|
Procedures for the measurement of packet loss, delay, and throughput in MPLS networks are defined in RFC XXXX. This document describes a profile, i.e. a simplified subset, of these procedures that suffices to meet the specific requirements of MPLS-based transport networks.
This document is a product of a joint Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) / International Telecommunication Union Telecommunication Standardization Sector (ITU-T) effort to include an MPLS Transport Profile within the IETF MPLS and Pseudowire Emulation Edge-to-Edge (PWE3) architectures to support the capabilities and functionalities of a packet transport network as defined by the ITU-T.
[RFC Editor, please remove this note before publication as an RFC and insert the correct Streams Boilerplate to indicate that the published RFC has IETF consensus.]
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as “work in progress.”
This Internet-Draft will expire on June 26, 2011.
Copyright (c) 2010 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.
Procedures for the measurement of packet loss, delay, and throughput in MPLS networks are defined in [I‑D.frost‑mpls‑loss‑delay] (Frost, D. and S. Bryant, “Packet Loss and Delay Measurement for MPLS Networks,” December 2010.). This document describes a profile, i.e. a simplified subset, of these procedures that suffices to meet the specific requirements of MPLS-based transport networks [RFC5921] (Bocci, M., Bryant, S., Frost, D., Levrau, L., and L. Berger, “A Framework for MPLS in Transport Networks,” July 2010.) as defined in [RFC5860] (Vigoureux, M., Ward, D., and M. Betts, “Requirements for Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) in MPLS Transport Networks,” May 2010.). This profile is presented for the convenience of implementors who are concerned exclusively with the transport network context.
The use of the profile specified in this document is purely optional. Implementors wishing to provide enhanced functionality that is within the scope of [I‑D.frost‑mpls‑loss‑delay] (Frost, D. and S. Bryant, “Packet Loss and Delay Measurement for MPLS Networks,” December 2010.) but outside the scope of this profile may do so, whether or not the implementation is restricted to the transport network context.
The assumption of this profile is that the devices involved in a measurement operation are configured for measurement by a means external to the measurement protocols themselves, for example via a Network Management System (NMS) or separate configuration protocol.
This document is a product of a joint Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) / International Telecommunication Union Telecommunication Standardization Sector (ITU-T) effort to include an MPLS Transport Profile within the IETF MPLS and Pseudowire Emulation Edge-to-Edge (PWE3) architectures to support the capabilities and functionalities of a packet transport network as defined by the ITU-T.
When an LM session is externally configured, the values of several protocol parameters can be fixed in advance at the endpoints involved in the session, so that inspection or negotiation of these parameters is not required:
The default values for these parameters are specified by this profile as follows:
The TC field is set according to the class of traffic to be measured.
This profile is restricted to direct-mode LM and therefore uses the MPLS Direct Packet Loss Measurement (DLM) Channel Type in the Associated Channel Header (ACH).
A simple implementation may assume externally-determined configuration and need only support the functionality required by these defaults.
When a DM session is externally configured, the values of several protocol parameters can be fixed in advance at the endpoints involved in the session, so that inspection or negotiation of these parameters is not required:
The default values for these parameters are specified by this profile as follows:
The TC field is set according to the class of traffic to be measured.
This profile uses the MPLS Delay Measurement (DM) Channel Type in the Associated Channel Header (ACH).
A simple implementation may assume externally-determined configuration and need only support the functionality required by these defaults.
This document delineates a subset of the procedures specified in [I‑D.frost‑mpls‑loss‑delay] (Frost, D. and S. Bryant, “Packet Loss and Delay Measurement for MPLS Networks,” December 2010.), and as such introduces no new security considerations in itself. The security considerations discussed in [I‑D.frost‑mpls‑loss‑delay] (Frost, D. and S. Bryant, “Packet Loss and Delay Measurement for MPLS Networks,” December 2010.) apply also to the profile presented in this document.
This document introduces no new IANA considerations.
| [I-D.frost-mpls-loss-delay] | Frost, D. and S. Bryant, “Packet Loss and Delay Measurement for MPLS Networks,” draft-frost-mpls-loss-delay-00 (work in progress), December 2010 (TXT). |
| [RFC5586] | Bocci, M., Vigoureux, M., and S. Bryant, “MPLS Generic Associated Channel,” RFC 5586, June 2009 (TXT). |
| [RFC5860] | Vigoureux, M., Ward, D., and M. Betts, “Requirements for Operations, Administration, and Maintenance (OAM) in MPLS Transport Networks,” RFC 5860, May 2010 (TXT). |
| [RFC5921] | Bocci, M., Bryant, S., Frost, D., Levrau, L., and L. Berger, “A Framework for MPLS in Transport Networks,” RFC 5921, July 2010 (TXT). |
| Dan Frost (editor) | |
| Cisco Systems | |
| Email: | danfrost@cisco.com |
| Stewart Bryant (editor) | |
| Cisco Systems | |
| Email: | stbryant@cisco.com |