GMPLS Signaling Extensions for Control of Evolving G.709 Optical Transport Networks
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-12

The information below is for an old version of the document that is already published as an RFC
Document Type RFC Internet-Draft (ccamp WG)
Authors Fatai Zhang  , Guoying Zhang  , Sergio Belotti  , Daniele Ceccarelli  , Khuzema Pithewan 
Last updated 2020-01-21 (latest revision 2013-09-12)
Replaces draft-zhang-ccamp-gmpls-evolving-g709
Stream Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF)
Formats plain text pdf htmlized bibtex
Reviews
Stream WG state Submitted to IESG for Publication
Document shepherd Lou Berger
Shepherd write-up Show (last changed 2013-07-04)
IESG IESG state RFC 7139 (Proposed Standard)
Consensus Boilerplate Yes
Telechat date
Responsible AD Adrian Farrel
Send notices to (None)
IANA IANA review state IANA OK - Actions Needed
IANA action state RFC-Ed-Ack
Network Working Group                                   Fatai Zhang, Ed. 
Internet Draft                                                    Huawei 
Updates: 4328                                              Guoying Zhang 
Category: Standards Track                                           CATR 
                                                          Sergio Belotti 
                                                          Alcatel-Lucent 
                                                           D. Ceccarelli 
                                                                Ericsson 
                                                        Khuzema Pithewan 
                                                                Infinera 
Expires: March 13, 2014                               September 13, 2013 
                                    
                                    
      Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling 
  Extensions for the evolving G.709 Optical Transport Networks Control 
                                    
                                    
              draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-12.txt 

Status of this Memo 

   This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with   
   the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering   
   Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups.  Note that   
   other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-   
   Drafts. 

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months   
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any   
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference   
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 

   The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at   
   http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. 

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at   
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. 

   This Internet-Draft will expire on March 13, 2014. 

    

Abstract 
 
   ITU-T Recommendation G.709 [G709-2012] has introduced new Optical 
   channel Data Unit (ODU) containers (ODU0, ODU4, ODU2e and ODUflex) 

 
 
Zhang                    Expires March 2014                   [Page 1] 


draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-12.txt           September 2013 

   and enhanced Optical Transport Networking (OTN) flexibility.  

   This document updates the ODU-related portions of RFC4328 to provide 
   the extensions to the Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching 
   (GMPLS) signaling to control the full set of OTN features including 
   ODU0, ODU4, ODU2e and ODUflex. 

    

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 be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. 

    

Table of Contents 

   1. Introduction ................................................. 3 
   2. Terminology .................................................. 3 
   3. GMPLS Extensions for the Evolving G.709 - Overview ........... 3 
   4. Generalized Label Request .................................... 4 
   5. Extensions for Traffic Parameters for the Evolving G.709 ..... 6 
      5.1. Usage of ODUflex(CBR) Traffic Parameters ................ 8 
      5.2. Usage of ODUflex(GFP) Traffic Parameters ................ 10 
      5.3. Notification on Errors of OTN-TDM Traffic Parameters .... 10 
   6. Generalized Label ............................................ 11 
      6.1. OTN-TDM Switching Type Generalized Label ................ 11 
      6.2. Procedures .............................................. 14 
         6.2.1. Notification on Label Error ........................ 15 
      6.3. Supporting Virtual Concatenation and Multiplication ..... 16 
      6.4. Examples ................................................ 17 
   7. Supporting Hitless Adjustment of ODUflex (GFP) ............... 18 
   8. Operations, Administration and Maintenance (OAM) Considerations19 
   9. Control Plane Backward Compatibility Considerations........... 20 
   10. Security Considerations  .................................... 20 
   11. IANA Considerations.......................................... 20 
   12. References .................................................. 22 
      12.1. Normative References ................................... 22 
      12.2. Informative References ................. ............... 23 
   13. Contributors ................................................ 24 
   14. Authors' Addresses .......................................... 26 
   15. Acknowledgment .............................................. 27 
 
 
 
 
Zhang                    Expires March 2014                   [Page 2] 

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-12.txt           September 2013 

 
1. Introduction 

   With the evolution and deployment of Optical Transport Network (OTN) 
   technology, it is necessary that appropriate enhanced control 
   technology support be provided for [G709-2012].  

   [OTN-FWK] provides a framework to allow the development of protocol 
   extensions to support GMPLS and Path Computation Element (PCE) 
   control of OTN as specified in [G709-2012]. Based on this framework, 
   [OTN-INFO] evaluates the information needed by the routing and 
   signaling process in OTNs to support GMPLS control of OTN. 

   [RFC4328] describes the control technology details that are specific 
   to the 2001 revision of the G.709 specification. This document 
   updates the ODU-related portions of [RFC4328] to provide Resource 
   ReserVation Protocol-Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) extensions to 
   support of control for [G709-2012].  

2. Terminology 

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",   
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this   
   document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. 

3. GMPLS Extensions for the Evolving G.709 - Overview 

   New features for the evolving OTN, for example, new ODU0, ODU2e, ODU4 
   and ODUflex containers are specified in [G709-2012]. The 
   corresponding new Signal Types are summarized below: 

      - Optical Channel Transport Unit (OTUk): 
         . OTU4 

      - Optical Channel Data Unit (ODUk): 
         . ODU0 
         . ODU2e 
         . ODU4 
         . ODUflex 

   A new Tributary Slot granularity (i.e., 1.25Gbps) is also described 
   in [G709-2012]. Thus, there are now two Tributary Slot (TS) 
   granularities for the foundation OTN ODU1, ODU2 and ODU3 containers. 
   The TS granularity at 2.5Gbps is used on the legacy interfaces while 
   the new 1.25Gbps is used on the new interfaces. 

 
 
Zhang                    Expires March 2014                   [Page 3] 

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-12.txt           September 2013 

   In addition to the support of ODUk mapping into OTUk (k = 1, 2, 3, 
   4), [G709-2012] encompasses the multiplexing of ODUj (j = 0, 1, 2, 
   2e, 3, flex) into an ODUk (k > j), as described in Section 3.1.2 of 
   [OTN-FWK]. 

   Virtual Concatenation (VCAT) of Optical channel Payload Unit-k (OPUk) 
   (OPUk-Xv, k = 1/2/3, X = 1...256) is also supported by [G709-2012]. 
   Note that VCAT of OPU0 / OPU2e / OPU4 / OPUflex is not supported per 
   [G709-2012]. 

   [RFC4328] describes GMPLS signaling extensions to support the control 
   for the 2001 revision of the G.709 specification. However, [RFC4328] 
   does not provide the means to signal all the new Signal Types and 
   related mapping and multiplexing functionalities. Moreover, it 
   supports only the deprecated auto- Multiframe Structure Identifier 
   (MSI) mode which assumes that the Tributary Port Number (TPN) is 
   automatically assigned in the transmit direction and not checked in 
   the receive direction. 

   This document extends the G.709 Traffic Parameters described in 
   [RFC4328] and presents a new flexible and scalable OTN-TDM 
   Generalized Label format. Additionally, procedures about Tributary 
   Port Number assignment through control plane are also provided in 
   this document. 

4. Generalized Label Request  

   The GENERALIZED_LABEL_REQUEST object, as described in [RFC3471], 
   carries the Label Switched Path (LSP) Encoding Type, the Switching 
   Type and the Generalized Protocol Identifier (G-PID).  

   [RFC4328] extends the GENERALIZED_LABEL_REQUEST object, introducing 
   two new code-points for the LSP Encoding Type (i.e., G.709 ODUk 
   (Digital Path) and G.709 Optical Channel) and adding a list of G-PID 
   values in order to accommodate the 2001 revision of the G.709 
   specification. 

   This document follows these extensions and a new Switching Type is 
   introduced to indicate the ODUk switching capability [G709-2012] in 
   order to support backward compatibility with [RFC4328], as described 
   in [OTN-FWK]. The new Switching Type (OTN-TDM Switching Type) is 
   defined in [OTN-OSPF]. 

   This document also updates the G-PID values defined in [RFC4328]: 

   Value    G-PID Type  
   -----    ----------        
 
 
Zhang                    Expires March 2014                   [Page 4] 


draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-12.txt           September 2013 

   47       Type field updated from "G.709 ODUj" to "ODU-2.5G" to 
            indicate transport of Digital Paths (e.g., at 2.5, 10 and 
            40Gbps) via 2.5Gbps TS granularity. 

   56       Type field updated from "ESCON" to "SBCON/ESCON" to align 
            with [G709-2012] payload type 0x1A. 

   Note: Value 47 includes mapping of Synchronous Digital Hierarchy 
   (SDH). 

   In the case of ODU multiplexing, the Lower Order ODU (LO ODU) (i.e., 
   the client signal) may be multiplexed into Higher Order ODU (HO ODU) 
   via 1.25G TS granularity, 2.5G TS granularity or ODU-any defined 
   below. Since the G-PID type "ODUk" defined in [RFC4328] is only used 
   for 2.5Gbps TS granularity, two new G-PID types are defined as 
   follows:  

   - ODU-1.25G:  Transport of Digital Paths at 1.25, 2.5, 10, 40 and 100 
                 Gbps via 1.25Gbps TS granularity. 

   - ODU-any:    Transport of Digital Paths at 1.25, 2.5, 10, 40 and 100 
                 Gbps via 1.25 or 2.5Gbps TS granularity (i.e., the 
                 fallback procedure is enabled and the default value of 
                 1.25Gbps TS granularity can be fallen back to 2.5Gbps 
                 if needed). 

   The full list of payload types defined in [G709-2012] and their 
   mapping to existing and new G-PID types are as follows: 

     G.709 
    Payload 
     Type     G-PID        Type/Comment             LSP Encoding 
     ====     =====    =====================     =================== 
     0x01              No standard value 
     0x02      49      CBRa                      G.709 ODUk 
     0x03      50      CBRb                      G.709 ODUk 
     0x04      32      ATM                       G.709 ODUk 
     0x05      59(TBA) Framed GFP                G.709 ODUk 
               54      Ethernet MAC (framed GFP) G.709 ODUk 
               70(TBA) 64B/66B GFP-F Ethernet    G.709 ODUk (k=2) 
     0x06              Not signaled 
     0x07      55      Ethernet PHY              G.709 ODUk (k=0,3,4) 
                       (transparent GFP)             
     0x08      58      Fiber Channel             G.709 ODUk (k=2e) 
     0x09      59(TBA) Framed GFP                G.709 ODUk (k=2) 
               70(TBA) 64B/66B GFP-F Ethernet    G.709 ODUk (k=2) 
     0x0A      60(TBA) STM-1                     G.709 ODUk (k=0) 
 
 
Zhang                    Expires March 2014                   [Page 5] 

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-12.txt           September 2013 

     0x0B      61(TBA) STM-4                     G.709 ODUk (k=0) 
     0x0C      58      Fiber Channel             G.709 ODUk (k=0) 
     0x0D      58      Fiber Channel             G.709 ODUk (k=1) 
     0x0E      58      Fiber Channel             G.709 ODUflex 
     0x0F      58      Fiber Channel             G.709 ODUflex 
     0x10      51      BSOT                      G.709 ODUk 
     0x11      52      BSNT                      G.709 ODUk 
     0x12      62(TBA) InfiniBand                G.709 ODUflex 
     0x13      62(TBA) InfiniBand                G.709 ODUflex 
     0x14      62(TBA) InfiniBand                G.709 ODUflex 
     0x15      63(TBA) Serial Digital Interface  G.709 ODUk (k=0) 
     0x16      64(TBA) Serial Digital            G.709 ODUk (k=1) 
                       Interface/1.001 
     0x17      63(TBA) Serial Digital Interface  G.709 ODUk (k=1) 
     0x18      64(TBA) Serial Digital            G.709 ODUflex 
                       Interface/1.001 
     0x19      63(TBA) Serial Digital Interface  G.709 ODUflex 
     0x1A      56      SBCON/ESCON               G.709 ODUk (k=0) 
               (IANA to update Type field) 
     0x1B      65(TBA) DVB_ASI                   G.709 ODUk (k=0) 
     0x1C      58      Fiber Channel             G.709 ODUk 
     0x20      47      G.709 ODU-2.5G            G.709 ODUk (k=2,3) 
               (IANA to update Type field) 
               66(TBA) G.709 ODU-1.25G           G.709 ODUk (k=1) 
     0x21      66(TBA) G.709 ODU-1.25G           G.709 ODUk (k=2,3,4) 
               67(TBA) G.709 ODU-Any             G.709 ODUk (k=2,3) 
     0x55              No standard value 
     0x66              No standard value 
     0x80-0x8F         No standard value 
     0xFD      68(TBA) Null Test                 G.709 ODUk 
     0xFE      69(TBA) Random Test               G.709 ODUk 
     0xFF              No standard value 

   Note: Values 59 and 70 include mapping of SDH. 

   Note that the mapping types for ODUj into OPUk are unambiguously per 
   Table 7-10 of [G709-2012], so it does not need to carry mapping type 
   information in the signaling. 

   Note also that additional information on G.709 client mapping can be 
   found in [G7041]. 

5. Extensions for Traffic Parameters for the Evolving G.709 

   The Traffic Parameters for OTN-TDM capable Switching Type are carried 
   in the OTN-TDM SENDER_TSPEC object in the Path message and the OTN-
   TDM FLOWSPEC object in the Resv message. The objects have the 
 
 
Zhang                    Expires March 2014                   [Page 6] 

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-12.txt           September 2013 

   following class and type: 

      -  OTN-TDM SENDER_TSPEC object: Class = 12, C-Type = 7 (TBA) 
      -  OTN-TDM FLOWSPEC object: Class = 9, C-Type = 7 (TBA) 

   The format of Traffic Parameters in these two objects is defined as 
   follows: 

      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 
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
     |  Signal Type  |                       Reserved                | 
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
     |              NVC              |        Multiplier (MT)        | 
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
     |                            Bit_Rate                           | 
     +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 

   Signal Type: 8 bits 

      As defined in [RFC4328] Section 3.2.1, with the following 
      additional values:  

       Value    Type 
       -----    ---- 
       4        ODU4 (i.e., 100Gbps) 
       9        OCh at 100Gbps 
       10       ODU0 (i.e., 1.25Gbps) 
       11       ODU2e (i.e., 10Gbps for FC1200 and GE LAN) 
       12~19    Reserved (for future use) 
       20       ODUflex(CBR) (i.e., 1.25*N Gbps) 
       21       ODUflex(Generic Framing Procedure-Framed (GFP-F)),  
                resizable (i.e., 1.25*N Gbps) 
       22       ODUflex(GFP-F), non resizable (i.e., 1.25*N Gbps) 
       23~255   Reserved (for future use) 
    
   NVC (Number of Virtual Components): 16 bits 

      As defined in [RFC4328] Section 3.2.3. This field MUST be set to 
      0 for ODUflex Signal Types. 

   Multiplier (MT): 16 bits 

      As defined in [RFC4328] Section 3.2.4. This field MUST be set to 
      1 for ODUflex Signal Types. 
 
 
Zhang                    Expires March 2014                   [Page 7] 

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-12.txt           September 2013 

   Bit_Rate: 32 bits 

      In case of ODUflex including ODUflex(CBR) and ODUflex(GFP) Signal 
      Types, this field indicates the nominal bit rate of ODUflex 
      expressed in bytes per second, encoded as a 32-bit IEEE single-
      precision floating-point number (referring to [RFC4506] and 
      [IEEE]). For other Signal Types, this field MUST be set to zero 
      on transmission and MUST be ignored on receipt and SHOULD be 
      passed unmodified by transit nodes. 

5.1. Usage of ODUflex(CBR) Traffic Parameters 

   In case of ODUflex(CBR), the information of Bit_Rate carried in the 
   ODUflex Traffic Parameters MUST be used to determine the actual 
   bandwidth of ODUflex(CBR) (i.e., Bit_Rate * (1 +/- Tolerance)). 
   Therefore the total number of tributary slots N in the HO ODUk link 
   can be reserved correctly. Where:  

         N = Ceiling of 

   ODUflex(CBR) nominal bit rate * (1 + ODUflex(CBR) bit rate tolerance) 
   --------------------------------------------------------------------- 
       ODTUk.ts nominal bit rate * (1 - HO OPUk bit rate tolerance) 

   In this formula, the ODUflex(CBR) nominal bit rate is the bit rate of 
   the ODUflex(CBR) on the line side, i.e., the client signal bit rate 
   after applying the 239/238 factor (according to Clause 7.3, Table 7-2 
   of [G709-2012]) and the transcoding factor T (if needed) on the CBR 
   client. According to clauses 17.7.3, 17.7.4 and 17.7.5 of [G709-
   2012]: 

   ODUflex(CBR) nominal bit rate = CBR client bit rate * (239/238) / T 

   The ODTUk.ts (Optical channel Data Tributary Unit k with ts tributary 
   slots) nominal bit rate is the nominal bit rate of the tributary slot 
   of ODUk, as shown in Table 1 (referring to Table 7-7 of [G709-2012]). 

              Table 1 - Actual TS bit rate of ODUk (in Kbps) 

      ODUk.ts       Minimum          Nominal          Maximum 
      ----------------------------------------------------------- 
      ODU2.ts    1,249,384.632    1,249,409.620     1,249,434.608 
      ODU3.ts    1,254,678.635    1,254,703.729     1,254,728.823 
      ODU4.ts    1,301,683.217    1,301,709.251     1,301,735.285 

   Note that: 

 
 
Zhang                    Expires March 2014                   [Page 8] 

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-12.txt           September 2013 

      Minimum bit rate of ODUTk.ts =  
         ODTUk.ts nominal bit rate * (1 - HO OPUk bit rate tolerance) 

      Maximum bit rate of ODTUk.ts =  
         ODTUk.ts nominal bit rate * (1 + HO OPUk bit rate tolerance) 

      Where: HO OPUk bit rate tolerance = 20ppm (parts per million) 

   Note that the bit rate tolerance is implicit in Signal Type and the 
   ODUflex(CBR) bit rate tolerance is fixed and it is equal to 100ppm as 
   described in Table 7-2 of [G709-2012]. 

   Therefore, a node receiving a Path message containing ODUflex(CBR)  
   nominal bit rate can allocate precise number of tributary slots and 
   set up the cross-connection for the ODUflex service.  

   Note that for different ODUk, the bit rates of the tributary slots 
   are different, and so the total number of tributary slots to be 
   reserved for the ODUflex(CBR) may not be the same on different HO 
   ODUk links. 

   An example is given below to illustrate the usage of ODUflex(CBR) 
   Traffic Parameters. 

     +-----+             +---------+             +-----+ 
     |     +-------------+ +-----+ +-------------+     | 
     |     +=============+\| ODU |/+=============+     | 
     |     +=============+/| flex+-+=============+     | 
     |     +-------------+ |     |\+=============+     | 
     |     +-------------+ +-----+ +-------------+     | 
     |     |             |         |             |     | 
     |     |   .......   |         |   .......   |     | 
     |  A  +-------------+    B    +-------------+  C  | 
     +-----+   HO ODU4   +---------+   HO ODU2   +-----+ 
    
       =========: TSs occupied by ODUflex 
       ---------: available TSs 

           Figure 1 - Example of ODUflex(CBR) Traffic Parameters 

   As shown in Figure 1, assume there is an ODUflex(CBR) service 
   requesting a bandwidth of 2.5Gbps from node A to node C. 

   In other words, the ODUflex Traffic Parameters indicate that Signal 
   Type is 20 (ODUflex(CBR)), Bit_Rate is 2.5Gbps (Note that the 
   tolerance is not signaled as explained above). 

 
 
Zhang                    Expires March 2014                   [Page 9] 


draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-12.txt           September 2013 

   -  On the HO ODU4 link between node A and B: 

      The maximum bit rate of the ODUflex(CBR) equals 2.5Gbps * (1 + 
      100ppm), and the minimum bit rate of the tributary slot of ODU4 
      equals 1,301,683.217 Kbps, so the total number of tributary slots 
      N1 to be reserved on this link is: 

      N1 = ceiling (2.5Gbps * (1 + 100ppm) / 1,301,683.217 Kbps) = 2 

   -  On the HO ODU2 link between node B and C: 

      The maximum bit rate of the ODUflex equals 2.5Gbps * (1 + 
      100ppm), and the minimum bit rate of the tributary slot of ODU2 
      equals 1,249,384.632 Kbps, so the total number of tributary slots 
      N2 to be reserved on this link is: 

      N2 = ceiling (2.5Gbps * (1 + 100ppm) / 1,249,384.632 Kbps) = 3 

5.2. Usage of ODUflex(GFP) Traffic Parameters 

   [G709-2012] recommends that the ODUflex(GFP) will fill an integral 
   number of tributary slots of the smallest HO ODUk path over which the 
   ODUflex(GFP) may be carried, as shown in Table 2.  

         Table 2 - Recommended ODUflex(GFP) bit rates and tolerance 

              ODU type              | Nominal bit-rate | Tolerance 
   ---------------------------------+------------------+----------- 
   ODUflex(GFP) of n TSs, 1<=n<=8   |   n * ODU2.ts    | +/-100 ppm 
   ODUflex(GFP) of n TSs, 9<=n<=32  |   n * ODU3.ts    | +/-100 ppm 
   ODUflex(GFP) of n TSs, 33<=n<=80 |   n * ODU4.ts    | +/-100 ppm 

   According to this table, the Bit_Rate field for ODUflex(GFP) MUST be 
   equal to one of the 80 values listed below: 

        1 * ODU2.ts;  2 * ODU2.ts; ...;  8 * ODU2.ts; 
        9 * ODU3.ts; 10 * ODU3.ts, ...; 32 * ODU3.ts; 
       33 * ODU4.ts; 34 * ODU4.ts; ...; 80 * ODU4.ts. 

   In this way, the number of required tributary slots for the 
   ODUflex(GFP) (i.e., the value of "n" in Table 2) can be deduced from 
   the Bit_Rate field. 

5.3. Notification on Errors of OTN-TDM Traffic Parameters 

   There is no Adspec associated with the OTN-TDM SENDER_TSPEC object. 
   Either the Adspec is omitted or an Int-serv Adspec with the Default 
 
 
Zhang                    Expires March 2014                  [Page 10] 

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-12.txt           September 2013 

   General Characterization Parameters and Guaranteed Service fragment 
   is used, see [RFC2210]. 

   For a particular sender in a session, the contents of the OTN-TDM 
   FLOWSPEC object received in a Resv message SHOULD be identical to the 
   contents of the OTN-TDM SENDER_TSPEC object received in the 
   corresponding Path message. If the objects do not match, a ResvErr 
   message with a "Traffic Control Error/Bad Flowspec value" error MUST 
   be generated. 

   Intermediate and egress nodes MUST verify that the node itself, and 
   the interfaces on which the LSP will be established, can support the 
   requested Signal Type, NVC and Bit_Rate values. If the requested 
   value(s) cannot be supported, the receiver node MUST generate a 
   PathErr message with a "Traffic Control Error/Service unsupported" 
   indication (see [RFC2205]). 

   In addition, if the MT field is received with a zero value, the node 
   MUST generate a PathErr message with a "Traffic Control Error/Bad 
   Tspec value" indication (see [RFC2205]). 

   Further, if the Signal Type is not ODU1, ODU2 or ODU3, and the NVC 
   field is not 0, the node MUST generate a PathErr message with a 
   "Traffic Control Error/Bad Tspec value" indication (see [RFC2205]). 

6. Generalized Label 

   This section defines the format of the OTN-TDM Generalized Label.   

6.1. OTN-TDM Switching Type Generalized Label 

   The following is the GENERALIZED_LABEL object format for that MUST be 
   used with the OTN-TDM Switching Type: 

    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 
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
   |         TPN           |   Reserved    |        Length         | 
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
   ~                   Bit Map          ......                     ~ 
   ~              ......                   |     Padding Bits      ~ 
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
    
   The OTN-TDM GENERALIZED_LABEL object is used to indicate how the LO 
   ODUj signal is multiplexed into the HO ODUk link. Note that the LO 
   OUDj signal type is indicated by Traffic Parameters, while the type 

 
 
Zhang                    Expires March 2014                  [Page 11] 

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-12.txt           September 2013 

   of HO ODUk link is identified by the selected interface carried in 
   the IF_ID RSVP_HOP object. 

   TPN (12 bits): indicates the TPN for the assigned Tributary Slot(s).  

      - In case of LO ODUj multiplexed into HO ODU1/ODU2/ODU3, only the 
         lower 6 bits of TPN field are significant and the other bits of 
         TPN MUST be set to 0. 

      - In case of LO ODUj multiplexed into HO ODU4, only the lower 7 
         bits of TPN field are significant and the other bits of TPN 
         MUST be set to 0.  

      - In case of ODUj mapped into OTUk (j=k), the TPN is not needed 
         and this field MUST be set to 0. 

   Per [G709-2012], The TPN is used to allow for correct demultiplexing 
   in the data plane. When an LO ODUj is multiplexed into HO ODUk 
   occupying one or more TSs, a new TPN value is configured at the two 
   ends of the HO ODUk link and is put into the related MSI byte(s) in 
   the OPUk overhead at the (traffic) ingress end of the link, so that 
   the other end of the link can learn which TS(s) is/are used by the LO 
   ODUj in the data plane. 

   According to [G709-2012], the TPN field MUST be set as according to 
   the following tables: 

    

          Table 3 - TPN Assignment Rules (2.5Gbps TS granularity) 
   +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 
   |HO ODUk|LO ODUj|TPN |          TPN Assignment Rules                | 
   +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 
   | ODU2  | ODU1  |1~4 |Fixed, = TS# occupied by ODU1                 | 
   +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 
   |       | ODU1  |1~16|Fixed, = TS# occupied by ODU1                 | 
   | ODU3  +-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 
   |       | ODU2  |1~4 |Flexible, != other existing LO ODU2s' TPNs    | 
   +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 

                                      

 
 
Zhang                    Expires March 2014                  [Page 12] 


draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-12.txt           September 2013 

          Table 4 - TPN Assignment Rules (1.25Gbps TS granularity) 
   +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 
   |HO ODUk|LO ODUj|TPN |          TPN Assignment Rules                | 
   +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 
   | ODU1  | ODU0  |1~2 |Fixed, = TS# occupied by ODU0                 | 
   +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 
   |       | ODU1  |1~4 |Flexible, != other existing LO ODU1s' TPNs    | 
   | ODU2  +-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 
   |       |ODU0 & |1~8 |Flexible, != other existing LO ODU0s and      | 
   |       |ODUflex|    |ODUflexes' TPNs                               | 
   +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 
   |       | ODU1  |1~16|Flexible, != other existing LO ODU1s' TPNs    | 
   |       +-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 
   |       | ODU2  |1~4 |Flexible, != other existing LO ODU2s' TPNs    | 
   | ODU3  +-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 
   |       |ODU0 & |    |Flexible, != other existing LO ODU0s and      | 
   |       |ODU2e &|1~32|ODU2es and ODUflexes' TPNs                    | 
   |       |ODUflex|    |                                              | 
   +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 
   | ODU4  |Any ODU|1~80|Flexible, != ANY other existing LO ODUs' TPNs | 
   +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ 

   Note that in the case of "Flexible", the value of TPN MAY not be 
   corresponding to the TS number as per [G709-2012].  

   Length (12 bits): indicates the number of bits of the Bit Map field, 
   i.e., the total number of TS in the HO ODUk link. The TS granularity, 
   1.25Gbps or 2.5Gbps, may be derived by dividing the HO ODUk link's 
   rate by the value of the Length field. In the context of [G709-2012], 
   the values of 4 and 16 indicate a TS granularity of 2.5Gbps, and the 
   values 2, 8, 32 and 80 indicate a TS granularity of 1.25Gbps.   

   In case of an ODUk mapped into OTUk, there is no need to indicate 
   which tributary slots will be used, so the length field MUST be set 
   to 0. 

   Bit Map (variable): indicates which tributary slots in HO ODUk that 
   the LO ODUj will be multiplexed into. The sequence of the Bit Map is 
   consistent with the sequence of the tributary slots in HO ODUk. Each 
   bit in the bit map represents the corresponding tributary slot in HO 
   ODUk with a value of 1 or 0 indicating whether the tributary slot 
   will be used by LO ODUj or not. 

   Padding bits are added after the Bit Map to make the whole label a 
   multiple of four bytes if necessary. Padding bits MUST be set to 0 
   and MUST be ignored on receipt. 

 
 
Zhang                    Expires March 2014                  [Page 13] 

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-12.txt           September 2013 

6.2. Procedures 

   The ingress node MUST generate a Path message and specify the OTN-TDM 
   Switching Type and corresponding G-PID in the 
   GENERALIZED_LABEL_REQUEST object, which MUST be processed as defined 
   in [RFC3473]. 

   The ingress node of an LSP MAY include Label ERO (Explicit Route 
   Object) subobject to indicate the label in each hops along the path. 
   Note that the TPN in the Label ERO subobject need not be assigned by 
   the ingress node. When the TPN is assigned by a node, the node MUST 
   assign a valid TPN value and then put this value into TPN field of 
   the GENERALIZED_LABEL object when receiving a Path message.  

   In order to create bidirectional LSP, the ingress node and upstream 
   node MUST generate an UPSTREAM_LABEL Object on the outgoing interface 
   to indicate the reserved TSs of ODUk and the assigned TPN value in 
   the upstream direction. This UPSTREAM_LABEL object is sent to the 
   downstream node via Path massage for upstream resource reservation. 

   The ingress node or upstream node MAY generate LABEL_SET object to 
   indicate which labels on the outgoing interface in the downstream 
   direction are acceptable. The downstream node will restrict its 
   choice of labels, i.e., TS resource and TPN value, to one which is in 
   the LABEL_SET object. 

   The ingress node or upstream node MAY also generate SUGGESTED_LABEL 
   object to indicate the preference of TS resource and TPN value on the 
   outgoing interface in the downstream direction. The downstream node 
   is not required to use the suggested labels and may use another label 
   based on local decision and send it to the upstream node, as 
   described in [RFC3473]. 

   When an upstream node receives a Resv message containing a 
   GENERALIZED_LABEL object with an OTN-TDM label, it MUST firstly 
   identify which ODU Signal Type is multiplexed or mapped into which 
   ODU Signal Type according to the Traffic Parameters and the IF_ID 
   RSVP_HOP object in the received message.  

   - In case of ODUj to ODUk multiplexing, the node MUST retrieve the 
      reserved tributary slots in the ODUk by its downstream neighbor 
      node according to the position of the bits that are set to 1 in 
      the Bit Map field. The node determines the TS granularity 
      (according to the total TS number of the ODUk, or pre-configured 
      TS granularity), so that the node can multiplex the ODUj into the 
      ODUk based on the TS granularity. The node MUST also retrieve the 
      TPN value assigned by its downstream neighbor node from the label, 
 
 
Zhang                    Expires March 2014                  [Page 14] 

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-12.txt           September 2013 

      and fill the TPN into the related MSI byte(s) in the OPUk overhead 
      in the data plane, so that the downstream neighbor node can check 
      whether the TPN received from the data plane is consistent with 
      the ExMSI and determine whether there is any mismatch defect.  

   - In case of ODUk to OTUk mapping, the size of Bit Map field MUST be 
      0 and no additional procedure is needed. 

   When a downstream node or egress node receives a Path message 
   containing GENERALIZED_LABEL_REQUEST object for setting up an ODUj 
   LSP from its upstream neighbor node, the node MUST generate an OTN-
   TDM label according to the Signal Type of the requested LSP and the 
   available resources (i.e., available tributary slots of ODUk) that 
   will be reserved for the LSP, and send the label to its upstream 
   neighbor node.  

   - In case of ODUj to ODUk multiplexing, the node MUST firstly 
      determine the size of the Bit Map field according to the Signal 
      Type and the tributary slot type of ODUk, and then set the bits to 
      1 in the Bit Map field corresponding to the reserved tributary 
      slots. The node MUST also assign a valid TPN, which MUST NOT 
      collide with other TPN value used by existing LO ODU connections 
      in the selected HO ODU link, and configure the Expected MSI 
      (ExMSI) using this TPN. Then, the assigned TPN MUST be filled into 
      the label. 

   - In case of ODUk to OTUk mapping, TPN field MUST be set to 0. Bit 
      Map information is not REQUIRED and MUST NOT be included, so 
      Length field MUST be set to 0 as well.  

6.2.1. Notification on Label Error 

   When an upstream node receives a Resv message containing a 
   GENERALIZED_LABEL object with an OTN-TDM label, the node MUST verify 
   if the label is acceptable. If the label is not acceptable, the node 
   MUST generate a ResvErr message with a "Routing problem/Unacceptable 
   label value" indication.  Per [RFC3473], the generated ResvErr 
   message MAY include an ACCEPTABLE_LABEL_SET object. With the 
   exception of label semantics, downstream node processing a received 
   ResvErr message and of ACCEPTABLE_LABEL_SET object is not modified by 
   this document. 

   Similarly, when a downstream node receives a Path message containing 
   an UPSTREAM_LABEL object with an OTN-TDM label, the node MUST verify 
   if the label is acceptable. If the label is not acceptable, the node 
   MUST generate a PathErr message with a "Routing problem/Unacceptable 
   label value" indication. Per [RFC3473], the generated PathErr message 
 
 
Zhang                    Expires March 2014                  [Page 15] 

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-12.txt           September 2013 

   MAY include an ACCEPTABLE_LABEL_SET object.  With the exception of 
   label semantics, the upstream nodes processing received a PathErr 
   message and of ACCEPTABLE_LABEL_SET object is not modified by this 
   document. 

   A received label SHALL be considered unacceptable when one of the 
   following cases occurs: 

   - The received label doesn't conform to local policy; 

   - Invalid value in the length field; 

   - The selected link only supports 2.5Gbps TS granularity while the 
      Length field in the label along with ODUk Signal Type indicates 
      the 1.25Gbps TS granularity; 

   - The label includes an invalid TPN value that breaks the TPN 
      assignment rules; 

   - The indicated resources (i.e., the number of "1" in the Bit Map 
      field) are inconsistent with the Traffic Parameters. 

6.3. Supporting Virtual Concatenation and Multiplication 

   Per [RFC6344], the Virtual Concatenation Groups (VCGs) can be created 
   using Co-Signaled style or Multiple LSPs style. 

   In case of Co-Signaled style, the explicit ordered list of all labels 
   MUST reflect the order of VCG members, which is similar to [RFC4328]. 
   In case of multiplexed virtually concatenated signals (NVC > 1), the 
   first label MUST indicate the components of the first virtually 
   concatenated signal; the second label MUST indicate the components of 
   the second virtually concatenated signal; and so on. In case of 
   multiplication of multiplexed virtually concatenated signals (MT > 
   1), the first label MUST indicate the components of the first 
   multiplexed virtually concatenated signal; the second label MUST 
   indicate components of the second multiplexed virtually concatenated 
   signal; and so on. 

   Support for Virtual Concatenation of ODU1, ODU2 and ODU3 Signal 
   Types, as defined by [RFC6344], is not modified by this document. 
   Virtual Concatenation of other Signal Types is not supported by 
   [G709-2012]. 

   Multiplier (MT) usage is as defined in [RFC6344] and [RFC4328]. 

 
 
Zhang                    Expires March 2014                  [Page 16] 

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-12.txt           September 2013 

6.4. Examples  

   The following examples are given in order to illustrate the label 
   format described in Section 6.1 of this document. 

   (1) ODUk into OTUk mapping:  

   In such conditions, the downstream node along an LSP returns a label 
   indicating that the ODUk (k=1, 2, 3, 4) is directly mapped into the 
   corresponding OTUk. The following example label indicates an ODU1 
   mapped into OTU1. 

    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 
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
   |       TPN = 0         |   Reserved    |     Length = 0        | 
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 

   (2) ODUj into ODUk multiplexing:  

   In such conditions, this label indicates that an ODUj is multiplexed 
   into several tributary slots of OPUk and then mapped into OTUk. Some 
   instances are shown as follow: 

   -  ODU0 into ODU2 Multiplexing: 

    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 
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
   |       TPN = 2         |   Reserved    |     Length = 8        | 
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
   |0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0|             Padding Bits (0)                  | 
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 

   This above label indicates an ODU0 multiplexed into the second 
   tributary slot of ODU2, wherein there are 8 TSs in ODU2 (i.e., the 
   type of the tributary slot is 1.25Gbps), and the TPN value is 2. 

   -  ODU1 into ODU2 Multiplexing with 1.25Gbps TS granularity: 

    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 
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
   |       TPN = 1         |   Reserved    |     Length = 8        | 
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
   |0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0|             Padding Bits (0)                  | 
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
 
 
Zhang                    Expires March 2014                  [Page 17] 

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-12.txt           September 2013 

   This above label indicates an ODU1 multiplexed into the 2nd and the 
   4th tributary slot of ODU2, wherein there are 8 TSs in ODU2 (i.e., 
   the type of the tributary slot is 1.25Gbps), and the TPN value is 1. 

   -  ODU2 into ODU3 Multiplexing with 2.5Gbps TS granularity: 

    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 
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
   |       TPN = 1         |   Reserved    |     Length = 16       | 
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 
   |0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0|       Padding Bits (0)        | 
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 

   This above label indicates an ODU2 multiplexed into the 2nd, 3rd, 5th 
   and 7th tributary slot of ODU3, wherein there are 16 TSs in ODU3 
   (i.e., the type of the tributary slot is 2.5Gbps), and the TPN value 
   is 1. 

7. Supporting Hitless Adjustment of ODUflex (GFP) 

   [G7044] describes the procedure of ODUflex (GFP) hitless resizing 
   using Link Connection Resize (LCR) and Bandwidth Resize (BWR) 
   protocols in OTN data plane. 

   For the control plane, signaling messages are REQUIRED to initiate 
   the adjustment procedure. Section 2.5 and Section 4.6.4 of [RFC3209] 
   describe how the Shared Explicit (SE) style is used in Traffic 
   Engineering (TE) network for bandwidth increasing and decreasing, 
   which is still applicable for triggering the ODUflex (GFP) adjustment 
   procedure in data plane.  

   Note that the SE style MUST be used at the beginning when creating a 
   resizable ODUflex connection (Signal Type = 21). Otherwise an error 
   with Error Code "Conflicting reservation style" MUST be generated 
   when performing bandwidth adjustment. 

   -  Bandwidth increasing 

       For the ingress node, in order to increase the bandwidth of an 
       ODUflex (GFP) connection, a Path message with SE style (keeping 
       Tunnel ID unchanged and assigning a new LSP ID) MUST be sent 
       along the path. 

       The ingress node will trigger the BWR protocol when successful 
       completion of LCR protocols on every hop after Resv message is 
       processed. On success of BWR, the ingress node SHOULD send a 
 
 
Zhang                    Expires March 2014                  [Page 18] 

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-12.txt           September 2013 

       PathTear message to delete the old control state (i.e., the 
       control state of the ODUflex (GFP) before resizing) on the 
       control plane. 

       A downstream node receiving Path message with SE style compares 
       the old Traffic Parameters (stored locally) with the new one 
       carried in the Path message, to determine the number of TS to be 
       added. After choosing and reserving new available TS(s), the 
       downstream node MUST send back a Resv message carrying both the 
       old and new GENERALIZED_LABEL objects in the SE flow descriptor. 

       An upstream neighbor receiving Resv message with SE flow 
       descriptor MUST determine which TS(s) is/are added and trigger 
       the LCR protocol between itself and its downstream neighbor node. 

   -  Bandwidth decreasing 

       For the ingress node, a Path message with SE style SHOULD also be 
       sent for ODUflex bandwidth decreasing.  

       The ingress node will trigger the BWR protocol when successful 
       completion of LCR handshake on every hop after Resv message is 
       processed. On success of BWR, the second step of LCR, i.e., link 
       connection decrease procedure will be started on every hop of the 
       connection. After completion of bandwidth decreasing, the ingress 
       node SHOULD send a ResvErr message to tear down the old control 
       state. 

       A downstream node receiving Path message with SE style compares 
       the old Traffic Parameters with the new one carried in the Path 
       message to determine the number of TS to be decreased. After 
       choosing TSs to be decreased, the downstream node MUST send back 
       a Resv message carrying both the old and new GENERALIZED_LABEL 
       objects in the SE flow descriptor.  

       An upstream neighbor receiving Resv message with SE flow 
       descriptor MUST determine which TS(s) is/are decreased and 
       trigger the first step of LCR protocol (i.e., LCR handshake) 
       between itself and its downstream neighbor node. 

8. Operations, Administration and Maintenance (OAM) Considerations 

   Regarding OTN OAM configuration, it could be done through either 
   Network Management Systems (NMS) or GMPLS control plane as defined in 
   [TDM-OAM]. [RFC4783] SHOULD be used for communication of alarm 
   information in GMPLS based OTN.  

 
 
Zhang                    Expires March 2014                  [Page 19] 

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-12.txt           September 2013 

   Management Information Base (MIB) may need be extended to read new 
   information (e.g, OTN-TDM Generalized Label, OTN-TDM SENDER_TSPEC/ 
   FLOWSPEC) from the OTN devices. This is out of scope of this 
   document. 

   More information about the management aspects for GMPLS based OTN 
   refer to Section 5.7 of [OTN-FWK]. 

9. Control Plane Backward Compatibility Considerations 

   As described in [OTN-FWK], since the [RFC4328] has been deployed in 
   the network for the nodes that support the 2001 revision of the G.709 
   specification, control plane backward compatibility SHOULD be taken 
   into consideration. More specifically: 

   o Nodes supporting this document SHOULD support [OTN-OSPF]. 

   o Nodes supporting this document MAY support [RFC4328] signaling. 

   o A node supporting both sets of procedures (i.e., [RFC4328] and 
      this document) is not REQUIRED to signal an LSP using both 
      procedures, i.e., to act as a signaling version translator. 

   o Ingress nodes that support both sets of procedures MAY select 
      which set of procedures to follow based on routing information or 
      local policy. 

   o Per [RFC3473], nodes that do not support this document will 
      generate a PathErr message, with a "Routing problem/Switching 
      Type" indication. 

10. Security Considerations 

   This document is a modification to [RFC3473] and [RFC4328], and only 
   differs in specific information communicated. As such, this document 
   introduces no new security considerations to the existing GMPLS 
   signaling protocols. Referring to [RFC3473] and [RFC4328], further 
   details of the specific security measures are provided. Additionally, 
   [RFC5920] provides an overview of security vulnerabilities and 
   protection mechanisms for the GMPLS control plane. 

11. IANA Considerations 

   Upon approval of this document, IANA will make the following 
   assignments in the "Class Types or C-Types  9 FLOWSPEC" and "Class 
   Types or C-Types  12 SENDER_TSPEC" section of the "RSVP Parameters" 

 
 
Zhang                    Expires March 2014                  [Page 20] 

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-12.txt           September 2013 

   registry located at http://www.iana.org/assignments/rsvp-
   parameters/rsvp-parameters.xml. 

      Value     Description         Reference 
      7(*)       OTN-TDM            [This.I-D] 
      
     (*) Suggested value 
      
   IANA maintains the "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching 
   (GMPLS) Signaling Parameters" registry (see 
   http://www.iana.org/assignments/gmpls-sig-parameters). "Generalized 
   PIDs (G-PID)" subregistry is included in this registry, which will be 
   extended and updated by this document as below.  

   The new G-PIDs should be shown in the TC MIB managed by IANA at 
   https://www.iana.org/assignments/ianagmplstc-mib/ianagmplstc-
   mib.xhtml. 

                                                        
      Value Type                            Technology       Reference 
      ===== ======================          ========== 
      47    G.709 ODU-2.5G                  G.709 ODUk      [RFC4328] 
            (IANA to update Type field)                     [This.I-D] 
      56    SBCON/ESCON                     G.709 ODUk,     [RFC4328] 
            (IANA to update Type field)     Lambda, Fiber   [This.I-D] 
      59*   Framed GFP                      G.709 ODUk      [This.I-D] 
      60*   STM-1                           G.709 ODUk      [This.I-D] 
      61*   STM-4                           G.709 ODUk      [This.I-D] 
      62*   InfiniBand                      G.709 ODUflex   [This.I-D] 
      63*   SDI (Serial Digital Interface)  G.709 ODUk      [This.I-D] 
      64*   SDI/1.001                       G.709 ODUk      [This.I-D] 
      65*   DVB_ASI                         G.709 ODUk      [This.I-D] 
      66*   G.709 ODU-1.25G                 G.709 ODUk      [This.I-D] 
      67*   G.709 ODU-Any                   G.709 ODUk      [This.I-D] 
      68*   Null Test                       G.709 ODUk      [This.I-D] 
      69*   Random Test                     G.709 ODUk      [This.I-D] 
      70*   64B/66B GFP-F Ethernet          G.709 ODUk      [This.I-D] 
    
   (*) Suggested value 

   Upon approval of this document, IANA will define an "OTN Signal Type" 
   subregistry to the "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching 
   (GMPLS) Signaling Parameters": 

    

    
 
 
Zhang                    Expires March 2014                  [Page 21] 

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-12.txt           September 2013 

      Value    Signal Type                           Reference 
      -----    -----------                           --------- 
      0        Not significant                       [RFC4328] 
      1        ODU1 (i.e., 2.5Gbps)                  [RFC4328] 
      2        ODU2 (i.e., 10Gbps)                   [RFC4328] 
      3        ODU3 (i.e., 40Gbps)                   [RFC4328] 
      4        ODU4 (i.e., 100Gbps)                  [this document] 
      5        Reserved (for future use)             [RFC4328] 
      6        Och at 2.5Gbps                        [RFC4328] 
      7        OCh at 10Gbps                         [RFC4328] 
      8        OCh at 40Gbps                         [RFC4328] 
      9        OCh at 100Gbps                        [this document] 
      10       ODU0 (i.e., 1.25Gbps)                 [this document] 
      11       ODU2e (i.e., 10Gbps for FC1200        [this document] 
               and GE LAN) 
      12~19    Reserved (for future use)             [this document] 
      20       ODUflex(CBR) (i.e., 1.25*N Gbps)      [this document] 
      21       ODUflex(GFP-F), resizable             [this document] 
               (i.e., 1.25*N Gbps) 
      22       ODUflex(GFP-F), non resizable         [this document] 
               (i.e., 1.25*N Gbps) 
      23~255   Reserved (for future use)             [this document] 

   New values are to be assigned via Standards Action as defined in 
   [RFC5226]. 

12. References 

12.1. Normative References 

   [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 
             Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 

   [RFC2205] Braden, R., Zhang, L., Berson, S., Herzog, S., and S. 
             Jamin, "Resource ReSerVation Protocol (RSVP) -- Version 1 
             Functional Specification", RFC 2205, September 1997. 

   [RFC2210] Wroclawski, J., "The Use of RSVP with IETF Integrated 
             Services", RFC 2210, September 1997. 

   [RFC3209] D. Awduche et al, "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP 
             Tunnels", RFC3209, December 2001. 

 
 
Zhang                    Expires March 2014                  [Page 22] 

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-12.txt           September 2013 

   [RFC3471] Berger, L., Editor, "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label 
             Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Functional Description", RFC 
             3471, January 2003. 

   [RFC3473] L. Berger, Ed., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching 
             (GMPLS) Signaling Resource ReserVation Protocol-Traffic 
             Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions", RFC 3473, January 2003. 

   [RFC4328] D. Papadimitriou, Ed. "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label 
             Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Extensions for G.709 Optical 
             Transport Networks Control", RFC 4328, Jan 2006. 

   [RFC4506] M. Eisler, Ed., "XDR: External Data Representation 
             Standard", RFC 4506, May 2006. 

   [RFC4783] L. Berger, Ed., "GMPLS - Communication of Alarm 
             Information", RFC 4783, December 2006. 

   [RFC6344] G. Bernstein et al, "Operating Virtual Concatenation (VCAT) 
             and the Link Capacity Adjustment Scheme (LCAS) with 
             Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)", 
             RFC6344, August 2011.  

   [OTN-OSPF] D. Ceccarelli et al, "Traffic Engineering Extensions to 
             OSPF for Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Control of Evolving G.709 
             OTN Networks", Work in Progress: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-
             ospf-g709v3, July 2013. 

   [G709-2012] ITU-T, "Interfaces for the Optical Transport Network 
             (OTN)", G.709/Y.1331 Recommendation, February 2012. 

   [G7044]   ITU-T, "Hitless adjustment of ODUflex", G.7044/Y.1347, 
             October 2011. 

   [G7041]   ITU-T, "Generic framing procedure", G.7041/Y.1303, April 
             2011. 

   [IEEE]    "IEEE Standard for Binary Floating-Point Arithmetic", 
             ANSI/IEEE Standard 754-1985, Institute of Electrical and 
             Electronics Engineers, August 1985. 

12.2. Informative References 

   [RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an 
             IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226, May 
             2008. 

 
 
Zhang                    Expires March 2014                  [Page 23] 

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-12.txt           September 2013 

   [RFC5920] Fang, L., Ed., "Security Framework for MPLS and GMPLS 
             Networks", RFC 5920, July 2010. 

   [OTN-FWK] Fatai Zhang et al, "Framework for GMPLS and PCE Control of 
             G.709 Optical Transport Networks", Work in Progress: draft-
             ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g709-framework, August 2013. 

   [OTN-INFO] S. Belotti et al, "Information model for G.709 Optical 
             Transport Networks (OTN)", Work in Progress: draft-ietf-
             ccamp-otn-g709-info-model, July 2013. 

   [TDM-OAM]   A. Kern, A. Takacs, "GMPLS RSVP-TE Extensions for 
               SONET/SDH and OTN OAM Configuration", draft-ietf-ccamp-
               rsvp-te-sdh-otn-oam-ext, Work in Progress. 

 

13. Contributors 

    
   Yi Lin 
   Huawei Technologies 
   F3-5-B R&D Center, Huawei Base 
   Bantian, Longgang District 
   Shenzhen 518129 P.R.China 
   Phone: +86-755-28972914 
   Email: yi.lin@huawei.com 
    
    
   Yunbin Xu 
   China Academy of Telecommunication Research of MII 
   11 Yue Tan Nan Jie Beijing, P.R.China 
   Phone: +86-10-68094134 
   Email: xuyunbin@mail.ritt.com.cn 
    
   Pietro Grandi 
   Alcatel-Lucent 
   Optics CTO 
   Via Trento 30 20059 Vimercate (Milano) Italy 
   +39 039 6864930 
   Email: pietro_vittorio.grandi@alcatel-lucent.it 

 
 
Zhang                    Expires March 2014                  [Page 24] 

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-12.txt           September 2013 

    
    
   Diego Caviglia 
   Ericsson 
   Via A. Negrone 1/A 
   Genova - Sestri Ponente 
   Italy 
   Email: diego.caviglia@ericsson.com 
    
    
   Rajan Rao 
   Infinera Corporation 
   169, Java Drive 
   Sunnyvale, CA-94089 
   USA 
   Email: rrao@infinera.com 
    
    
   John E Drake 
   Juniper 
   Email: jdrake@juniper.net 
    
    
   Igor Bryskin 
   Adva Optical 
   EMail: IBryskin@advaoptical.com 
    
    
   Jonathan Sadler, Tellabs 
   Email: jonathan.sadler@tellabs.com 
    
    
   Kam LAM, Alcatel-Lucent 
   Email: kam.lam@alcatel-lucent.com 
    
    
   Francesco Fondelli, Ericsson 
   Email: francesco.fondelli@ericsson.com 
    
    
   Lyndon Ong, Ciena 
 
 
Zhang                    Expires March 2014                  [Page 25] 

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-12.txt           September 2013 

   Email: lyong@ciena.com 
    
    
   Biao Lu, infinera 
   Email: blu@infinera.com 
    
14. Authors' Addresses 

   Fatai Zhang (editor) 
   Huawei Technologies 
   F3-5-B R&D Center, Huawei Base 
   Bantian, Longgang District 
   Shenzhen 518129 P.R.China 
   Phone: +86-755-28972912 
   Email: zhangfatai@huawei.com 
    
    
   Guoying Zhang 
   China Academy of Telecommunication Research of MII 
   11 Yue Tan Nan Jie Beijing, P.R.China 
   Phone: +86-10-68094272 
   Email: zhangguoying@mail.ritt.com.cn 
    
    
   Sergio Belotti 
   Alcatel-Lucent 
   Optics CTO 
   Via Trento 30 20059 Vimercate (Milano) Italy 
   +39 039 6863033 
   Email: sergio.belotti@alcatel-lucent.it 
    
    
   Daniele Ceccarelli 
   Ericsson 
   Via A. Negrone 1/A 
   Genova - Sestri Ponente 
   Italy 
   Email: daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com 
    
    
   Khuzema Pithewan 

 
 
Zhang                    Expires March 2014                  [Page 26] 

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-12.txt           September 2013 

   Infinera Corporation 
   169, Java Drive 
   Sunnyvale, CA-94089,  USA 
   Email: kpithewan@infinera.com 
    
    
15. Acknowledgment 

   The authors would like to thank Lou Berger, Deborah Brungard and 
   Xiaobing Zi for their useful comments to the document. 

Intellectual Property 
 
   The IETF Trust takes no position regarding the validity or scope of   
   any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be   
   claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology   
   described in any IETF Document or the extent to which any license   
   under such rights might or might not be available; nor does it   
   represent that it has made any independent effort to identify any   
   such rights. 

   Copies of Intellectual Property disclosures made to the IETF   
   Secretariat and any assurances of licenses to be made available, or   
   the result of an attempt made to obtain a general license or   
   permission for the use of such proprietary rights by implementers or   
   users of this specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR   
   repository at 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 be required to implement   
   any standard or specification contained in an IETF Document. Please   
   address the information to the IETF at ietf-ipr@ietf.org. 

   The definitive version of an IETF Document is that published by, or   
   under the auspices of, the IETF. Versions of IETF Documents that are   
   published by third parties, including those that are translated into   
   other languages, should not be considered to be definitive versions   
   of IETF Documents. The definitive version of these Legal Provisions   
   is that published by, or under the auspices of, the IETF. Versions of   
   these Legal Provisions that are published by third parties, including   
   those that are translated into other languages, should not be   
   considered to be definitive versions of these Legal Provisions. 

   For the avoidance of doubt, each Contributor to the IETF Standards   
   Process licenses each Contribution that he or she makes as part of   
 
 
Zhang                    Expires March 2014                  [Page 27] 

draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-12.txt           September 2013 

   the IETF Standards Process to the IETF Trust pursuant to the   
   provisions of RFC 5378. No language to the contrary, or terms,   
   conditions or rights that differ from or are inconsistent with the   
   rights and licenses granted under RFC 5378, shall have any effect and   
   shall be null and void, whether published or posted by such   
   Contributor, or included with or in such Contribution. 

Disclaimer of Validity 
 
   All IETF Documents and the information contained therein 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 TRUST AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL   
   WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY   
   WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION THEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE   
   ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS   
   FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. 

Copyright Notice 
 
   Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 
   document authors.  All rights reserved. 

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents 
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must 
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 
   described in the Simplified BSD License. 

    

 
 
Zhang                    Expires March 2014                  [Page 28]