@huawei.com
Guoqi Xu
Huawei
Huawei Bld., No. 156 Beiqing Rd.
Beijing
100095
China
Email: xuguoqi@huawei.com
Zhibo Hu
Huawei
Huawei Bld., No.156 Beiqing Rd.
Beijing
100095
China
Email: huzhibo@huawei.com
Li, et al. Expires 14 August 2023 [Page 10]
