summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/doc/rfc/rfc6423.txt
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorThomas Voss <mail@thomasvoss.com> 2024-11-27 20:54:24 +0100
committerThomas Voss <mail@thomasvoss.com> 2024-11-27 20:54:24 +0100
commit4bfd864f10b68b71482b35c818559068ef8d5797 (patch)
treee3989f47a7994642eb325063d46e8f08ffa681dc /doc/rfc/rfc6423.txt
parentea76e11061bda059ae9f9ad130a9895cc85607db (diff)
doc: Add RFC documents
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/rfc/rfc6423.txt')
-rw-r--r--doc/rfc/rfc6423.txt283
1 files changed, 283 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc6423.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc6423.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d30b217
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/rfc/rfc6423.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,283 @@
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) H. Li
+Request for Comments: 6423 China Mobile
+Updates: 5586 L. Martini
+Category: Standards Track Cisco System
+ISSN: 2070-1721 J. He
+ Huawei
+ F. Huang
+ Alcatel-Lucent
+ November 2011
+
+
+ Using the Generic Associated Channel Label for Pseudowire in
+ the MPLS Transport Profile (MPLS-TP)
+
+Abstract
+
+ This document describes the requirements for using the Generic
+ Associated Channel Label (GAL) in pseudowires (PWs) in MPLS Transport
+ Profile (MPLS-TP) networks, and provides an update to the description
+ of GAL usage in RFC 5586 by removing the restriction that is imposed
+ on using GAL for PWs, especially in MPLS-TP environments.
+
+Status of This Memo
+
+ This is an Internet Standards Track document.
+
+ This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
+ (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has
+ received public review and has been approved for publication by the
+ Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on
+ Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 5741.
+
+ Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
+ and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
+ http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6423.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Li, et al. Standards Track [Page 1]
+
+RFC 6423 Using GAL in MPLS-TP PW November 2011
+
+
+Copyright Notice
+
+ Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
+ document authors. All rights reserved.
+
+ This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
+ Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
+ (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
+ publication of this document. Please review these documents
+ carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
+ to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
+ include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
+ the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
+ described in the Simplified BSD License.
+
+Table of Contents
+
+ 1. Introduction ....................................................2
+ 2. Conventions Used in This Document ...............................2
+ 2.1. Terminology ................................................3
+ 3. GAL Usage for MPLS-TP PW ........................................3
+ 4. Security Considerations .........................................4
+ 5. Acknowledgments .................................................4
+ 6. References ......................................................5
+ 6.1. Normative References .......................................5
+ 6.2. Informative References .....................................5
+
+1. Introduction
+
+ [RFC5586] generalizes the Associated Channel mechanism of [RFC5085]
+ to be used for Sections, Label Switched Paths (LSPs), and Pseudowires
+ (PWs) in MPLS networks. [RFC5085] defines the Associated Channel
+ Header (ACH), and [RFC5586] generalizes this for use as the Generic
+ Associated Channel (G-ACh).
+
+ [RFC5586] defines a generalized label-based exception mechanism using
+ the Generic Associated Channel Label (GAL) to work together with the
+ ACH for use with LSPs but prohibits GAL usage with PWs.
+
+ This document removes the restriction imposed by [RFC5586].
+
+2. Conventions Used in This Document
+
+ The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
+ "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
+ document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
+
+
+
+
+
+Li, et al. Standards Track [Page 2]
+
+RFC 6423 Using GAL in MPLS-TP PW November 2011
+
+
+2.1. Terminology
+
+ ACH Associated Channel Header
+
+ CW Control Word
+
+ G-ACh Generic Associated Channel
+
+ GAL Generic Associated Channel Label
+
+ MPLS-TP MPLS Transport Profile
+
+ OAM Operation, Administration, and Maintenance
+
+3. GAL Usage for MPLS-TP PW
+
+ According to the MPLS-TP requirements document [RFC5654], it is
+ necessary that MPLS-TP mechanisms and capabilities be able to
+ interoperate with the existing IETF MPLS [RFC3031] and IETF PWE3
+ [RFC3985] architectures as appropriate. [RFC5586] differentiates
+ between the usage of the GAL with PWs in MPLS and MPLS-TP
+ environments in Section 4.2 as follows:
+
+ In MPLS-TP, the GAL MUST be used with packets on a G-ACh on LSPs,
+ Concatenated Segments of LSPs, and with Sections, and MUST NOT be
+ used with PWs.
+
+ This indicates that the GAL can be used for MPLS-TP LSPs and
+ Sections, but not for PWs in an MPLS-TP network.
+
+ However, there is no restriction imposed on the usage of the GAL in
+ MPLS PWs, which is described immediately afterwards in the same
+ section (Section 4.2) of [RFC5586]:
+
+ However, in other MPLS environments, this document places no
+ restrictions on where the GAL may appear within the label stack or
+ its use with PWs.
+
+ The inconsistency between the usage of the GAL with MPLS PWs and
+ MPLS-TP PWs may cause unnecessary implementation differences and is
+ in disagreement with the MPLS-TP requirements.
+
+ Therefore, this document specifies that the GAL can be used with
+ packets on a G-ACh on LSPs, Concatenated Segments of LSPs, Sections,
+ and PWs in both MPLS and MPLS-TP environments without discrimination.
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Li, et al. Standards Track [Page 3]
+
+RFC 6423 Using GAL in MPLS-TP PW November 2011
+
+
+ [RFC5586] is updated by removing the restrictions on using GAL for PW
+ as follows:
+
+ - Section 1 (Introduction) in [RFC5586], the original text:
+
+ The GAL mechanism is defined to work together with the ACH for
+ LSPs and MPLS Sections.
+
+ is replaced by:
+
+ The GAL mechanism is defined to work together with the ACH for
+ LSPs and MPLS Sections, and for PWs.
+
+ - Section 4.2. (GAL Applicability and Usage) in [RFC5586], the
+ original text:
+
+ In MPLS-TP, the GAL MUST be used with packets on a G-ACh on
+ LSPs, Concatenated Segments of LSPs, and with Sections, and
+ MUST NOT be used with PWs. It MUST always be at the bottom of
+ the label stack (i.e., S bit set to 1). However, in other MPLS
+ environments, this document places no restrictions on where the
+ GAL may appear within the label stack or its use with PWs.
+
+ is replaced by:
+
+ In MPLS-TP, the GAL MUST be used with packets on a G-ACh on
+ LSPs, Concatenated Segments of LSPs, and with Sections, and MAY
+ be used with PWs. The presence of a GAL indicates that an ACH
+ immediately follows the MPLS label stack.
+
+4. Security Considerations
+
+ There are no further security considerations than those in [RFC5586].
+
+5. Acknowledgments
+
+ The authors would like to thank Luyuan Fang, Adrian Farrel, Haiyan
+ Zhang, Guanghui Sun, Italo Busi, and Matthew Bocci for their
+ contributions to this work.
+
+ The authors would also like to thank the authors of [RFC5586] and
+ people who were involved in the development of [RFC5586].
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Li, et al. Standards Track [Page 4]
+
+RFC 6423 Using GAL in MPLS-TP PW November 2011
+
+
+6. References
+
+6.1. Normative References
+
+ [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
+ Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997
+
+ [RFC3031] Rosen, E., Viswanathan, A., and R. Callon, "Multiprotocol
+ Label Switching Architecture", RFC 3031, January 2001.
+
+ [RFC3985] Bryant, S., Ed., and P. Pate, Ed., "Pseudo Wire Emulation
+ Edge-to-Edge (PWE3) Architecture", RFC 3985, March 2005.
+
+ [RFC5586] Bocci, M., Ed., Vigoureux, M., Ed., and S. Bryant, Ed.,
+ "MPLS Generic Associated Channel", RFC 5586, June 2009.
+
+6.2. Informative References
+
+ [RFC5085] Nadeau, T., Ed., and C. Pignataro, Ed., "Pseudowire Virtual
+ Circuit Connectivity Verification (VCCV): A Control Channel
+ for Pseudowires", RFC 5085, December 2007.
+
+ [RFC5654] Niven-Jenkins, B., Ed., Brungard, D., Ed., Betts, M., Ed.,
+ Sprecher, N.,and S. Ueno, "Requirements of an MPLS
+ Transport Profile", RFC 5654, September 2009.
+
+Authors' Addresses
+
+ Han Li
+ China Mobile Communications Corporation
+ EMail: lihan@chinamobile.com
+
+
+ Luca Martini
+ Cisco Systems, Inc.
+ EMail: lmartini@cisco.com
+
+
+ Jia He
+ Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
+ EMail: hejia@huawei.com
+
+
+ Feng Huang
+ Alcatel-Lucent shanghai Bell
+ EMail: feng.f.huang@alcatel-sbell.com.cn
+
+
+
+
+
+Li, et al. Standards Track [Page 5]
+