1 / 6

IETF 67, MPLS WG, San Diego 11/08/2006

whitby
Download Presentation

IETF 67, MPLS WG, San Diego 11/08/2006

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. IGP Routing extensions for discovery of P2MP TE Tunnel Leaves draft-leroux-mpls-p2mp-te-autoleaf-02.txtJ.L. Le Roux (France Telecom) J.P. Vasseur (Cisco System Inc.) S. Yasukawa (NTT) M. Vigoureux (Alcatel) IETF 67, MPLS WG, San Diego 11/08/2006

  2. Problem Statement • In several situations (e.g. TV broadcasting with several regional sources) it is required to setup a series of P2MP TE-LSPs with distinct Ingress LSRs and a same group of Leaf LSRs • Such group of Leaf LSRs is referred to as a "Leaf Group" • This may rely on the configuration of all Leaf LSRs on each Ingress LSRs but this has obvious limitations • Potentially a lot of Ingress LSRs and Leaf LSRs => cumbersome configuration, prone to mis-configuration • This does not allow dynamic addition/removal of leaves • Hence a mechanism is required for automatic and dynamic discovery of the LSRs member of a Leaf Group • This draft addresses automation of P2MP TE-LSP configuration • This draft DOES NOT addresses reactivity to Multicast receivers activity

  3. Solution overview • A simple solution for Leaf Group discovery consists of relying on the IGP • This is particularly useful in BGP free and multicast free core networks • e.g P routers with only IGP & RSVP-TE • This draft defines ISIS and OSPF extensions allowing an LSR to advertise its desire to join/leave a Leaf Group • No new IGP procedure. This relies on OSPF and ISIS node capabilities procedures • Each LSR advertises the Leaf Group(s) it belongs to • A new TLV is defined: The Leaf Group TLV, that includes the set of Leaf Group(s) the LSR belongs to • to be carried in • The ISIS Router Capability TLV • The OSPF Router Information LSA

  4. Changes since Montreal • A new co-author joined the draft • The problem statement has been clarified • Automate the configuration of a series of P2MP TE-LSPs with same group of Leaf LSRs and distinct Ingress LSRs… • The scope of the Leaf Group has been extended accordingly • A Leaf Group may correspond to several P2MP TE-LSPs • The Leaf Group TLV format has been optimized • Factorization of leaf address • Considerations on the number of Leaf Groups and on the dynamicity • Recommendations on Dampening and Rate Limiting so as to avoid any unacceptable impact on the IGP scalability • The security section has been detailed • Some minor edits for the sake of clarity

  5. Next Steps • Service provider feedback required on the problem statement • WG feedback is required on the proposed solution • Adopt as WG doc?

  6. ThanksQuestions?

More Related