Exam Questions Updated On :
920-271 exam Dumps Source : Nortel WLAN 2300 Rls.7.0 implementation(R) and Management
Test Code : 920-271
Test title : Nortel WLAN 2300 Rls.7.0 implementation(R) and Management
Vendor title : Nortel
: 48 actual Questions
Dont forget to try these actual test questions questions for 920-271 exam.
i occupy been the usage of the killexams.com for some time to each and every my checks. terminal week, I passed with a bizarre score within the 920-271 exam by means of the usage of the celebrate resources. I had some doubts on topics, but the material cleared each and every my doubts. i occupy without problems determined the solution for each and every my doubts and issues. thanks for providing me the strong and dependable material. its miles the high-quality product as I recognise.
920-271 actual buy a scrutinize at questions and answers!
Learning for the 920-271 exam has been a tough going. With so many complicated subjects to cover, killexams.com added at the self credence for passing the exam via the expend of taking me thru focus questions onthe trouble. It paid off as I might also necessity to pass the exam with an first rate pass percent of eighty four%. Among thequestions got here twisted, but the solutions that matched from killexams.com helped me brand the prerogative answers.
What occupy a celebrate manual finish I necessity to skip 920-271 exam?
I almost lost accept as prerogative with in me inside the wake of falling flat the 920-271 exam.I scored 87% and cleared this exam. Much obliged killexams.com for recupemarks my fact. Subjects in 920-271 were truly difficult for me to find it. I almost surrendered the scheme to buy this exam yet again. Anyway because of my accomplice who prescribed me to apply killexams.com Questions & Answers. Inside a compass of simple 4 weeks I become absolutely prepared for this exam.
Get 920-271 certified with actual buy a scrutinize at question fiscal institution.
I purchased 920-271 training % and handed the exam. No problems in any respect, the entirety is precisely as they promise. immaculate exam enjoy, no problems to report. Thanks.
worked difficult on 920-271 books, but the gross thing changed into in the .
hello team, i occupy finished 920-271 in first attempt and thank you loads in your useful questions bank.
Can you believe, each and every 920-271 questions I prepared were asked.
Im going to provide the 920-271 exams now, sooner or later I felt the self notion due to 920-271 training. If I looked at my past each time I willing to provide the tests occupy been given nervous, I realize its humorous but now i am surprised why I felt no self warranty on my, motive is want of 920-271 education, Now im completely prepared can passed my test without problems, so if each and every of us of you felt low self guarantee virtually find registered with the killexams.com and initiate education, sooner or later you felt self warranty.
those 920-271 dumps works extraordinary inside the actual test.
This exam schooling kit has established itself to breathe surely well well worth the coins as I passed the 920-271 exam earlier this week with the score of ninety 4%. each and every questions are valid, this is what they offer you with on the exam! I dont grasp how killexams.com does it, however they occupy been keeping this up for years. My cousin used them for every other IT exam years in the past and says they had been simply as prerogative again within the day. Very answerable and sincere.
Is there someone who passed 920-271 exam?
I passed. Genuine, the exam become tough, so I simply got beyond it due to killexams.com and Exam Simulator. I am upbeat to record that I passed the 920-271 exam and feature as of past due acquired my assertion. The framework questions occupy been the component I turned into most stressed over, so I invested hours honing at the killexams.com exam simulator. It beyond any doubt helped, as consolidated with different segments.
920-271 exam questions are changed, wherein can i ascertain new query bank?
Like many others, I actually occupy currently handed the 920-271 exam. In my case, widespread majority of 920-271 exam questions came precisely from this manual. The solutions are accurate, too, so if you are preparing to buy your 920-271 exam, you could completely rely on this internet site.
WTF! 920-271 questions had been precisely the identical in relaxation test that I were given.
After 2 instances taking my exam and failed, I heard approximately killexams.com guarantee. Then i bought 920-271 Questions solutions. on line trying out Engine helped me to training to resolve query in time. I simulated this check for normally and this benefit me to hold recognition on questions at exam day.Now i am an IT certified! thanks!
Nortel's solution, which contains instant mesh and WLAN technologies, offers on-the-go clients ceaseless access to captious personnel and assistance from both indoor and outside areas, which helps to reduce operational expenses, boost worker productiveness, and enrich client delight through quicker response times. The solution additionally helps SIP-based mostly multimedia and collaborative purposes such as video conferencing, snappily messaging and file sharing.
Nortel's instant Mesh network solution uses instant links to combine access points installed interior or outside to give at ease, seamless access to wireless broadband capabilities. It makes it workable for businesses such as universities to installation WLANs in areas the location it's knotty or charge-prohibitive to quicken cables.
The city of Greenville, N.C. has bought Nortel's WLAN 2300, which helps indoor Wi-Fi facts, voice and multimedia services. Greeneville will expend Nortel's expertise to deliver its workforce with comfy cell entry to the city's database and the skill to respond to constituent and group wants from any zone inside the municipality.
Nortel's WLAN 2300 sequence is designed to benefit birth of superb voice, records and multimedia applications. Its scalability permits the mobility solution to grow as consumers grow, increasing to encompass new clients and functions whereas protecting the preliminary investment.
"Responsive executive is Greenville's exact precedence, and the skill to tarry in contact is a essential component in making inescapable they meet the needs of their community," talked about Rex Wilder, director of assistance expertise, metropolis of Greenville. "Mobility in communications helps manufacture sure personnel can respond prerogative now to ingredients, even when they are out of the office and enables us to maximise taxpayer bucks by means of making inescapable employees are as productive as viable, despite region."
"true mobility has spin into a beneficial asset in latest guidance society as americans more and more prognosticate their laptop capabilities to breathe purchasable to them anyplace they roam," referred to Malcolm Collins, president, business Networks, Nortel. "Nortel's cellular employee retort helps to replicate the workplace environment and enhance productiveness by allowing clients to engage with their key contacts in precise time and entry their corporate networks from any area."
Nortel is teaming up with Trapeze Networks to birth reselling the business's wireless LAN gadget by means of midyear and later co-boost products with embedded Trapeze technology, the companies introduced Wednesday.
Nortel is teaming up with Trapeze Networks to delivery reselling the enterprise's instant LAN equipment by using midyear and later co-boost products with embedded Trapeze know-how, the groups introduced Wednesday.
Nortel had been sourcing a line of WLAN gadget from Airespace, which agreed in January to breathe obtained by using Nortel compete Cisco. Nortel will continue to steer the Airespace-based mostly items, talked about Kyle Klassen, Nortel's director of WLAN product management.
the brand new Nortel WLAN 2300 collection, in line with the MX succession of WLAN switches from Trapeze, will initiate delivery in might also or June, in line with Klassen. Nortel will thoroughly verify the items for interoperability with Nortel's network, voice and safety gear, he noted. Trapeze brings a broader line of items to Nortel than did Airespace, which potential a better appropriate for purchasers starting from small and midsize businesses to colossal organizations, Klassen referred to.
beyond a product stopgap following the Airespace acquisition, the partnership will generate new innovation, each groups noted. With Trapeze's know-how, Nortel plans to benefit firms and repair providers offer secure wired or instant network entry via a unique authentication and protection infrastructure, said Jim Vogt, president and CEO of Trapeze.
The technology could even breathe extended to cellular and different sorts of networks and used in managed features offered by means of carriers, airports and building owners, he pointed out. Trapeze, of Pleasanton, Calif., already presents this technology in its personal WLAN gear, which makes it workable for enterprises to manufacture the most of an current device, reminiscent of a RADIUS server, to handle user entry to the network, Vogt talked about.
"you might breathe translating each and every these dollars you could occupy spent on the wired facet to these new users who are wireless," he said.
The corporations scheme to embed Trapeze know-how in Nortel switches in an endeavor to occupy each and every of the capabilities of each wired and instant switches, in accordance with each Vogt and Klassen. these products likely will spin into obtainable next yr, Klassen mentioned.
Cisco's acquisition of Airespace turned into a ample raise for the switch-based manner to WLANs taken by route of startups akin to Trapeze, Airespace and Aruba, observed Forrester research analyst Ellen Daley. these startups buy some intelligence out of wireless entry features and achieve it in a really generous switch. other vendors, together with Cisco, initially based mostly their concepts on standalone "fats" entry elements connected to a traditional wired LAN.
corporations want extra sophisticated, swap-primarily based WLAN programs as they adopt new wireless functions such as VoIP calls that require bigger fine of carrier, Daley pointed out. They also are looking to dispose of replica programs used nowadays for user authentication and security in wired and instant networks, she referred to. Nortel's deal with Trapeze should shove it alongside that course, Daley noted. however, Trapeze is not the most effectual video game on the town. Aruba, which has a partnership with Alcatel, also is mighty in these areas, she observed.be share of the community World communities on facebook and LinkedIn to palpate upon topics that are prerogative of mind.
NetworkingNortel launches security and placement answersNortel unveiled wireless LAN (WLAN) capabilities and options that allow company to manufacture expend of their present WLAN network to deploy superior enterprise purposes reminiscent of vicinity tracking, superior security options and voice over the WLAN community.
The voice capabilities on the Nortel instant LAN 2300 sequence will manufacture sure that voice excellent is maintained within the presence of other instant site visitors and will enable shoppers to optimize the efficiency of mobile instruments so that you can even breathe adopting the ordinary. This includes the Nortel WLAN Handset 6100 collection, planned for availability in 2Q07. These premise-based WLAN handsets are planned to combine with Nortel’s business VoIP and WLAN systems and provide the flexibility of 802.11 a/b/g assist.
Nortel’s Asset monitoring and administration solution allows organizations to expend their WLAN community to deliver true-time region and tracking of up to 10,000 individual assets or people with a location accuracy of one to 3 meters. The retort combines the Nortel WLAN 2300 collection with Ekahau real-time location system, enabling the expend of RF tags that verify their zone by using interacting with Nortel WLAN 2300 succession access points.
Nortel’s instant Intrusion Detection and Prevention (WIPS) retort gives customers an optional advanced WIPS security upgrade. The retort makes expend of WIPS expertise from AirDefense to permit Nortel WLAN purchasers to spin WLAN 2300 collection access elements into safety sensors that can identify and give protection to the business community in opposition t over 230 various kinds of threats that can goal the wireless network. The retort also gives safety coverage administration and enforcement, and scales from a unique office to lots of of areas.
The finished options can breathe establish now through Nortel and Nortel’s cost-added resellers and integrators.
Agilent introduces in-circuit vectoreless scrutinize at various strategies
Agilent applied sciences Inc. brought Agilent Medalist VTEP v2.0, a suite of vectorless verify concepts that contains the community Parameter measurement expertise.
Agilent’s VTEP v2.0 is designed to aid manufacturers celebrate the vital defects, which might demolish out detection each and every through purposeful scrutinize at various and product cargo.
additionally with VTEP v2.0, users find the improvement of the habitual VTEP know-how, which has bigger sensitivities and enhanced hullabaloo discount, as well as iVTEP, which is centered at integrated circuit applications with minimal frames. iVTEP additionally works for instruments with heat-spreaders and even these with attached warmth-sinks.
Agilent is additionally introducing the Medalist i3070 in-circuit scrutinize at various system for printed circuit board meeting. For more on the Medalist i3070, perceive www.agilent.com/about/newsroom/presrel/2007/20feb-em07014.html.
For greater advice, gratify visit www.agilent.com/see/vtep.
Agilent VTEP v2.0 is obtainable at no extra pervade on each and every Agilent Medalist i3070 techniques, that will start shipping March 2007, and is also attainable free-of-can pervade to current Agilent ICT shoppers on software help contract.
information ManagementEMC expands information infrastructure portfolioEMC Corp. introduced the availability of the EMC Documentum system Suite, a enterprise system management (BPM) solution for analyzing, modeling, orchestrating and optimizing business procedures involving individuals, systems, content material and statistics.
The software also offers conclusion-to-conclusion process lifecycle administration, with capabilities to optimize manner performance at each stage in the process lifecycle, from design and evaluation via execution and monitoring.
The EMC Documentum manner Suite gives:
EMC Documentum system Suite is accessible immediately. For greater counsel on EMC Documentum BPM options, quest counsel from www.software.emc.com/bpm.
NetSupport DNA 2.7 discovers, manages and tracks IT belongings
With the release of NetSupport DNA 2.7, Dynamic network Administration software, IT professionals at such groups can maintain IT costs in investigate.
besides the present home windows and Linux guide, the edition of NetSupport DNA additionally aspects full windows Vista steer and the introduction of optimized start gadget within the utility Distribution part. On the reporting front, the customized question and Reporting tool encompasses an automatic Scheduler and the selection to apportion custom information views to selected operators, additionally protected is the skill to automatically apportion restrictions on software expend with the aid of department and an information Cache controller for networks with towering records volumes.
NetSupport DNA 2.7 includes hardware and utility inventory, software distribution, software and web metering, query-primarily based reporting, alerting, an internet-based assist desk share and remote handle performance.
StorageHP introduces StorageWorks D2D Backup SystemHP added a disk-based mostly backup and restoration device.
The HP StorageWorks D2D Backup device automates and centralizes backup to give facts protection for up to four servers in a unique machine.
HP D2D Backup device aspects an iSCSI interface that plugs into a common Ethernet network and a setup wizard that permits customers to configure the machine.
Consolidating backups onto a unique disk-based mostly gadget eliminates the necessity for assorted direct-connected backup contraptions and the linked management overhead. moreover, browser-based mostly management allows for valued clientele to monitor their HP D2D Backup gear from anyplace on the community, at any time.
The HP D2D Backup gear is also purchasable as a discounted bundle that comprises the HP facts Protector specific application equipment. The bundle offers valued clientele with an entire information protection solution that helps thoroughly automatic each day backup of 4 servers.
The HP StorageWorks D2D Backup gear is attainable now and should breathe bought essentially via HP’s extensive network of more than one hundred forty five,000 channel resellers worldwide.
extra tips about the HP StorageWorks D2D Backup gadget is purchasable at www.hp.com/go/d2d-backup, or view a video presentation.
more counsel about the choices within the HP StorageWorks portfolio is available at www.hp.com/go/storageworks.
While it is very difficult task to select answerable certification questions / answers resources with respect to review, reputation and validity because people find ripoff due to choosing wrong service. Killexams.com manufacture it sure to serve its clients best to its resources with respect to exam dumps update and validity. Most of other's ripoff report complaint clients achieve to us for the brain dumps and pass their exams happily and easily. They never compromise on their review, reputation and quality because killexams review, killexams reputation and killexams client assurance is captious to us. Specially they buy keeping of killexams.com review, killexams.com reputation, killexams.com ripoff report complaint, killexams.com trust, killexams.com validity, killexams.com report and killexams.com scam. If you perceive any unfounded report posted by their competitors with the title killexams ripoff report complaint internet, killexams.com ripoff report, killexams.com scam, killexams.com complaint or something enjoy this, just advocate in sarcasm that there are always indelicate people damaging reputation of generous services due to their benefits. There are thousands of satisfied customers that pass their exams using killexams.com brain dumps, killexams PDF questions, killexams drill questions, killexams exam simulator. Visit Killexams.com, their sample questions and sample brain dumps, their exam simulator and you will definitely know that killexams.com is the best brain dumps site.
1Z0-873 exam prep | 1T6-511 exam questions | 000-M48 study guide | 920-433 braindumps | 00M-220 test prep | HP0-J35 drill test | 005-002 questions and answers | 000-M06 questions and answers | HP2-K34 exam prep | 7303-1 questions answers | HP0-J61 study guide | 1Z0-043 dumps | 1Z0-050 sample test | 000-601 braindumps | 1Z0-550 brain dumps | 1Z0-475 mock exam | HPE2-T30 free pdf | AEPA drill exam | 000-676 actual questions | COG-321 drill test |
Get towering marks in 920-271 exam with these dumps
At killexams.com, they deliver absolutely tested Nortel 920-271 actual Questions and Answers that are lately required for Passing 920-271 exam. They without a doubt enable individuals to find ready to prep the and assure. It is an excellent selection to quicken up your position as an expert inside the Industry.
If you are searching for Pass4sure Nortel 920-271 Dumps containing actual exams questions and answers for the Nortel WLAN 2300 Rls.7.0 implementation(R) and Management Exam preparation, they give most updated and quality wellspring of 920-271 Dumps that is http://killexams.com/pass4sure/exam-detail/920-271. They occupy aggregated a database of 920-271 Dumps questions from actual exams with a specific cessation goal to give you a random to find ready and pass 920-271 exam on the first attempt.
killexams.com Huge Discount Coupons and Promo Codes are as under;
WC2017 : 60% Discount Coupon for each and every exams on website
PROF17 : 10% Discount Coupon for Orders greater than $69
DEAL17 : 15% Discount Coupon for Orders greater than $99
DECSPECIAL : 10% Special Discount Coupon for each and every Orders
killexams.com helps a colossal scope of competitors pass the tests and find their accreditation. They occupy a major wide assortment of productive surveys. Their dumps are strong, slight, updated and of genuinely attractive Great to subdue the requesting circumstances of any IT certifications. killexams.com exam dumps are latest updated in prominently clobber route on well known start and material is released from time to time. Latest killexams.com dumps are open in testing centers with whom we're holding up their relationship to find latest material.
killexams.com Nortel Certification study aides are setup through IT masters. A Great many people objection that an unnecessary scope of questions in this kindly of sizable wide assortment of tutoring evaluations and exam asset, and they might breathe as of late wiped out to deal with the cost of any additional. Seeing killexams.com specialists drill session this far achieving version in the meantime as silent certification that every one the becoming acquainted with is anchored after significant examinations and exam. Everything is to manufacture reassurance for hopefuls on their street to certification.
We occupy Tested and Approved 920-271 Exams. killexams.com offers the most particular and latest IT exam materials which relatively fuse each and every exam subjects. With the steer of their 920-271 reckon materials, you don't necessity to misuse your hazard on examining significant piece of reference books and genuinely necessity to consume 10-20 hours to pro their 920-271 actual questions and answers. Whats more noteworthy, they accouter you with PDF Version and Software Version exam questions and answers. For Software Version materials, Its exhibited to panoply the applicants reenact the Nortel 920-271 exam in an actual environment.
We give free updates. Inside authenticity length, if 920-271 brain dumps which you occupy gotten exceptional, they will order you with the steer of email to down load most extreme latest variety of . On the off peril that you don't pass your Nortel Nortel WLAN 2300 Rls.7.0 implementation(R) and Management exam, They will give you full refund. You should route the verified propagation of your 920-271 exam archive card to us. Ensuing to declaring, they will startlingly accouter you with full REFUND.
killexams.com Huge Discount Coupons and Promo Codes are as under;
WC2017: 60% Discount Coupon for each and every exams on website
PROF17: 10% Discount Coupon for Orders greater than $69
DEAL17: 15% Discount Coupon for Orders greater than $99
DECSPECIAL: 10% Special Discount Coupon for each and every Orders
In the occasion which you prepare for the Nortel 920-271 exam using their exam simulator engine. It is something anyway difficult to prevail for each and every certifications inside the main endeavor. You don't necessity to control each and every dumps or any free deluge/rapidshare each and every stuff. They offer free demo of each IT Certification Dumps. You can watch the interface, question Great and usability of their tutoring exams sooner than you select to purchase.
920-271 Practice Test | 920-271 examcollection | 920-271 VCE | 920-271 study guide | 920-271 practice exam | 920-271 cram
Killexams M2140-726 drill questions | Killexams 3X0-104 drill questions | Killexams HPE2-T34 brain dumps | Killexams 650-042 questions and answers | Killexams HP2-Z05 drill exam | Killexams C2010-579 dumps questions | Killexams 000-224 drill test | Killexams 1Z0-023 actual questions | Killexams P8060-001 VCE | Killexams 9A0-041 test prep | Killexams M2140-648 sample test | Killexams 310-055 study guide | Killexams 000-550 exam prep | Killexams HP0-J25 test prep | Killexams HP2-E24 test prep | Killexams 920-220 mock exam | Killexams F50-528 study guide | Killexams A00-280 test questions | Killexams 1Z0-808 questions and answers | Killexams CEMAP-1 pdf download |
Killexams 70-412 actual questions | Killexams HP2-K40 bootcamp | Killexams CFA-Level-I sample test | Killexams DC0-260 drill test | Killexams 00M-226 test prep | Killexams MB4-219 test prep | Killexams C4040-250 braindumps | Killexams 70-776 drill Test | Killexams MA0-104 cheat sheets | Killexams 3300-1 drill test | Killexams DP-021W pdf download | Killexams HP0-500 VCE | Killexams EN0-001 braindumps | Killexams S90-09A questions and answers | Killexams 70-464 drill test | Killexams 200-047 study guide | Killexams 310-200 actual questions | Killexams M70-101 test questions | Killexams 9A0-125 dump | Killexams ST0-202 exam prep |
In inescapable networking topologies, it may breathe advantageous to maintain associations between endpoints and key transit points to advocate an instance of a service. Such associations are known as Calls. A call does not provide the actual connectivity for...Network Working Group D. Papadimitriou Request for Comments: 4974 Alcatel Updates: 3473 A. Farrel Category: Standards Track former Dog Consulting August 2007 Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions in advocate of Calls Status of This Memo This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements. gratify advert to the current edition of the "Internet Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited. Copyright Notice Copyright (C) The IETF dependence (2007). Abstract In inescapable networking topologies, it may breathe advantageous to maintain associations between endpoints and key transit points to advocate an instance of a service. Such associations are known as Calls. A call does not provide the actual connectivity for transmitting user traffic, but only builds a relationship by which subsequent Connections may breathe made. In Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) such Connections are known as Label Switched Paths (LSPs). This document specifies how GMPLS Resource Reservation Protocol - Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) signaling may breathe used and extended to advocate Calls. These mechanisms provide full and logical Call/Connection separation. The mechanisms proposed in this document are applicable to any environment (including multi-area), and for any nature of interface: packet, layer-2, time-division multiplexed, lambda, or fiber switching. Papadimitriou & Farrel Standards Track [Page 1] RFC 4974 GMPLS RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions August 2007 Table of Contents 1. Introduction ....................................................3 1.1. Applicability to ASON ......................................4 2. Conventions Used in This document ...............................4 3. Requirements ....................................................4 3.1. Basic call function ........................................4 3.2. Call/Connection Separation .................................5 3.3. call Segments ..............................................5 4. Concepts and Terms ..............................................5 4.1. What Is a Call? ............................................5 4.2. A Hierarchy of Calls, Connections, Tunnels, and LSPs .......6 4.3. Exchanging Access Link Capabilities ........................6 4.3.1. Network-Initiated Calls .............................7 4.3.2. User-Initiated Calls ................................7 4.3.3. Utilizing call Setup ................................8 5. Protocol Extensions for Calls and Connections ...................8 5.1. call Setup and Teardown ....................................8 5.2. call Identification ........................................9 5.2.1. Long figure call Identification .......................9 5.2.2. Short figure call Identification ......................9 5.2.3. Short figure call ID Encoding ........................10 5.3. LINK_CAPABILITY protest ....................................11 5.4. Revised Message Formats ...................................12 5.4.1. Notify Message .....................................12 5.5. ADMIN_STATUS protest .......................................13 6. Procedures in advocate of Calls and Connections .................14 6.1. Call/Connection Setup Procedures ..........................14 6.2. call Setup ................................................14 6.2.1. Accepting call Setup ...............................16 6.2.2. call Setup Failure and Rejection ...................16 6.3. Adding a Connections to a call ............................17 6.3.1. Adding a invert Direction LSP to a call ...........18 6.4. Call-Free Connection Setup ................................18 6.5. call crash ............................................18 6.6. Call/Connection Teardown ..................................19 6.6.1. Removal of a Connection from a call ................20 6.6.2. Removal of the terminal Connection from a call .........20 6.6.3. Teardown of an "Empty" call ........................20 6.6.4. Attempted Teardown of a call with Existing Connections ........................................20 6.6.5. Teardown of a call from the Egress .................21 6.7. Control Plane Survivability ...............................21 7. Applicability of call and Connection Procedures ................22 7.1. Network-Initiated Calls ...................................22 7.2. User-Initiated Calls ......................................23 7.3. External call Managers ....................................23 7.3.1. call Segments ......................................23 Papadimitriou & Farrel Standards Track [Page 2] RFC 4974 GMPLS RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions August 2007 8. Non-Support of call ID .........................................24 8.1. Non-Support by External call Managers .....................24 8.2. Non-Support by Transit Node ...............................24 8.3. Non-Support by Egress Node ................................25 9. Security Considerations ........................................25 9.1. call and Connection Security Considerations ...............25 10. IANA Considerations ...........................................26 10.1. RSVP Objects .............................................26 10.2. RSVP oversight Codes and oversight Values ........................27 10.3. RSVP ADMIN_STATUS protest Bits ............................27 11. Acknowledgements ..............................................27 12. References ....................................................28 12.1. Normative References .....................................28 12.2. Informative References ...................................29 1. Introduction This document defines protocol procedures and extensions to support Calls within Generalized MPLS (GMPLS). A call is an association between endpoints and possibly between key transit points (such as network boundaries) in advocate of an instance of a service. The end-to-end association is termed a "Call", and the association between two transit points or between an endpoint and a transit point is termed a "Call Segment". An entity that processes a call or call Segment is called a "Call Manager". A call does not provide the actual connectivity for transmitting user traffic, but only builds a relationship by which subsequent Connections may breathe made. In GMPLS, such Connections are known as Label Switched Paths (LSPs). This document does not modify Connection setup procedures defined in [RFC3473], [RFC4208], and [STITCH]. Connections set up as share of a call result the rules defined in these documents. A call may breathe associated with zero, one, or more than one Connection, and a Connection may breathe associated with zero or one Call. Thus, full and ratiocinative Call/Connection separation is needed. An example of the requirements for Calls can breathe establish in the ITU-T's Automatically Switched Optical Network (ASON) architecture [G.8080] and specific requirements for advocate of Calls in this context can be establish in [RFC4139]. Note, however, that while the mechanisms described in this document meet the requirements stated in [RFC4139], they occupy wider applicability. Papadimitriou & Farrel Standards Track [Page 3] RFC 4974 GMPLS RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions August 2007 The mechanisms defined in this document are equally applicable to any packet (PSC) interface, layer-2 interfaces (L2SC), TDM capable interfaces, LSC interfaces, or FSC interfaces. The mechanisms and protocol extensions are backward compatible, and can breathe used for Call management where only the call Managers necessity to breathe conscious of the protocol extensions. 1.1. Applicability to ASON [RFC4139] details the requirements on GMPLS signaling to fullfil the ASON architecture described in [G.8080]. The mechanisms described in this document meet the requirements for Calls as described in Sections 4.2 and 4.3 of [RFC4139] and the additional Call-related requirements in Sections 4.4, 4.7, 5, and 6 of [RFC4139]. [ASON-APPL] describes the applicability of GMPLS protocols to the ASON architecture. 2. Conventions Used in This document The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to breathe interpreted as described in [RFC 2119]. In addition, the reader is assumed to breathe chummy with the terminology used in [RFC3471], [RFC3473], [RFC3477], and [RFC3945]. 3. Requirements 3.1. Basic call Function The call concept is used to deliver the following capabilities: - Verification and identification of the call initiator (prior to LSP setup). - advocate of virtual concatenation with diverse path component LSPs. - Association of multiple LSPs with a unique call (note aspects related to recovery are detailed in [RFC4426] and [GMPLS-E2E]). - Facilitation of control plane operations by allowing an operational status change of the associated LSP. Procedures and protocol extensions to advocate call setup, and the association of Calls with Connections are described in Section 5 and onwards of this document. Papadimitriou & Farrel Standards Track [Page 4] RFC 4974 GMPLS RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions August 2007 3.2. Call/Connection Separation full and ratiocinative call and Connection separation is required. That is: - It MUST breathe workable to establish a Connection without dependence on a Call. - It MUST breathe workable to establish a call without any associated Connections. - It MUST breathe workable to associate more than one Connection with a Call. - Removal of the terminal Connection associated with a call SHOULD NOT result in the automatic removal of the call except as a matter of local policy at the ingress of the Call. - Signaling of a Connection associated with a call MUST NOT require the distribution or retention of Call-related information (state) within the network. 3.3. call Segments call Segment capabilities MUST breathe supported. Procedures and (GMPLS) RSVP-TE signaling protocol extensions to advocate call Segments are described in Section 7.3.1 of this document. 4. Concepts and Terms The concept of a call and a Connection are also discussed in the ASON architecture [G.8080] and [RFC4139]. This section is not intended as a substitute for those documents, but is a brief summary of the key terms and concepts. 4.1. What Is a Call? A call is an agreement between endpoints possibly in cooperation with the nodes that provide access to the network. call setup may include capability exchange, policy, authorization, and security. A call is used to facilitate and manage a set of Connections that provide end-to-end data services. While Connections require situation to breathe maintained at nodes along the data path within the network, Calls finish not involve the participation of transit nodes except to forward the call management requests as transparent messages. Papadimitriou & Farrel Standards Track [Page 5] RFC 4974 GMPLS RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions August 2007 A call may breathe established and maintained independently of the Connections that it supports. 4.2. A Hierarchy of Calls, Connections, Tunnels, and LSPs Clearly, there is a hierarchical relationship between Calls and Connections. One or more Connections may breathe associated with a Call. A Connection may not breathe share of more than one Call. A Connection may, however, exist without a Call. In GMPLS RSVP-TE [RFC3473], a Connection is identified with a GMPLS TE Tunnel. Commonly, a Tunnel is identified with a unique LSP, but it should breathe eminent that for protection, load balancing, and many other functions, a Tunnel may breathe supported by multiple parallel LSPs. The following identification reproduces this hierarchy. - call IDs are unique within the context of the pair of addresses that are the source and destination of the Call. - Tunnel IDs are unique within the context of the Session (that is the destination of the Tunnel). Applications may also find it convenient to advocate the Tunnel ID unique within the context of a Call. - LSP IDs are unique within the context of a Tunnel. Note that the Call_ID value of zero is reserved and MUST NOT breathe used during LSP-independent call establishment. Throughout the remains of this document, the terms LSP and Tunnel are used interchangeably with the term Connection. The case of a Tunnel that is supported by more than one LSP is covered implicitly. 4.3. Exchanging Access Link Capabilities In an overlay model, it is useful for the ingress node of an LSP to know the link capabilities of the link between the network and the remote overlay network. In the language of [RFC4208], the ingress node can manufacture expend of information about the link between the egress core node (CN) and the remote edge node (EN). They call this link the egress network link. This information may allow the ingress node to tailor its LSP request to appropriate those capabilities and to better utilize network resources with respect to those capabilities. For example, this might breathe used in transparent optical networks to supply information on lambda availability on egress network links, or, where the egress CN is capable of signal regeneration, it might provide a mechanism for negotiating signal quality attributes (such Papadimitriou & Farrel Standards Track [Page 6] RFC 4974 GMPLS RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions August 2007 as bit oversight rate). Similarly, in multi-domain routing environments, it could breathe used to provide end-to-end selection of component links (i.e., spatial attribute negotiation) where TE links occupy been bundled based on technology specific attributes. In some circumstances, the Traffic Engineering Database (TED) may contain enough information for decisions to breathe made about which egress network link to use. In other circumstances, the TED might not contain this information and call setup may provide a suitable mechanism to exchange information for this purpose. The Call- responder may expend the call parameters to select a subset of the available egress network links between the egress CN and the remote EN, and may report these links and their capabilities on the Call response so that the Call-initiator may select a suitable link. The sections that result betoken the cases where the TED may be used, and those where call parameter exchange may breathe appropriate. 4.3.1. Network-Initiated Calls Network-initiated Calls arise when the ingress (and correspondingly the egress) fib within the network and there may breathe no necessity to dole additional link capability information over and above the information distributed by the TE and GMPLS extensions to the IGP. Further, it is workable that future extensions to these IGPs will allow the distribution of more detailed information including optical impairments. 4.3.2. User-Initiated Calls User-initiated Calls arise when the ingress (and correspondingly the egress) fib outside the network. Edge link information may not be visible within the core network, nor (and specifically) at other edge nodes. This may avert an ingress from requesting suitable LSP characteristics to ensure successful LSP setup. Various solutions to this problem exist, including the definition of static TE links (that is, not advertised by a routing protocol) between the CNs and ENs. Nevertheless, special procedures may be necessary to advertise to the edge nodes outside of the network information about egress network links without also advertising the information specific to the contents of the network. In the future, when the requirements on the information that needs to breathe supported are better understood, TE extensions to EGPs may be defined to provide this function, and new rules for leaking TE information between routing instances may breathe used. Papadimitriou & Farrel Standards Track [Page 7] RFC 4974 GMPLS RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions August 2007 4.3.3. Utilizing call Setup When IGP and EGP solutions are not available at the User-to-Network Interface (UNI), there is silent a requirement to occupy the knowledge of the remote edge link capabilities at the local edge nodes. The call setup procedure provides an opportunity to ascertain edge link capabilities of remote edge nodes before LSP setup is attempted. - The Call-responder can recur information on one or more egress network links. The Call-responder could recur a full list of the available links with information about the link capabilities, or it could filter the list to recur information about only those links that might breathe appropriate to advocate the Connections needed by the Call. To finish this second option, the Call-responder must determine such appropriate links from information carried in the call request including destination of the Call, and the smooth of service (bandwidth, protection, etc.) required. - On receiving a call response, the Call-initiator must determine paths for the Connections (LSPs) that it will set up. The way that it does this is out of scope for this document since it is an implementation-specific, algorithmic process. However, it can buy as input the information about the available egress network links as supplied in the call response. The LINK_CAPABILITY protest is defined to allow this information to be exchanged. The information that is included in this protest is similar to that distributed by GMPLS-capable IGPs (see [RFC 4202]). 5. Protocol Extensions for Calls and Connections This section describes the protocol extensions needed in advocate of call identification and management of Calls and Connections. Procedures for the expend of these protocol extensions are described in Section 6. 5.1. call Setup and Teardown Calls are established independently of Connections through the expend of the Notify message. The Notify message is a targeted message and does not necessity to result the path of LSPs through the network. Simultaneous call and Connection establishment (sometimes referred to as piggybacking) is not supported. Papadimitriou & Farrel Standards Track [Page 8] RFC 4974 GMPLS RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions August 2007 5.2. call Identification As soon as the concept of a call is introduced, it is necessary to advocate some means of identifying the Call. This becomes particularly captious when Calls and Connections are separated and Connections must contain some reference to the Call. A call may breathe identified by a sequence of bytes that may have considerable (but not arbitrary) length. A call ID of 40 bytes would not breathe unreasonable. It is not the location of this document to supply rules for encoding or parsing call IDs, but it must provide a suitable means to communicate call IDs within the protocol. The full call identification is referred to as the long call ID. The Call_ID is only pertinent at the sender and receiver nodes. Maintenance of this information in the signaling situation is not mandated at any intermediate node. Thus, no change in [RFC3473] transit implementations is required and there are no backward compatibility issues. Forward compatibility is maintained by using the existing default values to betoken that no call processing is required. Further, the long call ID is not required as share of the Connection (LSP) situation even at the sender and receiver nodes so long as some figure of correlation is available. This correlation is provided through the short call ID. 5.2.1. Long figure call Identification The long call ID is only required on the Notify message used to establish the Call. It is carried in the "Session Name" field of the SESSION_ATTRIBUTE protest on the Notify message. A unique value per call is inserted in the "Session Name" field by the initiator of the Call. Subsequent core nodes MAY inspect this protest and MUST forward this protest transparently across network interfaces until reaching the egress node. Note that the structure of this field MAY breathe the protest of further formatting depending on the naming convention(s). However, [RFC 3209] defines the "Session Name" field as a Null padded panoply string, so any formatting conventions for the call ID must breathe limited to this scope. 5.2.2. Short figure call Identification The Connections (LSPs) associated with a call necessity to carry a reference to the call - the short call ID. A new field is added to the signaling protocol to identify an individual LSP with the call to which it belongs. Papadimitriou & Farrel Standards Track [Page 9] RFC 4974 GMPLS RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions August 2007 The new field is a 16-bit identifier (unique within the context of the address pairing provided by the Tunnel_End_Point_Address and the Sender_Address of the SENDER_TEMPLATE object) that MUST breathe exchanged on the Notify message during call initialization and is used on all subsequent LSP messages that are associated with the Call. This identifier is known as the short call ID and is encoded as described in Section 5.2.3. The call ID MUST NOT breathe used as share of the processing to determine the session to which an RSVP signaling message applies. This does not generate any backward compatibility issue since the reserved field of the SESSION protest defined in [RFC 3209] MUST NOT breathe examined on receipt. In the unlikely case of short Call_ID exhaustion, local node policy decides upon specific actions to breathe taken, but might comprise the use of second Sender_Address. Local policy details are outside of the scope of this document. 5.2.3. Short figure call ID Encoding The short call ID is carried in a 16-bit field in the SESSION object carried on the Notify message used during call setup, and on all messages during LSP setup and management. The field used was previously reserved (MUST breathe set to zero on transmission and ignored on receipt). This ensures backward compatibility with nodes that do not utilize Calls. The device below shows the new version of the object. Class = SESSION, Class-Num = 1, C-Type = 7(IPv4)/8(IPv6) 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ ~ IPv4/IPv6 Tunnel cessation Point Address ~ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Call_ID | Tunnel ID | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Extended Tunnel ID | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ IPv4/IPv6 Tunnel cessation Point Address: 32 bits/128 bits (see [RFC 3209]) Call_ID: 16 bits A 16-bit identifier used in the SESSION protest that remains constant over the life of the Call. The Call_ID value MUST breathe set to zero when there is no corresponding Call. Papadimitriou & Farrel Standards Track [Page 10] RFC 4974 GMPLS RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions August 2007 Tunnel ID: 16 bits (see [RFC 3209]) Extended Tunnel ID: 32 bits/128 bits (see [RFC 3209]) 5.3. LINK_CAPABILITY Object The LINK_CAPABILITY protest is introduced to advocate link capability exchange during call setup and MAY breathe included in a Notify message used for call setup. This optional protest includes the link-local capabilities of a link joining the Call-initiating node (or Call- terminating node) to the network. The specific node is indicated by the source address of the Notify message. The link reported can breathe a unique link or can breathe a bundled link [RFC4201]. The Class Number is selected so that the nodes that finish not recognize this protest drop it silently. That is, the top bit is set and the next bit is clear. This protest has the following format: Class-Num = 133 (form 10bbbbbb), C_Type = 1 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | // (Subobjects) // | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ The contents of the LINK_CAPABILITY protest is defined as a succession of variable-length data items called subobjects. The subobject format is defined in [RFC 3209]. The following subobjects are currently defined. - nature 1: the link local IPv4 address of a link or a numbered bundle using the format defined in [RFC 3209]. - nature 2: the link local IPv6 address of a link or a numbered bundle using the format defined in [RFC 3209]. - nature 4: the link local identifier of an unnumbered link or bundle using the format defined in [RFC3477]. Papadimitriou & Farrel Standards Track [Page 11] RFC 4974 GMPLS RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions August 2007 - nature 64: the Maximum Reservable Bandwidth corresponding to this link or bundle (see [RFC4201]). - nature 65: the interface switching capability descriptor (see [RFC 4202]) corresponding to this link or bundle (see also [RFC4201]). Note: future revisions of this document may extend the above list. A unique instance of this protest MAY breathe used to exchange capability information relating to more than one link or bundled link. In this case, the following ordering MUST breathe used: - each link MUST breathe identified by an identifier subobject (Type 1, 2, or 4) - capability subobjects (Type 64 or 65, and future subobjects) MUST breathe placed after the identifier subobject for the link or bundle to which they refer. Multiple instances of the LINK_CAPABILITY protest within the same Notify message are not supported by this specification. In the event that a Notify message contains multiple LINK_CAPABILITY objects, the receiver SHOULD process the first one as classic and SHOULD ignore subsequent instances of the object. 5.4. Revised Message Formats The Notify message is enhanced to advocate call establishment and teardown of Calls. perceive Section 6 for a description of the procedures. 5.4.1. Notify Message The Notify message is modified in advocate of call establishment by the optional addition of the LINK_CAPABILITY object. Further, the SESSION_ATTRIBUTE protest is added to the <notify session> sequence to carry the long call ID. The presence of the SESSION_ATTRIBUTE object MAY breathe used to distinguish a Notify message used for call management, but perceive Section 5.5 for another mechanism. The <notify session list> MAY breathe used to simultaneously set up multiple Calls. Papadimitriou & Farrel Standards Track [Page 12] RFC 4974 GMPLS RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions August 2007 The format of the Notify Message is as follows: <Notify message> ::= <Common Header> [ <INTEGRITY> ] [[ <MESSAGE_ID_ACK> | <MESSAGE_ID_NACK>]...] [ <MESSAGE_ID> ] <ERROR_SPEC> <notify session list> <notify session list> ::= [ <notify session list> ] <notify session> <notify session> ::= <SESSION> [ <ADMIN_STATUS> ] [ <POLICY_DATA>...] [ <LINK_CAPABILITY> ] [ <SESSION_ATTRIBUTE> ] [ <sender descriptor> | <flow descriptor> ] <sender descriptor> ::= perceive [RFC3473] <flow descriptor> ::= perceive [RFC3473] 5.5. ADMIN_STATUS Object Notify messages exchanged for call control and management purposes carry a specific new bit (the call Management or C bit) in the ADMIN_STATUS object. [RFC3473] indicates that the format and contents of the ADMIN_STATUS protest are as defined in [RFC3471]. The new "C" bit is added for call control as shown below. 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |R| Reserved |C|T|A|D| +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Reflect (R): 1 bit - perceive [RFC3471] Testing (T): 1 bit - perceive [RFC3471] Administratively down (A): 1 bit - perceive [RFC3471] Deletion in progress (D): 1 bit - perceive [RFC3471] call Management (C): 1 bit This bit is set when the message is being used to control and manage a Call. The procedures for the expend of the C bit are described in Section 6. Papadimitriou & Farrel Standards Track [Page 13] RFC 4974 GMPLS RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions August 2007 6. Procedures in advocate of Calls and Connections 6.1. Call/Connection Setup Procedures This section describes the processing steps for call and Connection setup. There are three cases considered: - A call is set up without any associated Connection. It is assumed that Connections will breathe added to the call at a later time, but this is neither a requirement nor a constraint. - A Connection may breathe added to an existing Call. This may happen if the call was set up without any associated Connections, or if another Connection is added to a call that already has one or more associated Connections. - A Connection may breathe established without any reference to a Call (see Section 6.4). This encompasses the previous LSP setup procedure. Note that a call MUST NOT breathe imposed upon a Connection that is already established. To finish so would require changing the short Call ID in the SESSION protest of the existing LSPs and this would constitute a change in the Session Identifier. This is not allowed by existing protocol specifications. call and Connection teardown procedures are described later in Section 6.6. 6.2. call Setup A call is set up before, and independent of, LSP (i.e., Connection) setup. call setup MAY necessitate verification of the link status and link capability negotiation between the call ingress node and the Call egress node. The procedure described below is applied only once for a call and hence only once for the set of LSPs associated with a Call. The Notify message (see [RFC3473]) is used to signal the call setup request and response. The new call Management (C) bit in the ADMIN_STATUS protest is used to betoken that this Notify is managing a Call. The Notify message is sent with source and destination IPv4/IPv6 addresses set to any of the routable ingress/egress node addresses respectively. Papadimitriou & Farrel Standards Track [Page 14] RFC 4974 GMPLS RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions August 2007 At least one session MUST breathe listed in the <notify session list> of the Notify message. In order to allow for long identification of the Call, the SESSION_ATTRIBUTE protest is added as share of the <notify session list>. Note that the ERROR_SPEC protest is not pertinent in call setup and MUST carry the oversight Code zero ("Confirmation") to betoken that there is no error. During call setup, the ADMIN_STATUS protest is sent with the following bits set. Bits not listed MUST breathe set to zero. R - to understanding the egress to respond C - to betoken that the Notify message is managing a Call. The SESSION, SESSION_ATTRIBUTE, SENDER_TEMPLATE, SENDER_TSPEC objects included in the <notify session> of the Notify message are built as follows. - The SESSION protest includes as Tunnel_End_Point_Address any of the Call-terminating (egress) node's IPv4/IPv6 routable addresses. The Call_ID is set to a non-zero value unique within the context of the address pairing provided by the Tunnel_End_Point_Address and the Sender_Address from the SENDER_TEMPLATE protest (see below). This value will breathe used as the short call ID carried on each and every messages for LSPs associated with this Call. Note that the Call_ID value of zero is reserved and MUST NOT be used since it will breathe present in SESSION objects of LSPs that are not associated with Calls. The Tunnel_ID of the SESSION protest is not pertinent for this procedure and SHOULD breathe set to zero. The Extended_Tunnel_ID of the SESSION protest is not pertinent for this procedure and MAY breathe set to zero or to an address of the ingress node. - The SESSION_ATTRIBUTE protest contains priority flags. Currently no expend of these flags is envisioned, however, future labor may identify value in assigning priorities to Calls; accordingly the Priority fields MAY breathe set to non-zero values. not anyone of the Flags in the SESSION_ATTRIBUTE protest is pertinent to this process and this field SHOULD breathe set to zero. The Session title field is used to carry the long call Id as described in Section 5. - The SENDER_TEMPLATE protest includes as Sender Address any of the Call-initiating (ingress) node's IPv4/IPv6 routable addresses. The LSP_ID is not pertinent and SHOULD breathe set to zero. - The bandwidth value inserted in the SENDER_TSPEC and FLOWSPEC objects MUST breathe ignored upon receipt and SHOULD breathe set to zero when sent. Papadimitriou & Farrel Standards Track [Page 15] RFC 4974 GMPLS RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions August 2007 Additionally, ingress/egress nodes that necessity to communicate their respective link local capabilities may comprise a LINK_CAPABILITY protest in the Notify message. The receiver of a Notify message may identify whether it is share of call management or reporting an oversight by the presence or absence of the SESSION_ATTRIBUTE protest in the <notify session list>. Full clarity, however, may breathe achieved by inspection of the new Call Management (C) bit in the ADMIN_STATUS object. Note that the POLICY_DATA protest may breathe included in the <notify session list> and MAY breathe used to identify requestor credentials, account numbers, limits, quotas, etc. This protest is opaque to RSVP, which simply passes it to policy control when required. Message IDs MUST breathe used during call setup. 6.2.1. Accepting call Setup A node that receives a Notify message carrying the ADMIN_STATUS protest with the R and C bits set is being requested to set up a Call. The receiver MAY fulfill authorization and policy according to local requirements. If the call is acceptable, the receiver responds with a Notify message reflecting the information from the call request with two exceptions. - The responder removes any LINK_CAPABLITY protest that was received and MAY insert a LINK_CAPABILITY protest that describes its own access link. - The ADMIN_STATUS protest is sent with only the C bit set. All other bits MUST breathe set to zero. The responder MUST expend the Message ID protest to ensure reliable delivery of the response. If no Message ID Acknowledgement is received after the configured number of retries, the responder SHOULD continue to assume that the call was successfully established. Call liveliness procedures are covered in Section 6.7. 6.2.2. call Setup Failure and Rejection call setup may fail or breathe rejected. If the Notify message can not breathe delivered, no Message ID acknowledgement will breathe received by the sender. In the event that the sender has retransmitted the Notify message a configurable number Papadimitriou & Farrel Standards Track [Page 16] RFC 4974 GMPLS RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions August 2007 of times without receiving a Message ID Acknowledgement (as described in [RFC 2961]), the initiator SHOULD declare the call failed and SHOULD route a call teardown request (see Section 6.6). It is also workable that a Message ID Acknowledgement is received but no call response Notify message is received. In this case, the initiator MAY re-send the call setup request a configurable number of times (see Section 6.7) before declaring that the call has failed. At this point, the initiator MUST route a call teardown request (see Section 6.6). If the Notify message cannot breathe parsed or is in error, it MAY be responded to with a Notify message carrying the oversight code 13 ("Unknown protest class") or 14 ("Unknown protest C-Type") if appropriate to the oversight detected. The call setup MAY breathe rejected by the receiver because of security, authorization, or policy reasons. Suitable oversight codes already exist [RFC 2205] and can breathe used in the ERROR_SPEC protest included in the Notify message sent in response. oversight response Notify messages SHOULD also expend the Message ID object to achieve answerable delivery. No action should breathe taken on the failure to receive a Message ID Acknowledgement after the configured number of retries. 6.3. Adding a Connections to a Call Once a call has been established, LSPs can breathe added to the Call. Since the short call ID is share of the SESSION object, any LSP that has the selfsame call ID value in the SESSION protest belongs to the same Call, and the Notify message used to establish the call carried the selfsame call ID in its SESSION object. There will breathe no confusion between LSPs that are associated with a call and those which are not, since the call ID value MUST breathe equal to zero for LSPs that are not associated with a Call, and MUST NOT be equal to zero for a convincing call ID. LSPs for different Calls can breathe distinguished because the call ID is unique within the context of the source address (in the SENDER_TEMPLATE object) and the destination address (in the SESSION object). Ingress and egress nodes MAY group together LSPs associated with the selfsame call and process them as a group according to implementation requirements. Transit nodes necessity not breathe conscious of the association of multiple LSPs with the selfsame Call. Papadimitriou & Farrel Standards Track [Page 17] RFC 4974 GMPLS RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions August 2007 The ingress node MAY select to set the "Session Name" of an LSP to match the long call ID of the associated Call. The C bit of the ADMIN_STATUS protest MUST NOT breathe set on LSP messages including on Notify messages that pertain to the LSP and MUST be ignored. 6.3.1. Adding a invert Direction LSP to a Call Note that once a call has been established, it is symmetric. That is, either cessation of the call may add LSPs to the Call. Special keeping is needed when managing LSPs in the invert direction since the addresses in the SESSION and SENDER_TEMPLATE are reversed. However, since the short call ID is unique in the context of a given ingress-egress address pair, it may safely breathe used to associate the LSP with the Call. Note that since Calls are defined here to breathe symmetrical, the issue of potential call ID crash arises. This is discussed in Section 6.5. 6.4. Call-Free Connection Setup It continues to breathe workable to set up LSPs as per [RFC3473] without associating them with a Call. If the short call ID in the SESSION protest is set to zero, there is no associated call and the Session title field in the SESSION_ATTRIBUTE protest MUST breathe interpreted simply as the title of the session (see [RFC 3209]). The C bit of the ADMIN_STATUS protest MUST NOT breathe set on messages for LSP control, including on Notify messages that pertain to LSPs, and MUST breathe ignored when received on such messages. 6.5. call Collision Since Calls are symmetrical, it is workable that both ends of a Call will attempt to establish Calls with the selfsame long call IDs at the selfsame time. This is only an issue if the source and destination address pairs match. This situation can breathe avoided by applying some rules to the contents of the long call ID, but such mechanisms are outside the scope of this document. If a node that has sent a call setup request and has not yet received a response itself receives a call setup request with the selfsame long call ID and matching source/destination addresses, it SHOULD process as follows: Papadimitriou & Farrel Standards Track [Page 18] RFC 4974 GMPLS RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions August 2007 - If its source address is numerically greater than the remote source address, it MUST discard the received message and continue to wait for a response to its setup request. - If its source address is numerically smaller than the remote source address, it MUST discard situation associated with the Call setup that it initiated, and MUST respond to the received Call setup. If a node receives a call setup request carrying an address pair and long call ID that match an existing Call, the node MUST recur an oversight message (Notify message) with the new oversight Code "Call Management" and the new oversight Value "Duplicate Call" in response to the new call request, and MUST NOT manufacture any changes to the existing Call. A further possibility for contention arises when short call IDs are assigned by a pair of nodes for two separate Calls that are set up simultaneously using different long call IDs. In this event, a node receives a call setup request carrying a short call ID that matches one that it previously sent for the selfsame address pair. The following processing MUST breathe followed: - If the receiver's source address is numerically greater than the remote source address, the receiver returns an oversight (Notify message) with the new oversight Code "Call Management" and the new oversight Value "Call ID Contention". - If the receiver's source address is numerically less than the remote source address, the receiver accepts and processes the Call request. It will receive an oversight message sent as described above, and at that point, it selects a new short call ID and re- sends the call setup request. 6.6. Call/Connection Teardown As with Call/Connection setup, there are several cases to consider. - Removal of a Connection from a Call - Removal of the terminal Connection from a Call - Teardown of an "empty" Call The case of tearing down an LSP that is not associated with a Call does not necessity to breathe examined as it follows exactly the procedures described in [RFC3473]. Papadimitriou & Farrel Standards Track [Page 19] RFC 4974 GMPLS RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions August 2007 6.6.1. Removal of a Connection from a Call An LSP that is associated with a call may breathe deleted using the yardstick procedures described in [RFC3473]. No special procedures are required. Note that it is not workable to remove an LSP from a call without deleting the LSP. It is not convincing to change the short call ID from non-zero to zero since this involves a change to the SESSION object, which is not allowed. 6.6.2. Removal of the terminal Connection from a Call When the terminal LSP associated with a call is deleted, the question arises as to what happens to the Call. Since a call may exist independently of Connections, it is not always acceptable to mumble that the removal of the terminal LSP from a call removes the Call. The removal of the terminal LSP does not remove the call and the procedures described in the next Section MUST breathe used to delete the Call. 6.6.3. Teardown of an "Empty" Call When each and every LSPs occupy been removed from a Call, the call may breathe torn down or left for expend by future LSPs. Deletion of Calls is achieved by sending a Notify message just as for call setup, but the ADMIN_STATUS protest carries the R, D, and C bits on the teardown request and the D and C bits on the teardown response. Other bits MUST breathe set to zero. When a Notify message is sent for deleting a call and the initiator does not receive the corresponding reflected Notify message (or possibly even the Message ID Ack), the initiator MAY retry the deletion request using the selfsame retry procedures as used during Call establishment. If no response is received after full retry, the node deleting the call MAY declare the call deleted, but under such circumstances the node SHOULD avoid re-using the long or short Call IDs for at least five times the Notify refresh period. 6.6.4. Attempted Teardown of a call with Existing Connections If a Notify request with the D bit of the ADMIN_STATUS protest set is received for a call for which LSPs silent exist, the request MUST be rejected with the oversight Code "Call Management" and oversight Value "Connections silent Exist". The situation of the call MUST NOT be changed. Papadimitriou & Farrel Standards Track [Page 20] RFC 4974 GMPLS RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions August 2007 6.6.5. Teardown of a call from the Egress Since Calls are symmetric, they may breathe torn down from the ingress or egress. When the call is "empty" (has no associated LSPs), it may breathe deleted by the egress sending a Notify message just as described above. Note that there is a possibility that both ends of a call initiate call deletion at the selfsame time. In this case, the Notify message acting as teardown request MAY breathe interpreted by its recipient as a teardown response. But since the Notify messages acting as teardown requests carry the R bit in the ADMIN_STATUS object, they MUST be responded to anyway. If a teardown request Notify message is received for an unknown call ID, it is, nevertheless, responded to in the affirmative. 6.7. Control Plane Survivability Delivery of Notify messages is secured using Message ID Acknowledgements as described in previous sections. Notify messages provide end-to-end communication that does not rely on constant paths through the network. Notify messages are routed according to IGP routing information. No consideration is, therefore, required for network resilience (for example, make- before-break, protection, snappily re-route), although end-to-end resilience is of interest for node restart and completely disjoint networks. occasional Notify messages SHOULD breathe sent by the initiator and terminator of the call to advocate the call alive and to handle ingress or egress node restart. The time period for these retransmissions is a local matter, but it is RECOMMENDED that this period should be twice the shortest refresh period of any LSP associated with the Call. When there are no LSPs associated with a Call, an LSR is RECOMMENDED to expend a refresh period of no less than one minute. The Notify messages are identical to those sent as if establishing the call for the first time, except for the LINK_CAPABILITY object, which may occupy changed since the call was first established, due to, e.g., the establishment of Connections, link failures, or the addition of new component links. The current link information is useful for the establishment of subsequent Connections. A node that receives a refresh Notify message carrying the R bit in the ADMIN_STATUS object MUST respond with a Notify response. A node that receives a refresh Notify message (response or request) MAY reset its timer - thus, in classic processing, Notify refreshes involve a unique exchange once per time period. Papadimitriou & Farrel Standards Track [Page 21] RFC 4974 GMPLS RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions August 2007 A node (sender or receiver) that is unsure of the status of a Call MAY immediately route a Notify message as if establishing the call for the first time. Failure to receive a refresh Notify request has no specific meaning. A node that fails to receive a refresh Notify request MAY route its own refresh Notify request to establish the status of the Call. If a node receives no response to a refresh Notify request (including no Message ID Acknowledgement), a node MAY assume that the remote node is unreachable or unavailable. It is a local policy matter whether this causes the local node to teardown associated LSPs and delete the Call. In the event that an edge node restarts without preserved state, it MAY relearn LSP situation from adjacent nodes and call situation from remote nodes. If a Path or Resv message is received with a non-zero call ID but without the C bit in the ADMIN_STATUS, and for a call ID that is not recognized, the receiver is RECOMMENDED to assume that the Call establishment is delayed and ignore the received message. If the call setup never materializes, the failure by the restarting node to refresh situation will understanding the LSPs to breathe torn down. Optionally, the receiver of such an LSP message for an unknown call ID may recur an oversight (PathErr or ResvErr message) with the oversight code "Call Management" and oversight Value "Unknown call ID". 7. Applicability of call and Connection Procedures This section considers the applicability of the different Call establishment procedures at the NNI and UNI reference points. This section is informative and is not intended to prescribe or prevent other options. 7.1. Network-Initiated Calls Since the link properties and other traffic-engineering attributes are likely known through the IGP, the LINK_CAPABILITY protest is not usually required. In multi-domain networks, it is workable that access link properties and other traffic-engineering attributes are not known since the domains finish not share this sort of information. In this case, the call setup mechanism may comprise the LINK_CAPABILITY object. Papadimitriou & Farrel Standards Track [Page 22] RFC 4974 GMPLS RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions August 2007 7.2. User-Initiated Calls It is workable that the access link properties and other traffic- engineering attributes are not shared across the core network. In this case, the call setup mechanism may comprise the LINK_CAPABILITY object. Further, the first node within the network may breathe answerable for managing the Call. In this case, the Notify message that is used to set up the call is addressed by the user network edge node to the first node of the core network. Moreover, neither the long call ID nor the short call ID is supplied (the Session title Length is set to zero and the call ID value is set to zero). The Notify message is passed to the first core node, which is answerable for generating the long and short call IDs before dispatching the message to the remote call cessation point (which is known from the SESSION object). Further, when used in an overlay context, the first core node is allowed (see [RFC4208]) to replace the Session title assigned by the ingress node and passed in the Path message. In the case of Call management, the first core node: 1) MAY insert a long call ID in the Session title of a Path message. 2) MUST replace the Session title with that originally issued by the user edge node when it returns the Resv message to the ingress node. 7.3. External call Managers Third party call management agents may breathe used to apply policy and authorization at a point that is neither the initiator nor terminator of the Call. The previous example is a particular case of this, but the process and procedures are identical. 7.3.1. call Segments call Segments exist between a set of default and configured External call Managers along a path between the ingress and egress nodes, and expend the protocols described in this document. The techniques that are used by a given service provider to identify which External call Managers within its network should process a given call are beyond the scope of this document. An External call Manager uses classic IP routing to route the Notify message to the next External call Manager. Notify messages (requests Papadimitriou & Farrel Standards Track [Page 23] RFC 4974 GMPLS RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions August 2007 and responses) are therefore encapsulated in IP packets that identify the sending and receiving External call Managers, but the addresses used to identify the call (the Sender Address in the SENDER_TEMPLATE protest and the Tunnel Endpoint Address in the SESSION object) continue to identify the endpoints of the Call. 8. Non-Support of call ID It is captious that the procedures described above operate as seamlessly as workable with legacy nodes that finish not advocate the extensions described. Clearly, there is no necessity to reckon the case where the Call initiator does not advocate call setup initiation. 8.1. Non-Support by External call Managers It is unlikely that a call initiator will breathe configured to route Call establishment Notify requests to an external call manager, including the first core node, if that node does not advocate call setup. A node that receives an unexpected call setup request will topple into one of the following categories. - Node does not advocate RSVP. The message will fail to breathe delivered or responded to. No Message ID Acknowledgement will breathe sent. The initiator will retry and then give up. - Node supports RSVP or RSVP-TE but not GMPLS. The message will be delivered but not understood. It will breathe discarded. No Message ID Acknowledgement will breathe sent. The initiator will retry and then give up. - Node supports GMPLS but not call management. The message will be delivered, but parsing will fail because of the presence of the SESSION_ATTRIBUTE object. A Message ID Acknowledgement may be sent before the parse fails. When the parse fails, the Notify message may breathe discarded in which case the initiator will retry and then give up; alternatively, a parse oversight may breathe generated and returned in a Notify message which will betoken to the initiator that call management is not supported. 8.2. Non-Support by Transit Node Transit nodes SHOULD NOT examine Notify messages that are not addressed to them. However, they will perceive short call IDs in all messages for each and every LSPs associated with Calls. Papadimitriou & Farrel Standards Track [Page 24] RFC 4974 GMPLS RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions August 2007 Previous specifications situation that these fields SHOULD breathe ignored on receipt and MUST breathe transmitted as zero. This might breathe interpreted by some implementations as sense that the fields should breathe zeroed before the objects are forwarded. If this happens, LSP setup will not breathe possible. If either of the fields is zeroed either on the Path or the Resv message, the Resv message will achieve the initiator with the field set to zero - this is an indication to the initiator that some node in the network is preventing call management. expend of specific Routes may benefit to mitigate this issue by avoiding such nodes. Ultimately, however, it may breathe necessary to upgrade the offending nodes to handle these protocol extensions. 8.3. Non-Support by Egress Node It is unlikely that an attempt will breathe made to set up a call to a remote node that does not advocate Calls. If the egress node does not advocate call management through the Notify message, it will react (as described in Section 8.1) in the selfsame route as an External call Manager. 9. Security Considerations gratify advert to each of the documents referenced in the following sections for a description of the security considerations applicable to the features that they provide. 9.1. call and Connection Security Considerations call setup is vulnerable to attacks both of spoofing and denial of service. Since call setup uses Notify messages, the process can be protected by the expend of the INTEGRITY protest to secure those messages as described in [RFC 2205] and [RFC3473]. Deployments where security is a concern SHOULD expend this mechanism. Implementations and deployments MAY additionally protect the Call setup exchange using end-to-end security mechanisms such as those provided by IPsec (see [RFC-4302] and [RFC-4303]), or using RSVP security [RFC 2747]. Note, additionally, that it would breathe desirable to expend the process of independent call establishment, where the call is set up separately from the LSPs, to apply an extra smooth of authentication and policy for the end-to-end LSPs above that which is available with Call-less, hop-by-hop LSP setup. However doing so will require additional work to set up security associations between the peer and the call manager that meet the requirements of [RFC 4107]. The mechanism described in this document is expected to meet this expend case when combined with Papadimitriou & Farrel Standards Track [Page 25] RFC 4974 GMPLS RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions August 2007 this additional work. Application of this mechanism to the authentication and policy expend case prior to standardization of a security solution is inappropriate and outside the current applicability of the mechanism. The frequency of call establishment is application subject and hard to generalize. Key exchange for Call-related message exchanges is therefore something that should breathe configured or arranged dynamically in different deployments according to the counsel in [RFC 4107]. Note that the remote RSVP-TE signaling relationship between call endpoints is no different from the signaling relationship between LSRs that establish an LSP. That is, the LSRs are not necessarily IP-adjacent in the control plane in either case. Thus, key exchange should be regarded as a remote procedure, not a unique hop procedure. There are several procedures for automatic remote exchange of keys, and IKEv2 [RFC4306] is particularly suggested in [RFC3473]. 10. IANA Considerations 10.1. RSVP Objects A new RSVP protest is introduced. IANA has made an assignment from the "RSVP Parameters" registry using the sub-registry "Class Names, Class Numbers, and Class Types". o LINK_CAPABILITY object Class-Num = 133 (form 10bbbbbb) The Class Number is selected so that nodes not recognizing this protest drop it silently. That is, the top bit is set and the next bit is cleared. C-Type = 1 (TE Link Capabilities) The LINK_CAPABILITY protest is only defined for inclusion on Notify messages. advert to Section 5.3 of this document. IANA maintains a list of subobjects that may breathe carried in this object. This list is maintained in the registry entry for the LINK_CAPABILITY protest as is common drill for the subobjects of other RSVP objects. For each subobject, IANA lists: - subobject nature number - subobject name - reference indicating where subobject is defined. Papadimitriou & Farrel Standards Track [Page 26] RFC 4974 GMPLS RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions August 2007 The initial list of subobjects is provided in Section 5.3 of this document. 10.2. RSVP oversight Codes and oversight Values A new RSVP oversight Code and new oversight Values are introduced. IANA has made assignments from the "RSVP Parameters" registry using the sub- registry "Error Codes and Globally-Defined oversight Value Sub-Codes". o oversight Codes: - call Management (value 32) o oversight Values: - call Management/Call ID Contention (value 1) - call Management/Connections silent Exist (value 2) - call Management/Unknown call ID (value 3) - call Management/Duplicate call (value 4) 10.3. RSVP ADMIN_STATUS protest Bits [GMPLS-E2E] requested that IANA manage the bits of the RSVP ADMIN_STATUS object. A new "Administrative Status Information Flags" sub-registry of the "GMPLS Signaling Parameters" registry was created. This document defines one new bit, the C bit, to breathe tracked in that sub-registry. Bit number 28 has been assigned. perceive Section 5.5 of this document. 11. Acknowledgements The authors would enjoy to thank George Swallow, Yakov Rekhter, Lou Berger, Jerry Ash, and Kireeti Kompella for their very useful input to, and comments on, an earlier revision of this document. Thanks to Lyndon Ong and Ben Mack-Crane for lengthy discussions during and after working group terminal call, and to Deborah Brungard for a final, detailed review. Thanks to Suresh Krishnan for the GenArt review, and to Magnus Nystrom for discussions about security. Useful comments were received during IESG review from Brian Carpenter, Lars Eggert, Ted Hardie, Sam Hartman, and Russ Housley. Papadimitriou & Farrel Standards Track [Page 27] RFC 4974 GMPLS RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions August 2007 12. References 12.1. Normative References [GMPLS-E2E] Lang, J., Ed., Rekhter, Y., Ed., and D. Papadimitriou, Ed., "RSVP-TE Extensions in advocate of End-to-End Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Recovery", RFC 4872, May 2007. [RFC 2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for expend in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. [RFC 2205] Braden, R., Ed., Zhang, L., Berson, S., Herzog, S., and S. Jamin, "Resource ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP) -- Version 1 Functional Specification", RFC 2205, September 1997. [RFC 2747] Baker, F., Lindell, B., and M. Talwar, "RSVP Cryptographic Authentication", RFC 2747, January 2000. [RFC 2961] Berger, L., Gan, D., Swallow, G., Pan, P., Tommasi, F., and S. Molendini, "RSVP Refresh Overhead Reduction Extensions", RFC 2961, April 2001. [RFC 3209] Awduche, D., Berger, L., Gan, D., Li, T., Srinivasan, V., and G. Swallow, "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP Tunnels", RFC 3209, December 2001. [RFC3471] Berger, L., Ed., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Functional Description", RFC 3471, January 2003. [RFC3473] Berger, L., Ed., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Resource ReserVation Protocol-Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions", RFC 3473, January 2003. [RFC3477] Kompella, K. and Y. Rekhter, "Signalling Unnumbered Links in Resource ReSerVation Protocol - Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE)", RFC3477, January 2003. [RFC3945] Mannie, E., Ed., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Architecture", RFC3945, October 2004. [RFC4201] Kompella, K., Rekhter, Y., and L. Berger, "Link Bundling in MPLS Traffic Engineering (TE)", RFC4201, October 2005. Papadimitriou & Farrel Standards Track [Page 28] RFC 4974 GMPLS RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions August 2007 [RFC 4202] Kompella, K., Ed., and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "Routing Extensions in advocate of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)", RFC 4202, October 2005. [RFC4208] Swallow, G., Drake, J., Ishimatsu, H., and Y. Rekhter, "Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) User- Network Interface (UNI): Resource ReserVation Protocol- Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) advocate for the Overlay Model", RFC4208, October 2005. [RFC-4302] Kent, S., "IP Authentication Header", RFC-4302, December 2005. [RFC-4303] Kent, S., "IP Encapsulating Security Payload (ESP)", RFC 4303, December 2005. [RFC4306] Kaufman, C., Ed., "Internet Key Exchange (IKEv2) Protocol", RFC4306, December 2005. [RFC4426] Lang, J., Ed., Rajagopalan, B., Ed., and D. Papadimitriou, Ed., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Recovery Functional Specification", RFC 4426, March 2006. 12.2. Informative References [ASON-APPL] Drake, J., Papadimitriou, D., Farrel, A., Brungard, D., Ali, Z., Ayyangar, A., Ould-Brahim, H., and D. Fedyk, "Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) RSVP-TE Signalling in support of Automatically Switched Optical Network (ASON), labor in Progress, July 2005. [RFC 4107] Bellovin, S. and R. Housley, "Guidelines for Cryptographic Key Management", BCP 107, RFC 4107, June 2005. [RFC4139] Papadimitriou, D., Drake, J., Ash, J., Farrel, A., and L. Ong, "Requirements for Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Signaling Usage and Extensions for Automatically Switched Optical Network (ASON)", RFC4139, July 2005. [STITCH] Ayyangar, A., Kompella, K., Vasseur, JP., and A. Farrel, "Label Switched Path Stitching with Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching Traffic Engineering (GMPLS TE)", labor in Progress, April 2007. Papadimitriou & Farrel Standards Track [Page 29] RFC 4974 GMPLS RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions August 2007 For information on the availability of the following document, please perceive http://www.itu.int. [G.8080] ITU-T, "Architecture for the Automatically Switched Optical Network (ASON)," Recommendation G.8080/ Y.1304, November 2001 (and Revision, January 2003). Authors' Addresses John Drake Boeing Satellite Systems 2300 East Imperial Highway El Segundo, CA 90245 EMail: John.E.Drake2@boeing.com Deborah Brungard (AT&T) Rm. D1-3C22 - 200 S. Laurel Ave. Middletown, NJ 07748, USA EMail: firstname.lastname@example.org Zafar Ali (Cisco) 100 South Main St. #200 Ann Arbor, MI 48104, USA EMail: email@example.com Arthi Ayyangar (Nuova Systems) 2600 San Tomas Expressway Santa Clara, CA 95051 EMail: firstname.lastname@example.org Don Fedyk (Nortel Networks) 600 Technology Park Drive Billerica, MA, 01821, USA EMail: email@example.com Contact Addresses Dimitri Papadimitriou Alcatel-Lucent, Fr. Wellesplein 1, B-2018 Antwerpen, Belgium Phone: +32 3 240-8491 EMail: firstname.lastname@example.org Adrian Farrel former Dog Consulting Phone: +44 (0) 1978 860944 EMail: email@example.com Papadimitriou & Farrel Standards Track [Page 30] RFC 4974 GMPLS RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions August 2007 Full Copyright Statement Copyright (C) The IETF dependence (2007). This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors retain each and every 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, THE IETF dependence AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING task oblige DISCLAIM each and every WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE expend 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 breathe claimed to pertain to the implementation or expend of the technology described in this document or the extent to which any license under such rights might or might not breathe available; nor does it portray that it has made any independent endeavor to identify any such rights. Information on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be establish in BCP 78 and BCP 79. Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any assurances of licenses to breathe made available, or the result of an attempt made to obtain a generic license or permission for the expend of such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this specification can breathe obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at http://www.ietf.org/ipr. 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 breathe required to implement this standard. gratify address the information to the IETF at firstname.lastname@example.org. Acknowledgement Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the Internet Society. Papadimitriou & Farrel Standards Track [Page 31]
3COM [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
AccessData [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
ACFE [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
ACI [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
Acme-Packet [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
ACSM [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
ACT [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Admission-Tests [13 Certification Exam(s) ]
ADOBE [93 Certification Exam(s) ]
AFP [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
AICPA [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
AIIM [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Alcatel-Lucent [13 Certification Exam(s) ]
Alfresco [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Altiris [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
Amazon [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
American-College [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
Android [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
APA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
APC [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
APICS [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
Apple [69 Certification Exam(s) ]
AppSense [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
APTUSC [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Arizona-Education [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
ARM [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Aruba [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
ASIS [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
ASQ [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
ASTQB [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
Autodesk [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
Avaya [101 Certification Exam(s) ]
AXELOS [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Axis [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Banking [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
BEA [5 Certification Exam(s) ]
BICSI [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
BlackBerry [17 Certification Exam(s) ]
BlueCoat [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
Brocade [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
Business-Objects [11 Certification Exam(s) ]
Business-Tests [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
CA-Technologies [20 Certification Exam(s) ]
Certification-Board [10 Certification Exam(s) ]
Certiport [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
CheckPoint [43 Certification Exam(s) ]
CIDQ [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
CIPS [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
Cisco [318 Certification Exam(s) ]
Citrix [48 Certification Exam(s) ]
CIW [18 Certification Exam(s) ]
Cloudera [10 Certification Exam(s) ]
Cognos [19 Certification Exam(s) ]
College-Board [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
CompTIA [76 Certification Exam(s) ]
ComputerAssociates [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
Consultant [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
Counselor [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
CPP-Institute [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
CSP [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
CWNA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
CWNP [13 Certification Exam(s) ]
CyberArk [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Dassault [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
DELL [11 Certification Exam(s) ]
DMI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
DRI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
ECCouncil [22 Certification Exam(s) ]
ECDL [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
EMC [128 Certification Exam(s) ]
Enterasys [13 Certification Exam(s) ]
Ericsson [5 Certification Exam(s) ]
ESPA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Esri [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
ExamExpress [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
Exin [40 Certification Exam(s) ]
ExtremeNetworks [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
F5-Networks [20 Certification Exam(s) ]
FCTC [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
Filemaker [9 Certification Exam(s) ]
Financial [36 Certification Exam(s) ]
Food [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
Fortinet [14 Certification Exam(s) ]
Foundry [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
FSMTB [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Fujitsu [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
GAQM [9 Certification Exam(s) ]
Genesys [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
GIAC [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
Google [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
GuidanceSoftware [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
H3C [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
HDI [9 Certification Exam(s) ]
Healthcare [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
HIPAA [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
Hitachi [30 Certification Exam(s) ]
Hortonworks [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
Hospitality [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
HP [752 Certification Exam(s) ]
HR [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
HRCI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Huawei [21 Certification Exam(s) ]
Hyperion [10 Certification Exam(s) ]
IAAP [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
IAHCSMM [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
IBM [1533 Certification Exam(s) ]
IBQH [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
ICAI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
ICDL [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
IEEE [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
IELTS [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
IFPUG [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
IIA [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
IIBA [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
IISFA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Intel [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
IQN [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
IRS [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
ISA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
ISACA [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
ISC2 [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
ISEB [24 Certification Exam(s) ]
Isilon [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
ISM [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
iSQI [7 Certification Exam(s) ]
ITEC [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Juniper [65 Certification Exam(s) ]
LEED [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Legato [5 Certification Exam(s) ]
Liferay [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Logical-Operations [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Lotus [66 Certification Exam(s) ]
LPI [24 Certification Exam(s) ]
LSI [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
Magento [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
Maintenance [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
McAfee [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
McData [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
Medical [68 Certification Exam(s) ]
Microsoft [375 Certification Exam(s) ]
Mile2 [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
Military [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Misc [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Motorola [7 Certification Exam(s) ]
mySQL [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
NBSTSA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
NCEES [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
NCIDQ [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
NCLEX [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
Network-General [12 Certification Exam(s) ]
NetworkAppliance [39 Certification Exam(s) ]
NI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
NIELIT [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Nokia [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
Nortel [130 Certification Exam(s) ]
Novell [37 Certification Exam(s) ]
OMG [10 Certification Exam(s) ]
Oracle [282 Certification Exam(s) ]
P&C [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
Palo-Alto [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
PARCC [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
PayPal [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Pegasystems [12 Certification Exam(s) ]
PEOPLECERT [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
PMI [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
Polycom [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
PostgreSQL-CE [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Prince2 [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
PRMIA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
PsychCorp [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
PTCB [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
QAI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
QlikView [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Quality-Assurance [7 Certification Exam(s) ]
RACC [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Real Estate [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Real-Estate [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
RedHat [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
RES [5 Certification Exam(s) ]
Riverbed [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
RSA [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
Sair [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
Salesforce [5 Certification Exam(s) ]
SANS [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
SAP [98 Certification Exam(s) ]
SASInstitute [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
SAT [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
SCO [10 Certification Exam(s) ]
SCP [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
SDI [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
See-Beyond [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Siemens [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Snia [7 Certification Exam(s) ]
SOA [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
Social-Work-Board [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
SpringSource [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
SUN [63 Certification Exam(s) ]
SUSE [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
Sybase [17 Certification Exam(s) ]
Symantec [135 Certification Exam(s) ]
Teacher-Certification [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
The-Open-Group [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
TIA [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
Tibco [18 Certification Exam(s) ]
Trainers [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
Trend [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
TruSecure [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
USMLE [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
VCE [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
Veeam [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
Veritas [33 Certification Exam(s) ]
Vmware [58 Certification Exam(s) ]
Wonderlic [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
Worldatwork [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
XML-Master [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
Zend [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
Dropmark : http://killexams.dropmark.com/367904/11587058
Wordpress : http://wp.me/p7SJ6L-Rg
Issu : https://issuu.com/trutrainers/docs/920-271
Dropmark-Text : http://killexams.dropmark.com/367904/12124625
Blogspot : http://killexams-braindumps.blogspot.com/2017/11/never-miss-these-920-271-questions.html
RSS Feed : http://feeds.feedburner.com/DontMissTheseNortel920-271Dumps
weSRCH : https://www.wesrch.com/business/prpdfBU1HWO000WQVA
Calameo : http://en.calameo.com/books/004923526ed5c02a9b213
publitas.com : https://view.publitas.com/trutrainers-inc/pass4sure-920-271-dumps-and-practice-tests-with-real-questions
Box.net : https://app.box.com/s/uqx00dtrd6j4tt7zooy8jw7us3bjlagw
zoho.com : https://docs.zoho.com/file/5psib3734f13517bf4bd5b37b9614517da9f8