DS-TE protocol Extensions Russian Dolls Model (RDM) Maximum Allocation Model (MAM) Maximum Allocation w Reservation(MAR)

1
DS-TE protocol ExtensionsRussian Dolls Model
(RDM)Maximum Allocation Model (MAM) Maximum
Allocation w Reservation(MAR)

• draft-ietf-tewg-diff-te-proto-05.txt
• draft-ietf-tewg-diff-te-russian-04.txt
• draft-ietf-tewg-diff-te-mam-01.txt
• draft-ietf-tewg-te-mar-02.txt
• Francois Le Faucheur
• flefauch_at_cisco.com

2
Closed Issue 1

• Vienna Issue
• relationship between Shared Mesh Restoration
  and DS-TE Bandwidth Constraints Models needs to
  be understood
• is there an issue?
• How do we address it?

3
Closed Issue 1 (Ctnd)

• Conclusions
• Shared Mesh Restoration can work simultaneously
  with DS-TE.
• Shared Mesh Restoration should operate
  independently within each DS-TE Class-Type (and
  not across Class-Types).    
• Shared Mesh Restoration can work with RDM, MAM
  and MAR
• Resolution
• make a wording change to the definition of
  "Reserved (CTc)" which is used in the formulas
  for defining RDM, MAM and MAR so that the
  formulas are compatible with how Shared-Mesh
  Restoration performs bandwidth reservation/CAC  
• add a note in RDM, MAM and MAR specs that these
  BC Model definitions are compatible with Shared
  Mesh Restoration with the assumption that Shared
  Mesh Restoration operates independently within
  each Class-Type.
• Reference
• email 26 Aug subject Result of investigation
  Relationship between Shared Mesh Restoration and
  DSTE Bandwidth Constraints Models for details

4
Closed Issue 2

• Issue raised by draft-sivabalan-diff-te-bundling
  and discussed in Vienna
• MPLS TE base specs discuss use of preemption
  priority p
• DS-TE proto redefines unreservable bandwidth
  available at priority "p" to be the reservable
  bandwidth available for TE-Class "i
• TE improvements (eg bundled links, FA-LSP,..)
  refer to how to address the particulars of that
  improvement with regards to priority p (not to
  TE-Class i)
• TE improvements need to be generalised to apply
  to TE-Class i
• Resolution
• Add a section in proto- 7.DS-TE support with
  MPLS extensions.

5
Closed Issue 2 (Ctnd)

• Resolution
• Add in proto- a section tatement that for the
  IGP and RSVP RFCs, as well as technologies that
  improve upon them (e.g. FA-LSP, link bundling,
  etc..), in order to be DS-TE compliant, you need
  to map all references of "p" to TE-Classi and
  map
• make a wording change to the definition of
  "Reserved (CTc)" which is used in the formulas
  for defining RDM, MAM and MAR so that the
  formulas are compatible with how Shared-Mesh
  Restoration performs bandwidth reservation/CAC  
• that these BC Model definitions are compatible
  with Shared Mesh Restoration with the assumption
  that Shared Mesh Restoration operates
  independently within each Class-Type.
• Reference
• email 26 Aug subject Result of investigation
  Relationship between Shared Mesh Restoration and
  DSTE Bandwidth Constraints Models for details

6
Open Issues

• None

7
Status

• -proto- Standards Track
• -rdm-, -mam-, -mar Informational Track
• WG Last Call completed
• Under IESG Review

8
Thank You !