Ability for a Stateful Path Computation Element (PCE) to request and obtain control of a Label Switched Path (LSP)
draft-ietf-pce-lsp-control-request-11

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (pce WG)
Last updated 2019-11-04 (latest revision 2019-10-13)
Replaces draft-raghu-pce-lsp-control-request
Stream IETF
Intended RFC status Proposed Standard
Formats plain text xml pdf htmlized bibtex
Reviews
Stream WG state Submitted to IESG for Publication
Document shepherd Hariharan Ananthakrishnan
Shepherd write-up Show (last changed 2019-06-25)
IESG IESG state RFC Ed Queue
Consensus Boilerplate Yes
Telechat date
Responsible AD Deborah Brungard
Send notices to Hariharan Ananthakrishnan <hari@netflix.com>
IANA IANA review state Version Changed - Review Needed
IANA action state RFC-Ed-Ack
RFC Editor RFC Editor state EDIT
PCE Working Group                                            A. Raghuram
Internet-Draft                                                A. Goddard
Intended status: Standards Track                                    AT&T
Expires: April 15, 2020                                       J. Karthik
                                                            S. Sivabalan
                                                     Cisco Systems, Inc.
                                                                 M. Negi
                                                     Huawei Technologies
                                                        October 13, 2019

  Ability for a Stateful Path Computation Element (PCE) to request and
             obtain control of a Label Switched Path (LSP)
                 draft-ietf-pce-lsp-control-request-11

Abstract

   A Stateful Path Computation Element (PCE) retains information about
   the placement of Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) Traffic
   Engineering Label Switched Paths (TE LSPs).  When a PCE has stateful
   control over LSPs it may send indications to LSP head-ends to modify
   the attributes (especially the paths) of the LSPs.  A Path
   Computation Client (PCC) that has set up LSPs under local
   configuration may delegate control of those LSPs to a stateful PCE.

   There are use-cases in which a stateful PCE may wish to obtain
   control of locally configured LSPs of which it is aware but that have
   not been delegated to the PCE.

   This document describes an extension to the Path Computation Element
   communication Protocol (PCEP) to enable a PCE to make requests for
   such control.

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."

Raghuram, et al.         Expires April 15, 2020                 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft             LSP Control Request              October 2019

   This Internet-Draft will expire on April 15, 2020.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2019 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
   (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 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  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
   2.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     2.1.  Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   3.  LSP Control Request Flag  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
   4.  Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
   5.  Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
     5.1.  Huawei's Proof of Concept based on ONOS . . . . . . . . .   6
   6.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
   7.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   7
     7.1.  SRP Object Flags  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
   8.  Manageability Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     8.1.  Control of Function and Policy  . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     8.2.  Information and Data Models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     8.3.  Liveness Detection and Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     8.4.  Verify Correct Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   8
     8.5.  Requirements On Other Protocols . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     8.6.  Impact On Network Operations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   9.  Acknowledgements  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
   10. References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     10.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     10.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
   Appendix A.  Contributor Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11

1.  Introduction

   Stateful Path Computation Element (PCE) communication Protocol (PCEP)
Show full document text