Resource Reservation Protocol (RSVP) Extensions for Path Key Support
Draft of message to be sent after approval:
From: The IESG <email@example.com> To: IETF-Announce <firstname.lastname@example.org> Cc: Internet Architecture Board <email@example.com>, RFC Editor <firstname.lastname@example.org>, ccamp mailing list <email@example.com>, ccamp chair <firstname.lastname@example.org> Subject: Protocol Action: 'RSVP Extensions for Path Key Support' to Proposed Standard The IESG has approved the following document: - 'RSVP Extensions for Path Key Support ' <draft-ietf-ccamp-path-key-ero-04.txt> as a Proposed Standard This document is the product of the Common Control and Measurement Plane Working Group. The IESG contact persons are Ross Callon and Adrian Farrel. A URL of this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-ccamp-path-key-ero-04.txt
Technical Summary The paths taken by Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) and Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Traffic Engineering (TE) Label Switched Paths (LSPs) may be computed by Path Computation Elements (PCEs). Where the TE LSP crosses multiple domains, such as Autonomous Systems (ASes), the path may be computed by multiple PCEs that cooperate, with each responsible for computing a segment of the path. To preserve confidentiality of topology within each AS, the PCEs support a mechanism to hide the contents of a segment of a path (such as the segment of the path that traverses an AS), called the Confidential Path Segment (CPS), by encoding the contents as a Path Key Subobject (PKS) and embedding this subobject within the result of its path computation. This document describes how to carry Path Key Subobjects in the Resource Reservation Protocol (RSVP) Explicit Route Objects (EROs) and Record Route Object (RROs) so as to facilitate confidentiality in the signaling of inter-domain TE LSPs. Working Group Summary Good consensus reported (see PROTO writeup by Deborah Brungard). The draft was reviewed in last call by the CCAMP and PCE working groups, as well as IETF last call. A last-minute question was raised on the number of bits assigned to the path key ID (should 16 be extended to 32). This was resolved in discussions on the PCE mailing list, and it was decided to leave it at 16 consistent with draft-ietf-pce-path-key-05.txt. Document Quality There are several interoperable implementations of draft-ietf-pce-path-key-05.txt. These implementations are of no value without the extensions defined in this draft (since a computed path is of no value if you can't signal it). There is one known experimental implementation of the extensions defined in this draft. Personnel Deborah Brungard is the Document Shepherd. Ross Callon is the responsible AD.