1 / 30

CCAMP WG of the 58 th IETF Meeting

CCAMP WG of the 58 th IETF Meeting. Jun-Hyun, Moon Computer Communications LAB., Kawangwoon University imp@kw.ac.kr. Agenda. Time available 150 minutes New charter Working Group Drafts Interactions with other WGs ITU-T Liaison Charter Work GMPLS MIB Protection and Restoration

garvey
Download Presentation

CCAMP WG of the 58 th IETF Meeting

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. CCAMP WG of the 58th IETF Meeting Jun-Hyun, Moon Computer Communications LAB., Kawangwoon University imp@kw.ac.kr

  2. Agenda • Time available 150 minutes • New charter • Working Group Drafts • Interactions with other WGs • ITU-T Liaison • Charter Work • GMPLS MIB • Protection and Restoration • ASON Signaling Requirements • ASON Routing Requirements • Tunneling Protocol • Multi-Area/AS/Region

  3. New Charter • Old Charter • Basic groundwork and protocols complete • New work items • Multiple IGP areas, multiple ASes, and multiple providers, including techniques for crankback • Signaling and routing ASON • Determine the actual route and other properties of paths set by CCAMP signaling protocols

  4. Working Group Drafts • New RFC • RFC 3609 Tracing Requirements for Generic Tunnels • RFC queue • Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching Architecture (draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-architecture-07.txt) • Blocked by all GMPLS and LMP drafts • Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching Extensions for SONET and SDH Control (draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-architecture) • Blocked by draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-architecture • LMP (draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-10.txt)

  5. Working Group Drafts (cont.) • In IESG review after Last Call • Routing Extensions in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-routing-09.txt) • OSPF Extensions in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (draft-ietf-ccamp-ospf-gmpls-extensions-12.txt) • In IETF Last Call (Ends 2003/11/24) • LMP-WDM (draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-wdm-02.txt) • SONET/SDH Encoding for LMP Test messages (draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-test-sonet-sdh-03.txt) • Pending AD review • LMP MIB (draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-mib-07.txt) • Framework for GMPLS-based Control of SDH/SONET Networks (draft-ietf-ccamp-sdhsonet-control-02.txt

  6. Working Group Drafts (cont.) • Work still in progress • No comment in this meeting • WG last call soon • GMPLS UNI: RSVP Support for the Overlay Model (draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-overlay-02.txt) • Generalized MPLS Singnaling Extension for G.709 Optical Transport Networks Control (draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g709-04.txt) • New revision soon • Exclude Routes – Extension to RSVP-TE (draft-ietf-ccamp-rsvp-te-exclude-route-00.txt) • Discussion in this meeting • ASON requirements (draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ason-reqts-04.txt) • Protection and Recovery drafts • GMPLS MIBs

  7. Interactions with Other WGs • TEWG • Multi-area/AS requirements (draft-ietf-tewg-interas-mpls-te-req) • Please review and use when developing solutions • MPLS • Point-to-multipoint LSPs (draft-yasukawa-mpls-p2mp-requirement) • Requirements and solutions include all switching types • OSPF/IS-IS • GMPLS extensions “complete” • May interact for solutions to ASON routing requirements • IPO • IP over Optical Networks : A Freamework (draft-ietf-ipo-framework) • Just completing IESG review

  8. ITU-T Study Group 15Communications to IETF CCAMP Working Group Wesam Alanqar ITU-T SG15 Representative to IETF CCAMP Wesam.Alanqar@mial.sprint.com

  9. Management Framework Discovery Architecture G.disc_arch G.fame Auto- discovery Initialization & Recovery Signaling Routing DCN/SCN G.7714 G.7716 G.7713 G.7715 G.7712 Protocol New Requirement (Detailed) G.7715.1 G.7714.1 G.7713.1 G.7713.2 Protocol Specification G.7713.3 ITU-T SG 15, Question 14 ASON Control & Management Recommendations ITU-T Q14/15 – Optical Control Plane

  10. Liaison Statement To IETF CCAMP on RSVP-TE and CR-LDP • ITU Question 14 of Study Group 15 thanks IETF for the liaison notifying us of the survey taken of implementers of GMPLS constrained LSP signaling. • As Recommendation G.7713.3 is currently in force, we will continue to have a normative reference to CR-LDP [RFC 3212] • Your liaison has raised a concern regarding on-going maintenance of the CR-LDP code point space. We expect that future requests for code points in the range allocated to CR-LDP (0x0800 to 0x08FF) in [RFC 3212] will be granted based on “IETF Consensus” as defined in RFC 2434.

  11. ASON Updates • SG 15 has consented G.7715.1/Y.1706.1 “ASON Routing Architecture and requirements for Link State protocols” • This Recommendation provides architecture and requirement for a link state realization of G.7715/Y.1706 and G.8080/Y.1304 and is protocol neutral. • This may be of assistance to the ASON Routing Requirements design team. • There were no changes made to Discovery Recommendations. • However, new issues were included in the G.7714 living list such as an Interoperable solution for ECC based discovery mechanisms. • Question 9 of SG15 is assessing G.7714.1 discovery methods in the context of the existing equipment Recommendation G.783.

  12. Protection and Restoratoin • draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-recovery-terminology-02.txt • draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-recovery-analysis-02.txt • draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-recovery-functional-01.txt • draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-recovery-e2e-signaling-02.txt

  13. Terminology draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-recovery-terminology-02.txt March’ 02 March’ 02 (closed) – PS for July’ 03 (closed) Analysis draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-recovery-analysis-02.txt March’ 02 Jan’ 03 (closed) – Info for June’ 03 (closed) Functional Specification draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-recovery-functional-01.txt Jan’ 03 (closed) – PS for April’ 03 (closed) July’ 02 Aug’ 02 draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-recovery-e2e-signaling-02.txt GMPLS RSVP-TE Specification Mar’ 03 (closed) – PS for July’ 03 (tbd) Effort Positioning, Status and Timing……

  14. Mechanisms covered by the Signaling I-d • Recovery Scope : end-2-end • Coverage : (failure detection => sd or sf) • LSP Protection : full LSP signaling (cross-connection) b/f failure occurrence • (Pre-planned) Re-routing (w/ shared re-routing as particular case) : pre-signaling b/f failure + LSP activation after failure – allows for low priority • LSP Dynamic Re-routing (a.k.a restoration) : full LSP signaling after failure occurrence • Notification message (and objects) <= from RFC 3473 • Two objects described : • Protection Object (C-Type 2) <=extends RFC 3473 • Primary Path Route Object (New object) : shared recovery

  15. Extra-Traffic LSP issue • Advertisement : To make bandwidth pre-reserved for protecting (not activate) LSP(s) available for extra-traffic => this bandwidth may be included in the Unreserved Bandwidth sub-TLV at priority lower the protecting LSP Setup Priority • Note : Max LSP Bandwidth in Interface Switching Capability Descriptor sub-TLV should reflect that bandwidth pre-reserved for protecting LSP(s) is available for extra-traffic

  16. Extra-Traffic LSP issue (cont.) • Signaling : LSPs for extra traffic established using bandwidth pre-reserved for protecting LSP(s) by setting SESSION_ATTRIBUTE • Setup Priority = X (Setup Priority of the protecting LSP) • Holding Priority = at least to X + 1 • Note : if resources pre-reserved for the protecting LSP are used by lower priority LSPs. These LSPs MUST be preempted when the protecting LSP is activated.

  17. Terminology draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-recovery-terminology-02.txt Analysis draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-recovery-analysis-02.txt Functional Specification draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-recovery-functional-01.txt GMPLS RSVP-TE Specification 3q’ 03 (first phase closed) What is the Next Step? • Commit the Signaling I-d as a WG document • Perform thorough revision of the document(s) • Dec’ 03 submit documents to IESG

  18. ASON Signaling Requirements • draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ason-reqts-03.txt • draft-ong-ccamp-3473-3474-iw-00.txt • draft-iwata-mpls-crankback-07.txt

  19. Outline - draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ason-reqts-04.txt • brief review of problem statement & requirements for GMPLS signaling extensions for ASON • You read the draft • changes from 01 to 04 version • next steps

  20. Problem Statement forGMPLS Extensions for ASON • problem statement • extend GMPLS signaling [RFC 3417/RFC 3437] • must meet FULL functional requirements of ASON architecture in GMPLS • Provide call & connection management [G.7713] • must be BACKWARD COMPATIBLE with current GMPLS RFCs • ASON architecture includes • automated control plane supporting both call & connection management [G.8080] • control plane applicable to different transport technologies (e.g., SDH/SONET, OTN) & networking environments (e.g., inter-carrier, intra-carrier) • multiple reference points of information exchange • between administrative domain & user • between administrative domain & areas within administrative domain • between controllers within areas

  21. Requirements forGMPLS Extensions for ASON • need to support ASON functionality in GMPLS • soft permanent connection capability • call & connection separation (includes calls without connections & adding/removing connections to/from calls) • call segment • extended restart capabilities during control plane failures • extended label association • crankback capability • additional error cases

  22. Changes from 01 to 04 Version • Introduction • refine reference point terminology (UNI, E-NNI, I-NNI) • ASON model distinguishes reference points (representing point of protocol information exchange) • between an administrative domain & a user a.k.a user network interface (UNI) • between an administrative domains a.k.a external network-network interface (E-NNI) • between areas of the same administrative domain & between controllers within areas a.k.a internal network-network interface (I-NNI) • Terminology section. add UNI term • review of author list

  23. Changes form 01 to 04 Version • Section 4 Requirements for Extending Applicability of GMPLS to ASON • Definition of GMPLS [RFC 3473] compliant UNI • ‘any User-Network Interface (UNI) that is compliant with [RFC 3437] is considered, by definition, to be a GMPLS UNI and must be supported’ • [GMPLS-OVERLAY] & [GMPLS-VPN] meet definition of GMPLS UNI • refine agnosticism criteria wrt UNI implementation for GMPLS support of ASON requirements • ‘support of GMPLS-ASON signaling protocol requirements must be strictly independent of & agnostic to any UNI & not be constrained by implementation specifics of the UNI [G.8080, G.7713]’

  24. Changes form 01 to 04 Version • refine interworking aspects of non-GMPLS address space/signaling mapping • end-to-end signaling should be facilitated regardless of administrative boundaries & protocols within the network • includes both GMPLS control domains & non-GMPLS control domains • I-D addresses ASON support within a GMPLS controls domain & between GMPLS control domains • I-D does not restrict use to other protocols within a control domain • mapping of non-GMPLS protocol signaling requests & support of non-GMPLS address formats are responsibility of non-GMPLS control domain

  25. Next Steps • no open issues at this point • authors feel this I-D is ready for WG last call • draft-left-ccamp-gmpls-ason-reqts-04.txt • progress GMPLS signaling extensions for ASON • Progress GMPLS routing requirements & protocol extensions for ASON

  26. Overview – draft-ong-ccamp-3473-3474-iw-00.txt • RFCs 3473 and 3474 • Multiple implementations exist and have been tested • 3474 represents an ITU-T standard(G.7713.2) • Draft explains interworking (at a high level) • Specifics are in the draft • More detail and clarifications to be added • Where does this fit? • Is it an IETF activity (Yes! IETF RFCs are the subject) • If so, is it CCAMP (Up to this group) • How does this relate to ASON extension work for GMPLS?

  27. 3474 Concepts • Overlay or multiple domain model • Client interface (overlay) • Exterior network-network interfaces (between domains) • Client address space (TNA) • Separate address space and format • Call-ID and related information • Carried transparently across intermediate nodes • Multi-session RSVP • End-to-end connection stitched together from multiple tunnels

  28. 3474 Concepts – Multi-session RSVP • Multiple tunnels stitched together • Tunnel within each domain • Tunnels connecting domains (including UNI) • Functions such as restoration may be bounded by tunnel span other domain 3473 domain

  29. Conclusion • Develop 3473-to-3474 interworking draft • Open for comments • Is it a CCAMP item? (at least CCAMP review) • As a separate informational document? • Work with 3474 when defining ASON extensions to GMPLS • Identify where there may be real open issues in 3474 • (e.g. ResvErr/ResvTear treatment) • Converge rather than diverge • Simplify rather than complicate interworking

  30. Other draft • Communicaton of Alarms • draft-berger-ccamp-gmpls-alarm-spec-00.txt • Generized MPLS Signaling for Layer-2 LSPs • draft-papadimitriou-ccamp-gmpls-l2sc-lsp-00.txt • Component Link Recording and Resource Control for GMPLS Link Bundles • draft-zamfir-exmplicit-resource-control-bundle-02.txt

More Related