[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Fwd: GMPLS signaling (RSVP) assignment request.
FYI
>Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 18:39:18 -0500
>To: iana@iana.org
>From: Lou Berger <lberger@movaz.com>
>Subject: GMPLS signaling (RSVP) assignment request.
>
>Hello!
>
>We'd like to request assignment of types defined in
>draft-ietf-mpls-generalized-rsvp-te-06. This draft has
>passed WG last call and is on it's way to IESG/IETF last call.
>Assignment is needed to ensure interoperability.
>
>Thank you,
>Lou Berger (and co-authors)
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>RSVP related values defined in draft-ietf-mpls-generalized-rsvp-te-06
>with suggested values.
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>Message Types
>
>o Notify message (suggested Message type =21)
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>Class Types
>
>o RSVP_HOP (Existing C-Num 3)
> - IPv4 IF_ID RSVP_HOP (Suggested C-type =3)
> - IPv6 IF_ID RSVP_HOP (Suggested C-type =4)
>
>o ERROR_SPEC (Existing C-Num 6)
> - IPv4 IF_ID ERROR_SPEC (Suggested C-type =3)
> - IPv6 IF_ID ERROR_SPEC (Suggested C-type =4)
>
>o LABEL_REQUEST (Existing Class-Num 19)
> - Generalized_Label_Request (Suggested C-Type =4)
>
>o RSVP_LABEL (Existing Class-Num 16)
> - Generalized_Label (Suggested C-Type =2)
> - Waveband_Switching_Label C-Type (Suggested C-Type =3)
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>New Class-Nums, C-Types inherited from Label object (same as CNum16)
>
>o RECOVERY_LABEL Class-Num of form 0bbbbbbb (suggested =34)
>o SUGGESTED_LABEL Class-Num of form 10bbbbbb (suggested =129)
>o UPSTREAM_LABEL Class-Num of form 0bbbbbbb (suggested =35)
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>New Class-Nums
>
>o LABEL_SET Class-Num of form 0bbbbbbb (suggested =36)
> - Type 1 (C-Type =1)
>o ACCEPTABLE_LABEL_SET Class-Num of form 10bbbbbb (suggested =130)
> - Type 1 Acceptable_Label_Set (C-type from label_set cnum)
>o NOTIFY_REQUEST Class-Num of form 11bbbbbb (suggested =195)
> - IPv4 Notify Request (C-Type =1)
> - IPv6 Notify Request (C-Type =2)
>o PROTECTION Class-Num of form 0bbbbbbb (suggested =37)
> - Type 1 (C-Type =1)
>o ADMIN STATUS Class-Num of form 11bbbbbb (suggested =196)
> - Type 1 (C-Type =1)
>o RESTART_CAP Class-Num of form 10bbbbbb (suggested =131)
> - Type 1 (C-Type =1)
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>ERO/RRO subobject types
>
>o Label ERO subobject
> Type 3 - Label
>
>o Label RRO subobject
> Type 3 - Label
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>Error codes
>
>o "Routing problem/Label Set" (Suggested value =11)
>o "Routing problem/Switching Type" (Suggested value =12)
>o "Routing problem/Unacceptable label value" (Suggested value =13)
>o "Routing problem/Unsupported Encoding" (Suggested value =14)
>o "Routing problem/Unsupported Link Protection" (Suggested value =15)
>o "Notify Error/Control Channel Active State" (Suggested value =4)
>o "Notify Error/Control Channel Degraded State" (Suggested value =5)
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>[related section from draft]
>13. IANA Considerations
>
> IANA assigns values to RSVP protocol parameters. Within the current
> document multiple objects are defined. Each of these objects contain
> C-Types. This section defines the rules for the assignment of the
> related C-Type values. This section uses the terminology of BCP 26
> "Guidelines for Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs"
> [BCP26].
>
> As per [RFC2205], C-Type is an 8-bit number that identifies the
> function of an object. There are no range restrictions. All
> possible values except zero are available for assignment.
>
> The assignment of C-Type values of the objects defined in this
> document fall into three categories. The first category inherit C-
> Types from the Label object, i.e., object class number 16 [RSVP-TE].
> IANA is requested to institute a policy whereby all C-Type values
> assign for the Label object are also assigned for the following
> objects:
> o Suggested_Label (Class-Num TBA)
> o Upstream_Label (Class-Num TBA)
> o Recovery_Label (Class-Num TBA)
>
> The second category of objects follow independent policies.
> Specifically, following the policies outlined in [BCP26], C-Type
> values in the range 0x00 - 0x3F are allocated through an IETF
> Consensus action, values in the range 00x40 - 0x5F are allocated as
> First Come First Served, and values in the range 0x60 - 0x7F are
> reserved for Private Use. This policy applies to the following
> objects.
> o Label_Set (Class-Num TBA)
> o Notify_Request (Class-Num TBA)
> o Protection (Class-Num TBA)
> o Admin Status (Class-Num TBA)
> o Restart_Cap (Class-Num TBA)
>
>
>
>Berger, et. al. [Page 35]
>Internet Draft draft-ietf-mpls-generalized-rsvp-te-06.txt November 2001
>
>
> The assignment of C-Type values for the remaining object, the
> Acceptable_Label_Set object, follows the assignment of C-Type values
> of the Label_Set object. IANA is requested to institute a policy
> whereby all C-Type values assigned for the Label_Set object are also
> assigned for the Acceptable_Label_Set object.