Carrying a Contract ID in PCEP draft-leroux-pce-contract-id-01.txt ...

0 comments

file time: 2008-02-16

filetype:ppt

Click Here To Download...

>  

   
 
 
 
         Carrying a Contract ID in PCEP    
             
                 draft-leroux-pce-contract-id-01.txt 
                                                                                                               
                             
                                       J.L. Le Roux (France Telecom)  
                                  R. Jacob (Brighthaul) 
                                  R. Douville (Alcatel-Lucent) 
                        

 

Background 
 

Inter-Provider TE-LSP = TE-LSP that crosses at least one provider boundary Inter-provider TE-LSP computation may rely on communication between PCEs in each provider (such as BRPC) Preliminary service negotiation and activation is required at the service level, between the set of providers the LSP will traverse SLA, SLS, TE parameters, $... The IPSphere Forum is defining an architecture that allows automating the negotiation and activation of an inter-provider TE-LSP service The instantiated service is identified by a contract ID in the form of a Universally Unique IDentifier UUID (RFC 4122) The contract ID has to be carried in PCEP so that a path computation request can be policed based upon the beforehand agreed service  

The PCEP Contract ID object  1/2 

This draft defines PCEP extensions so as to transparently transport a service contract id A new PCEP object is defined, the CONTRACT ID object, to be carried in PCReq messages Carries the identifier of the TE-LSP service contract that has been negotiated and instantiated at the service level. Encoded as a 128 bit UUID as defined in RFC 4122 The content of the PCEP object is transparent and not processed at the PCEP level  

The PCEP Contract ID object  2/2 

The Contract ID object is communicated to a service Policy Decision Point (PDP) to apply policies at the service level, based upon the agreed service Policies include: Request acceptance/rejection, TE parameter filtering/translation, next-AS determination, etc. No assumption on the way the object is communicated to the PDP, as well as on the actual location of the PDP (co-located or not) New error values defined for the PCEP error code "Policy Violation"  

    

SP3 

R3 

    

    

SP1 

SP2 

R1 

Set policy (Contract ID) 

LSP Setup Request 
Contract ID 
LSP parameters 
AS-Path SP1-SP2-SP3 

LSP Config 
Contract ID 
Dest R3 
LSP parameters 
AS-Path SP1-SP2-SP3 

PCReq 
Contract ID 
Dest R3 
IRO AS2-AS3 

 
PCReq 
Contract ID 
Dest R3 
IRO AS3 

 
PCReq 
Contract ID 
Dest R3 
IRO AS1-AS2-AS3 

PCRep 
ERO  R6-R3 or CPS 

Policy Request (Contract ID) 

OK 

PCRep  
ERO  R5-R6-R3 or CPS 

R5 

R6 

Execute Start

Contract ID 

Execute Start

Contract ID 

IPSphere Service Execution 

SMS  

SMS  

SMS  

PCE 

PCE 

PCE 

NMS 

NMS 

PM 

NMS 

PM 

PM 

PCRep 
ERO: R1-R5-R6-R3 or CPS 

Policy Request (Contract ID) 

OK 

Set policy (Contract ID)

 

Next Steps 

Straightforward PCEP extension allowing for communication in an inter-provider context  
Comment from Dimitri: "The contract ID should be carried in a more generic PCEP Policy Data object" This would be a TLV in the yet to be defined Policy Data object  
Need for RSVP-TE extensions to carry the Contract ID Within the RSVP-TE Policy Data object (need for a new P-Type) Draft to be submitted for Chicago  
WG feedback Required  

Thanks 
 
Questions?

   download Carrying a Contract ID in PCEP draft-leroux-pce-contract-id-01.txt ...