Issues with Link Bundling Draft and updates from MPLS WG Meeting draft-ietf-mpls-bundle-04.txt

1
Issues with Link Bundling Draft and updates from
MPLS WG Meeting draft-ietf-mpls-bundle-04.txt
Zafar Ali (zali_at_cisco.com)
2
Background Why Bundling Draft is Pulled from
RFC Editor Queue?

• A team of contributors, which includes authors of
  the Bundling Draft, had identified and discussed
  some issues with bundling draft coupled with
  RFC3471/ 73
• List of Contributors (Ordered Alphabetically)
  Zafar Ali, Arthi Ayyangar, Lou Berger, Igor
  Bryskin, John Drake, Adrian Farrel, Kireeti
  Kompella, Dimitri Papadimitriou, Yakov Rekhter,
  and Anca Zamfir.
• These issues concerns text in bundling draft and
  in RFC 3471/73 and hence concerns MPLS and CCAMP
  WGs.

3
List of Issues

• Scoping of Component Link ID
• Node vs. Bundled TE link Scoped.
• Equivalents of Type 4/5 TLVs for IPv4 and IPv6
  IF_ID RSVP_HOP and IF_ID ERROR_SPEC Objects.
• Recording (and explicit control) of the component
  link ID.

4
Updates from MPLS WG Meeting

• These issues were discussed in MPLS WG meeting on
  11/9/2004.
• Authors of bundling draft plan to address issue 1
  and 2 in the revised version.
• MPLS WG is following up and will close on issue 1
  and 2, in the context of the bundling draft.
• Component link recording (and explicit control)
  will remain outside the scope of the bundling
  draft.

5
Planned updates to draft-ietf-mpls-bundle-04
Authors of the bundling draft plan to update the
ID as follows,

• Node/IP scope for all component link TLV types
• Tightly define support for different components
  in each direction (for bidirectional LSPs)
• For types 1, 2 and 3
• And types 4 and 5
• Use TE Router ID in types 3, 4, 5 TLVs
• Allow, but recommend against use of types 4 and 5
• The bundling document would also document all the
  potential error cases that could happen in
  particular in case of inversion, if the
  components themselves are bidirectional.

6
Issue 3 Recording (and explicit control) of the
Component Link ID

• This work will be pursued by CCAMP or MPLS WG as
  a separate ID.
• draft-dimitri-ccamp-gmpls-rsvp-te-bundled-links
  or draft-zamfir-explicit-resource-control-bundle
  will be revised based on closure of issues 1 and
  2 in the bundling draft.

7
Next Step

• MPLS WGs will close the issues 1 and 2 in the
  context of the bundling draft.
• Based on the closure of these issues we will be
  able to close on solution for Issue 3.
• We need to find home for the Recording (and
  explicit control) of the component link ID (MPLS
  or CCAMP WG).

Thank You