1. IETF 67, MPLS WG, San Diego 11/08/2006
IGP Routing extensions for discovery of P2MP TE Tunnel Leaves draft-leroux-mpls-p2mp-te-autoleaf-02.txt J.L. Le Roux (France Telecom) J.P. Vasseur (Cisco System Inc.) S. Yasukawa (NTT) M. Vigoureux (Alcatel)
IETF 67, MPLS WG, San Diego 11/08/2006

2. Problem Statement
In several situations (e.g. TV broadcasting with several regional sources) it is required to setup a series of P2MP TE-LSPs with distinct Ingress LSRs and a same group of Leaf LSRs
Such group of Leaf LSRs is referred to as a "Leaf Group"
This may rely on the configuration of all Leaf LSRs on each Ingress LSRs but this has obvious limitations
Potentially a lot of Ingress LSRs and Leaf LSRs => cumbersome configuration, prone to mis-configuration
This does not allow dynamic addition/removal of leaves
Hence a mechanism is required for automatic and dynamic discovery of the LSRs member of a Leaf Group
This draft addresses automation of P2MP TE-LSP configuration
This draft DOES NOT addresses reactivity to Multicast receivers activity

3. Solution overview
A simple solution for Leaf Group discovery consists of relying on the IGP
This is particularly useful in BGP free and multicast free core networks
e.g P routers with only IGP & RSVP-TE
This draft defines ISIS and OSPF extensions allowing an LSR to advertise its desire to join/leave a Leaf Group
No new IGP procedure. This relies on OSPF and ISIS node capabilities procedures
Each LSR advertises the Leaf Group(s) it belongs to
A new TLV is defined: The Leaf Group TLV, that includes the set of Leaf Group(s) the LSR belongs to
to be carried in
The ISIS Router Capability TLV
The OSPF Router Information LSA

4. Changes since Montreal
A new co-author joined the draft
The problem statement has been clarified
Automate the configuration of a series of P2MP TE-LSPs with same group of Leaf LSRs and distinct Ingress LSRs…
The scope of the Leaf Group has been extended accordingly
A Leaf Group may correspond to several P2MP TE-LSPs
The Leaf Group TLV format has been optimized
Factorization of leaf address
Considerations on the number of Leaf Groups and on the dynamicity
Recommendations on Dampening and Rate Limiting so as to avoid any unacceptable impact on the IGP scalability
The security section has been detailed
Some minor edits for the sake of clarity

5. Next Steps Service provider feedback required on the problem statement
WG feedback is required on the proposed solution
Adopt as WG doc?

6. Thanks Questions?