CCAMP WG Huub van Helvoort Internet Draft Huawei Technologies Updates: 4427 Intended status: Standards track July 11, 2013 Expires: January 2014 Update Forced Switch Priority draft-helvoort-ccamp-fs-priority-00.txt Status of this Memo This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF Contributions published or made publicly available before November 10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process. Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other than English. 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 January 11, 2014. van Helvoort Expires January 11, 2014 [Page 1] Internet-Draft Update Forced Switch Priority July 2013 Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2013 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 (http://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. Abstract This document clarifies the definitions related to Manual Switch and Forced Switch. This document updates RFC 4427. Table of Contents 1. Introduction ................................................ 2 2. Manual Switch and Forced Switch.............................. 3 3. Security Considerations ..................................... 3 4. IANA Considerations ......................................... 3 5. References .................................................. 4 5.1. Normative References.................................... 4 5.2. Informative References.................................. 4 6. Acknowledgments ............................................. 4 1. Introduction The external commands, Manual Switch and Forced Switch, provide an operator the ability to control the recovery schemes. The definitions in [RFC4427] provide an informative description but do not provide enough description to distinguish the processing of these commands for usage with priority treatment. The current description has led to the open question of how the commands are to be processed for relative priority treatment. This document provides clarification of the terms relative to [G.808.1]. van Helvoort Expires January 11, 2014 [Page 2] Internet-Draft Update Forced Switch Priority July 2013 2. Manual Switch and Forced Switch This section updates [RFC4427]. Section 4.13 of [RFC4427] contains the following text regarding the definitions: D. Forced switch-over for normal traffic: A switch-over action, initiated externally, that switches normal traffic to the recovery LSP/span, unless an equal or higher priority switch-over command is in effect. E. Manual switch-over for normal traffic: A switch-over action, initiated externally, that switches normal traffic to the recovery LSP/span, unless a fault condition exists on other LSPs/spans (including the recovery LSP/span) or an equal or higher priority switch-over command is in effect. This definition does not provide enough detail with respect to their usage relative to priorities. In order to avoid mis-interpretation, this document adds the following Note as clarification: Note: For 1+1 protection schemes (which do not use a communication channel), a Forced Switch over for normal traffic will have the highest priority, it will not be overridden by a signal fail on the protection channel. For other protection schemes (which do use a communication channel), a Forced Switch over for normal traffic will be overridden if a signal fail is present on the protection channel. Definitions of ITU-T terminology in this section are intended to aid understanding of the concepts. For the full definition of these terms and their use, the reader is referred to the appropriate ITU-T Recommendations and RFCs. 3. Security Considerations This document clarifies usage of terms defined in [RFC4427]. No new information is conveyed; therefore no additional considerations are included here. 4. IANA Considerations There are no items for IANA to consider. van Helvoort Expires January 11, 2014 [Page 3] Internet-Draft Update Forced Switch Priority July 2013 5. References 5.1. Normative References [RFC4427] Mannie E. and Papadimitriou D., "Recovery (Protection and Restoration) Terminology for Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) ", RFC 4427, March 2006. 5.2. Informative References [G.808.1] ITU-T Recommendation G.808.1, "Generic protection switching - Linear trail and subnetwork protection", February 2010. 6. Acknowledgments This document was prepared using 2-Word-v2.0.template.dot. Authors' Addresses Huub van Helvoort Huawei Technologies Karspeldreef 4 Amsterdam 1011 CJ The Netherlands Phone: +31 20 4300832 Email: Huub.van.Helvoort@huawei.com van Helvoort Expires January 11, 2014 [Page 4]