110 likes | 277 Views
Control Plane Resilience. Young H. Kim ETRI November 7, 2005. Status of Drafts. draft-kim-ccamp-cpr-reqts-01.txt Requirements for providing CP resilience in non-(G)MPLS and (G)MPLS Terminology, necessities, and solution specific requirements for CP resilience
E N D
Control Plane Resilience Young H. Kim ETRI November 7, 2005
Status of Drafts • draft-kim-ccamp-cpr-reqts-01.txt • Requirements for providing CP resilience in non-(G)MPLS and (G)MPLS • Terminology, necessities, and solution specific requirements forCP resilience • But, focused on a specific solution of control channels • draft-kim-ccamp-accp-protocol-00.txt • Based on the concept of common channel signaling • Extension of LMP’s control channel management • Protocol description for CC protection/restoration
Overview of CP • Components of CP • Control entities • Control nodes • Control channels • Glance of IP/(G)MPLS • IP: fate sharing bet’n CP and DP, no real CP, IGP based • MPLS: similar to IP • GMPLS: separation bet’n CP and DP, real CP, ? • Et cetera • Users of control channels: vary according to provisioning rule • Configuration of control channels: in-bend and out-of-bend
Control entity A Control entity C Control entity B Control entity A Control node A Relationship of CP Components Control entity C Control entity B Control entity A Control node B Control channel Control entity A Control entity C Control entity B Control entity A Control node C
Issue Matrix for CP Resilience Existing tools Components Fields Problems Timescale IP/MPLS - IGP - Protocol Specific GR Protocol dependent Control entities (CEs) Selective GMPLS IP/MPLS Deployment policy dependent Nothing special Control nodes (CNs) Node duplicate GMPLS Not sure Not sure Not sure IP/MPLS Control channels (CCs) - No use of detour CCs - No consideration of physical CCs 1 year for extension GMPLS LMP
Example of Control Network Node-B b3 IP Network b1 b2 a1 c1 a4 a2 c2 Node-A Node-C a3 c3 <Control modes> <In case between A and B nodes> • Associated mode: PG-1 • Quasi-associated mode: PG-2 • Non-associated mode: PG-3 • PG-1: a1/b1 • PG-2: a2/c2-c1/b2, a3/c3-c1/b2 • PG-3: a4/b3
Information Flows on Switchover Node-A Node-B Node-C Node-A a1 b1 Switchover SwitchoverAck c2 a2 Switchover b2 c1 SwitchoverNack c2
Future Works • draft-kim-ccamp-cpr-reqts-01.txt • To be updated based on discussion of mailing list • Especially, protocol-neutral approachesneeded • draft-kim-ccamp-accp-protocol-00.txt • ACCP’s FSM • How to use control channels separately dependent on control packets such as signaling, routing and link management • End-to-end CC connection using concatenation of CCs within a control network • CC recovery between control networks … • My hope: consensus of these drafts, then WG documents