Network Working Group V. Manral, Ed. Internet-Draft IPInfusion Inc. Intended status: Standards Track February 20, 2011 Expires: August 24, 2011 Traffic Engineering Extensions for link Latency draft-manral-ospf-te-delay-00 Abstract RFC 3630 [RFC3630] describes extensions to OSPF protocol RFC 2328 [RFC2328] to support intra-area Traffic Engineering (TE). For multiple applications such as High Performance Computing and Electronic Financial markets, response times are critical. This document defines the Traffic Engineering (TE) extensions to RFC 3630 [RFC3630] and and RFC 5329 [RFC5329] for defining a delay metric, which can be used by latency sensistive applications. Requirements Language The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. 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 http://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 August 24, 2011. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. Manral Expires August 24, 2011 [Page 1] Internet-Draft OSPF Link Latency February 2011 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. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Link Latency Sub-TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 5. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 6. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 6.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 6.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Manral Expires August 24, 2011 [Page 2] Internet-Draft OSPF Link Latency February 2011 1. Introduction In High Frequency trading for Electronic Financial markets, computers make decisions based on the Electronic Data received, without human intervention. These trades now account for a majority of the trading volumes and rely exclusively on ultra-low-latency direct market access. For MPLS networks that carry this traffic, latency is used as the ciriteria for defining Traffic Engineering tunnels. This draft defines extensions to RFC 3630 [RFC3630] and RFC 5329 [RFC5329] to support a per link latency metric. This metric combined with the hop-count define the delay/ latency on a Link State Path (LSP). This draft may be extended to carry the per-node switching latency of an MPLS router. 2. Link Latency Sub-TLV The Link Latency Sub-TLV is valid only when carried in the Link TLV. The TLV MUST be sent in the Link TLV and MUST be ignored when received in any other TLV. 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | 22 | 4 | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Delay value | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Figure 1: Link Latency Sub-TLV Type A 16-bit field set to 22. Length A 16-bit field that indicates the length of the value. portion in octets. For this sub-TLV, it MUST be 4 octets. Value Delay value of packet sent on the link in nano-seconds. 3. IANA Considerations A new sub-TLV type is requested for the Link TLV for both RFC3630 and RFC5329. The suggested value for the TLV is 22. Manral Expires August 24, 2011 [Page 3] Internet-Draft OSPF Link Latency February 2011 Value Meaning ----- ------- 22 Link Latency sub-TLV 4. Security Considerations This document raises no new security issues. 5. Acknowledgements TBD. 6. References 6.1. Normative References [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. [RFC2328] Moy, J., "OSPF Version 2", STD 54, RFC 2328, April 1998. [RFC3630] Katz, D., Kompella, K., and D. Yeung, "Traffic Engineering (TE) Extensions to OSPF Version 2", RFC 3630, September 2003. [RFC5329] Ishiguro, K., Manral, V., Davey, A., and A. Lindem, "Traffic Engineering Extensions to OSPF Version 3", RFC 5329, September 2008. 6.2. Informative References Manral Expires August 24, 2011 [Page 4] Internet-Draft OSPF Link Latency February 2011 Author's Address Vishwas Manral (editor) IPInfusion Inc. 1188 E. Arques Ave. Sunnyvale, CA 94085 US Phone: 408-400-1900 Fax: Email: vishwas@ipinfusion.com URI: Manral Expires August 24, 2011 [Page 5]