DOCSLIB.ORG

Network Convergence Over MPLS

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Network Convergence Over MPLS Network Convergence over MPLS Enrique Vázquez, Manuel Álvarez-Campana, Ana B. García Dept. of Telematics, Technical University of Madrid, ETS Ing. Telecomunicación, Ciudad Universitaria, 28040 Madrid, Spain {enrique, mac, abgarcia}@dit.upm.es http://www.dit.upm.es Abstract. Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) is emerging as a flexible technology that can transport voice, IPv4, IPv6, layer 2 services (Frame Relay, ATM, Ethernet, etc.), and even PDH and SDH/SONET circuits over a single packet infrastructure, in a new attempt to solve the old problem of network convergence. MPLS traffic engineering, quality of service support (in combina- tion with DiffServ), and fast restoration capabilities can be used to provide each service with strict service-level agreements (SLAs) in a cost-efficient way. Sev- eral standardization and industry organizations are contributing to this goal. This article reviews current activities in the IETF, MPLS/Frame Relay Alliance, and ITU-T related to transport over MPLS, comparing their approaches, identi- fying overlaps, and open issues. 1 Introduction About ten years ago, the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and the ATM Forum specified several solutions to transport IP packets over Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM) networks, including Classical IP over ATM, LAN Emulation over ATM, and Multiprotocol over ATM. All of these followed a network overlay model where IP was put over ATM, and each of them retained their own control procedures. Concur- rently, several vendors proposed alternative solutions that sought a tighter integration of IP and ATM in some cases, or simply to forward packets at very high speeds based on fixed-length labels à la ATM, but without cells. For example, in IP Switching [1], promoted by Ipsilon Networks, IP packets are segmented into cells, and the ATM virtual connection identifier included in every cell header is used as the packet label. The standard ATM signaling and routing protocols are replaced by the label assignment protocols defined by IP Switching. In more gen- eral proposals, packet labeling is defined independently of the lower layers, so that la- beled packets may be transported over ATM or any other technology. See for exam- ple Tag Switching, promoted by Cisco [2]. The Multiprotocol Label Switching (MPLS) architecture, standardized by the IETF in 2001 [3], follows this general approach. Packets labeled with MPLS can be encap- sulated over different layer 2 protocols, including Ethernet, Point-to-Point Protocol (PPP), Frame Relay (FR), and ATM. MPLS label values may be copied to suitable fields in the layer 2 header, for example the Data Link Connection Identifier (DLCI) in Frame Relay, or the Virtual Path/Channel Identifiers (VPI/VCI) in ATM, so that labeled packets can be forwarded directly by FR or ATM switches with the appropri- ate control software upgrades. The initial focus on using labels to simplify packet forwarding and increase router performance quickly shifted to using labels as a powerful tool to tag selected packet flows and control the routes they follow across the network. In particular, MPLS is very flexible in terms of: − What is labeled: IP packets or other protocol data units. MPLS can transport voice and data, with or without IP. See the following sections. − How many labels are used: several labels can be applied to the same packet form- ing a label stack. Packets are classified and labeled when they enter the MPLS network. More labels may be added to the stack at convenient points inside the network. For example, if the link between two MPLS nodes A and B fails, node A may add a new label to packets in transit in order to forward them to B via an al- ternative path that bypasses the failure. When the packets arrive to node B this la- bel is removed. − What is the label meaning: for example, labels may be used to determine the packet route, to indicate a class of service, as a multiplexing identifier to distin- guish several flows that follow the same route, to separate packets corresponding to different virtual private networks, etc. − The method used to assign and distribute labels in the network: label values may be configured manually by the network administrator, or may be assigned automati- cally in different ways, for example coupled with the normal routing procedures in the network. Alternatively, labels may be assigned by exchanging signaling mes- sages from node to node along a particular route, similarly to a connection estab- lishment in an ATM network. The chosen route may have been selected by a con- straint-based routing algorithm taking into account the capacity required to serve a particular traffic flow. The MPLS capabilities are exploited in several important applications, including the implementation of IP Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) [4], Traffic Engineering (MPLS-TE) [5], support of Differentiated Services (DiffServ) [6], DiffServ-aware Traffic Engineering (DS-TE) [7,8], and fast rerouting [9,10]. Many aspects of MPLS are still subject of research and standardization. For example, at the time of writing this paper there were over 100 Internet Drafts related to MPLS. The focus has also shifted from transporting MPLS over different layer 2 technolo- gies to the opposite, i.e. transporting layer 2 protocols over MPLS. In particular, MPLS is well suited to implement Virtual Private LAN Services (VPLS) that extend Ethernet over the metropolitan and wide area. This article reviews the standards and implementation agreements for voice, layer 2, and layer 1 transport over MPLS produced by the IETF, the ITU-T, the MPLS/Frame Relay Alliance (MFA), and the ATM Forum. See Fig. 1. Section 2 compares the solutions proposed by ITU-T and the MFA for direct voice transport over MPLS, i.e. without encapsulating it in ATM cells or IP packets. Sec- tions 3 and 4 present the specifications for layer 2 and layer 1 transport over MPLS under development by the IETF and the MFA. ATM Forum specifications for ATM- MPLS interworking are also considered. Finally, section 5 outlines the evolution of MPLS-based applications. Ethernet, SONET voice voice IP ATM,… SDH PDH MFA IETF PWE3 MFA Martini AAL2 (IA5.0) VoMPLS (IA1.0) Drafts CEP AAL1 (IA4.0) MPLS CEP: Circuit Emulation over Packet MFA: MPLS/Frame Relay Alliance PWE3: Pseudo Wire Emulation Edge to Edge VoMPLS: Voice over MPLS Fig. 1. Network convergence over MPLS 2 Voice Transport over MPLS Voice packets can be transported over MPLS without the overhead associated to the typical RTP/UDP/IP encapsulation [11]. When several voice communications are transported between the same end-points, e.g. two voice gateways in Fig. 2, concate- nating voice packets from different communications before labeling and transmission helps to reduce the encapsulation overhead. In voice over IP, the RTP/UDP/IP headers may be compressed using different al- gorithms like IP Header Compression, Compressed RTP, Enhanced Compressed RTP, Robust Header Compression, and others defined in RFCs or Internet drafts. Concatenation may be implemented in different protocol layers. For example, Com- posite IP (CIP) and Lightweight IP Encapsulation (LIPE) concatenate voice packets above IP, while Point-to-Point Protocol Multiplexing (PPPmux) implements concate- nation at layer 2. Gateway MPLS network PSTN Voice network ISDN … LSR VoFR PSTN VoATM … Voice network Gateway Label Switching Router Label Switched Path Fig. 2. Voice over MPLS reference architecture In voice over MPLS, two main solutions have been proposed for concatenation. The first one, defined in the MPLS/FR Alliance (MFA) implementation agreement 1.0 [12], supports transport of multiplexed voice channels, various voice compression algorithms, silence removal and silence insertion descriptors, transfer of dialed digits, and channel associated signaling. Each concatenated voice packet is preceded by a 4- octet header that includes a channel identifier, a payload type, a counter, and a pay- load length field. See Fig. 3. If the payload length is not a multiple of 4 octets, up to 3 pad octets are included to make it word (32 bits) aligned. Up to 248 calls can be mul- tiplexed within a single Label Switched Path (LSP) identified by the outer MPLS la- bel. As an implementation option, additional inner LSPs may be created using stacked labels. 8 8 8 6 2 bits CID Channel Identifier CID PT C L P PT Payload Type C Counter VoMPLS header L Length in words (32 bits) P PAD length in octets payload payload payload Layer 2 1 or more MPLS labels length must be a Layer 2 overhead (4 octets each) multiple of 4 octets overhead Fig. 3. Voice over MPLS (MPLS/Frame Relay Alliance IA 1.0) The second solution addresses similar functions, but instead of defining a new voice encapsulation like [12], it reuses components of the ATM Adaptation Layer type 2 (AAL2), defined for transport of several variable bit rate voice and data streams multiplexed over an ATM connection. See ITU-T recommendation Y.1261 [13] and the new MFA implementation agreement 5.0 [14]. AAL2/MPLS is concep- tually similar to AAL2/ATM but replaces ATM connections with MPLS LSPs, so the ATM cell header overhead is eliminated. AAL2 may also be used over IP as dis- cussed in [15]. RTP AAL (1, 2, or 5) UDP VoMPLS AAL2 ATM IP (MFA IA 1.0) (MFA IA 5.0) MPLS Fig. 4. Protocol stacks for voice transport over MPLS 3 Layer 2 Transport over MPLS The transport of voice over AAL/ATM/MPLS shown on the left column in Fig. 4 is a particular example of transport of ATM cells, containing voice or any other type of information, over an MPLS network. The ATM Forum specifications for ATM- MPLS network interworking [16,17] define procedures to send a single ATM cell, a group of cells, or an AAL5 protocol data unit (PDU) encapsulated in a MPLS frame.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • ATM and Frame Relay to MPLS Control Plane Interworking Straw
    ATM and Frame Relay to MPLS Control Plane Interworking: Client-Server MFA Forum 10.0.0 MFA Forum September 2006 ATM and Frame Relay to MPLS Control Plane Interworking: Client-Server MFA Forum 10.0.0 Note: The user’s attention is called to the possibility that implementation of the MPLS implementation agreement contained herein may require the use of inventions covered by patent rights held by third parties. By publication of this MPLS implementation agreement the MFA Forum makes no representation that the implementation of the specification will not infringe on any third party rights. The MFA Forum take no position with respect to any claim that has been or may be asserted by any third party, the validity of any patent rights related to any such claims, or the extent to which a license to use any such rights may not be available. Editor: Chris Metz [email protected] For more information contact: The MFA Forum Suite 307 39355 California Street Fremont, CA 94538 USA Phone: +1 (510) 608-3997 FAX: +1 (510) 608-5917 E-Mail: [email protected] WWW: http://www.mplsforum.org/ Full Notice Copyright © 2006 MFA Forum. All rights reserved. This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to others, and works that comment on or otherwise explain it or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this document itself may not
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Circuit Emulation Services Over Ethernet
    Introduction to Circuit Emulation Services over Ethernet delivery – results that ultimately benefit enterprises and Abstract spur user demand. This paper provides an introduction to Circuit Emulation Services over Ethernet (CESoE) enabling the support of CESoE provides benefits to incumbent carriers, synchronous services such as T1/E1 over an competitive operators, mobile/wireless service providers, asynchronous Ethernet infrastructure. The paper discusses and enterprise users. For example, CESoE enables the benefits of CESoE to service providers offering providers to offer a complete service portfolio that Ethernet access services, as well as to subscribers to those integrates emerging Ethernet services along with full- services in various applications. Finally, the paper featured TDM voice services and private-line services discusses the current activities of MEF in standardizing (for voice or data). This means that, for the first time, and promoting CESoE. service providers can leverage business models based on all the advantages of Ethernet as a converged packet Introduction to CESoE network, without sacrificing revenues from these Since its inception in 2001, the Metro Ethernet Forum has widespread and still-growing legacy TDM services. been developing technical specifications and implementation agreements for carrier-grade Ethernet For next-generation competitive operators that have built infrastructure and services to benefit service providers, Ethernet-only networks, CESoE’s ability to enable full- enterprises and residential users around the world. Since featured voice and private-line services represents private T1/E1 and SONET/SDH private line services are important incremental revenue opportunities. For widely available, the MEF initiated work in 2002 to incumbent carriers looking to move into greenfield define requirements for providing Circuit Emulation markets, Metro Ethernet with CES allows the carrier to Services (CES) over metro Ethernet networks.
    [Show full text]
  • Next-Generation Packet-Based Transport Networks (PTN) Reza Vaez-Ghaemi, Ph.D
    White Paper Next-Generation Packet-Based Transport Networks (PTN) Reza Vaez-Ghaemi, Ph.D. Introduction Competition for market share among telecom, cable/multimedia service (MSO), and mobile operators further fuels the need for network investments. High-speed Internet services, IP video, and smartphone applications significantly increase the average revenue per user. For these high bandwidth services to become profitable, the cost per bit must drop drastically, which packet and optical technologies make possible to a degree. This white paper focuses on packet-based transport technologies. Packet-based technologies have been deployed in Enterprise environments for many years, because Ethernet enables a cost-effective networking of computing equipment and peripherals in local area networks (LANs). However, Ethernet lacks key attributes necessary for deployment in wide area networks (WANs), which are characterized by large numbers of subscribers and services. It is mandatory to clearly differentiate and process various services. Some services such as voice and video are more sensitive to delay and/or delay variation than others. Fast restoration of services is another key attribute of a Carrier-grade technology. Also, WANs are large and may consist of multiple operators’ networks; thus it is very critical to be able to manage faults and monitor performance for these networks. This white paper focuses on next-generation packet-based transport networks (PTN) with a focus on emerging Multiple Protocol Labeling Switching (MPLS) technologies. IP/MPLS MPLS was originally developed by the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) to deliver a cost-efficient way of routing traffic in high-performance core networks. However, MPLS has since found strong application in service providers’ core networks and as a platform for data services, such as Layer 3 or Layer 2 virtual private networks (VPN).
    [Show full text]
  • Packet-Optical the Infinera Way Ebook
    PACKET-OPTICAL THE INFINERA WAY INFINERA 1 OPTICAL FIBER PROVIDES almost lossless telephone service) to cover a wide range of We hope you find Packet-Optical the PREFACE transmission of signals at an ultra-wide solutions and networks with varying degrees Infinera Way informative and useful, whether range of frequencies. Packet switching, of capabilities and functionality. you use it to research a particular subject or implemented using the Ethernet family read the complete volume from beginning Packet-optical integration has some great of protocols and interfaces, offers one of to end. advantages in terms of cost and service the most efficient ways to sort and direct differentiation. Infinera´s technologies take The descriptions are kept independent streams of digital data. Packet-optical this one step further, with benefits including of product releases as much as possible. networking combines these two outstanding reduced equipment, lower operational costs Current details of the Infinera product technologies, positioning them to dominate and key capabilities such as low latency portfolio are available at www.infinera.com. the next generation of transport networks. and excellent synchronization, outlined Packet-Optical the Infinera Way was written in Chapter 2. Chapter 3 describes how Features of Infinera’s packet-optical solutions to help Infinera’s customers, prospects packet-optical networks are best managed that we believe to be unique are highlighted and partners, and anyone else who needs and how to take advantage of current and with this marker throughout the text. to have a better understanding of the future software-defined networking (SDN) packet-optical world. This book focuses on developments.
    [Show full text]
  • TDM Over Packet Network Pseudowire Emulation End-To-End
    TDM over Packet Network PseudoWire Emulation End-to-End IP6702A IP6704A AM3440-A/C/E AM3440-CHPA IP6750 G7860A O9400R-PTN O9500R-PTN O9550-TDMoEA card iNET EMS iNMS NMS The TDM world is decreasing against packet IP/Ethernet... Because of the sensitive communication to latency, high reliability and large number of installations of legacy, industrial applications, with analog, frequency based RTU/NTU, the TDM transport/multiplexing of such traffic is still unavoidable. TDM PseudoWire (PW) is the solu- tion to make legacy and sensitives applications coexist inside IP/Ethernet/MPLS. Loop Telecom TDM PseudoWire Emulation End to End (PWE3 or PW) over switched packet Ethernet/IP/MPLS-TP solutions can support the following infrastructures: Multiservice PseudoWire Network Point to Point/Multipoint over IP/Ethernet/MPLS-TP over IP/Ethernet PseudoWire Network at EDGE of IP/MPLS existing Network www.LoopTelecom.com To Transport of Analogue, Low Rate, E1/T1... over IP/Ethernet/MPLS-TP Loop Telecom has extensive expertise to access, transport, voice encapsulation, analog signal, synchronous, asynchronous, legacy interfaces, teleprotection, dry contacts…and low rate SCADA Ethernet over TDM or Packet networks. Starting from E1/T1, all multiservice interfaces we have naturally developed SDH/SONET transport solutions, PseudoWire Emulation over PSN IP/Ethernet and finally large organized Packet Transmission Network PTN with MPLS-TP. We gateway and bridge all these technologies to save CAPEX and OPEX. Definitions Mulservice This includes the technical/industrial applicaons as voice, analogue data, asynchronous and synchronous low rate, con- tact relay informaon, teleprotecon... using standard or old (legacy) interfaces, named legacy, generally their rates do not exceed 2Mbps.
    [Show full text]
  • Pseudowire Emulation Edge-To-Edge Mibs
    Pseudowire Emulation Edge-to-Edge MIBs The Pseudowire Emulation Edge-to-Edge MIBs for Ethernet, Frame Relay, and ATM Services feature provides Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP) support within an Any Transport over Multiprotocol Label Switching (AToM) infrastructure emulating Ethernet, Frame Relay, and ATM services over packet switched networks (PSNs). The Pseudowire Emulation Edge-to-Edge (PWE3) MIBs are the following: • CISCO-IETF-PW-MIB (PW-MIB) • CISCO-IETF-PW-MPLS-MIB (PW-MPLS-MIB) • CISCO-IETF-PW-ENET-MIB (PW-ENET-MIB) • CISCO-IETF-PW-FR-MIB (PW-FR-MIB) • CISCO-IETF-PW-ATM-MIB (PW-ATM-MIB) • Finding Feature Information, on page 1 • Prerequisites for Pseudowire Emulation Edge-to-Edge MIBs, on page 2 • Restrictions for Pseudowire Emulation Edge-to-Edge MIBs, on page 2 • Information About Pseudowire Emulation Edge-to-Edge MIBs, on page 3 • How to Configure Pseudowire Emulation Edge-to-Edge MIBs, on page 19 • Configuration Examples for the Pseudowire Emulation Edge-to-Edge MIBs, on page 22 • Additional References, on page 22 • Feature Information for Pseudowire Emulation Edge-to-Edge MIBs, on page 24 • Glossary, on page 25 Finding Feature Information Your software release may not support all the features documented in this module. For the latest caveats and feature information, see Bug Search Tool and the release notes for your platform and software release. To find information about the features documented in this module, and to see a list of the releases in which each feature is supported, see the feature information table at the end of this module. Use Cisco Feature Navigator to find information about platform support and Cisco software image support.
    [Show full text]
  • Optical Transport Networks & Technologies
    - 1 - OTNT_Standardization_WorkPlan_V22 Optical Transport Networks & Technologies Standardization Work Plan Issue 23, June 2017 GENERAL ........................................................................................................................... 3 PART 1: STATUS REPORTS AS OF JUNE 2017 .............................................................. 4 1 HIGHLIGHT OF ITU-T SG15 ........................................................................................ 4 2 REPORTS FROM OTHER ORGANIZATIONS ............................................................ 5 PART 2: STANDARD WORK PLAN ................................................................................... 9 1 INTRODUCTION TO PART 2 ...................................................................................... 9 2 SCOPE ......................................................................................................................... 9 3 ABBREVIATIONS ...................................................................................................... 10 4 DEFINITIONS AND DESCRIPTIONS ........................................................................ 10 4.1 Optical and other Transport Networks & Technologies (OTNT) ..................................................10 4.2 Optical Transport Network (OTN) (largely revised in 09/2016 reflecting B100G).......................11 4.2.1 FlexE in OIF (updated in June-2017) .......................................................................................... 12 4.3 Support for mobile networks
    [Show full text]
  • Removing Cell Demultiplexing Performance Bottleneck in ATM Pseudo Wire Emulation Over MPLS Networks
    1 Removing Cell Demultiplexing Performance Bottleneck in ATM Pseudo Wire Emulation over MPLS Networks Puneet Konghot and Hao Che {[email protected], [email protected]} The Department of Computer Science and Engineering University of Texas at Arlington ABSTRACT Cell multiplexing is highly desirable to achieve increased transport efficiency in Asynchronous Transfer Mode (ATM) pseudo wire emulation over a multiprotocol label switching (MPLS) network. Supporting cell multiplexing, however, can create performance bottleneck at the egress provider edge (PE) where fully programmable network processors are used to do the cell demultiplexing. In this paper, a scheme is proposed to allow a large number of cells to be demultiplexed, without having to implement special ASIC-based hardware optimized for cell demultiplexing. The idea is to configure a sequence of concatenated data plane processing devices to share the cell demultiplexing task with the egress PE. Performance analysis shows that the use of just two processing devices is sufficient to achieve high transport efficiency. This may as well be achieved by the addition of one router without a central control card. Therefore, service providers can employ this scheme to enable cell multiplexing with limited add-on cost, while preserving the existing investment. 1 Introduction The infrastructure of service providers providing multiple services consists of heterogeneous networks wherein each network implements a specific service like Frame Relay, ATM, etc. Providing interworking functions among heterogeneous networks is expensive in terms of capital, operational, management and planning costs. These are the main motivations for service providers to attempt to consolidate the delivery of multiple services through a single Packet Switched Network (PSN).
    [Show full text]
  • Optical Transport Networks & Technologies Standardization Work Plan
    INTERNATIONAL TELECOMMUNICATION UNION STUDY GROUP 15 TELECOMMUNICATION TD 433 (PLEN/15) STANDARDIZATION SECTOR STUDY PERIOD 2013-2016 English only Original: English Question(s): 3/15 22 June - 3 July 2015 TD Source: Rapporteur Q3/15 Title: Optical Transport Networks & Technologies Standardization Work Plan (version 20) (for Agreement, 3 July 2015) Attention: This is not a publication made available to the public, but an internal ITU-T Document intended only for use by the Member States of ITU, by ITU-T Sector Members and Associates, and their respective staff and collaborators in their ITU related work. It shall not be made available to, and used by, any other persons or entities without the prior written consent of ITU-T. - 2 - TD 433 (PLEN/15) Optical Transport Networks & Technologies Standardization Work Plan Issue 20, July 2015 1 GENERAL .................................................................................................................... 4 2 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 4 3 SCOPE ......................................................................................................................... 4 4 ABBREVIATIONS ........................................................................................................ 5 5 DEFINITIONS AND DESCRIPTIONS .......................................................................... 6 5.1 Optical and other Transport Networks & Technologies (OTNT) ..................................................
    [Show full text]
  • MPLS-TP in Multi-Service Packet Network Deployments Tutorial
    MPLS-TP in Multi-Service Packet Network Deployments Tutorial MR-245 October 2010 Agenda 1. Introduction to the Broadband Forum 2. Technology, Market and Business drivers 3. MPLS-TP Technology Overview – Architecture, data plane, OAM, control plane, survivability 4. MPLS(-TP) Use Cases 5. Broadband Forum Applicability 6. Network Scenarios 7. Summary 2 We are the Broadband Forum http://www.broadband-forum.org The Broadband Forum is the central organization driving broadband solutions and empowering converged packet networks worldwide to better meet the needs of vendors, service providers and their customers. We develop multi-service broadband packet networking specifications addressing interoperability, architecture and management. Our work enables home, business and converged broadband services, encompassing customer, access and backbone networks. Disclaimer: this tutorial is provided solely for educational purposes. At this point, the applicability of MPLS-TP to BBF architectures and solutions is under active study. Options shown are examples of potential uses. Implementations and architectural requirements are specified in BBF Technical Reports. 3 The BroadbandSuite Goals and Focus The BroadbandSuite is broken down into three major domains: BroadbandManagement – Goal – enhance network management capabilities and enable an intelligent, programmable control layer that unifies diverse networks – Focus - empower service providers to deliver and efficiently maintain personalized services that enhance the subscriber experience BroadbandNetwork
    [Show full text]
  • PWE3 Draft Status
    PWE3 WG Document Status IETF-61 Danny McPherson [email protected] Stewart Bryant [email protected] Dependencies • Draft text may change if dependency text changes • Drafts cannot become an RFC until their dependencies are RFCs • Carried out a dependency analysis of drafts and propose to use this to drive the order of IESG submission Dependencies - 2 • We have concerns that not all normative references ARE normative references • Authors need to validate normative reverences to ensure – Normative refs are true normative refs – All normative refs are called up Requirements and Arch Requirements for Pseudo-Wire Emulation Edge-to-Edge (PWE3) http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3916.txt PWE3 Architecture <draft-ietf-pwe3-arch-07.txt> Will send edits to RFC-ed this week Depends on <draft-ietf-pwe3-fragmentation-06.txt> <draft-ietf-l2tpext-l2tp-base-14.txt> Fragmentation PWE3 Fragmentation and Reassembly <draft-ietf-pwe3-fragmentation-06.txt> Needs an update to call up the CW draft then drop the encap drafts as normative. Can then LC and send to IESG Depends on <draft-ietf-pwe3-arch-07.txt> <draft-ietf-l2tpext-l2tp-base-14.txt> <draft-ietf-pwe3-atm-encap-06.txt> <draft-ietf-pwe3-ethernet-encap-07.txt> <draft-ietf-pwe3-frame-relay-02.txt> <draft-ietf-pwe3-satop-01.txt> <draft-ietf-pwe3-control-protocol-08.txt> Control Word PWE3 Control Word for use over an MPLS PSN <draft-ietf-pwe3-cw-00.txt> In many cases this draft should be called up instead of arch and encap drafts as informative ref Sent LC 1-Oct-2004 Will need another pass IANA IANA Allocations for pseudo Wire Edge to Edge Emulation (PWE3) <draft-ietf-pwe3-iana-allocation-07.txt> In last call Reason for advancing: 1) Will set up registries and remove IANA action as a gate for other drafts 2) Satisfy code-point requests Control Pseudowire Setup and Maintenance using LDP <draft-ietf-pwe3-control-protocol-12.txt> Has passed LC but keeps getting a stream of minor change requests.
    [Show full text]
  • Time Division Multiplexing (TDM) to Internet Protocol (IP) White Paper
    TDM to IP White Paper FAA Telecommunications Infrastructure (FTI)-2 Time Division Multiplexing (TDM) to Internet Protocol (IP) White Paper Networks and Telecommunications Community of Interest FTI-2 Working Group Technology, Performance, and Operations Subcommittee Date Released: May 11, 2017 Synopsis Virtually all local exchange carriers in the U.S. will migrate their networks from the current TDM based architecture to an architecture that is based on Ethernet access to an IP fabric. Two primary drivers for this migration are (1) more efficient bandwidth in an IP environment and (2) equipment manufacturers and chip set providers will soon discontinue production of TDM based equipment. This white paper will attempt to address some of the fundamental issues relating to TDM to IP migration; it also addresses timelines, migration strategies and network adaptive technologies for those applications that continue to demand a TDM interface. American Council for Technology-Industry Advisory Council (ACT-IAC) 3040 Williams Drive, Suite 500, Fairfax, VA 22031 www.actiac.org ● (p) (703) 208.4800 (f) ● (703) 208.4805 Advancing Government Through Collaboration, Education and Action Page i TDM to IP White Paper American Council for Technology-Industry Advisory Council (ACT-IAC) The American Council for Technology (ACT) – Industry Advisory Council (IAC) is a non-profit educational organization established to create a more effective and innovative government. ACT-IAC provides a unique, objective and trusted forum where government and industry executives are working together to improve public services and agency operations through the use of technology. ACT-IAC contributes to better communications between government and industry, collaborative and innovative problem solving and a more professional and qualified workforce.
    [Show full text]