Extensions to the Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) to Compute Service-Aware Label Switched Paths (LSPs)
RFC 8233
Document | Type | RFC - Proposed Standard (September 2017; Errata) | |
---|---|---|---|
Authors | Dhruv Dhody , Qin Wu , Vishwas Manral , Zafar Ali , Kenji Kumaki | ||
Last updated | 2018-12-20 | ||
Replaces | draft-dhody-pce-pcep-service-aware, draft-wu-pce-pcep-link-bw-utilization | ||
Stream | IETF | ||
Formats | plain text html pdf htmlized bibtex | ||
Reviews | |||
Stream | WG state | Submitted to IESG for Publication | |
Document shepherd | Jonathan Hardwick | ||
Shepherd write-up | Show (last changed 2016-08-18) | ||
IESG | IESG state | RFC 8233 (Proposed Standard) | |
Action Holders |
(None)
|
||
Consensus Boilerplate | Yes | ||
Telechat date | |||
Responsible AD | Deborah Brungard | ||
Send notices to | "Jonathan Hardwick" <jonathan.hardwick@metaswitch.com> | ||
IANA | IANA review state | Version Changed - Review Needed | |
IANA action state | RFC-Ed-Ack |
Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) D. Dhody Request for Comments: 8233 Q. Wu Category: Standards Track Huawei ISSN: 2070-1721 V. Manral Nano Sec Co Z. Ali Cisco Systems K. Kumaki KDDI Corporation September 2017 Extensions to the Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) to Compute Service-Aware Label Switched Paths (LSPs) Abstract In certain networks, such as, but not limited to, financial information networks (e.g., stock market data providers), network performance criteria (e.g., latency) are becoming as critical to data path selection as other metrics and constraints. These metrics are associated with the Service Level Agreement (SLA) between customers and service providers. The link bandwidth utilization (the total bandwidth of a link in actual use for the forwarding) is another important factor to consider during path computation. IGP Traffic Engineering (TE) Metric Extensions describe mechanisms with which network performance information is distributed via OSPF and IS-IS, respectively. The Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) provides mechanisms for Path Computation Elements (PCEs) to perform path computations in response to Path Computation Client (PCC) requests. This document describes the extension to PCEP to carry latency, delay variation, packet loss, and link bandwidth utilization as constraints for end-to-end path computation. Status of This Memo This is an Internet Standards Track document. This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has received public review and has been approved for publication by the Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 7841. Information about the current status of this document, any errata, and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8233. Dhody, et al. Standards Track [Page 1] RFC 8233 Service-Aware LSPs September 2017 Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2017 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 ....................................................3 1.1. Requirements Language ......................................4 2. Terminology .....................................................4 3. PCEP Extensions .................................................5 3.1. Extensions to METRIC Object ................................5 3.1.1. Path Delay Metric ...................................6 3.1.1.1. Path Delay Metric Value ....................7 3.1.2. Path Delay Variation Metric .........................7 3.1.2.1. Path Delay Variation Metric Value ..........8 3.1.3. Path Loss Metric ....................................8 3.1.3.1. Path Loss Metric Value .....................9 3.1.4. Non-Understanding / Non-Support of Service-Aware Path Computation ......................9 3.1.5. Mode of Operation ..................................10 3.1.5.1. Examples ..................................11 3.1.6. Point-to-Multipoint (P2MP) .........................11 3.1.6.1. P2MP Path Delay Metric ....................11 3.1.6.2. P2MP Path Delay Variation Metric ..........12 3.1.6.3. P2MP Path Loss Metric .....................12 3.2. Bandwidth Utilization .....................................12 3.2.1. Link Bandwidth Utilization (LBU) ...................12 3.2.2. Link Reserved Bandwidth Utilization (LRBU) .........13Show full document text