1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
391
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
411
412
413
414
415
416
417
418
419
420
421
422
423
424
425
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
440
441
442
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
456
457
458
459
460
461
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
470
471
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
480
481
482
483
484
485
486
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531
532
533
534
535
536
537
538
539
540
541
542
543
544
545
546
547
548
549
550
551
552
553
554
555
556
557
558
559
560
561
562
563
564
565
566
567
568
569
570
571
572
573
574
575
576
577
578
579
580
581
582
583
584
585
586
587
588
589
590
591
592
593
594
595
596
597
598
599
600
601
602
603
604
605
606
607
608
609
610
611
612
613
614
615
616
617
618
619
620
621
622
623
624
625
626
627
628
629
630
631
632
633
634
635
636
637
638
639
640
641
642
643
644
645
646
647
648
649
650
651
652
653
654
655
656
657
658
659
660
661
662
663
664
665
666
667
668
669
670
671
672
673
674
675
676
677
678
679
680
681
682
683
684
685
686
687
688
689
690
691
692
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
706
707
708
709
710
711
712
713
714
715
716
717
718
719
720
721
722
723
724
725
|
<pre>Network Working Group F. Le Faucheur, Ed.
Request for Comments: 4127 Cisco Systems, Inc.
Category: Experimental June 2005
<span class="h1">Russian Dolls Bandwidth Constraints Model for</span>
<span class="h1">Diffserv-aware MPLS Traffic Engineering</span>
Status of This Memo
This memo defines an Experimental Protocol for the Internet
community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind.
Discussion and suggestions for improvement are requested.
Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005).
Abstract
This document provides specifications for one Bandwidth Constraints
Model for Diffserv-aware MPLS Traffic Engineering, which is referred
to as the Russian Dolls Model.
Table of Contents
<a href="#section-1">1</a>. Introduction ....................................................<a href="#page-2">2</a>
<a href="#section-1.1">1.1</a>. Specification of Requirements ..............................<a href="#page-2">2</a>
<a href="#section-2">2</a>. Contributing Authors ............................................<a href="#page-3">3</a>
<a href="#section-3">3</a>. Definitions .....................................................<a href="#page-4">4</a>
<a href="#section-4">4</a>. Russian Dolls Model Definition ..................................<a href="#page-5">5</a>
5. Example Formulas for Computing "Unreserved TE-Class [i]" with
Russian Dolls Model .............................................<a href="#page-7">7</a>
6. Receiving Both Maximum Reservable Bandwidth and Bandwidth
Constraints sub-TLVs ............................................<a href="#page-8">8</a>
<a href="#section-7">7</a>. Security Considerations .........................................<a href="#page-8">8</a>
<a href="#section-8">8</a>. IANA Considerations .............................................<a href="#page-8">8</a>
<a href="#section-9">9</a>. Acknowledgements ................................................<a href="#page-9">9</a>
<a href="#appendix-A">Appendix A</a>: Addressing [<a href="#ref-DSTE-REQ" title=""Requirements for Support of Differentiated Services-aware MPLS Traffic Engineering"">DSTE-REQ</a>] Scenarios .......................<a href="#page-10">10</a>
Normative References ..............................................<a href="#page-11">11</a>
Informative References ............................................<a href="#page-12">12</a>
<span class="grey">Le Faucheur Experimental [Page 1]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-2" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc4127">RFC 4127</a> Russian Dolls Model for DS-TE June 2005</span>
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-1" href="#section-1">1</a>. Introduction</span>
[<a id="ref-DSTE-REQ">DSTE-REQ</a>] presents the Service Providers requirements for support of
Diffserv-aware MPLS Traffic Engineering (DS-TE). This includes the
fundamental requirement to be able to enforce different Bandwidth
Constraints for different classes of traffic.
[<a id="ref-DSTE-REQ">DSTE-REQ</a>] also defines the concept of Bandwidth Constraints Model
for DS-TE and states that "The DS-TE technical solution MUST specify
at least one Bandwidth Constraints Model and MAY specify multiple
Bandwidth Constraints Models".
This document provides a detailed description of one particular
Bandwidth Constraints Model for DS-TE which is introduced in
[<a href="#ref-DSTE-REQ" title=""Requirements for Support of Differentiated Services-aware MPLS Traffic Engineering"">DSTE-REQ</a>] and called the Russian Dolls Model (RDM).
[<a id="ref-DSTE-PROTO">DSTE-PROTO</a>] specifies the Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP) and RSVP-
TE signaling extensions for support of DS-TE. These extensions
support RDM.
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="section-1.1" href="#section-1.1">1.1</a>. Specification of Requirements</span>
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 [<a href="./rfc2119" title=""Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels"">RFC2119</a>].
<span class="grey">Le Faucheur Experimental [Page 2]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-3" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc4127">RFC 4127</a> Russian Dolls Model for DS-TE June 2005</span>
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-2" href="#section-2">2</a>. Contributing Authors</span>
This document was the collective work of several authors. The text
and content were contributed by the editor and the co-authors listed
below. (The contact information for the editor appears in the
Editor's Address section.)
Jim Boyle Kireeti Kompella
Protocol Driven Networks, Inc. Juniper Networks, Inc.
1381 Kildaire Farm Road #288 1194 N. Mathilda Ave.
Cary, NC 27511, USA Sunnyvale, CA 94099
Phone: (919) 852-5160 EMail: kireeti@juniper.net
EMail: jboyle@pdnets.com
William Townsend Thomas D. Nadeau
Tenor Networks Cisco Systems, Inc.
100 Nagog Park 250 Apollo Drive
Acton, MA 01720 Chelmsford, MA 01824
Phone: +1-978-264-4900 Phone: +1-978-244-3051
EMail: btownsend@tenornetworks.com EMail: tnadeau@cisco.com
Darek Skalecki
Nortel Networks
3500 Carling Ave,
Nepean K2H 8E9
Phone: +1-613-765-2252
EMail: dareks@nortelnetworks.com
<span class="grey">Le Faucheur Experimental [Page 3]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-4" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc4127">RFC 4127</a> Russian Dolls Model for DS-TE June 2005</span>
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-3" href="#section-3">3</a>. Definitions</span>
For readability a number of definitions from [<a href="#ref-DSTE-REQ" title=""Requirements for Support of Differentiated Services-aware MPLS Traffic Engineering"">DSTE-REQ</a>] are repeated
here:
Class-Type (CT): the set of Traffic Trunks crossing a link that is
governed by a specific set of bandwidth constraints.
CT is used for the purposes of link bandwidth
allocation, constraint-based routing and admission
control. A given Traffic Trunk belongs to the same
CT on all links.
TE-Class: A pair of:
i. a Class-Type
ii. a preemption priority allowed for that Class-
Type. This means that an LSP transporting a Traffic
Trunk from that Class-Type can use that preemption
priority as the setup priority, the holding
priority, or both.
A number of recovery mechanisms under investigation or specification
in the IETF take advantage of the concept of bandwidth sharing across
particular sets of LSPs. "Shared Mesh Restoration" in [<a href="#ref-GMPLS-RECOV" title=""Generalized MPLS Recovery Functional Specification"">GMPLS-RECOV</a>]
and "Facility-based Computation Model" in [<a href="#ref-MPLS-BACKUP" title=""MPLS Traffic Engineering Fast Reroute: Bypass Tunnel Path Computation for Bandwidth Protection"">MPLS-BACKUP</a>] are example
mechanisms that increase bandwidth efficiency by sharing bandwidth
across backup LSPs protecting against independent failures. To
ensure that the notion of "Reserved (CTc)" introduced in [<a href="#ref-DSTE-REQ" title=""Requirements for Support of Differentiated Services-aware MPLS Traffic Engineering"">DSTE-REQ</a>]
is compatible with such a concept of bandwidth sharing across
multiple LSPs, the wording of the "Reserved (CTc)" definition
provided in [<a href="#ref-DSTE-REQ" title=""Requirements for Support of Differentiated Services-aware MPLS Traffic Engineering"">DSTE-REQ</a>] is generalized into the following:
Reserved (CTc): For a given Class-Type CTc ( 0 <= c <= MaxCT ), let
us define "Reserved(CTc)" as the total amount of the
bandwidth reserved by all the established LSPs which
belong to CTc.
With this generalization, the Russian Dolls Model definition provided
in this document is compatible with Shared Mesh Restoration defined
in [<a href="#ref-GMPLS-RECOV" title=""Generalized MPLS Recovery Functional Specification"">GMPLS-RECOV</a>], so that DS-TE and Shared Mesh Protection can
operate simultaneously. This assumes that Shared Mesh Restoration
operates independently within each DS-TE Class-Type and does not
operate across Class-Types (for example, backup LSPs protecting
Primary LSPs of CTx also need to belong to CTx; Excess Traffic LSPs
sharing bandwidth with Backup LSPs of CTx also need to belong to
CTx).
<span class="grey">Le Faucheur Experimental [Page 4]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-5" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc4127">RFC 4127</a> Russian Dolls Model for DS-TE June 2005</span>
We also introduce the following definition:
Reserved(CTb,q): Let us define "Reserved(CTb,q)" as the total amount
of the bandwidth reserved by all the established
LSPs that belong to CTb and have a holding priority
of q. Note that if q and CTb do not form one of the
8 possible configured TE-Classes, then there cannot
be any established LSPs that belongs to CTb and has
a holding priority of q; therefore, in this case,
Reserved(CTb,q) = 0.
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-4" href="#section-4">4</a>. Russian Dolls Model Definition</span>
RDM is defined in the following manner:
o Maximum Number of Bandwidth Constraints (MaxBC)=
Maximum Number of Class-Types (MaxCT) = 8
o for each value of b in the range 0 <= b <= (MaxCT - 1):
SUM (Reserved (CTc)) <= BCb,
where the SUM is across all values of c in the
range b <= c <= (MaxCT - 1)
o BC0= Maximum Reservable Bandwidth, so that
SUM (Reserved(CTc)) <= Max-Reservable-Bw,
where the SUM is across all values of c in the
range 0 <= c <= (MaxCT - 1)
A DS-TE LSR implementing RDM MUST support enforcement of Bandwidth
Constraints in compliance with this definition.
Both preemption within a CT and across CTs is allowed.
Where 8 CTs are active, the RDM Bandwidth Constraints can also be
expressed in the following way:
- All LSPs from CT7 use no more than BC7
- All LSPs from CT6 and CT7 use no more than BC6
- All LSPs from CT5, CT6 and CT7 use no more than BC5
- etc.
- All LSPs from CT0, CT1, ..., CT7 use no more than BC0 = "Maximum
Reservable Bandwidth"
<span class="grey">Le Faucheur Experimental [Page 5]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-6" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc4127">RFC 4127</a> Russian Dolls Model for DS-TE June 2005</span>
Purely for illustration purposes, the diagram below represents the
Russian Dolls Bandwidth Constraints Model in a pictorial manner when
3 Class-Types are active:
I------------------------------------------------------I
I-------------------------------I I
I--------------I I I
I CT2 I CT2+CT1 I CT2+CT1+CT0 I
I--------------I I I
I-------------------------------I I
I------------------------------------------------------I
I-----BC2------>
I----------------------BC1------>
I------------------------------BC0=Max Reservable Bw--->
While simpler Bandwidth Constraints models or, conversely, more
flexible/sophisticated Bandwidth Constraints models can be defined,
the Russian Dolls Model is attractive in some DS-TE environments for
the following reasons:
- Although it is a little less intuitive than the Maximum
Allocation Model (see [<a href="#ref-DSTE-MAM" title=""Maximum Allocation Bandwidth Constraints Model for Diffserv-aware MPLS Traffic Engineering"">DSTE-MAM</a>]), RDM is still a simple model
to conceptualize.
- RDM can be used simultaneously to ensure bandwidth efficiency
and to protect against QoS degradation of all CTs, whether
preemption is used or not.
- RDM can be used in conjunction with preemption to simultaneously
achieve (i) isolation across CTs (so that each CT is guaranteed
its share of bandwidth no matter the level of contention by
other classes), (ii) bandwidth efficiency, and (iii) protection
against QoS degradation of all CTs.
- RDM only requires limited protocol extensions such as the ones
defined in [<a href="#ref-DSTE-PROTO" title=""Protocol Extensions for Support of Diffserv-aware MPLS Traffic Engineering"">DSTE-PROTO</a>].
RDM may not be attractive in some DS-TE environments for the
following reasons:
- if the usage of preemption is precluded for some administrative
reason, while RDM can still ensure bandwidth efficiency and
protection against QoS degradation of all CTs, RDM cannot
guarantee isolation across Class-Types.
Additional considerations on the properties of RDM can be found in
[<a href="#ref-BC-CONS" title=""Considerations on Bandwidth Constraints Model for DS-TE"">BC-CONS</a>] and [<a href="#ref-BC-MODEL" title=""Bandwidth Constraints Models for Differentiated Services (Diffserv)-aware MPLS Traffic Engineering: Performance Evaluation"">BC-MODEL</a>].
<span class="grey">Le Faucheur Experimental [Page 6]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-7" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc4127">RFC 4127</a> Russian Dolls Model for DS-TE June 2005</span>
As a simple example usage of the "Russian Dolls" Bandwidth
Constraints Model, a network administrator, using one CT for Voice
(CT1) and one CT for data (CT0), might configure on a given link:
- BC0 = Max-Reservable - Bw = 2.5 Gb/s (i.e., Voice + Data is
limited to 2.5 Gb/s)
- BC1 = 1.5 Gb/s (i.e., Voice is limited to 1.5 Gb/s).
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-5" href="#section-5">5</a>. Example Formulas for Computing "Unreserved TE-Class [i]" with</span>
<span class="h2"> Russian Dolls Model</span>
As specified in [<a href="#ref-DSTE-PROTO" title=""Protocol Extensions for Support of Diffserv-aware MPLS Traffic Engineering"">DSTE-PROTO</a>], formulas for computing "Unreserved TE-
Class [i]" MUST reflect all of the Bandwidth Constraints relevant to
the CT associated with TE-Class[i], and thus, depend on the Bandwidth
Constraints Model. Thus, a DS-TE LSR implementing RDM MUST reflect
the RDM Bandwidth Constraints defined in <a href="#section-4">section 4</a> above when
computing "Unreserved TE-Class [i]".
As explained in [<a href="#ref-DSTE-PROTO" title=""Protocol Extensions for Support of Diffserv-aware MPLS Traffic Engineering"">DSTE-PROTO</a>], the details of admission control
algorithms, as well as formulas for computing "Unreserved TE-Class
[i]", are outside the scope of the IETF work. Keeping that in mind,
we provide in this section an example for illustration purposes, of
how values for the unreserved bandwidth for TE-Class[i] might be
computed with RDM. In the example, we assume the basic admission
control algorithm, which simply deducts the exact bandwidth of any
established LSP from all of the Bandwidth Constraints relevant to the
CT associated with that LSP.
We assume that:
TE-Class [i] <--> < CTc , preemption p>
in the configured TE-Class mapping.
For readability, formulas are first shown assuming only 3 CTs are
active. The formulas are then extended to cover the cases where more
CTs are used.
If CTc = CT0, then "Unreserved TE-Class [i]" =
[ BC0 - SUM ( Reserved(CTb,q) ) ] for q <= p and 0 <= b <= 2
If CTc = CT1, then "Unreserved TE-Class [i]" =
MIN [
[ BC1 - SUM ( Reserved(CTb,q) ) ] for q <= p and 1 <= b <= 2,
[ BC0 - SUM ( Reserved(CTb,q) ) ] for q <= p and 0 <= b <= 2
]
<span class="grey">Le Faucheur Experimental [Page 7]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-8" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc4127">RFC 4127</a> Russian Dolls Model for DS-TE June 2005</span>
If CTc = CT2, then "Unreserved TE-Class [i]" =
MIN [
[ BC2 - SUM ( Reserved(CTb,q) ) ] for q <= p and 2 <= b <= 2,
[ BC1 - SUM ( Reserved(CTb,q) ) ] for q <= p and 1 <= b <= 2,
[ BC0 - SUM ( Reserved(CTb,q) ) ] for q <= p and 0 <= b <= 2
]
The formula can be generalized to 8 active CTs and expressed in a
more compact way in the following:
"Unreserved TE-Class [i]" =
MIN [
[ BCc - SUM ( Reserved(CTb,q) ) ] for q <= p and c <= b <= 7,
[ BC(c-1) - SUM ( Reserved(CTb,q) ) ] for q <= p and (c-1)<= b <= 7,
. . .
[ BC0 - SUM ( Reserved(CTb,q) ) ] for q <= p and 0 <= b <= 7,
]
where:
TE-Class [i] <--> < CTc , preemption p>
in the configured TE-Class mapping.
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-6" href="#section-6">6</a>. Receiving Both Maximum Reservable Bandwidth and Bandwidth</span>
<span class="h2"> Constraints sub-TLVs</span>
[<a id="ref-DSTE-PROTO">DSTE-PROTO</a>] states that "A DS-TE LSR, which does advertise BCs, MUST
use the new "Bandwidth Constraints" sub-TLV (in addition to the
existing Maximum Reservable Bandwidth sub-TLV) to do so."
With RDM, BC0 is equal to the Maximum Reservable Bandwidth because
they both represent the aggregate constraint across all CTs. Thus, a
DS-TE LSR, receiving both the "Maximum Reservable Bw" sub-TLV and the
new "Bandwidth Constraints" sub-TLV (which contains BC0) for a given
link where the RDM model is used, MAY ignore the "Maximum Reservable
Bw" sub-TLV.
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-7" href="#section-7">7</a>. Security Considerations</span>
Security considerations related to the use of DS-TE are discussed in
[<a href="#ref-DSTE-PROTO" title=""Protocol Extensions for Support of Diffserv-aware MPLS Traffic Engineering"">DSTE-PROTO</a>]. Those apply independently of the Bandwidth Constraints
Model, including RDM specified in this document.
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-8" href="#section-8">8</a>. IANA Considerations</span>
[<a id="ref-DSTE-PROTO">DSTE-PROTO</a>] defines a new name space for "Bandwidth Constraints
Model Id". The guidelines for allocation of values in that name
space are detailed in section 13.1 of [<a href="#ref-DSTE-PROTO" title=""Protocol Extensions for Support of Diffserv-aware MPLS Traffic Engineering"">DSTE-PROTO</a>]. In accordance
<span class="grey">Le Faucheur Experimental [Page 8]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-9" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc4127">RFC 4127</a> Russian Dolls Model for DS-TE June 2005</span>
with these guidelines, the IANA has assigned a Bandwidth Constraints
Model Id for RDM from the range 0-239 (which is to be managed as per
the "Specification Required" policy defined in [<a href="#ref-IANA-CONS" title="">IANA-CONS</a>]).
Bandwidth Constraints Model Id 0 was allocated by IANA to RDM.
<span class="h2"><a class="selflink" id="section-9" href="#section-9">9</a>. Acknowledgements</span>
We thank Martin Tatham for his key contribution in this work.
Tatiana Renko is also warmly thanked for her instantiation of the
Russian Doll.
<span class="grey">Le Faucheur Experimental [Page 9]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-10" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc4127">RFC 4127</a> Russian Dolls Model for DS-TE June 2005</span>
Appendix A: Addressing [<a href="#ref-DSTE-REQ" title=""Requirements for Support of Differentiated Services-aware MPLS Traffic Engineering"">DSTE-REQ</a>] Scenarios
This appendix provides examples of how the Russian Dolls Bandwidth
Constraints Model can be used to support each of the scenarios
described in [<a href="#ref-DSTE-REQ" title=""Requirements for Support of Differentiated Services-aware MPLS Traffic Engineering"">DSTE-REQ</a>].
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="appendix-A.1" href="#appendix-A.1">A.1</a>. Scenario 1: Limiting Amount of Voice</span>
By configuring on every link:
- Bandwidth Constraint 1 (for CT1 = Voice) = "certain percentage"
of link capacity
- BC0 (for CT1=Voice + CT0=Data) = link capacity
By configuring:
- every CT1/Voice TE-LSP with preemption = 0
- every CT0/Data TE-LSP with preemption = 1
DS-TE with the Russian Dolls Model will address all the requirements:
- amount of Voice traffic limited to desired percentage on every
link
- data traffic capable of using all remaining link capacity
- voice traffic capable of preempting other traffic
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="appendix-A.2" href="#appendix-A.2">A.2</a>. Scenario 2: Maintain Relative Proportion of Traffic Classes</span>
By configuring on every link:
- BC2 (for CT2) = e.g., 45%
- BC1 (for CT1+CT2) = e.g., 80%
- BC0 (for CT0+CT1+CT2) = e.g., 100%
DS-TE with the RDM will ensure that the amount of traffic of each CT
established on a link is within acceptable levels as compared to the
resources allocated to the corresponding Diffserv Per Hop Behaviors
(PHBs) regardless of which order the LSPs are routed in, regardless
of which preemption priorities are used by which LSPs and regardless
of failure situations.
<span class="grey">Le Faucheur Experimental [Page 10]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-11" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc4127">RFC 4127</a> Russian Dolls Model for DS-TE June 2005</span>
By also configuring:
- every CT2/Voice TE-LSP with preemption = 0
- every CT1/Premium Data TE-LSP with preemption = 1
- every CT0/Best-Effort TE-LSP with preemption = 2
DS-TE with the Russian Dolls Model will also ensure that:
- CT2 Voice LSPs always have first preemption priority in order to
use the CT2 capacity
- CT1 Premium Data LSPs always have second preemption priority in
order to use the CT1 capacity
- Best-Effort can use up to link capacity of what is left by CT2
and CT1.
Optional automatic adjustment of Diffserv scheduling configuration
could be used for maintaining very strict relationships between the
amounts of established traffic of each Class Type and corresponding
Diffserv resources.
<span class="h3"><a class="selflink" id="appendix-A.3" href="#appendix-A.3">A.3</a>. Scenario 3: Guaranteed Bandwidth Services</span>
By configuring on every link:
- BC1 (for CT1) = "given" percentage of link bandwidth
(appropriate to achieve the Guaranteed Bandwidth service's QoS
objectives)
- BC0 (for CT0+CT1) = 100% of link bandwidth
DS-TE with the Russian Dolls Model will ensure that the amount of
Guaranteed Bandwidth Traffic established on every link remains below
the given percentage so that it will always meet its QoS objectives.
At the same time, it will allow traffic engineering of the rest of
the traffic such that links can be filled up.
Normative References
[<a id="ref-DSTE-REQ">DSTE-REQ</a>] Le Faucheur, F. and W. Lai, "Requirements for Support
of Differentiated Services-aware MPLS Traffic
Engineering", <a href="./rfc3564">RFC 3564</a>, July 2003.
<span class="grey">Le Faucheur Experimental [Page 11]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-12" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc4127">RFC 4127</a> Russian Dolls Model for DS-TE June 2005</span>
[<a id="ref-DSTE-PROTO">DSTE-PROTO</a>] Le Faucheur, F., Ed., "Protocol Extensions for Support
of Diffserv-aware MPLS Traffic Engineering", <a href="./rfc4124">RFC 4124</a>,
June 2005.
[<a id="ref-RFC2119">RFC2119</a>] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", <a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp14">BCP 14</a>, <a href="./rfc2119">RFC 2119</a>, March 1997.
[<a id="ref-IANA-CONS">IANA-CONS</a>] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing
an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", <a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp26">BCP 26</a>, <a href="./rfc2434">RFC</a>
<a href="./rfc2434">2434</a>, October 1998.
Informative References
[<a id="ref-BC-CONS">BC-CONS</a>] Le Faucheur, F., "Considerations on Bandwidth
Constraints Model for DS-TE", Work in Progress, June
2002.
[<a id="ref-BC-MODEL">BC-MODEL</a>] Lai, W., "Bandwidth Constraints Models for
Differentiated Services (Diffserv)-aware MPLS Traffic
Engineering: Performance Evaluation", <a href="./rfc4128">RFC 4128</a>, June
2005.
[<a id="ref-DSTE-MAM">DSTE-MAM</a>] Le Faucheur, F. and W. Lai, "Maximum Allocation
Bandwidth Constraints Model for Diffserv-aware MPLS
Traffic Engineering", <a href="./rfc4125">RFC 4125</a>, June 2005.
[<a id="ref-GMPLS-RECOV">GMPLS-RECOV</a>] Lang, et al., "Generalized MPLS Recovery Functional
Specification", Work in Progress.
[<a id="ref-MPLS-BACKUP">MPLS-BACKUP</a>] Vasseur, et al., "MPLS Traffic Engineering Fast
Reroute: Bypass Tunnel Path Computation for Bandwidth
Protection", Work in Progress.
Editor's Address
Francois Le Faucheur
Cisco Systems, Inc.
Village d'Entreprise Green Side - Batiment T3
400, Avenue de Roumanille
06410 Biot-Sophia Antipolis
France
Phone: +33 4 97 23 26 19
EMail: flefauch@cisco.com
<span class="grey">Le Faucheur Experimental [Page 12]</span></pre>
<hr class='noprint'/><!--NewPage--><pre class='newpage'><span id="page-13" ></span>
<span class="grey"><a href="./rfc4127">RFC 4127</a> Russian Dolls Model for DS-TE June 2005</span>
Full Copyright Statement
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005).
This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
contained in <a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp78">BCP 78</a>, 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.
Intellectual Property
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 <a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp78">BCP 78</a> and <a href="https://www.rfc-editor.org/bcp/bcp79">BCP 79</a>.
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
<a href="http://www.ietf.org/ipr">http://www.ietf.org/ipr</a>.
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.
Acknowledgement
Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
Internet Society.
Le Faucheur Experimental [Page 13]
</pre>
|
