90 likes | 121 Views
Explore the goals and requirements for MPLS in a single PW, including decoupling control protocols, addressing overhead concerns, and distinguishing MPLS transport methods. Considerations and additional requirements for seamless integration are discussed.
E N D
Generic PWs? { balus, bryant, mcpherson, pan, stein }
Carriage in single PW… • MPLS (below bottom label) • IPv4 • IPv6 • Compressed header (TCP/UDP/RTP)? • IS-IS • Another PW • Other?
Network Topology T-PE T-PE IP(v4,v6),IS-IS,MPLS,OAM over PW S-PE S-PE Applicability: Carrier of Carrier, Access Gateway to Service PoP Gateway
Goals & Requirements • Decouple control protocols from that of the SP (SP and customer don’t want to integrate MPLS signaling protocols - e.g., LDP) • Can’t always employ PW type associated with AC type: • Overhead (payload & state, e.g., PPP) • Interworking w/different AC types • Undefined AC types
Goals & Requirements (cont) • Distinguish MPLS carried in PWs from classical MPLS • Implications/Considerations of PW CW and ECMP • MPLS relies on IP for signaling, can’t ignore bootstrapping function
Additional Consideration • CW always required (e.g., Always use 0000 nibble for data, VCCV indicated as usual) • SS & MS considerations • L2VPN requirements (IPLS)
Extraneous Considerations • ITU move to divorce MPLS from IP and replace with perhaps PNNI (George?) • MPLS Forum UNI w/RSVP (GMPLS-only)? • L2TPv3 (have IP PW today) • L2VPN requirements
Payload Considerations • Self-describing payload • How? • Registry • PPP • EtherType • New?
Request to make WG item • Applicability/requirements ID • Arch/framework ID • Protocol Work..