| Internet-Draft | PCEP Extensions for NRP | July 2024 |
| Dong, et al. | Expires 4 January 2025 | [Page] |
This document specifies the extensions to Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) to carry Network Resource Partition (NRP) related information in the PCEP messages. The extensions in this document can be used to indicate the NRP-specific constraints and information needed in path computation, path status report and path initialization.¶
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 https://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 4 January 2025.¶
Copyright (c) 2024 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 (https://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 Revised BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.¶
[RFC5440] describes the Path Computation Element (PCE) Communication Protocol (PCEP). PCEP enables the communication between a Path Computation Client (PCC) and a PCE, or between PCE and PCE, for the purpose of computation of Multi-protocol Label Switching (MPLS) as well as Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Traffic Engineering Label Switched Path (TE LSP) characteristics. As depicted in [RFC4655], a PCE MUST be able to compute the path of a TE LSP by operating on the TED and considering bandwidth and other constraints applicable to the TE LSP service request.¶
[RFC8231] specifies a set of extensions to PCEP to enable stateful control of TE LSPs within and across PCEP sessions in compliance with [RFC4657]. It includes mechanisms to effect LSP State Synchronization between PCCs and PCEs, delegation of control over LSPs to PCEs, and PCE control of timing and sequence of path computations within and across PCEP sessions. The model of operation where LSPs are initiated from the PCE is described in [RFC8281]. [RFC8664] specifies PCEP extensions to allow a stateful PCE to compute and initiate TE paths, as well as a PCC to request a path subject to certain constraints and optimization criteria in SR networks.¶
With the introduction and evolvement of 5G and other network scenarios, existing or emerging applications or customers may require connectivity services with additional characteristics. As described in [RFC9543], an RFC 9543 Network Slice enables connectivity service between a set of Service Demarcation Points (SDPs) with specific Service Level Objectives (SLOs) and Service Level Expectations (SLEs) over a common underlay network. For the realization of RFC 9543 network slice service, the concept Network Resource Partition (NRP) is introduced in [RFC9543]. A Network Resource Partition (NRP) is a subset of the buffer/queuing/ scheduling resources and associated policies on each of a connected set of links in the underlay network.¶
[I-D.ietf-teas-enhanced-vpn] describes a framework and the candidate technologies for providing enhanced VPN services based on NRPs. An NRP could be used as the underlay to meet the requirement of one or a group of enhanced VPN services.¶
In MPLS or SR based network, the set of network resources allocated to an NRP can be identified using resource-aware SR SIDs as defined in [I-D.ietf-spring-resource-aware-segments] [I-D.ietf-spring-sr-for-enhanced-vpn], or the data plane NRP ID as defined in [I-D.ietf-6man-enhanced-vpn-vtn-id]. The logical topology associated with an NRP could be specified using mechanisms such as Multi-Topology [RFC4915], [RFC5120] or Flex-Algo [RFC9350], etc.¶
To meet specific service requirement, traffic flows of an RFC 9543 network slice service need be steered onto TE paths of the corresponding NRP. A PCC may request the PCE for computing a TE path within an NRP, so that the path computation would take the resource attributes and the associated topology of the NRP into consideration. Correspondingly, a PCE may reply or initiate a TE path with NRP-specific control plane and data plane information to a PCC.¶
This document specifies the extensions to PCEP to carry NRP related information in the PCEP messages. The extensions can be used in the basic PCE computation, the stateful PCE and the PCE-initiated LSP mechanisms to indicate the NRP-specific constraints and information needed in path computation, path status report and path initialization.¶
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all capitals, as shown here.¶
A new NRP TLV for use in the LSPA Object is defined to indicate the NRP ID and the related information which needs to be considered in path computation or instantiation. The format of the NRP TLV is as follows:¶
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type=TBD1 | Length=Variable | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | NRP ID | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Flags | Reserved | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | // Optional sub-TLV(s) // | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Where:¶
NRP ID: A network-wide unique 32-bit identifier which is used to identify an NRP.¶
Flags: 16-bit flags. Currently all the flags are reserved for future use. They SHOULD be set to zero on transmission and MUST be ignored on receipt.¶
Reserved: 16-bit reserved field for future use. All the bits SHOULD be set to zero on transmission and MUST be ignored on receipt.¶
Optional sub-TLVs: Additional information which can be used in NRP-specific constraints. Currently no sub-TLV is defined in this document.¶
A PCEP speaker indicates whether it supports NRP-specific path computation using a new PCEP capability called "NRP-CAPABILITY". When the PCEP session is created, it sends an Open message with an OPEN Object containing the NRP-CAPABILITY TLV. The format of this TLV is as follows:¶
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Type=TBD2 | Length=4 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Flags |D| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
The type (16 bits) of the TLV is TBA. The length field is 16 bits long and has a fixed value of 4.¶
The value comprises a single field -- Flags (32 bits):¶
D (Data Plane NRP ID CAPABILITY - 1 bit): if set to 1 by a PCC, the D flag indicates that the PCC supports the encapsulation of data plane NRP ID in data packet; if set to 1 by a PCE, it indicates that the PCE supports to provide path computation result with the data plane NRP ID used for the path.¶
Unassigned bits in the Flags field MUST be set to zero on transmission and ignored on receipt.¶
The NRP TLV defined in this document can be used for NRP-aware TE path computation, NRP-specific path status report and NRP-specific path instantiation, thus it is applicable to both the basic PCE mechanisms and the stateful PCE mechanisms.¶
NRP-aware TE path computation SHOULD be performed based on the constraints and network resources associated with a specific NRP. Information about the NRP-specific network resource and topology attributes may be obtained by the PCE either from the network planning system, or using a distributed control plane such as IGP or BGP-LS with necessary extensions. The detailed mechanism is out of the scope of this document.¶
In a PCReq message, the NRP TLV SHOULD be carried in the LSPA Object to indicate that the path computation needs to be executed using the network resource and topological attributes of the NRP. The PCE SHOULD use the network resource and topology attributes associated with the specified NRP as the parameters in path computation. In a PCRep message, the NRP TLV MAY be carried in the LSPA Object in case of failure to indicate the path computation in the specified NRP was not successful.¶
The NRP TLV defined in this document can be used for NRP-specific path update and report in the stateful PCE mechanisms.¶
A PCE MAY include the NRP TLV in PCUpd Message to indicate the NRP in which the TE path needs to be updated. The NRP ID SHOULD be the same as the NRP ID of the existing TE path. If a PCC receives an PCUpd message in which the NRP ID does not match with the NRP ID of the path, the PCC MUST keep the LSP state unchanged, and include an LSP Error Code value of "NRP Mismatch" (TBD3) in LSP State Report message. On successful update of a TE path, the NRP TLV SHOULD be included in the PCRpt message to indicate the NRP in which the TE path is reported.¶
The NRP TLV defined in this document can be used for NRP-specific path initiation in the PCE-Initiated LSP mechanisms.¶
In a PCInitiate message, the NRP TLV MAY be included to indicate the NRP in which the path needs to be initiated. Depending on the setting of the D flag in the NRP Capability, the PCC will use either the resources-aware SIDs associated with the NRP or the data plane NRP ID in constructing the NRP specific TE path. If the PCC determines that the LSP parameters proposed in the PCInitiate message are unacceptable, it MUST send a PCErr message with Error-type=24 (PCE instantiation error) and Error-value=1 (Unacceptable instantiation parameters). On successful completion of the LSP instantiation, the NRP TLV SHOULD be included in the PCRpt message to indicate the NRP in which the TE path was instantiated.¶
The mechanism described in this document adds NRP-specific information to PCEP. NRP-specific constraints may be considered in path computation of PCE, and in path instantiation, path update and report, a TE path may be associated with an NRP ID. As the number of NRP increases, the number of PCEP messages exchanged between PCC and PCE would also increase. However, since the PCEP messages are exchanged only between the PCCs and PCE, the impacts to the control plane of PCC and PCE are considered acceptable.¶
This document defines a new NRP TLV that do not add any new security concerns beyond those discussed in [RFC5440] in itself. Some deployments may find the NRP information to be extra sensitive and could be used to influence path computation and setup with adverse effect. Additionally, snooping of PCEP messages with such data or using PCEP messages for network reconnaissance may give an attacker sensitive information about the operations of the network. Thus, such deployment should employ suitable PCEP security mechanisms like TCP Authentication Option (TCP-AO) [RFC5925] or Transport Layer Security (TLS) [RFC8253]. The procedure based on TLS is considered a security enhancement and thus is much better suited for the sensitive information.¶
This document makes following requests to IANA for action.¶
IANA is requested to make the following allocations in the "PCEP TLV Type Indicators" subregistry of the "Path Computation Element Protocol (PCEP) Numbers" registry:¶
Value Description Reference
----- ---------------- -------------
TBD1 NRP This document
TBD2 NRP CAPABILITY This document¶
IANA is requested to allocate a new error code in the "LSP-ERROR-CODE TLV Error Code Field" sub-registry of the "Path Computation Element Protocol (PCEP) Numbers" registry:¶
Value Description Reference
----- ---------------- -------------
TBD3 NRP Mismatch This document¶
Dhruv Dhody Email: dhruv.ietf@gmail.com Zhibo Hu Email: huzhibo@huawei.com¶
The authors would like to thank Zhenbin Li for his review and valuable comments.¶