Path Computation Element D. Dhody
Internet-Draft Huawei
Updates: 8231, 8233, 8281, 8623, 8664, 8685, 29 July 2024
8697, 8745, 8733, 8779, 8780, 8800,
8934, 9050, 9059, 9168, 9357, 9504,
9603 (if approved)
Intended status: Standards Track
Expires: 30 January 2025
Update to the IANA PCEP Registration Procedures
draft-dhody-pce-iana-update-03
Abstract
This document updates the registration procedure within the IANA
"Path Computation Element Protocol (PCEP) Numbers" group of
registries. This specification changes some of the registries with
Standards Action to IETF Review as defined in RFC 8126. This memo
updates RFCs 8231, 8233, 8281, 8623, 8664, 8685, 8697, 8733, 8745,
8779, 8780, 8800, 8934, 9050, 9059, 9168, 9357, 9504, and 9603.
Discussion Venues
This note is to be removed before publishing as an RFC.
Discussion of this document takes place on the Path Computation
Element Working Group mailing list (pce@ietf.org), which is archived
at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/pce/.
Source for this draft and an issue tracker can be found at
https://github.com/dhruvdhody/draft-dhody-pce-iana-update.
Status of This Memo
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."
Dhody Expires 30 January 2025 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft PCEP-IANA July 2024
This Internet-Draft will expire on 30 January 2025.
Copyright Notice
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.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. PCEP Registries Affected . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Appendix A. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1. Introduction
The IANA "Path Computation Element Protocol (PCEP) Numbers" registry
group was populated by several RFCs produced by the Path Computation
Element (PCE) working group. Most of the registries include the
"IETF Review" [RFC8126] as registration procedures. There are a few
registries that use "Standards Action". Thus the values in those
registries can be assigned only through Standards Track or Best
Current Practice RFCs in the IETF Stream. This memo changes the
policy from Standards Action to IETF Review to allow any type of RFC
under the IETF stream to make the allocation request.
2. PCEP Registries Affected
The following table lists the "Path Computation Element Protocol
(PCEP) Numbers" registries whose registration policy has changed from
Standards Action to IETF Review. Affected registries now list this
document as a reference. Where this change is applied to a specific
range of values within the particular registry, that range is given
in the Remarks column.
Dhody Expires 30 January 2025 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft PCEP-IANA July 2024
+==========================+================================+=======+
|Registry | RFC |Remarks|
+==========================+================================+=======+
|BU Object Type Field | [RFC8233] | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------+-------+
|LSP Object Flag Field | [RFC8231] | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------+-------+
|STATEFUL-PCE-CAPABILITY | [RFC8231] | |
|TLV Flag Field | | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------+-------+
|LSP-ERROR-CODE TLV Error | [RFC8231] | |
|Code Field | | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------+-------+
|SRP Object Flag Field | [RFC8281] | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------+-------+
|SR-ERO Flag Field | [RFC8664] | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------+-------+
|PATH-SETUP-TYPE-CAPABILITY| [RFC8664] | |
|Sub-TLV Type Indicators | | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------+-------+
|SR Capability Flag Field | [RFC8664] | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------+-------+
|WA Object Flag Field | [RFC8780] | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------+-------+
|Wavelength Restriction TLV| [RFC8780] | |
|Action Values | | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------+-------+
|Wavelength Allocation TLV | [RFC8780] | |
|Flag Field | | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------+-------+
|S2LS Object Flag Field | [RFC8623] | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------+-------+
|H-PCE-CAPABILITY TLV Flag | [RFC8685] | |
|Field | | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------+-------+
|H-PCE-FLAG TLV Flag Field | [RFC8685] | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------+-------+
|ASSOCIATION Flag Field | [RFC8697] | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------+-------+
|ASSOCIATION Type Field | [RFC8697] | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------+-------+
|AUTO-BANDWIDTH-CAPABILITY | [RFC8733] | |
|TLV Flag Field | | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------+-------+
|Path Protection | [RFC8745] | |
|Association Group TLV Flag| | |
|Field | | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------+-------+
Dhody Expires 30 January 2025 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft PCEP-IANA July 2024
|Generalized Endpoint Types| [RFC8779] | 0-244|
+--------------------------+--------------------------------+-------+
|GMPLS-CAPABILITY TLV Flag | [RFC8779] | |
|Field | | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------+-------+
|DISJOINTNESS-CONFIGURATION| [RFC8800] | |
|TLV Flag Field | | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------+-------+
|SCHED-PD-LSP-ATTRIBUTE TLV| [RFC8934] | |
|Opt Field | | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------+-------+
|Schedule TLVs Flag Field | [RFC8934] | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------+-------+
|FLOWSPEC Object Flag Field| [RFC9168] | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------+-------+
|Bidirectional LSP | [RFC9059] | |
|Association Group TLV Flag| | |
|Field | | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------+-------+
|PCECC-CAPABILITY sub-TLV | [RFC9050] | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------+-------+
|CCI Object Flag Field for | [RFC9050] | |
|MPLS Label | | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------+-------+
|TE-PATH-BINDING TLV BT | [RFC9050] | |
|Field | | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------+-------+
|TE-PATH-BINDING TLV Flag |[I-D.ietf-pce-binding-label-sid]| |
|Field | | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------+-------+
|LSP-EXTENDED-FLAG TLV Flag| [RFC9357] | |
|Field | | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------+-------+
|LSP Exclusion Subobject | [RFC9504] | |
|Flag Field | | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------+-------+
|SRv6-ERO Flag Field | [RFC9603] | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------+-------+
|SRv6 Capability Flag Field| [RFC9603] | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------+-------+
Table 1: PCEP Registries Affected
Dhody Expires 30 January 2025 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft PCEP-IANA July 2024
Question to the WG: The current document updates all
the registries. Should we keep "Standards Action" for
some of them such as flag fields with limited bits?
Rationale: There are some registries where the space
is tight but the IETF-review is fine -- our WG and
LC process should be enough to handle the case of fewer
bits which ideally require creating a new field/registry
as we did in the past.
3. Security Considerations
This memo does not change the Security Considerations for any of the
updated RFCs.
4. IANA Considerations
This memo is entirely about updating the IANA "Path Computation
Element Protocol (PCEP) Numbers" registry.
5. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-pce-binding-label-sid]
Sivabalan, S., Filsfils, C., Tantsura, J., Previdi, S.,
and C. Li, "Carrying Binding Label/Segment Identifier
(SID) in PCE-based Networks.", Work in Progress, Internet-
Draft, draft-ietf-pce-binding-label-sid-16, 27 March 2023,
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-pce-
binding-label-sid-16>.
[RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for
Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26,
RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8126>.
[RFC8231] Crabbe, E., Minei, I., Medved, J., and R. Varga, "Path
Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)
Extensions for Stateful PCE", RFC 8231,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8231, September 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8231>.
[RFC8233] Dhody, D., Wu, Q., Manral, V., Ali, Z., and K. Kumaki,
"Extensions to the Path Computation Element Communication
Protocol (PCEP) to Compute Service-Aware Label Switched
Paths (LSPs)", RFC 8233, DOI 10.17487/RFC8233, September
2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8233>.
Dhody Expires 30 January 2025 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft PCEP-IANA July 2024
[RFC8281] Crabbe, E., Minei, I., Sivabalan, S., and R. Varga, "Path
Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)
Extensions for PCE-Initiated LSP Setup in a Stateful PCE
Model", RFC 8281, DOI 10.17487/RFC8281, December 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8281>.
[RFC8623] Palle, U., Dhody, D., Tanaka, Y., and V. Beeram, "Stateful
Path Computation Element (PCE) Protocol Extensions for
Usage with Point-to-Multipoint TE Label Switched Paths
(LSPs)", RFC 8623, DOI 10.17487/RFC8623, June 2019,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8623>.
[RFC8664] Sivabalan, S., Filsfils, C., Tantsura, J., Henderickx, W.,
and J. Hardwick, "Path Computation Element Communication
Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Segment Routing", RFC 8664,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8664, December 2019,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8664>.
[RFC8685] Zhang, F., Zhao, Q., Gonzalez de Dios, O., Casellas, R.,
and D. King, "Path Computation Element Communication
Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for the Hierarchical Path
Computation Element (H-PCE) Architecture", RFC 8685,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8685, December 2019,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8685>.
[RFC8697] Minei, I., Crabbe, E., Sivabalan, S., Ananthakrishnan, H.,
Dhody, D., and Y. Tanaka, "Path Computation Element
Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Establishing
Relationships between Sets of Label Switched Paths
(LSPs)", RFC 8697, DOI 10.17487/RFC8697, January 2020,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8697>.
[RFC8733] Dhody, D., Ed., Gandhi, R., Ed., Palle, U., Singh, R., and
L. Fang, "Path Computation Element Communication Protocol
(PCEP) Extensions for MPLS-TE Label Switched Path (LSP)
Auto-Bandwidth Adjustment with Stateful PCE", RFC 8733,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8733, February 2020,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8733>.
[RFC8745] Ananthakrishnan, H., Sivabalan, S., Barth, C., Minei, I.,
and M. Negi, "Path Computation Element Communication
Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Associating Working and
Protection Label Switched Paths (LSPs) with Stateful PCE",
RFC 8745, DOI 10.17487/RFC8745, March 2020,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8745>.
Dhody Expires 30 January 2025 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft PCEP-IANA July 2024
[RFC8779] Margaria, C., Ed., Gonzalez de Dios, O., Ed., and F.
Zhang, Ed., "Path Computation Element Communication
Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for GMPLS", RFC 8779,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8779, July 2020,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8779>.
[RFC8780] Lee, Y., Ed. and R. Casellas, Ed., "The Path Computation
Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extension for
Wavelength Switched Optical Network (WSON) Routing and
Wavelength Assignment (RWA)", RFC 8780,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8780, July 2020,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8780>.
[RFC8800] Litkowski, S., Sivabalan, S., Barth, C., and M. Negi,
"Path Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)
Extension for Label Switched Path (LSP) Diversity
Constraint Signaling", RFC 8800, DOI 10.17487/RFC8800,
July 2020, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8800>.
[RFC8934] Chen, H., Ed., Zhuang, Y., Ed., Wu, Q., and D. Ceccarelli,
"PCE Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for Label
Switched Path (LSP) Scheduling with Stateful PCE",
RFC 8934, DOI 10.17487/RFC8934, October 2020,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8934>.
[RFC9050] Li, Z., Peng, S., Negi, M., Zhao, Q., and C. Zhou, "Path
Computation Element Communication Protocol (PCEP)
Procedures and Extensions for Using the PCE as a Central
Controller (PCECC) of LSPs", RFC 9050,
DOI 10.17487/RFC9050, July 2021,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9050>.
[RFC9059] Gandhi, R., Ed., Barth, C., and B. Wen, "Path Computation
Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for
Associated Bidirectional Label Switched Paths (LSPs)",
RFC 9059, DOI 10.17487/RFC9059, June 2021,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9059>.
[RFC9168] Dhody, D., Farrel, A., and Z. Li, "Path Computation
Element Communication Protocol (PCEP) Extension for Flow
Specification", RFC 9168, DOI 10.17487/RFC9168, January
2022, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9168>.
[RFC9357] Xiong, Q., "Label Switched Path (LSP) Object Flag
Extension for Stateful PCE", RFC 9357,
DOI 10.17487/RFC9357, February 2023,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9357>.
Dhody Expires 30 January 2025 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft PCEP-IANA July 2024
[RFC9504] Lee, Y., Zheng, H., Gonzalez de Dios, O., Lopez, V., and
Z. Ali, "Path Computation Element Communication Protocol
(PCEP) Extensions for Stateful PCE Usage in GMPLS-
Controlled Networks", RFC 9504, DOI 10.17487/RFC9504,
December 2023, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9504>.
[RFC9603] Li, C., Ed., Kaladharan, P., Sivabalan, S., Koldychev, M.,
and Y. Zhu, "Path Computation Element Communication
Protocol (PCEP) Extensions for IPv6 Segment Routing",
RFC 9603, DOI 10.17487/RFC9603, July 2024,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc9603>.
Appendix A. Acknowledgments
Thanks to John Scudder for the initial discussion behind this
document.
Author's Address
Dhruv Dhody
Huawei
India
Email: dhruv.ietf@gmail.com
Dhody Expires 30 January 2025 [Page 8]