Internet DRAFT - draft-ietf-pwe3-iana-allocation
draft-ietf-pwe3-iana-allocation
Network Working Group Luca Martini
Internet Draft
Expiration Date: May 2006 Cisco Systems Inc.
November 2005
IANA Allocations for pseudo Wire Edge to Edge Emulation (PWE3)
draft-ietf-pwe3-iana-allocation-15.txt
Status of this Memo
By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.
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/1id-abstracts.html
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
Abstract
This document allocates the fixed Pseudo-wire identifier , and other
fixed protocol values for protocols that have been defined in the
pseudo wire edge to edge working group. ( PWE3 ) Detailed IANA
allocation instructions are also included in this document.
Martini [Page 1]
Internet Draft draft-ietf-pwe3-iana-allocation-15.txt November 2005
Table of Contents
1 Specification of Requirements .......................... 2
2 Introduction ........................................... 2
3 IANA Considerations .................................... 3
3.1 Expert Review Directives ............................... 3
3.2 MPLS Pseudowire Type ................................... 3
3.3 Interface Parameters Sub-TLV type ...................... 4
3.4 Attachment Identifiers ................................. 5
3.4.1 Attachment Individual Identifier Type .................. 5
3.4.2 Attachment Group Identifier (AGI) Type ................. 6
3.5 Pseudo Wire Status ..................................... 6
4 Security Considerations ................................ 7
5 Full Copyright Statement ............................... 7
6 Intellectual Property Statement ........................ 7
7 Normative References ................................... 8
8 Informative References ................................. 8
9 Author Information ..................................... 10
1. Specification of Requirements
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 [RFC2119]
2. Introduction
Most of the new IANA registries, and respective iana allocation
processes for protocols defined in the PWE3 IETF working group can be
found in this document. The IANA registries defined here, are in
general subdivided into three main ranges: a range to be allocated by
IETF consensus according to [RFC2434], a range to be allocated by the
expert review process according to [RFC2434], and a range to be
allocated in a first come first served basis reserved for vendor
proprietary allocations. It should be noted that vendor proprietary
types MUST NOT be registered for IETF standards or extensions of
those, whether still in development or already completed.
Martini [Page 2]
Internet Draft draft-ietf-pwe3-iana-allocation-15.txt November 2005
3. IANA Considerations
IANA is requested to create several registries as described in the
following paragraphs. Each of these registries contains numeric
values used to identify data types. In each of these registries the
value of 0 is reserved, and MUST not be used.
3.1. Expert Review Directives
Throughout this document allocation procedures for several registries
call for an expert review process according to [RFC2434]. The expert
should consider the following points:
* Avoid Duplication of code point allocations.
* A brief clear description of the code point allocation requested.
* Whether the type allocation requested is appropriate for the
particular requested value range in the registry.
The Expert reviewing the request MUST provide an answer, approving,
or disapproving the request within 10 business days from when the he
or she received the expert review request.
3.2. MPLS Pseudowire Type
IANA needs to set up a registry of "MPLS Pseudowire Type". These are
15-bit values. PW Type values 1 through 30 are specified in this
document, PW Type values 31 through 1024 are to be assigned by IANA,
using the "Expert Review" policy defined in [RFC2434]. PW Type values
1025 through 4096, and 32767 are to be allocated using the IETF
consensus policy defined in [RFC2434]. PW Type values 4097 through
32766 are reserved for vendor proprietary extensions and are to be
assigned by IANA, using the "First Come First Served" policy defined
in [RFC2434]. A Pseudowire Type description is required for any
assignment from this registry. Additionally, for the vendor
proprietary extensions range a citation of a person or company name
is also required. A document reference should also be provided.
Initial Pseudowire type value allocations are specified below:
PW type Description Reference
0x0001 Frame Relay DLCI ( Martini Mode ) [FRAME]
0x0002 ATM AAL5 SDU VCC transport [ATM]
0x0003 ATM transparent cell transport [ATM]
0x0004 Ethernet Tagged Mode [ETH]
0x0005 Ethernet [ETH]
0x0006 HDLC [PPPHDLC]
Martini [Page 3]
Internet Draft draft-ietf-pwe3-iana-allocation-15.txt November 2005
0x0007 PPP [PPPHDLC]
0x0008 SONET/SDH Circuit Emulation Service Over MPLS [CEP]
0x0009 ATM n-to-one VCC cell transport [ATM]
0x000A ATM n-to-one VPC cell transport [ATM]
0x000B IP Layer2 Transport [RFC3032]
0x000C ATM one-to-one VCC Cell Mode [ATM]
0x000D ATM one-to-one VPC Cell Mode [ATM]
0x000E ATM AAL5 PDU VCC transport [ATM]
0x000F Frame-Relay Port mode [FRAME]
0x0010 SONET/SDH Circuit Emulation over Packet [CEP]
0x0011 Structure-agnostic E1 over Packet [SAToP]
0x0012 Structure-agnostic T1 (DS1) over Packet [SAToP]
0x0013 Structure-agnostic E3 over Packet [SAToP]
0x0014 Structure-agnostic T3 (DS3) over Packet [SAToP]
0x0015 CESoPSN basic mode [CESoPSN]
0x0016 TDMoIP AAL1 Mode [TDMoIP]
0x0017 CESoPSN TDM with CAS [CESoPSN]
0x0018 TDMoIP AAL2 Mode [TDMoIP]
0x0019 Frame Relay DLCI [FRAME]
3.3. Interface Parameters Sub-TLV type
IANA needs to set up a registry of "Pseudowire Interface Parameter
Sub-TLV types". These are 8 bit values. Sub-TLV types 1 through 12
are specified in this document. Sub-TLV types 13 through 64 are to be
assigned by IANA, using the "Expert Review" policy defined in
[RFC2434]. Sub-TLV types 65 through 127, and 255 are to be allocated
using the IETF consensus policy defined in [RFC2434]. Sub-TLV types
values 128 through 254 are reserved for vendor proprietary extensions
and are to be assigned by IANA, using the "First Come First Served"
policy defined in [RFC2434].
Any assignments requested from this registry require a description up
to 54 characters.
For each allocation a length field MUST also be specified in one of
the following formats:
- Text as follows:"up to X", where X is a decimal integer
- Up to 3 different decimal integers.
The text "up to X" is meant to mean up to and including X.
Additionally, for the vendor proprietary extensions range a citation
of a person or company name is also required. A document reference
should also be provided.
Initial Pseudowire Interface Parameter Sub-TLV type allocations are
Martini [Page 4]
Internet Draft draft-ietf-pwe3-iana-allocation-15.txt November 2005
specified below:
Parameter ID Length Description Reference
0x01 4 Interface MTU in octets [CRTL]
0x02 4 Maximum Number of concatenated ATM cells [ATM]
0x03 up to 82 Optional Interface Description string[CRTL]
0x04 4 CEP/TDM Payload Bytes [CEP/TDM]
0x05 4 CEP options [CEP]
0x06 4 Requested VLAN ID [ETH]
0x07 6 CEP/TDM bit-rate [CEP/TDM]
0x08 4 Frame-Relay DLCI Length [FRAME]
0x09 4 Fragmentation indicator [FRAG]
0x0A 4 FCS retention indicator [FCS]
0x0B 4/8/12 TDM options [TDMoIP]
0x0C 4 VCCV parameter [VCCV]
Note that the Length field is defined as the length of the Sub-TLV
including the Sub-TLV type and length field itself.
3.4. Attachment Identifiers
3.4.1. Attachment Individual Identifier Type
IANA needs to set up a registry of "Attachment Individual Identifier
(AII) Type". These are 8-bit values. AII Type value 1 is defined in
this document. AII Type values 2 through 64 are to be assigned by
IANA using the "Expert Review" policy defined in [RFC2434]. AII Type
values 65 through 127, and 255 are to be allocated using the IETF
consensus policy defined in [RFC2434]. AII types values 128 through
254 are reserved for vendor proprietary extensions and are to be
assigned by IANA, using the "First Come First Served" policy defined
in [RFC2434].
Any assignments requested from this registry require a description up
to 54 characters.
For each allocation a length field MUST also be specified as a
decimal integer.
Additionally, for the vendor proprietary extensions range a citation
of a person or company name is also required. A document reference
should also be provided.
Initial Attachment Individual Identifier (AII) Type allocations are
specified below:
AII Type Length Description Reference
Martini [Page 5]
Internet Draft draft-ietf-pwe3-iana-allocation-15.txt November 2005
0x01 4 A 32 bit unsigned number local identifier. [SIG]
3.4.2. Attachment Group Identifier (AGI) Type
IANA needs to set up a registry of "Attachment Group Identifier (AGI)
Type". These are 8-bit values. AGI Type value 1 is defined in this
document. AGI Type values 2 through 64 are to be assigned by IANA
using the "Expert Review" policy defined in [RFC2434]. AGI Type
values 65 through 127, and 255 are to be allocated using the IETF
consensus policy defined in [RFC2434]. AGI types values 128 through
254 are reserved for vendor proprietary extensions and are to be
assigned by IANA, using the "First Come First Served" policy defined
in [RFC2434].
Any assignments requested from this registry require a description up
to 54 characters.
For each allocation a length field MUST also be specified as a
decimal integer.
Additionally, for the vendor proprietary extensions range a citation
of a person or company name is also required. A document reference
should also be provided.
Initial Attachment Group Identifier (AGI) Type allocations are
specified below:
AGI Type Length Description Reference
0x01 8 Route distinguisher (RD) [SIG]
3.5. Pseudo Wire Status
IANA needs to set up a registry of "Pseudowire Status Codes". These
are bit strings of length 32. Status bits 0 to 4 are defined in this
document. Status bits 5 to 31 are to be assigned by IANA using the
"Expert Review" policy defined in [RFC2434].
Any requests for allocation from this registry require a description
up to 65 characters.
Initial Pseudowire Status Codes value allocations are as follows:
Bit MaskDescription
0x00000000 - Pseudo Wire forwarding (clear all failures) [CRTL]
0x00000001 - Pseudo Wire Not Forwarding [CRTL]
0x00000002 - Local Attachment Circuit (ingress) Receive Fault [CRTL]
Martini [Page 6]
Internet Draft draft-ietf-pwe3-iana-allocation-15.txt November 2005
0x00000004 - Local Attachment Circuit (egress) Transmit Fault [CRTL]
0x00000008 - Local PSN-facing PW (ingress) Receive Fault [CRTL]
0x00000010 - Local PSN-facing PW (egress) Transmit Fault [CRTL]
4. Security Considerations
This document specifies only fixed identifiers, and not the protocols
used to carry the encapsulated packets across the network. Each such
protocol may have its own set of security issues, but those issues
are not affected by the identifiers specified herein.
5. Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005).
This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
retain all their rights.
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
"AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
6. Intellectual Property Statement
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
Intellectual Property Rights 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; nor does it represent that it has
made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat 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 implementers or users of this
specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
Martini [Page 7]
Internet Draft draft-ietf-pwe3-iana-allocation-15.txt November 2005
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-
ipr@ietf.org.
7. Normative References
[RFC2434] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an
IANA Considerations section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 2434, October
1998.
[RFC2277] Alvestrand, H., "IETF Policy on Character Sets and
Languages", BCP 18, RFC 2277, January 1998.
[RFC2119] S. Bradner, "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[BCP79] S. Bradner, Ed., "Intellectual Property Rights in IETF
Technology", BCP 79, RFC 3979, March 2005.
[BCP78] S. Bradner, Ed., "IETF Rights in Contributions",
BCP 78, RFC 3978, March 2005.
8. Informative References
[CRTL] "Pseudowire Setup and Maintenance using LDP",
Martini, L., et al., draft-ietf-pwe3-control-protocol-16.txt,
April 2005. (work in progress)
[VCCV] T. D. Nadeau, R. Aggarwal, "Pseudo Wire Virtual Circuit
Connectivity Verification (VCCV)", draft-ietf-pwe3-vccv-07.txt,
August 2005. (work in progress)
[FRAG] Andrew G. Malis, W. Mark Townsley, "PWE3 Fragmentation
and Reassembly", draft-ietf-pwe3-fragmentation-09.txt,
September 2005. (work in progress)
[FCS] Andrew G. Malis, David Allan, Nick Del Regno, "PWE3 Frame
Check Sequence Retention", draft-ietf-pwe3-fcs-retention-04.txt,
September 2005. (work in progress)
[CEP] "SONET/SDH Circuit Emulation Service Over Packet (CEP)",
draft-ietf-pwe3-sonet-11.txt (work in progress)
Martini [Page 8]
Internet Draft draft-ietf-pwe3-iana-allocation-15.txt November 2005
[SAToP] "Structure-Agnostic TDM over Packet (SAToP)",
draft-ietf-pwe3-satop-03.txt (work in progress)
[FRAME] "Frame Relay over Pseudo-Wires",
draft-ietf-pwe3-frame-relay-02.txt (work in progress )
[ATM] "Encapsulation Methods for Transport of ATM Cells/Frame Over IP
and MPLS Networks", draft-ietf-pwe3-atm-encap-05.txt (work in
progress)
[PPPHDLC] "Encapsulation Methods for Transport of PPP/HDLC Frames
Over IP and MPLS Networks",
draft-ietf-pwe3-hdlc-ppp-encap-05.txt (work in progress)
[ETH] "Encapsulation Methods for Transport of Ethernet Frames Over
IP/MPLS Networks", draft-ietf-pwe3-ethernet-encap-06.txt.
(work in progress)
[CESoPSN] A.Vainshtein et al, "TDM Circuit Emulation Service
over Packet Switched Network (CESoPSN)", Work in Progress,
July 2005, draft-ietf-pwe3-cesopsn-03.txt (work in progress)
[TDMoIP] Y. Stein, "TDM over IP", February 2005,
draft-ietf-pwe3-tdmoip-04.txt (work in progress).
[RFC1144] V. Jacobson, "Compressing TCP/IP Headers for
Low-Speed Serial Links", RFC 1144, February 1990.
[RFC2507] M. Degermark, B. Nordgren, S. Pink, "IP Header
Compression", rfc 2507, February 1999.
[RFC2508] S. Casner, V. Jacobson, "Compressing IP/UDP/RTP
Headers for Low-Speed Serial Links'
[RFC3032] E. Rosen, et al., "MPLS Label Stack Encoding"
RFC 3032, January 2001.
[RFC3095] C. Bormann, Ed. "RObust Header Compression (ROHC):
Framework and four profiles: RTP, UDP, ESP, and uncompressed",
RFC 3095, July 2001.
[RFC3545] T. Koren, et al., "Enhanced Compressed RTP (CRTP)
for Links with High Delay, Packet Loss and Reordering",
RFC 3545, July 2003.
[SIG] E. Rosen, W. Luo, B. Davie, "Provisioning, Autodiscovery,
and Signaling in L2VPNs", draft-ietf-l2vpn-signaling-06.txt,
September 2005. (work in progress)
Martini [Page 9]
Internet Draft draft-ietf-pwe3-iana-allocation-15.txt November 2005
9. Author Information
Luca Martini
Cisco Systems, Inc.
9155 East Nichols Avenue, Suite 400
Englewood, CO, 80112
e-mail: lmartini@cisco.com
Martini [Page 10]
