uni extensions for diversity and latency support 13-mar-13ietf 86 orlando1 don...
TRANSCRIPT
IETF 86 Orlando 1
UNI Extensions for Diversityand Latency Support
13-Mar-13
Don Fedyk [email protected] Beller [email protected] Levrau [email protected] Ceccerelli [email protected] Zhang [email protected] Tochio [email protected]
draft-fedyk-ccamp-uni-extensions-01
IETF 86 – CCAMP WG
2
Agenda
• I-D history and brief overview• Updates from 00 to 01 version• Relationship with other CCAMP work• Next steps
13-Mar-13 IETF 86 Orlando
IETF 86 Orlando 3
I-D History and Brief Overview
• draft-fedyk-ccamp-l1vpn-extnd-overlay-01 becamedraft-fedyk-ccamp-uni-extensions-00 as per Vancouver meeting suggestion to broaden the applicability scope from GMPLS UNI for L1VPNs to the GMPLS UNI in general:– Title/I-D file name changed– Content aligned with new scope– Still applicable to the GMPLS UNI for a L1VPN following the overlay
extension service model (L1VPN is a special case of the general UNI case)
• draft-fedyk-ccamp-uni-extensions-00 is still addressing:– UNI extensions for achieving diversity in the provider network– UNI extensions to deal with latency/latency variation (delay/
delay variation) constraints
13-Mar-13
IETF 86 Orlando 4
Updates from 00 to 01 version
• Diversity part:– Error handling procedures added
• Latency part:– “Latency Signaling Extensions” section revised (new text
added)
• Reference added and references updated
13-Mar-13
5
Relationship with other CCAMP work
• draft-fedyk-ccamp-uni-extensions-01 complements:– draft-ietf-ccamp-lsp-diversity-01.txt– draft-ali-ccamp-extended-srlg-00.txtthese drafts address signaling extensions to support LSP
diversity and SRLG for multi-provider domain networks
• draft-fedyk-ccamp-uni-extensions-01 differs from:– draft-beeram-ccamp-melg-00.txtdraft describes routing actions on a virtual topology that
has been provided to the CEs
13-Mar-13 IETF 86 Orlando
6
Next Steps
• Solicit feedback/comments from the group
• Further refinement of dual-homing solution including more detailed signaling extensions
• Further refinement of latency section
• Collaboration with authors working on:draft-farrel-interconnected-te-info-exchange-00.txt
13-Mar-13 IETF 86 Orlando
7
Thank You!
13-Mar-13 IETF 86 Orlando
IETF 86 Orlando 8
Backup Slides
13-Mar-13
9
Dual-homing Problem Statement
PE1 P P PE
PE2 P P PE
CE CE
LSP1
LSP2
Problem Statement: ensure that LSP1 and LSP2 are mutually disjoint13-Mar-13 IETF 86 Orlando
10
Option 1: Exchange of SRLG List
PE1 P P PE
PE2 P P PE
CE CE
LSP1
LSP2
SRLG_IDs(LSP1)
SRLG_IDs(LSP1)
SRLG_IDs(LSP2)
Exchange of SRLG ID list for disjoint LSPs via source CE node13-Mar-13 IETF 86 Orlando
11
Option 2: Exchange of Path Affinity Set
PE1 P P PE
PE2 P P PE
CE CE
LSP1
LSP2
PAS(LSP1)
PAS(LSP1)
• Exchange of PAS + LSP ID via source CE node• Dissemination of (PAS, LSP ID, SRLG IDs) among PEs for each L1VPN
13-Mar-13 IETF 86 Orlando