Skip to main content

OSPF-TE Link Availability Extension for Links with Variable Discrete Bandwidth
draft-ietf-ccamp-ospf-availability-extension-06

The information below is for an old version of the document.
Document Type
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft that was ultimately published as RFC 8330.
Authors Hao Long , Hao Long , Hao Long , Hao Long , Hao Long , Hao Long , Hao Long , Hao Long , Min Ye , Min Ye , Min Ye , Min Ye , Min Ye , Min Ye , Min Ye , Min Ye , Greg Mirsky , Greg Mirsky , Greg Mirsky , Greg Mirsky , Greg Mirsky , Greg Mirsky , Greg Mirsky , Greg Mirsky , Alessandro D'Alessandro , Alessandro D'Alessandro , Alessandro D'Alessandro , Alessandro D'Alessandro , Alessandro D'Alessandro , Alessandro D'Alessandro , Alessandro D'Alessandro , Alessandro D'Alessandro , Himanshu C. Shah , Himanshu C. Shah , Himanshu C. Shah , Himanshu C. Shah , Himanshu C. Shah , Himanshu C. Shah , Himanshu C. Shah , Himanshu C. Shah
Last updated 2016-08-25 (Latest revision 2016-08-19)
Replaces draft-long-ccamp-ospf-availability-extension, draft-long-ccamp-ospf-availability-extension, draft-long-ccamp-ospf-availability-extension, draft-long-ccamp-ospf-availability-extension, draft-long-ccamp-ospf-availability-extension, draft-long-ccamp-ospf-availability-extension, draft-long-ccamp-ospf-availability-extension, draft-long-ccamp-ospf-availability-extension
RFC stream Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
Formats
Reviews
Additional resources Mailing list discussion
Stream WG state Submitted to IESG for Publication
Document shepherd Fatai Zhang
Shepherd write-up Show Last changed 2016-06-14
IESG IESG state Became RFC 8330 (Proposed Standard)
Consensus boilerplate Yes
Telechat date (None)
Responsible AD Deborah Brungard
Send notices to "Fatai Zhang" <zhangfatai@huawei.com>
draft-ietf-ccamp-ospf-availability-extension-06
Network Working Group                                     H. Long, M.Ye 
Internet Draft                             Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd         
Intended status: Standards Track                              G. Mirsky 
                                                               Ericsson   
                                                         A.D'Alessandro 
                                                   Telecom Italia S.p.A 
                                                                H. Shah 
                                                                  Ciena         
Expires: February 2017                                  August 19, 2016                               
                                      
    OSPF-TE Link Availability Extension for Links with Variable Discrete 
                                Bandwidth 
            draft-ietf-ccamp-ospf-availability-extension-06.txt 

Abstract 

   A network may contain links with variable discrete bandwidth, e.g., 
   copper, radio, etc. The bandwidth of such links may change 
   discretely in reaction to changing external environment. 
   Availability is typically used for describing such links during 
   network planning. This document introduces an optional ISCD 
   Availability sub-TLV to extend the Open Shortest Path First (OSPF) 
   Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS). This extension 
   can be used for route computation in a network that contains links 
   with variable discrete bandwidth. 

    

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), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that 
   other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
   Drafts. 

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six 
   months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents 
   at any time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as 
   reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 

 
 
 
Long, et al.          Expires February 19, 2017               [Page 1] 


Internet-Draft    Availability extension to OSPF-TE        August 2016 
    

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at 
   http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt 

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at 
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html 

   This Internet-Draft will expire on February 19, 2016. 

Copyright Notice 

   Copyright (c) 2016 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. 

Table of Contents 

   1. Introduction ................................................ 3 
   2. Overview .................................................... 4 
   3. Extension to OSPF Routing Protocol........................... 4 
      3.1. ISCD Availability sub-TLV............................... 4 
      3.2. Signaling Process....................................... 5 
   4. Security Considerations...................................... 5 
   5. IANA Considerations ......................................... 6 
   6. References .................................................. 6 
      6.1. Normative References.................................... 6 
      6.2. Informative References.................................. 6 
   7. Acknowledgments ............................................. 7 
 
Conventions used in this document 

   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 RFC-2119 [RFC2119]. 

   The following acronyms are used in this draft: 

 
 
Long, et al.          Expires February 19, 2017               [Page 2] 


Internet-Draft    Availability extension to OSPF-TE        August 2016 
    

   GMPLS     Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching 

   LSA       Link State Advertisement 

   ISCD      Interface Switching Capacity Descriptor 

   LSP       Label Switched Path 

   OSPF      Open Shortest Path First 

   PSN       Packet Switched Network 

   SNR       Signal-to-noise Ratio 

   SONET-SDH Synchronous Optical Network - Synchronous Digital 
   Hierarchy 

   SPF       Shortest Path First 

1. Introduction 

   Some data communication technologies, e.g., microwave, and copper,   
   allow seamless change of maximum physical bandwidth through a set of 
   known discrete values. The parameter availability [G.827], [F.1703], 
   [P.530] is often used to describe the link capacity during network 
   planning. The availability is a time scale, which is a proportion of 
   the operating time that the requested bandwidth is ensured. 
   Assigning different availability classes to different types of 
   service over such kind of links provides more efficient planning of 
   link capacity. To set up an LSP across these links, availability 
   information is required for the nodes to verify bandwidth 
   satisfaction and make bandwidth reservation. The availability 
   information should be inherited from the availability requirements 
   of the services expected to be carried on the LSP. For example, 
   voice service usually needs "five nines" availability, while non-
   real time services may adequately perform at four or three nines 
   availability. Since different service types may need different 
   availabilities guarantees, multiple <availability, bandwidth> pairs 
   may be required when signaling. The signaling extension for links 
   with discrete bandwidth is defined in [ETPAI]. 

   For the route computation, the availability information should be 
   provided along with bandwidth resource information. In this document, 
   an extension on Interface Switching Capacity Descriptor (ISCD) 
   [RFC4202] for availability information is defined.  
 
 
Long, et al.          Expires February 19, 2017               [Page 3] 


Internet-Draft    Availability extension to OSPF-TE        August 2016 
    

2. Overview 

   A node which has link(s) with variable bandwidth attached should 
   include a <bandwidth, availability> information list in its OSPF TE 
   LSA messages. The list provides the mapping between the link nominal 
   bandwidth and its availability level. This information is used for 
   path calculation by the node(s).The setup of a Label Switched Path 
   requires this piece of information to be flooded in the network and 
   used by the nodes or the PCE for the path computation. The computed 
   path can then be provisioned via the signaling protocol. 

   For links with variable discrete bandwidth, Availability information 
   is needed to be carried by the signaling for a better link bandwidth 
   utilization. Extensions to RSVP-TE can be found in [ETPAI]. 

3. Extension to OSPF-TE 

3.1. ISCD Availability sub-TLV 

   The ISCD sub-TLV is defined in Section 1.4 of [RFC4203]. The ISCD 
   Availability sub-TLV is defined in this document as a sub-TLV of 
   ISCD. The Switching Capability specific information field of ISCD 
   MAY include one or more ISCD Availability sub-TLV(s). The ISCD 
   Availability sub-TLV has the following format: 

       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          | 
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
      |                   Availability level                          | 
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
      |                   LSP Bandwidth at Availability level n       | 
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+  
      Type: TBA by IANA, suggested value is 0x01, 16 bits; 

      Length: A 16 bits field that expresses the length of the TLV in 
    bytes; 

       Availability level: 32 bits 

           This field is a 32-bit IEEE floating point number which 
           describes the decimal value of availability guarantee of the 
           switching capability in the ISCD object. The value MUST be 

 
 
Long, et al.          Expires February 19, 2017               [Page 4] 


Internet-Draft    Availability extension to OSPF-TE        August 2016 
    

           less than 1. The Availability level is usually expressed in 
           the value of 0.99/0.999/0.9999/0.99999. 

       LSP Bandwidth at Availability level n: 32 bits 

           This field is a 32-bit IEEE floating point number which 
           describes the LSP Bandwidth at a certain Availability level 
           which was described in the Availability field. The units are 
           bytes per second.  

3.2. Processing Procedures  

   A node which has link(s) with variable bandwidth attached SHOULD 
   contain one or more ISCD Availability sub-TLVs in its OSPF TE LSA 
   messages. Each ISCD Availability sub-TLV provides the information 
   about how much bandwidth a link can support for a specified 
   availability. This information SHOULD be used for path calculation 
   by the node(s).  

   A node that doesn't support ISCD Availability sub-TLV SHOULD ignore 
   ISCD Availability sub-TLV. If a node who supports ISCD Availability 
   sub-TLVs doesn't receive the TLV, it indicates that the link is with 
   fixed bandwidth, and the availability can be interpreted as the 
   highest availability value, e.g., five nines. It's legal to send 
   multiple ISCD Availability sub-TLVs for the same availability level. 

4. Security Considerations 

   This document extends [RFC4203].  As with [RFC4203], it specifies 
   the contents of Opaque LSAs in OSPFv2.  As Opaque LSAs are not used 
   for Shortest Path First (SPF) computation or normal routing, the 
   extensions specified here have no direct effect on IP routing. 
   Tampering with GMPLS TE LSAs may have an effect on the underlying 
   transport (optical and/or Synchronous Optical Network - Synchronous 
   Digital Hierarchy (SONET-SDH)) network.  [RFC3630] notes that the 
   security mechanisms described in [RFC2328] apply to Opaque LSAs 
   carried in OSPFv2.  An analysis of the security of OSPF is provided 
   in [RFC6863] and applies to the extensions to OSPF as described in 
   this document.  Any new mechanisms developed to protect the 
   transmission of information carried in Opaque LSAs will also 
   automatically protect the extensions defined in this document. 

   Please refer to [RFC5920] for details on security threats; defensive 
   techniques; monitoring, detection, and reporting of security attacks; 
   and requirements. 
 
 
Long, et al.          Expires February 19, 2017               [Page 5] 


Internet-Draft    Availability extension to OSPF-TE        August 2016 
    

5. IANA Considerations 

   This document introduces an Availability sub-TLV of the ISCD sub-TLV 
   of the TE Link TLV in the TE Opaque LSA for OSPF v2. IANA will 
   created and maintain a new sub-registry, the "Types for sub-TLV of 
   Interface Switching Capability Descriptor" registry under the "Open 
   Shortest Path First (OSPF) Traffic Engineering TLVs" registry, see 
   http://www.iana.org/assignments/ospf-traffic-eng-tlvs. 

   This document proposes a suggested value for the Availability sub-
   TLV; it is recommended that the suggested value be granted by IANA.  

   Type             Description                    Reference 

   ---              ------------------             ----------- 

   0                Reserved                       [This ID] 

   0x01             Availability                   [This ID]  

   The registration procedure for this registry is Standards Action as 
   defined in [RFC5226]. 

6. References 

6.1. Normative References 

   [RFC4202] Kompella, K. and Rekhter, Y. (Editors), "Routing 
             Extensions in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label 
             Switching (GMPLS)", RFC 4202, October 2005. 

   [RFC4203] Kompella, K., Ed., and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "OSPF Extensions 
             in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching 
             (GMPLS)", RFC 4203, October 2005. 

6.2. Informative References 

   [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 
             Requirement Levels", RFC 2119, March 1997. 

   [RFC2328] Moy, J., "OSPF Version 2", STD 54, RFC 2328, April 1998. 

   [RFC3630] Katz, D., Kompella, K., and D. Yeung, "Traffic Engineering 
             (TE) Extensions to OSPF Version 2", RFC 3630, September 
             2003. 
 
 
Long, et al.          Expires February 19, 2017               [Page 6] 


Internet-Draft    Availability extension to OSPF-TE        August 2016 
    

   [RFC5226] Narten,T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an 
             IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", RFC 5226, May 2008. 

   [RFC5920] Fang, L., "Security Framework for MPLS and GMPLS Networks", 
             RFC 5920, July 2010. 

   [RFC6863] Hartman, S. and D. Zhang, "Analysis of OSPF Security 
             According to the Keying and Authentication for Routing 
             Protocols (KARP) Design Guide", RFC 6863, March 2013. 

   [G.827]  ITU-T Recommendation, "Availability performance parameters 
             and objectives for end-to-end international constant bit-
             rate digital paths", September, 2003. 

   [F.1703]  ITU-R Recommendation, "Availability objectives for real 
             digital fixed wireless links used in 27 500 km 
             hypothetical reference paths and connections", January, 
             2005. 

   [P.530]   ITU-R Recommendation," Propagation data and prediction 
             methods required for the design of terrestrial line-of-
             sight systems", February, 2012 

   [ETPAI]   H., Long, M., Ye, Mirsky, G., Alessandro, A., Shah, H., 
             "Ethernet Traffic Parameters with Availability 
             Information", Work in Progress, June, 2015 

7. Acknowledgments 

   The authors would like to thank Acee Lindem, Daniele Ceccarelli, Lou 
   Berger for their comments on the document. 

    

   Authors' Addresses 

 
 
Long, et al.          Expires February 19, 2017               [Page 7] 


Internet-Draft    Availability extension to OSPF-TE        August 2016 
    

   Hao Long 
   Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. 
   No.1899, Xiyuan Avenue, Hi-tech Western District 
   Chengdu 611731, P.R.China 
    
   Phone: +86-18615778750 
   Email: longhao@huawei.com 
    
    
   Min Ye 
   Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. 
   No.1899, Xiyuan Avenue, Hi-tech Western District 
   Chengdu 611731, P.R.China 
 
   Email: amy.yemin@huawei.com 
    
   Greg Mirsky 
   Ericsson 
    
   Email: gregory.mirsky@ericsson.com 
    
   Alessandro D'Alessandro 
   Telecom Italia S.p.A 
    
   Email: alessandro.dalessandro@telecomitalia.it 
    
   Himanshu Shah 
   Ciena Corp. 
   3939 North First Street 
   San Jose, CA 95134 
   US 
    
   Email: hshah@ciena.com 
    

 
 
Long, et al.          Expires February 19, 2017               [Page 8]