generalized mpls plan de controle basé sur ip pour les réseaux optiques

Generalized MPLSGeneralized MPLSPlan de controle basé sur IP pour les Plan de controle basé sur IP pour les

réseaux optiquesréseaux optiques

Papadimitriou Dimitri Network Technology and Analysis

[email protected]

Deuxième journée française sur l'IETFDeuxième journée française sur l'IETFDecembre 2002 - Paris, FranceDecembre 2002 - Paris, France

IntroductionIntroduction

GFSI - December 2002 D.Papadimitriou - All rights reserved © 2002, Alcatel

Today Connection Service Requests

CORE Vendor B

NMS NMSNMS

Metro Vendor A Metro Vendor C

NMS

FAX FAX

Network Operation Center



NMS

Source Router

Dest. Router

It works… but actually not a long term solution !!!

I/f between vendor B’’ and

C

I/f between vendor A and

B’Standard SDH data

plane but all complexity in

Management Plane

I/f between vendor B’ and

B”


How are we approaching the problem?

Generalized MPLS (GMPLS): a set of mechanisms and protocols intended to make switching layers of a network more dynamic in their operation (and in particular the SDH/Sonet, G.709 (pre-)OTN and Ethernet) compatible with the parallel evolution in the IP/MPLS domain

Extend the functions & capabilities of MPLS to work with Optical equipment (and more generally any kind of switching equipment)

Define appropriate architectures and frameworks for this to happen with modern equipment

Define mechanisms strategies for the support of legacy TDM and Optical equipment that was not designed to be controlled

Extend the capabilities of MPLS protocols to operate with TDM and Optical equipment (instead of re-inventing new paradigms)

Standardise GMPLS to ensure interoperability and investment protection for Service Providers

Generalized MPLS would become a super-set of MPLS


OTN ITU-TStandards

ASTN - ASONStandards

NewSDH & OTN

products

Usefulfeatures beingimplemented

Potentialnew services

Operationallarge network

MPLS RFCsand drafts

GMPLSpre-std ’s

Routing RFCs and drafts

GMPLS for OpticsGMPLS for Optics

Engineering World

Operationalworld

Manufacturer's world

Abstract world

An «OPEN» GMPLS Philosophy

Research - Academic world

GMPLS Concepts and GMPLS Concepts and Technology Evolution from Technology Evolution from

IETF PerspectiveIETF Perspective


Transmission & Control Plane Evolutions

Transport plane

Analog(copper) Digital Optical (analog, fiber)

point-to-point

Switched

Optical packet switching

Framing dependent

1970 1995

Control/management plane

Operator-assisted/centrally managed provisioning

Framing independent

Optical Switching (pre-)/OTNDigital Switching (SDH)

Framing dependent meaning LOVC/HOVC/MSn/RSn/OSn switching

??

Today

Automated & Distributed (GMPLS control plane)

Transmission

20xx 20xx

Transition


GMPLS Objectives Dimension Space

Automation LevelOperator Resource Optimization

Distribution LevelNetwork Resource Optimization

Other criteria

Parameter (flexibility) mainly cost dependent

Other criteria are mainly (control plane): Availability - Robustness - Scalability

but also Survivability (transport plane)

May depend on other variables


Evolution of a Standard

Step 1. MPLS: Multi-Protocol Label Switching IP packet based Traffic Engineering for Packet LSPs (MPLS-TE - Step

2) Step 3. MPS: Multi-Protocol Lambda Switching

MPLS control applied on optical channels (wavelengths/lambda’s) & first “optical” IGP TE extensions

New Protocol introduction for Link Management (LMP)

Step 4. GMPLS: Generalized MPLS MPLS control applied on layer2 (ATM/FR/Ethernet),

TDM circuits (SDH/Sonet) and Optical channel and IGP TE extensions including OSPF & IS-IS

GMPLS: “separation” b/w Technology dependent and independent

LMP extended to “passive devices” via LMP-WDM GMPLS covers G.707 SDH, G.709 OTN…

IETF 46-48

IETF48-49

IETF50-51

IETF52-55+


MPLS-TE

LDP - CR-LDP

RSVP-TE

GMPLS

ASON Model

OIF

OIF UNI/NNI

ITU-T SG 15

IETF - MPLS WG

IGP-TE (Area)

GMPLS RSVP-TE

GMPLS IGP-TE (Area)

GMPLS CR-LDP

GMPLS IGP-TE (Multi)

GMPLS P&R (Recovery)

1998-2001

IETF - CCAMP WG

From MPLS to GMPLS - Evolution

Slowdown (perceived from mid’01) low impact on Standards but resulted in consolidation & affecting “photonic” evolution

2002-2004

ILEC impact

ISP - CLEC impact

Framework

LMP & LMP-WDMBreak-out was the

introduction of legacy ITU-T technologies

Not within Optical Networking Priorities

2000

Consolidation

Synchronisation after 2002

Re-Charter

1996-1998

MPS

HPN - MRN

G.709 OTN

SDH/Sonet

“Optical”

Transport Plane

Evolution


Each OXC includes the equivalent of MPLS-capable Label-Switching Router (LSR)

MPLS control plane is implemented in each OXC Lambda LSPs (control plane entities) are considered

similarly to MPLS Label-Switched Paths (LSPs) Selection of wavelengths (or lambdas) and OXC ports is

considered as similar to the label selection using MPLS MPLS signaling protocols (such as RSVP-TE, CR-LDP)

are adapted for Lambda LSP setup/delete/etc. IGPs (such as OSPF, ISIS) with “optical” traffic-

engineering extensions used for topology/resource discovery using IP address space (no “reachability extensions”)

The Early Stage: MPS


Label & Lambda Switching equivalence

MPS Controller

1

11 1

DeMux Mux

1

1

3 x 3

1

3 x 3

3 3

12 2

1

O/E/O

O/E/O

O/E/O O/E/O

O/E/O

O/E/O

IF in Label in IF out Label out

2 2 5 5 6 6 4 4 8 4 7 9

mapping

1 1

33

2 2

IF in Label in IF out Label out

9 2 4 7 3 6 8 9 3 4 7 9

MPLS Controller

Label Space FEC - Label processing at control and

transport level

Generalized Label Space Wavelength Identifier Space - Label Processing at control

plane level only

Label Read Label Write

mapping

Label Switched Router Optical Cross-Connect

PacketSwitching

Matrix

Optical ChannelMatrix

CommonControl Plane


Towards Distributed (Common) Control Plane

IP Distributed Control Channels

Transport Planes

Transport Channels

Management Channels

Network Management

System

Network Controller

Network Device

Management Plane

Control Plane

EMS

Network Device

Control Plane

Transport Planes

NMS

Centralized Distributed

IP Control Channels implemented using IF/IB - IF/OB or OF/OB (signalling transport mechanisms) enabling the transport of “control IP packets” exchanged throughout IP distributed control plane

Network controllers (or GMPLS controllers) can

STILL be either co-located or non-co-located within the

network device (SDH XC, OADM, OXC, PXC,

etc.)

Evolution of the NMS includes SNMPv2/3,

COPS, LDAP and other Traffic Engineering/

Optimization Tools and QoS Policing SLS/SLA

Mgt


IP Distributed Control Plane

IP Distributed Control Plane

• IP Control Channels enabling the transport of “control IP packets” exchanged throughout IP distributed control plane

• IP Control Channels implemented using IF/IB - IF/OB or OF/OB (signalling transport mechanisms)

• (G)MPLS Controllers can be either co-located or non-co-located within the network device (ATM/MPLS LSR, SDH XC, OADM, OXC, PXC, etc.)

Management Plane

Transport Plane(s)

IP Control Channels

Transport Channels

Management Channels

Network Management

System

Network Controller

Network Device

• IP Distributed Control Plane topology MAPS the Transport Plane topology - without precluding “virtual topologies”


Pre-OTN Approaches

Fully transparent: Non-intrusive monitoring of optical signal (LOS)

FEC frame termination transparent bit stream signal non-intrusive monitoring STM-N signal (RSn and MSn overhead) pre-OTN case: 4 x STM-16 multiplex

FEC frame terminated transparent STM-N MSn signal (repeater functionality) non-intrusive monitoring of MSn signal

FEC frame terminated transparent AUG-N signal (back-to-back LTE) non-intrusive monitoring of HOVC signals

Pre-OTN digital wrapper frame terminated transparent bit stream signal non-intrusive monitoring STM-N signal (RSn and MSn overhead)

… Thus interoperability at the transport plane level was not that obvious!


From MPS to GMPLS

MPS assumed only 2 transport layers Assumption: SDH/Sonet used as framing for p2p links

(payload: IP/MPLS or Ethernet) Therefore core/backbone networks including

• “IP/MPLS” packet or Ethernet MAC layer • Optical (pre-OTN based) layer

However, current transmission technologies also include:

SDH (ITU-T G.707) - Sonet (ANSI T1.105) OTN (ITU-T G.709) Ethernet (LAN and WAN) ATM and Frame Relay

Why to consider them ? Same “drivers” and needs as IP/MPLS and optical layer Enable fully integrated model Eliminate the need for UNI specific protocol Provide complete of MPLS-TE protocol extensions


Packet Network using MPLS Optical Network using GMPLS

Explicit routed LSP’s Optical/TDM LSP Provisioning

Network Resilience

Recovery LSP’s Protection and Restoration

Class Of Service

LSP’s as TE tunnels (FA Concept) Optical CoS (LSP Multiplexing)

Traffic Engineering

Virtual Private Networks

GMPLS - (XXX or BGP ?)/GVPNMPLS - BGP/VPN

The challenge is how to extend the MPLS-TE Protocol suite to achieve these functions in the optical domain

(estimation in ‘00: 2 years - today a minimum of 1

additional year is expected to consolidate 2 first steps)

MPLS - GMPLS Convergence

Not “classical” IP or IETF topics

Competing w/ IP QoS Approach

But the problem is related to BGP

Legacy Transmission

Initial Situation at the IETF


GMPLS Key Concepts Re-use of MPLS-TE concepts for the definition of distributed

control plane protocols applicable to non-packet or “optical” oriented networks:

Optical channels/TDM Circuits/etc. define Lambda/TDM/etc. switched path Generalization of label spaces: wavelengths, sub-channels, etc.)

Generalization of IP Address Prefix to “non-packet” terminating interfaces further extended to unnumbered interfaces => allows for separation between transport and control plane

Generalization of TE Link concepts and attributes to “non-packet” resources (in particular: OPTICAL)

• Virtual TE Links => Forwarding Adjacencies (FA) => Mapping of several transport plane layers in the control plane (LSP Regions) which delivers the same scalability as control plane associated to layered transport plane technologies

• Link Bundling => TE Link recursion Further generalization to accommodate unnumbered FA and FA

bundling Development of graceful/hitless restart mechanisms (signalling &

routing) for increasing reliability taking advantage of transport/control separation


Transport Layers and G.709 TE Links

Hierarchical (Overlaid) Transport Layers Tributary Slots (sub-channel)

• ODU1 (2.5 Gbps)• ODU2 (10 Gbps)• ODU3 (40 Gbps)• or combination

Wavelength (channel) Fiber (interface)

Discrete Bandwidth Signals OMS and OCh TE Links

Switching Granularity

Sub-Channel 1

Sub-Channel 2

Sub-Channel N

Sub-Channel 1

Sub-Channel 2

Sub-Channel N

Channel 1 Channel N

ODU TE Link... ...

OMS TE Link

OCh TE Link

Control Plane View


Generalized MPLS - Switching Layers

AAMS, LB, JMS - 10

GMPLS Signalling uniformly address the issues of LSP establishment (setup) /teardown (delete) through different switching (i.e. networking) layers => GMPLS “optical” and “optical” GMPLS ( common control plane)•Classical Packet LSPs in the MPLS switching layer terminating at PSC interfaces (LSR I/f)

•Lambda LSP (L-LSP) corresponding to optical channel switching layer terminating at OXC/PXC (Label=Wavelength, OXC=E-O-E Matrix or PXC= O-O Matrix with LSC I/f•Fiber LSP corresponding to fiber switching layer terminating at fiber cross-connects interconnected by fiber bundles (Label=Fiber, Fiber Cross-Connect with FSC interfaces)

Packet (IP/MPLS) Switching Layer

•SDH/Sonet or Ethernet used as FRAMING (Adaptation only) no TDM LSP defined

WavelengthSwitching Layer

*

Fiber (Spatial) Switching Layer

Fiber LSP

Lambda LSP

Packet LSP

* The wavelength-switching layer can also include waveband switching

Framing

•TDM LSPs corresponding to STS SPE/ HOVC switching layer terminating at OXC (Label=Sub-Channel, OXC=E-O with TDM I/f and DWDM system)

TDM Switching

GMP L S

TDM LSP


LSP Hierarchy (Nesting) and FA-LSP

Lambda 1

Lambda N

FSC Cloud

LSC Cloud

TDM Cloud

PSC Cloud

Fiber 1

Fiber NFiber Bundle

TDM Slot 1

TDM Slot N

Packet LSP 1

Packet LSP N

Fiber LSP’s

Lambda LSP’s

TDM LSP’s

Packet LSP’s

Combining Low-Order LSP’s Splitting High-Order LSP’s


Key Enablers - Advantages

Lambda/TDM/etc. LSP’s w/ label space: wavelengths/timeslot/etc.

Provide flexibility in (link) resource selection (for bi-directional LSP setup)

Generalization of IP Address Prefix to “non-packet” terminating interfaces

Avoid definition of dedicated (new) address space per technology - further extended to unnumbered interfaces

Control/Transport plane separation (resilience) and avoid waste of packet terminating address space values

Generalization of TE Link concepts and attributes to “non-packet” resources (in particular OPTICAL)

Virtual TE Links (Forwarding adjacencies): Mapping of several transport plane layers in control plane (a.k.a. LSP Regions) which delivers the same scalability as the one provided by layered transport plane technologies => SCALABILITY (routing)

Link Bundling => SCALABILITY (routing) allowing TE Aggregation => Specific (component) Resource Selection

(local policy) provides robustness and contention avoidance


Management Plane

Forwarding Plane

Control Plane

Signaling Plane

Adapted from IP such as

RSVP-TEor

CR-LDP

Routing Plane

Adaptedfrom IP such as

OSPF-TE,ISIS-TE

E.g

. SD

H/S

ON

ET

, G.709, E

thern

et

GM

PL

S

E.g

.TM

N o

r SN

MP

or T

L-1

Not done at the IETF,specific task of the

ITU-T (SG15) for SDH/OTH, IEEE for Ethernet, etc.

Already widely developedbut we need now to

manage the control plane,IETF developments

for SNMP MIBs.

Right in the IETF scopesince application of MPLS

generalization (GMPLS is a super-set of MPLS)

IETF GMPLS Work per Plane


User AdminDomain

User AdminDomain

Provider C Admin Domain

I-NNI

Administrative Domain A

Internet

Inter-domain

User AdminDomain

GMPLS Protocol suite applies at intra- and inter-domain interfaces

Global Picture (IETF View)

Administrative Domain B

Intra-domain

Administrative Domain C

Intra-domain

Inter-domain

Inter-domain

Inter-domain Inter-domain

Actually, GMPLS is “model independent” it just follows the well known “internet” engineering principles from the node to the area then from the area to the Autonomous System (intra-carrier) and last between AS’s (inter-carrier)

Intra-domain


GMPLS Building Blocks

GMPLS Architecture

Core signaling

CoreTE - Routing

(TE-)LinkManagement

Frameworkand

requirements

Protection &Restoration

Technologyextensions(*)

Others

(*) Includes SDH/Sonet and G.709 OTN

Starting Point - MPLS Architecture and MPLS-TE

Generalized VPN

Transmission Background

Technology Indpt

Technology Dept

Meta Extensions


draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-architecture-03.txt

GMPLS Architecture

Core signaling

CoreTE - Routing

(TE-)LinkManagement

Frameworkand

requirements

Protection &Restoration

Technologyextensions

Others

draft-ietf-mpls-generalized-signaling-09.txtdraft-ietf-mpls-generalized-rsvp-te-09.txtdraft-ietf-mpls-generalized-cr-ldp-07.txt

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g709-03.txtdraft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-sonet-sdh-07.txt

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-routing-05.txtdraft-ietf-ccamp-ospf-gmpls-extensions-09.txt

draft-ietf-isis-gmpls-extensions-14.txtdraft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-07.txt

draft-ietf-mpls-bundle-04.txtdraft-ietf-mpls-lsp-hierarchy-07.txtdraft-ietf-mpls-rsvp-unnum-08.txtdraft-ietf-mpls-crldp-unnum-10.txt

Last Call

Proposed Standard

Under AD Review

Under ReviewUnder AD Review MPLS Related

GMPLS Building Blocks

Note: several other more specialized I-d ’s under discussion


Terminology

Functional Specification

Analysis

GMPLS Signalling

Draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-recovery-terminology-00.txtTo be finalized with the other drafts (cycle)

Draft-papadimitriou-ccamp-gmpls-recovery-analysis-03.txt

To provide an analysis grid to be used to evaluate, compare and contrast the GMPLS based recovery mechanism

WG document requested, to be taken on the list

Draft-bala-gmpls-recovery-functional-01.txt

To determine and discuss recovery scenarios to be covered (what’s in what’s out) by the protocol dependent specification

Ongoing effort, first version to be issued after consensus on previous step (expectation ~1Q’03)

Aug’02 - IETF 54

Nov’02 - IETF 55

Mar’02 - IETF 53

CCAMP WG Protection and Restoration Design Team

Start Dec’01


Future Developments

Short term: Keeping track of G.709 OTN evolutions Shared meshed (multi-layer) recovery and Routing

diversity … we are nearly done !

Longer term: Tackle “All-Optical” challenges optical physical routing impairments transparency issues optical performance measurement and monitoring

Refine GMPLS management model including performance management security and policy scheduling services billing/accounting


User AdminDomain

User AdminDomain

Provider C Admin DomainUNI

Control Domain CMulti-vendor Agreement

I-NNI

Control Domain A(e.g., vendor 1, metro)

I-NNI

E-NNI Control Domain B(e.g., vendor 2, core)

Single Carrier 1 - Single Administrative Domain

E-NNI

E-NNI

User AdminDomain

GMPLS Protocol suite with interface specific extensions applied at UNI and E-NNI

(intra-/inter- carrier) interfaces

I-NNI

Global Picture (ITU & OIF View)

UNI

E-NNI

E-NNI


E-NNI



From the Meta model to the Protocol(s)

ITU-TTrack

OIFTrack

GMPLS profileand extensions

(shorter term models)

G.ASTN(G.807)

G.ASON(G.8080)

G.dcm, G.rtgand others

GMPLS + Extensions

PNNI + extensionsfrom scratch + new

protocols

Metamodel

Abstractmodel

Abstractprotocol

Realprotocol(s)

IETFTrack

GMPLS Protocol Suite remains in the very

long term (no model)

Stdbody

Abstract and Formal worldEngineering world:

implementation

OIF UNI 1.0

OIF NNI 1.0 OIF NNI 1.0Domain Service & Overlay Control

Plane Interconnection Model

Re-use of well known Internet (existing) principles

Unified Service Model - Peer & Overlay Control Plane Inter - Connection Model

GMPLS Implementation GMPLS Implementation SurveySurvey


InternalDevelopSTExternalYesREquipPolaris

On saleProductSTExternalYesREquipNEC

On saleBetaG W ST L FExternalYesREquipAlcatel

On sale-M G SP TInternalYesR + LCodeWipro

InternalDevelopM G WP LExternalREquip.NTT

On saleProductM G W SP T L FInternalYesRCodeNetPlane

internalAlphaG SP TInternalYesREquip.Equipe

InternalAlphaSTExternalYesRCodeCiena

-BetaM G SP T LExternalYesREquip.Accelight

M: 10, G:21, W: 9, S: 17

G

M G W

G S

M G W S

G S

G W S

G

M G S

GM G SG SG W

M G W S

G

M G W S

LabelType

On sale: 8P: 4, A: 4, B: 3, D: 7

P: 10, T: 14, L: 14, F: 9

Internal: 9External: 14

17R:23 L:3

Equip: 14Code: 8

24

InternalDevelopLExternalR-Anonymous 2

InternalDevelopP L FExternalREquip.Tropic

InternalAlphaT L FExternalYesREquip.Tellium

----Yes LCodeNortel

On saleProductLLabN+GMPLSYesREquip.Movaz

On sale-T L FInternalYesREquip.Marconi

InternalDevelopLExt+GMPLSREquip.Lumentis

Field trialBetaPInternalYesREquip.Juniper

InternalDevelop-InternalRCodeJapan Telecom-DevelopP TInternalYesREquip.Intel-DevelopTISI+TE,GMPLSYesRCodeHCL Techno.

InternalAlphaL FInternalR + LCodeFirst Wave

On saleProductP T L FExt + GMPLSYesRCodeData Connection

On saleBetaL FExt + TEREquip.Calient

On saleProductP T L FInternalYesRTesterAgilent

AvailabilityStatusSwitchingCapability

SoftwareGenealogy

SDH/SONETExtensions

SignalingProtocol

TypeCompany

P=PSC, T=TDM, L=LSC, F=FSCM=MPLS label, G=generalized label, W=waveband label, S=SDH/SONET label

ConclusionsConclusions


Conclusion

GMPLS is not the future, … it is the present It constitutes an integral part of the coming generation of packet,

frame and optical integrated networks providing unified services NMS proprietary solutions might be pragmatic as a short term

solution, they don’t address the current carrier/service provider needs

GMPLS provides common mechanisms applicable to IP and optical layers, allowing interoperable, scalable, parallel, reliable and cohesive evolution of networks in the IP and optical dimensions

Both GMPLS@UNI (at OIF) and GMPLS (at IETF) are standards-based and have their specific domain of use: the debate peer versus overlay is off (if used in their applicability scope then co-existence)

The LSP hierarchy, bundling and hitless restart creates sufficient scalability, flexibility and resiliency for common network operations

The enhanced signaling capabilities GMPLS allow service provider to quickly and efficiently build high capacity agile infrastructures supporting fast connection provisioning

Therefore, GMPLS is critical in any carrier/service provider solution that aims to enable large volumes of traffic in a cost-efficient manner


Thanks for your attention...Thanks for your attention...

… … Questions ?Questions ?


References

E.Mannie (Editor) et al., ‘Generalized MPLS Architecture’, Informational Draft, draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-architecture-03.txt, February 2002.

Lou Berger (Editor), et al., ‘Generalized MPLS Signaling – Signaling Functional Requirements,’ Internet Draft, Work in progress, draft-ietf-mpls-generalized-signalling-09.txt, August 2002.

Lou Berger (Editor) et al., ‘Generalized MPLS Signaling – RSVP-TE Extensions,’ Internet Draft, Work in progress, draft-ietf-mpls-generalized-rsvp-te-09.txt, October 2002.

Lou Berger (Editor) et al., ‘Generalized MPLS Signaling – CR-LDP Extensions,’ Internet Draft, Work in progress, draft-ietf-mpls-generalized-cr-ldp-07.txt, August 2002.

E.Mannie and D.Papadimitriou (Editors) et al., ‘Generalized MPLS Extensions for SONET and SDH Control’, Internet Draft, Work in progress, draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-sonet-sdh-06.txt, August 2002.

D.Papadimitriou (Editor) et al., ‘Generalized MPLS Extensions for G.079 Optical Transport Networks Control’, Internet Draft, Work in progress, draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g709-03.txt, November 2002.

K. Kompella et al., “Routing Extensions in Support of Generalized MPLS”, Internet Draft, Work in progress, draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-routing-05.txt, August 2002.

K. Kompella et al., “IS-IS Extensions in Support of Generalized MPLS”, Internet Draft, Work in progress, draft-ietf-isis-gmpls-extensions-14.txt, August 2002.

K. Kompella et al. “OSPF Extensions in Support of Generalized MPLS”, Internet Draft, Work in progress, draft-ietf-ccamp-ospf-gmpls-extensions-08.txt, August 2002.


References

E.Mannie, D.Papadimitriou et al., ‘Extensions to OSPF and IS-IS in support of GMPLS for SDH/SONET Control,’ Internet Draft, Work in progress, draft-mannie-ccamp-gmpls-sonet-sdh-ospf-isis-01.txt, June 2002.

G.Gasparini, D.Papadimitriou et al., ‘TE-Routing Extensions to OSPF and ISIS for GMPLS Control of G.709 Optical Transport Networks’, Internet Draft, Work in progress, draft-gasparini-ccamp-gmpls-g709-ospf-isis-03.txt, June 2002.

K.Kompella, Y.Rekhter, “Signalling Unnumbered Links in RSVP-TE”, Internet Draft, Work in progress, draft-ietf-mpls-rsvp-unnum-07.txt, August 2002.

K.Kompella, Y.Rekhter, “Signalling Unnumbered Links in CR-LDP”, Internet Draft, Work in progress, draft-ietf-mpls-crldp-unnum-07.txt, August 2002.

K.Kompella and Y.Rekhter, LSP Hierarchy with MPLS TE, Internet Draft, Work in progress, draft-ietf-mpls-lsp-hierarchy-07.txt, August 2002.

K.Kompella, Y.Rekhter and L. Berger, “Link Bundling in MPLS Traffic Engineering”, Internet Draft, Work in progress, draft-ietf-mpls-bundle-04.txt, June 2002.

D. Awduche et al., ‘Multi-Protocol Lambda Switching: Combining MPLS Traffic Engineering Control With Optical Cross-Connects,’ Internet Draft, Work in progress, draft-awduche-mpls-te-optical-03.txt, April 2001.

generalized mpls plan de controle basé sur ip pour les réseaux optiques

Documents