9/8/2015 draft-bocci-mpls-tp-gach-gal-00.txt MPLS Generic Associated Channel draft-bocci-mpls-tp-gach-gal-00.txt Matthew Bocci (ALU) & Martin Vigoureux (ALU) (Eds.) George Swallow (Cisco), David Ward (Cisco), Rahul Aggarwal (Juniper)

9/8/2015 draft-bocci-mpls-tp-gach-gal-00.txt Objective Objective is to generalise the PW associated channel to LSPs and MPLS sections Allow a common set of OAM and other FCAPs functions Allow future extensibility of such functions for MPLS in general, including MPLS-TP

9/8/2015 draft-bocci-mpls-tp-gach-gal-00.txt Background Two drafts introduced in Dublin: –draft-bocci-pwe3-mpls-tp-ge-ach-00.txt Generalise PW ACH to LSPs and MPLS sections (GE-ACH) –draft-vigoureux-mpls-tp-gal-00 Created a new Generic Alert Label (GAL) to indicate the presence of ACH immediately after BoS on a LSP or section Differentiate specific packets (e.g. OAM) from others, such as normal user-plane ones, Proposed Label 13 Comments in Dublin that the context of the GAL and GE-ACH needed to be better explained

9/8/2015 draft-bocci-mpls-tp-gach-gal-00.txt Generic Associated Channel Header Identical to the existing PW ACH of RFC | |Version| Reserved | Channel Type |

9/8/2015 draft-bocci-mpls-tp-gach-gal-00.txt Generic Alert Label Example label stack for LSPs | LSP Label | TC |S| TTL | | GAL | TC |S| TTL | | Generic-ACH | |.. MPLS-TP OAM packet.. | GAL is NOT used for PWs (existing control word mechanisms apply) GAL and G-ACH ONLY present on LSP OAM packets –No need for control word on LSP user packets

9/8/2015 draft-bocci-mpls-tp-gach-gal-00.txt Generic Alert Label Example label stack for MPLS Sections | GAL | TC |S| TTL | | Generic-ACH | |.. MPLS-TP OAM packet.. | No need for LSP label

9/8/2015 draft-bocci-mpls-tp-gach-gal-00.txt draft-bocci-mpls-tp-gach-gal-00 Merger of two original drafts Updated terminology (G-ACH = GE-ACH) Clarified use of IP demux of MPLS OAM packets by default in MPLS in general, but G-ACH used where IP demux not available Addressed requests for flexible use of ACH channels for experimentation and testing by allocating range of experimental code points: : IETF Consensus : Experimental (as per RFC3692)

9/8/2015 draft-bocci-mpls-tp-gach-gal-00.txt draft-bocci-mpls-tp-gach-gal-00 Compatibility: LSR or PE MUST discard G-ACH packets if: –Not G-ACH capable, –Cannot process packets on indicated G-ACH channel –Has not agreed to process packets on indicated channel –…and MAY increment a counter and issue system/SNMP notification This updates RFC5085 behaviour for MPLS PWs Added more detailed security considerations.

9/8/2015 draft-bocci-mpls-tp-gach-gal-00.txt Next Steps Consensus to move to working group draft Some comments already received: –GAL always BoS in MPLS-TP, but not necessarily so in other MPLS applications Other comments from the list? Update draft to draft-ietf-mpls-tp-gach-gal-00.txt