Network Working Group T. Eriksson Internet-Draft TeliaSonera Expires: August 9, 2004 S. Poretsky Quarry Technologies R. Papneja Isocore February 9, 2004 Terminology for Benchmarking LDP Data Plane Convergence draft-eriksson-ldp-convergence-term-00.txt Status of this Memo This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. 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." The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http:// www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. This Internet-Draft will expire on August 9, 2004. Copyright Notice Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). All Rights Reserved. Abstract This document defines new terms needed for benchmarking of LDP convergence. Usefull existing terminology is also referenced. Eriksson, et al. Expires August 9, 2004 [Page 1] Internet-Draft Terminology for Benchmarking LDP Data Plane Convergence February 2004 Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Existing Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.1 BMWG Convergence Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2.2 MPLS/LDP Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. Term Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.1 LDP Binding Table . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.2 FEC Forwarding Table . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.3 FEC Convergence Event . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.4 FEC Forwarding Table Convergence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.5 FEC Convergence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.6 Multiple Next-Hop FEC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.7 Ingress LSR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3.8 Egress LSR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . . 10 Eriksson, et al. Expires August 9, 2004 [Page 2] Internet-Draft Terminology for Benchmarking LDP Data Plane Convergence February 2004 1. Introduction This draft describes the terminology for benchmarking LDP Convergence. An accompanying document describes the methodology for doing the benchmarking [TBD]. The main motivation for doing this work is the increased focus on lowering convergence time for LDP as an alternative to other solutions such as MPLS Fast Reroute. The purpose of this documents is to find existing terminology as well as define new terminology when needed terms are not available. The terminology will support the methodology that will be based on black-box testing of the LDP dataplane. The approach is very similar to the one found in [3] and [4]. 2. Existing Terminology 2.1 BMWG Convergence Terms Route Convergence Defined in [3]. Convergence Packet Loss Defined in [3]. Convergence Event Instant Defined in [3]. Convergence Recovery Instant Defined in [3]. Rate-Derived Convergence Time Defined in [3]. Convergence Event Transition Defined in [3]. Convergence Recovery Transition Defined in [3]. Loss-Derived Convergence Time Defined in [3]. Restoration Convergence Time Defined in [3]. Packet Sampling Interval Defined in [3]. Eriksson, et al. Expires August 9, 2004 [Page 3] Internet-Draft Terminology for Benchmarking LDP Data Plane Convergence February 2004 Local Interface Defined in [3]. Neighbor Interface Defined in [3]. Remote Interface Defined in [3]. Preferred Egress Interface Defined in [3]. Next-Best Egress Interface Defined in [3]. Stale Forwarding Defined in [3]. 2.2 MPLS/LDP Terms Label Defined in [1]. FEC Defined in [1]. Label Withdraw Defined in [2]. IGP update message Defined in TBD LSP Defined in [1]. LSR Defined in [1]. Per-Interface label space Defined in TBD. Per-Platform label space Defined in TBD MPLS Node Defined in [1]. Eriksson, et al. Expires August 9, 2004 [Page 4] Internet-Draft Terminology for Benchmarking LDP Data Plane Convergence February 2004 MPLS Edge Node Defined in [1]. MPLS Node Defined in [1]. MPLS Edge Node Defined in [1]. MPLS EgressNode Defined in [1]. MPLS Ingress Node Defined in [1]. Upstream LSR Defined in [1]. Downstream LSR Defined in [1]. 3. Term Definitions 3.1 LDP Binding Table Definition: Table in which the LSR maintains all learned labels. It consists of the prefix and label information bound to a peer's LDP identifier and the list of sent and received bindings/peer. Discussion: None Measurement Units: N/A Issues: None See Also: FEC Forwarding Table 3.2 FEC Forwarding Table Eriksson, et al. Expires August 9, 2004 [Page 5] Internet-Draft Terminology for Benchmarking LDP Data Plane Convergence February 2004 Definition: Table n which the LSR maintains the next hop information for the particular FEC with the associated outgoing label and interface. It is used for setting up the FEC forwarding table is retrieved from the LIB entry. Discussion: None Measurement Units: N/A Issues: None See Also: LDP Binding Table 3.3 FEC Convergence Event Definition: The occurrence of a planned or unplanned action in the network that results in a change to an LSR's LDP next-hop forwarding. Discussion: Convergence Events include link loss, routing protocol session loss, router failure, and better next-hop. Measurement Units: N/A Issues: None See Also: FEC Forwarding Table Convergence FEC Convergence 3.4 FEC Forwarding Table Convergence Definition: Recovery from a change in the FEC Forwarding Table due to a FEC Convergence Event. Discussion: FEC Forwarding Table Convergence updates after the RIB and LDP Binding Table update due to a FECConvergence Event. FEC Forwarding Table Convergence can be observed externally by the rerouting of data Traffic to a new egress interface. Eriksson, et al. Expires August 9, 2004 [Page 6] Measurement Units: N/A Issues: None See Also: FEC Forwarding Table FEC Convergence Event FEC Convergence 3.5 FEC Convergence Definition: A change in the LDP Binding Table due to a FEC Convergence Event. Discussion: FEC Convergence is a change in an LDP Binding of a prefix and label to a peer's LDP Identifier. This change can be an update or recovery due to a FEC Convergence Event. FEC Convergence is an LSR action made prior to FEC Forwarding Table Convergence. FEC Convergence is not an externally observable Black-Box measurement. Measurement Units: N/A Issues: Where is LDP Identifier defined? Where is LDP Binding defined? See Also: LDP Binding Table FEC Convergence Event FEC Forwarding Table Convergence 3.6 Multiple Next-Hop FEC Definition: A FEC with more than one next-hop and associated outgoing label and interface. Discussion: A Multiple Next-Hop FEC can be verified from the FEC Forwarding Table and from externally observing traffic being forwarded to a FEC on one or more interfaces. Measurement Units: N/A Eriksson, et al. Expires August 9, 2004 [Page 7] Internet-Draft Terminology for Benchmarking LDP Data Plane Convergence February 2004 Issues: None See Also: FEC Forwarding Table 3.7 Ingress LSR Definition: An MPLS ingress node which is capable of forwarding native L3 packets. Discussion: None Measurement Units: N/A Issues: None See Also: MPLS Node MPLS Edge Node MPLS Egress Node MPLS Ingress Node Label Switching Router (LSR) Egress LSR 3.8 Egress LSR Definition: An MPLS Egress node which is capable of forwarding native L3 packets. Discussion: None Measurement Units: N/A Issues: None See Also: MPLS Node MPLS Edge Node MPLS Egress Node Eriksson, et al. Expires August 9, 2004 [Page 8] Internet-Draft Terminology for Benchmarking LDP Data Plane Convergence February 2004 MPLS Ingress Node Label Switching Router (LSR) Ingress LSR 4. Security Considerations TBD 5. Acknowledgements References [1] Rosen, E., Viswanathan, A. and R. Callon, "Multiprotocol Label Switching Architecture", RFC 3031, January 2001. [2] Andersson, L., Doolan, P., Feldman, N., Fredette, A. and B. Thomas, "LDP Specification", RFC 3036, January 2001. [3] Poretsky, S. and B. Imhoff, "Terminology for Benchmarking IGP Data Plane Route Convergence", draft-ietf-bmwg-igp-dataplane-conv-term-02.txt (work in progress), January 2004. [4] Poretsky, S. and B. Imhoff, "Benchmarking Methodology for IGP Data Plane Route Convergence", draft-ietf-bmwg-igp-dataplane-conv-meth-01.txt (work in progress), October 2003. Authors' Addresses Thomas Eriksson TeliaSonera EMail: thomas.a.eriksson(at)teliasonera.com Scott Poretsky Quarry Technologies EMail: sporetsky(at)quarrytech.com Rajiv Papneja Isocore EMail: rpapneja(at)isocore.com Eriksson, et al. Expires August 9, 2004 [Page 9] Internet-Draft Terminology for Benchmarking LDP Data Plane Convergence February 2004 Intellectual Property Statement The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any intellectual property or other rights that might be claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in this document or the extent to which any license under such rights might or might not be available; neither does it represent that it has made any effort to identify any such rights. Information on the IETF's procedures with respect to rights in standards-track and standards-related documentation can be found in BCP-11. Copies of claims of rights made available for publication and any assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of such proprietary rights by implementors or users of this specification can be obtained from the IETF Secretariat. The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary rights which may cover technology that may be required to practice this standard. Please address the information to the IETF Executive Director. Full Copyright Statement Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004). All Rights Reserved. This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than English. The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assignees. This document and the information contained herein is provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION Eriksson, et al. Expires August 9, 2004 [Page 10] Internet-Draft Terminology for Benchmarking LDP Data Plane Convergence February 2004 HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Acknowledgment Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the Internet Society. Eriksson, et al. Expires August 9, 2004 [Page 11]