60 likes | 234 Views
GENERALIZED? Bandwidth . PCE WG , IETF 87, July 2013, Berlin RFC5440 - draft- ietf - pce - gmpls - pcep -extensions. BANDWITH What is the problem?. RFC5440, section 7.7 “The BANDWIDTH object body has a fixed length of 4 bytes .” RFC5440 defines 2 C-Types (1 and 2)
E N D
GENERALIZED? Bandwidth PCE WG, IETF 87, July 2013, Berlin RFC5440 - draft-ietf-pce-gmpls-pcep-extensions
BANDWITHWhat is the problem? RFC5440, section 7.7 “The BANDWIDTH object body has a fixed length of 4 bytes.” RFC5440 defines 2 C-Types (1 and 2) does is apply to RFC5440 defined C-Type, or any future C-Type. Cannot be extended
Solution-1 define a new object • GMPLS PCEP extensions : new object • Plus : keep existing implementation backward compatible • Problems : Processing rules for GMPLS-able speaker are more complex
Solution-2 • Change RFC5440 to allow TLVs in BANDWIDTH • - new extensions, with negotiation ? • Cons : • may break existing implementations, • Make a PCEP v1.1 with negotiation, with diverging object <format>
Solution-3 • RFC5440 Errata : • “The BANDWIDTH object Ctype 1 and Ctype 2 body have a fixed length of 4 bytes.” • Plus : • Allows new Ctype, do not change RFC5440-only implementation • Cons: • interworking between implementation checking on the object class will not support new Ctypes • Mitigation : negotiate a “relaxed” BW object class versus Class/Type
Discussion/Next Steps Implementation feedback