The IESG has approved the following document: - 'Multisegment Pseudowires in Passive Optical Networks' (draft-li-pwe3-ms-pw-pon-06.txt) as an Informational RFC This document has been reviewed in the IETF but is not the product of an IETF Working Group. The IESG contact person is Stewart Bryant. A URL of this Internet Draft is: http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-li-pwe3-ms-pw-pon/ Technical Summary This document describes the application of MPLS multi-segment pseudowires (MS-PWs) in a dual-technology environment comprising a Passive Optical Network (PON) and an MPLS Packet Switched Network (PSN). PON technology may be used in mobile backhaul networks to support the end segments closest to the aggregation devices. In these cases, there may be a very large number of Pseudowire (PW) Terminating Provider Edge nodes (T-PEs). The MPLS control plane could be used to provision these end segments, but support for the necessary protocols would complicate the management of the T-PEs and would significantly increase their expense. Alternatively, static, or management plane, configuration could be used to configure the end segments, but the very large number of such segments in a PON places a very heavy burden on the network manager. This document describes how to set up the end segment of an end-to- end MPLS PW over a Gigabit-capable Passive Optical Network (G-PON) or 10 Gigabit-capable Passive Optical Network (XG-PON) using the G-PON and XG-PON management protocol, Optical Network Termination Management and Control Interface (OMCI). This simplifies and speeds up PW provisioning compared with manual configuration. This document also shows how a MS-PW may be constructed from an end segment supported over a PON, and switched to one or more segments supported over an MPLS PSN. Working Group Summary The PWE3 working group has had this work introduced on the mailing list and at two IETF meetings. Additionally, the WG was specifically requested to review the document on the understanding that a request had been made for AD Sponsorship. The WG concluded that although the draft is directly related to the charter and work of the WG, there was not sufficient interest within the WG to adopt the draft as a WG document. However, the WG were asked and did not object to the draft being advanced as AD Sponsored. Note that an IPR disclosure has been submitted for this document. Document Quality This is an informational document with no implementation specifics. There are on-going discussions with operators about following the deployment models shown in this document. Personnel Daniel King is the Document Shepherd for this document. Stewart Bryant is the Responsible Area Director. RFC Editor Note Section 6 OLD This document describes a variation of a multi-segment pseudowire running over an MPLS PSN, in which one or both of the MPLS PSNs that provide connectivity between a T-PE and its associated S-PE is replaced by a G-PON/XG-PON PSN. The security considerations that apply to the PW itself [RFC3985] [RFC4385] are unchanged by this change in PSN type. For further considerations of PW security see the security considerations section of the specific PW type being deployed. G-PON/XG-PON [G.987.3] [G.984.3] includes security mechanisms that are as good as those provided in a well secured MPLS PSN. The use of a G-PON/XG-PON PSN in place of an MPLS PSN therefore does not increase the security risk of a multi-segment pseudowire. Protecting against an attack at the physical or data link layer of the PON is out of the scope of this document. NEW This document describes a variation of a multi-segment pseudowire running over an MPLS PSN, in which one or both of the MPLS PSNs that provide connectivity between a T-PE and its associated S-PE is replaced by a G-PON/XG-PON PSN. The security considerations that apply to the PW itself [RFC3985] [RFC4385] are unchanged by this change in PSN type. For further considerations of PW security see the security considerations section of the specific PW type being deployed. G-PON/XG-PON [G.987.3] [G.984.3] includes security mechanisms that are as good as those provided in a well secured MPLS PSN. The use of a G-PON/XG-PON PSN in place of an MPLS PSN therefore does not increase the security risk of a multi-segment pseudowire. Protecting against an attack at the physical or data link layer of the PON is out of the scope of this document. The MPLS control plane and management plane mechanisms are unchanged by this document. This document introduces OMCI as a provisioning mechanism that runs between the OLT Controller and the ONT Controller across a GEM connection that is established at ONT initialization. In other words, the protocol runs on an in-fiber control channel. That means that injection and modification of OMCI messages would be very hard (harder, for example, than injection or modification in an MPLS ACH which has been accepted to provide adequate security by isolation ([RFC4385] and [RFC5586]). END --- Section 7.1 NEW [RFC5586] Bocci, M., Vigoureux, M., and S. Bryant, "MPLS Generic Associated Channel", RFC 5586, June 2009. [RFC4385] Bryant, S., Swallow, G., Martini, L., and D. McPherson, "Pseudowire Emulation Edge-to-Edge (PWE3) Control Word for Use over an MPLS PSN", RFC 4385, February 2006. END _______________________________________________ IETF-Announce mailing list IETF-Announce@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce
