60 likes | 241 Views
Layer 1 VPNs. draft-takeda-l1vpn-applicability-02.txt Deborah Brungard (AT&T) Adrian Farrel (Olddog Consulting) Hamid Ould-Brahim (Nortel Networks) Dimitri Papadimitriou (Alcatel) Tomonori Takeda (NTT). draft-takeda-l1vpn-framework-03.txt Raymond Aubin (Nortel)
E N D
Layer 1 VPNs draft-takeda-l1vpn-applicability-02.txt Deborah Brungard (AT&T) Adrian Farrel (Olddog Consulting) Hamid Ould-Brahim (Nortel Networks) Dimitri Papadimitriou (Alcatel) Tomonori Takeda (NTT) draft-takeda-l1vpn-framework-03.txt Raymond Aubin (Nortel) Marco Carugi (Nortel) Ichiro Inoue (NTT) Hamid Ould-Brahim (Nortel) Tomonori Takeda (NTT) 62nd IETF Minneapolis March 2005
Summary of Status • Framework I-D in progress summarizing the work of ITU-T SG13 • Applicability analysis I-D in progress • Applicability analysis of following I-Ds to L1VPNs • GVPN - draft-ouldbrahim-ppvpn-gvpn-bgpgmpls • GMPLS Overlay - draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-overlay • Guidelines for additional protocol enhancement 62nd IETF Minneapolis March 2005
Framework I-D • Updates in 03 version • Clarification on business cases/deployment scenarios (section 4.3) • Clarification on differences between L1VPNs and L2/L3 VPNs (section 3.1.2) • Status and next steps • Almost complete • Any comment? • What to do when the draft is finished? 62nd IETF Minneapolis March 2005
Applicability Analysis I-D • Updates in 02 version • Signaling mechanisms (nesting/stitching and shuffling) (sections 6.2 and 6.3) • Status and next steps • Getting stable • Some details to be added (e.g. security considerations) • New revision expected as the work on protocols progresses 62nd IETF Minneapolis March 2005
Analysis Results (Summary) • All work is mostly done • VPN signaling • No extensions needed (all work in applicability analysis I-D) • VPN membership information exchange (PE-to-PE) • BGP-based approach requires no (or very minor) extensions. • IGP-based approach requires several extensions (based on existing IGP mechanisms). • VPN routing • For Virtual Link Service Model, no (or very minor) extensions needed. • For Virtual Node Service Model, several extensions needed (already detailed in GVPN I-D) • We believe for Per VPN Peer Service Model, no extensions are needed. 62nd IETF Minneapolis March 2005
Next Steps • Propose to adopt L1VPNs as a new CCAMP charter item • Coordination with other bodies (e.g., ITU-T) • Propose to adopt L1VPN framework I-D as a WG document • Develop protocol extensions based on applicability analysis I-D as a baseline. 62nd IETF Minneapolis March 2005