1. 66th IETF Montreal July 2006 Requirements for delivering MPLS services Over L3VPN draft-kumaki-l3VPN-e2e-mpls-rsvp-te-reqts-01.txt Kenji Kumaki KDDI, Editor Raymond Zhang BT infonet

2. 66th IETF Montreal July 2006 Overview Motivation –Provide robust MPLS services to customers Can offer end-to-end paths using LDP –Can’t offer end-to-end paths using RSVP extensions Offer CE-to-CE MPLS TE LSPs between customer sites –Guarantee bandwidth, Provide fast protection, diversely routed path …… –Provide all of the benefits of a L3VPN Offer vrf instance per customer to avoid security issues –Customers can not forward packets through the service provider’s general forwarding instance. –They can not join the service provider’s routing domain and MPLS signaling domain. Assign address space that is unique only to a VPN

3. 66th IETF Montreal July 2006 Overview (cont.) This draft is to: –Clarify issues for e2e MPLS TE LSP over BGP/MPLS IP-VPNs –Describe reference models for e2e MPLS TE LSP over BGP/MPLS IP-VPNs –Describe specific requirements for e2e MPLS TE LSP over BGP/MPLS IP-VPNs

4. 66th IETF Montreal July 2006 Reference model Service Provider’s network Customer’s or another SP’s network Customer’s or another SP’s network P-TE LSPs Vrf instances C-TE LSPs

5. 66th IETF Montreal July 2006 Summary of Requirements Establish C-TE LSPs over BGP/MPLS IP-VPN (i.e. vrf instance) Offer scalable and robust C-TE LSPs over vrf instance Provide these LSPs in carrier’s carrier environments as well as basic BGP/MPLS IP-VPN environments Detailed requirements [See in section 5.] –FRR support –Admission control support –Policy control support –Optimal path support –DS-TE support –MPLS OAM support –etc

6. 66th IETF Montreal July 2006 Major Changes from -00 Added new co-author, Raymond Zhang Section 3 –Clarified problem statement Section 4 –Changed terminology C-TE LSP P-TE LSP Section 5 –Added sub-section “Admission control support on P-TE LSP head-ends”

7. 66th IETF Montreal July 2006 Remaining Issues Any other specific requirements?

8. 66th IETF Montreal July 2006 Next Actions Need more comments and feedback from WG Request WG to accept this I-D as a WG document