1 / 5

GMPLS RSVP-TE Signaling in support of ASON

GMPLS RSVP-TE Signaling in support of ASON. draft-dimitri-ccamp-gmpls-rsvp-te-ason-01.txt J.Drake (Calient) - D.Papadimitriou (Alcatel) - A.Farrel (Old Dog Consulting) - D.Brungard (ATT) - Z.Ali (Cisco). Guidelines for this I-d. Backward/Forward compatibility with GMPLS RFC’s (RFC 3471/73)

doris
Download Presentation

GMPLS RSVP-TE Signaling in support of ASON

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. GMPLS RSVP-TE Signaling in support of ASON draft-dimitri-ccamp-gmpls-rsvp-te-ason-01.txt J.Drake (Calient) - D.Papadimitriou (Alcatel) - A.Farrel (Old Dog Consulting) - D.Brungard (ATT) - Z.Ali (Cisco)

  2. Guidelines for this I-d • Backward/Forward compatibility with GMPLS RFC’s (RFC 3471/73) • Independence between UNI and (E-)NNI (agnosticism) • Interworking (at UNI and/or (E-)NNI) must be impact free on GMPLS RFC’s • Only define new objects and procedures when strictly needed (max re-use principle)

  3. Changes from version -00.txt • Added Appendix 1 following comment at IETF 57 and discussion on list • Provides detailed analysis of Info RFC’s 3474/ 76 wrt ASON requirements & RFC 3473 compatibility • Concludes that Info RFC’s 3474/76 • are not backward compatible w/ RFC 3473 • intra-domain: RFC 3474/76 not compatible w/ RFC 3473 • inter-domain: RFC 3474/76 (E-NNI/UNI) requires IWFs for RFC 3473 domains and are limited to single hop sessions • lack support for multiple requirements

  4. Requirements vs Info RFC 3474/76 vs Proposal Requirements Info RFC 3474/76 Proposal Soft Permanent Connection Yes (SPC_Label (*)) Yes (RFC 3473) e2e Capability Negotiation No Yes Call w/o Connection setup No (*) Yes Call w/ (single) Connection setup Yes (limited to single hop sessions (*)) Yes Multiple Connection per Call (add/remove) No Yes Call Segments No Yes Restart (CP failures) Limited (*) Yes Crankback Signaling No Ongoing Backward Compatibility No (see (*)) Yes

  5. Conclusion & Next Steps • Info RFC’s 3474/76 are not backward compatible with GMPLS RFC 3473 • Info RFC’s 3474/76 are not sufficient => Use this I-d as baseline to provide a “backward compatible and more complete solution” in support of ASON

More Related