Access Extensions for ANCP
draft-lihawi-ancp-protocol-access-extension-08
The information below is for an old version of the document.
| Document | Type |
This is an older version of an Internet-Draft whose latest revision state is "Active".
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Authors | Hongyu Li , Thomas Haag , Birgit Witschurke | ||
| Last updated | 2022-03-31 | ||
| RFC stream | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | I-D Exists | |
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
draft-lihawi-ancp-protocol-access-extension-08
Network Working Group H. Li
Internet-Draft Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
Intended status: Experimental T. Haag
Expires: 3 October 2022 B. Witschurke
Deutsche Telekom
1 April 2022
Access Extensions for ANCP
draft-lihawi-ancp-protocol-access-extension-08
Abstract
The purpose of this document is to specify extensions to ANCP (Access
Node Control Protocol) (RFC6320) to support PON as described in
RFC6934 and some other DSL Technologies including G.fast. This
document updates RFC6320 by modifications to terminologies, flows and
specifying new TLV types.
This document updates RFC6320 by modifications to terminologies,
flows and specifying new TLV types.
Requirements Language
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 RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
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."
This Internet-Draft will expire on 3 October 2022.
Li, et al. Expires 3 October 2022 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated-Title April 2022
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2022 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 (https://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 Revised BSD License text as
described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Modification to ANCP - General Aspects . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Modification to DSL-Type TLV 0x0091 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5. Extension to DSL Sub TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5.1. Expected Throughput (ETR) TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
5.2. Attainable expected throughput (ATTETR) TLV . . . . . . . 6
5.3. Gamma Data Rate (GDR) TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5.4. Attainable Gamma Data Rate (ATTGDR) TLV . . . . . . . . . 6
6. ANCP-Based PON Topology Discovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6.1. ANCP Port Up and Port Down Event Message Descriptions . . 7
6.2. PON Access Line Identification . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6.2.1. Access-Loop-Circuit-ID TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6.2.2. Access-Loop-Remote-ID TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6.3. TLVs for PON Access Line Attributes . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6.3.1. PON-Access-Line-Attributes TLV . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6.3.2. PON-Access-Type TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
6.3.3. ONT/ONU-Average-Data-Rate-Downstream TLV . . . . . . 11
6.3.4. ONT/ONU-Peak-Data-Rate-Downstream TLV . . . . . . . . 11
6.3.5. ONT/ONU-Maximum-Data-Rate-Upstream TLV . . . . . . . 11
6.3.6. ONT/ONU-Assured-Data-Rate-Upstream TLV . . . . . . . 11
6.3.7. PON-Tree-Maximum-Data-Rate-Upstream TLV . . . . . . . 12
6.3.8. PON-Tree-Maximum-Data-Rate-Downstream TLV . . . . . . 12
6.3.9. Reserved TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
6.3.10. Reserved TLV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
7. IANA Actions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
7.1. ANCP TLV Type Registry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
9. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Li, et al. Expires 3 October 2022 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated-Title April 2022
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
1. Introduction
RFC6934 introduces application of ANCP to PON. However, RFC6320
[RFC6320] haven't been updated to support PON. Besides, DSL
technology is also evolving. G.fast, VDSL2 Vectoring and VDSL2 Annex
Q were introduced as upgraded versions to provide higher bandwidths
for the last mile..
This document considers all existing Access technologies used in a
Telco network, yet not supported by RFC6320 and specifies new TLVs
accordingly.
2. Terminology
This section repeats some definitions from RFC6320 and RFC6934
[RFC6934], but also updates some definitions where appropriate.
Access Node (AN): [RFC5851] Network device, usually located at a
service provider central office or street cabinet that terminates
access (local) loop connections from subscribers. In case the access
loop is a Digital Subscriber Line (DSL), the Access Node provides DSL
signal termination and is referred to as a DSL Access Multiplexer
(DSLAM). In case the access loop is a Passive Optical Network (PON),
the Access Node is referred to as an Optical Line Terminal (OLT).
Optical Line Terminal (OLT): is located in the service provider's
central office (CO) or street cabinet. It terminates and aggregates
multiple PONs (providing fiber access to multiple premises or
neighborhoods) on the subscriber side and interfaces with the Network
Access Server (NAS) that provides subscriber management.
Optical Network Terminal (ONT): terminates PON on the network side
and provides PON adaptation. The subscriber side interface and the
location of the ONT are dictated by the type of network deployment.
For an FTTP deployment (with fiber all the way to the apartment or
living unit), ONT has Ethernet (Fast Ethernet (FE) / Gigabit Ethernet
(GE) / Multimedia over Coax Alliance (MoCA)) connectivity with the
Home Gateway (HGW) / Customer Premises Equipment (CPE). In certain
cases, one ONT may provide connections to more than one Home Gateway
at the same time.
Optical Network Unit (ONU): a generic term denoting a device that
terminates any one of the distributed (leaf) endpoints of an Optical
Distribution Network (ODN), implements a PON protocol, and adapts PON
PDUs to subscriber service interfaces. In the case of a multi-
dwelling unit (MDU) or multi-tenant unit (MTU), a multi-subscriber
Li, et al. Expires 3 October 2022 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated-Title April 2022
ONU typically resides in the basement or a wiring closet (FTTB case)
and has FE/GE/Ethernet over native Ethernet link or over xDSL
(typically VDSL2) connectivity with each CPE at the subscriber
premises. In the case where fiber is terminated outside the premises
(neighborhood or curb side) on an ONT/ONU, the last-leg-premises
connections could be via existing or new copper, with xDSL physical
layer (typically VDSL2). In this case, the ONU effectively is a
"PON-fed DSLAM". In new FTTdp based deployments the access node is
named DPU (Distribution Point Unit). Basically from ANCP perspective
this node provides the same functionality. Besides VDSL2, G.fast is
mature and widely deployed.
3. Modification to ANCP - General Aspects
ANCP message formats remain the same as described in section 3.5.1 of
RFC6320 when it is applied to PON. However, some message
descriptions need to be modified to make them applicable to variant
Access Networks, other than DSL specific.
The ANCP Adjacency message is extended to other Access Technologies
than DSL. Generalize the message format to following:
The following capabilities are defined for ANCP:
o Capability Type: Access Topology Discovery = 0x01
Access technology: ANY
Length (in bytes): 0
Capability Data: NULL
For the detailed protocol specification of this capability, see
Section 6 of RFC6320.
o Capability Type: Access Line Configuration = 0x02
Access technology: ANY
Length (in bytes): 0
Capability Data: NULL
For the detailed protocol specification of this capability, see
Section 7 of RFC6320.
o Capability Type: Access Remote Line Connectivity Testing = 0x04
Li, et al. Expires 3 October 2022 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated-Title April 2022
Access technology: ANY
Length (in bytes): 0
Capability Data: NULL
For the detailed protocol specification of this capability, see
Section 8 of RFC6320.
4. Modification to DSL-Type TLV 0x0091
Add following new DSL-Type values.
Value: 32-bit unsigned integer
G.fast = 8
VDSL2 Annex Q = 9
SDSL bonded = 10
VDSL2 bonded = 11
G.fast bonded = 12
VDSL2 Annex Q bonded = 13
5. Extension to DSL Sub TLV
DSL sub TLVs are listed in Section 6.5 of RFC6320. G.Fast requires
beside existing TLVs the following new TLVs.
5.1. Expected Throughput (ETR) TLV
Type: 0x009B Expected Throughput at L2 (ETR) upstream
Description: Reports the expected throughput upstream after
retransmission (ITU-T G.997.2, clause 7.11.1.2)
Length: 4 bytes
Value: Rate in kbits/s as a 32-bit unsigned integer
Type: 0x009C Expected Throughput at L2 (ETR) downstream
Description: Reports the expected throughput downstream after
retransmission (ITU-T G.997.2, clause 7.11.1.2)
Li, et al. Expires 3 October 2022 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated-Title April 2022
Length: 4 bytes
Value: Rate in kbits/s as a 32-bit unsigned integer
5.2. Attainable expected throughput (ATTETR) TLV
Type: 0x009D Attainable Expected Throughput (ATTETR) upstream
Description: Reports the attainable expected Throughput upstream at
L2 (ITU-T G.997.2, clause 7.11.2.2)
Length: 4 bytes
Value: Rate in kbits/s as a 32-bit unsigned integer
Type: 0x009E Attainable Expected Throughput (ATTETR) downstream
Description: Reports the attainable expected Throughput downstream at
L2 (ITU-T G.997.2, clause 7.11.2.2)
Length: 4 bytes
Value: Rate in kbits/s as a 32-bit unsigned integer
5.3. Gamma Data Rate (GDR) TLV
Type: 0x009F Gamma data rate (GDR) upstream
Description: Reports the Gamma data rate (GDR) upstream (ITU-T
G.997.2, clause 7.11.1.3)
Length: 4 bytes
Value: Rate in kbits/s as a 32-bit unsigned integer
Type: 0x00A0 Gamma Data Rate (GDR) downstream
Description: Reports the Gamma data rate (GDR) downstream(ITU-T
G.997.2, clause 7.11.1.3)
Length: 4 bytes
Value: Rate in kbits/s as a 32-bit unsigned integer
5.4. Attainable Gamma Data Rate (ATTGDR) TLV
Type: 0x00A1 Attainable Gamma data rate (ATTGDR) upstream
Li, et al. Expires 3 October 2022 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated-Title April 2022
Description: Reports the Attainable Gamma data rate upstream (ATTGDR)
(ITU-T G.997.2, clause 7.11.2.3)
Length: 4 bytes
Value: Rate in kbits/s as a 32-bit unsigned integer
Type: 0x00A2 Attainable Gamma data rate (ATTGDR) downstream
Description: Reports the Attainable Gamma data rate (ATTGDR) (ITU-T
G.997.2, clause 7.11.2.3) downstream
Length: 4 bytes
Value: Rate in kbits/s as a 32-bit unsigned integer
6. ANCP-Based PON Topology Discovery
This section describes topology discovery messages applied for PON.
TLVs not addressed here remain the same as applied for DSL.
6.1. ANCP Port Up and Port Down Event Message Descriptions
The format of the ANCP Port Up and Port Down Event messages is shown
in Figure xx1. It has the same format as the one described in
section 6.3 of RFC6320. The only difference is that DSL-Line-
Attributes TLV is updated as Access-Line-Attributes TLV.
Li, et al. Expires 3 October 2022 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated-Title April 2022
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| TCP/IP Encapsulating Header (Section 3.2) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ANCP General Message Header |
+ (Section 3.6.1) +
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
~ Unused (20 bytes) ~
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|x|x|x|x|x|x|x|x| Message Type | Tech Type | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| # of TLVs | Extension Block length (bytes)|
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
~ Access line identifying TLV(s) ~
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| ACCESS-Line-Attributes TLV |
~ (MANDATORY in Port Up, OPTIONAL in Port Down) ~
| |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 1: Format of the ANCP Port Up and Port Down Event Messages
for PON Topology Discovery
NOTE: TLVs MAY be in a different order from what is shown in this
figure.
Figure xx1: Format of the ANCP Port Up and Port Down Event Messages
for PON Topology Discovery
See Section 3.6.1 of RFC6320 for a description of the ANCP general
message header. The Message Type field MUST be set to 80 for Port
Up, 81 for Port Down. It is applicable to both DSL and PON based
access systems. The 4-bit Result field MUST be set to zero
(signifying Ignore). The 12-bit Result Code field and the 24-bit
Transaction Identifier field MUST also be set to zeroes. Other
fields in the general header MUST be set a as described in
Section 3.6 of RFC6320.
The five-word Unused field is a historical leftover. The handling of
unused/reserved fields is described in Section 3.4 of RFC6320.
Li, et al. Expires 3 October 2022 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated-Title April 2022
The remaining message fields belong to the "extension block", and are
described as follows:
Extension Flags (8 bits): The flag bits denoted by 'x' are currently
unspecified and reserved.
Message Type (8 bits): Message Type has the same value as in the
general header (i.e., 80 or 81).
Tech Type (8 bits): MUST be set to 0x01 (PON).
Reserved (8 bits): set as described in Section 3.4 of RFC6320.
# of TLVs (16 bits): The number of TLVs that follow, not counting
TLVs encapsulated within other TLVs.
Extension Block Length (16 bits): The total length of the TLVs
carried in the extension block in bytes, including any padding within
individual TLVs.
TLVs: One or more TLVs to identify a PON Access line and zero or more
TLVs to define its characteristics.
6.2. PON Access Line Identification
Most ANCP messages involve actions relating to a specific access
line. Thus, it is necessary to describe how PON access lines are
identified within those messages. This section defines four TLVs for
that purpose and provides an informative description of how they are
used in PON. TLVs not addressed here remain unchanged as applied for
DSL.
6.2.1. Access-Loop-Circuit-ID TLV
Type: 0x0001
Description: A locally administered human-readable string generated
by or configured on the Access Node, uniquely identifying the
corresponding access loop logical port on the user side of the Access
Node, as described in Section 5.7 of [TR-156]..
Length: Up to 63 bytes
Value: ASCII string
Li, et al. Expires 3 October 2022 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated-Title April 2022
6.2.2. Access-Loop-Remote-ID TLV
Type: 0x0002
Description: An operator-configured string that uniquely identifies
the user on the associated access line, as described in Section 5.7
of [TR-156].
Length: Up to 63 bytes
Value: ASCII string
6.3. TLVs for PON Access Line Attributes
6.3.1. PON-Access-Line-Attributes TLV
Type: 0x0012
Description: This TLV encapsulates attribute values of a PON access
line serving a subscriber.
Length: Variable (up to 1023 bytes)
Value: One or more encapsulated TLVs corresponding to PON access line
attributes. The PON-Access-Line-Attributes TLV MUST contain at least
one TLV when it is present in a Port Up or Port Down message. The
actual contents are determined by the AN control application.
Technology-independent attributes of RFC6320, such as TLV0x0090, are
valid for PON and not repeated here.
6.3.2. PON-Access-Type TLV
Type: 0x0097
Description: Indicates the type of PON transmission system in use.
Length: 4 bytes
Value: 32-bit unsigned integer
OTHER = 0
GPON = 1
XG-PON1 = 2
Li, et al. Expires 3 October 2022 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated-Title April 2022
TWDM-PON = 3
XGS-PON = 4
WDM-PON = 5
Unknown = 7
6.3.3. ONT/ONU-Average-Data-Rate-Downstream TLV
Type: 0x00b0
Description: ONT/ONU downstream average data rate L2
Length: 4 bytes
Value: Rate in kbits/s as a 32-bit unsigned integer
6.3.4. ONT/ONU-Peak-Data-Rate-Downstream TLV
Type: 0x00b1
Description: ONT/ONU downstream peak data rate L2
Length: 4 bytes
Value: Rate in kbits/s as a 32-bit unsigned integer
6.3.5. ONT/ONU-Maximum-Data-Rate-Upstream TLV
Type: 0x00b2
Description: ONT/ONU upstream maximum data rate L2
Length: 4 bytes
Value: Rate in kbits/s as a 32-bit unsigned integer
6.3.6. ONT/ONU-Assured-Data-Rate-Upstream TLV
Type: 0x00b3
Description: ONT/ONU upstream assured data rate L2
Length: 4 bytes
Value: Rate in kbits/s as a 32-bit unsigned integer
Li, et al. Expires 3 October 2022 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated-Title April 2022
6.3.7. PON-Tree-Maximum-Data-Rate-Upstream TLV
Type: 0x00b4
Description: PON Tree upstream maximum data rate L2
Length: 4 bytes
Value: Rate in kbits/s as a 32-bit unsigned integer
6.3.8. PON-Tree-Maximum-Data-Rate-Downstream TLV
Type: 0x00b5
Description: PON Tree downstream maximum data rate L2
Length: 4 bytes
Value: Rate in kbits/s as a 32-bit unsigned integer
6.3.9. Reserved TLV
Type: 0x00b6
Description: Reserved
Length: tbd
Value: tbd
6.3.10. Reserved TLV
Type: 0x00b7
Description: Reserved
Length: tbd
Value: tbd
7. IANA Actions
7.1. ANCP TLV Type Registry
This document defines following sets of TLVs for PON, some of them
have defined by RFC6320 and are referenced here for completeness:
Li, et al. Expires 3 October 2022 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated-Title April 2022
+----------+--------------------------------------------+-----------+
| Type Code| TLV Name | Reference |
+----------+--------------------------------------------+-----------+
| 0x0000 | Reserved | RFC 6320 |
| 0x0001 | Access-Loop-Circuit-ID | RFC 6320 |
| 0x0002 | Access-Loop-Remote-ID | RFC 6320 |
| 0x0003 | Access-Aggregation-Circuit-ID-ASCII | RFC 6320 |
| 0x0005 | Service-Profile-Name | RFC 6320 |
| 0x0006 | Access-Aggregation-Circuit-ID-Binary | RFC 6320 |
| 0x0011 | Command | RFC 6320 |
| 0x0012 | PON-Access-Line-Attributes | RFC xxxx |
| 0x0097 | PON-Access-Type | RFC xxxx |
| 0x0098 | Reserved | RFC xxxx |
| 0x0099 | Reserved | RFC xxxx |
| 0x009A | Reserved | RFC xxxx |
| 0x009B | Expected Throughput (ETR) upnstream | RFC xxxx |
| 0x009C | Expected Throughput (ETR)-downstream | RFC xxxx |
| 0x009D | Attainable Expected Throughput (ATTETR) upstream | RFC xxxx |
| 0x009E | Attainable Expected Throughput (ATTETR)-downstream | RFC xxxx |
| 0x009F | Guaranteed Data Rate (GDR)-upnstream | RFC xxxx |
| 0x00A0 | Guaranteed Data Rate (GDR) downstream | RFC xxxx |
| 0x00A1 | Attainable Guaranteed Data Rate (ATTGDR)-upstream | RFC xxxx |
| 0x00A2 | Attainable Guaranteed Data Rate (ATTGDR)-downstream | RFC xxxx |
| 0x00B0 | ONT/ONU-Average-Data-Rate-Downstream | RFC xxxx |
| 0x00B1 | ONT/ONU-Peak-Data-Rate-Downstream | RFC xxxx |
| 0x00B2 | ONT/ONU-Maximum-Data-Rate-Upstream | RFC xxxx |
| 0x00B3 | ONT/ONU-Assured-Data-Rate-Upstream | RFC xxxx |
| 0x00B4 | PON-Tree-Maximum-Data-Rate-Upstream | RFC xxxx |
| 0x00B5 | PON-Tree-Maximum-Data-Rate-Downstream | RFC xxxx |
| 0x00B6 | Reserved | RFC xxxx |
| 0x00B7 | Reserved | RFC xxxx |
| 0x0106 | Status-Info | RFC 6320 |
| 0x1000 | Target (single access line variant) | RFC 6320 |
| 0x1001 - | Reserved for Target variants | RFC 6320 |
+----------+--------------------------------------------+-----------+
8. Security Considerations
There are no new security considerations beyond what is described in
RFC6320 and RFC6934.
9. Acknowledgements
Many thanks to Norbert Voigt, John Gibbons, Sven Ooghe, Koen De
Sagher and Sven Leimer for joint work reviewing the document and
providing valuable comments to this document.
10. References
Li, et al. Expires 3 October 2022 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated-Title April 2022
10.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC6320] Wadhwa, S., Moisand, J., Haag, T., Voigt, N., and T.
Taylor, Ed., "Protocol for Access Node Control Mechanism
in Broadband Networks", RFC 6320, DOI 10.17487/RFC6320,
October 2011, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6320>.
[RFC6934] Bitar, N., Ed., Wadhwa, S., Ed., Haag, T., and H. Li,
"Applicability of the Access Node Control Mechanism to
Broadband Networks Based on Passive Optical Networks
(PONs)", RFC 6934, DOI 10.17487/RFC6934, June 2013,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6934>.
10.2. Informative References
[RFC5515] Mammoliti, V., Pignataro, C., Arberg, P., Gibbons, J., and
P. Howard, "Layer 2 Tunneling Protocol (L2TP) Access Line
Information Attribute Value Pair (AVP) Extensions",
RFC 5515, DOI 10.17487/RFC5515, May 2009,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5515>.
[TR-156_Issue-3]
Forum, T. B., "Using GPON Access in the context of TR-
101", November 2012.
Authors' Addresses
Hongyu Li
Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
Industrial Base, bantain Longgang
Shenzhen
518129
P.R. China
Email: honyu.li@huawei.com
Thomas Haag
Deutsche Telekom
Heinrich-Hertz_Strasse 3-7
64295 Darmstadt
Germany
Email: haagt@telekom.de
Li, et al. Expires 3 October 2022 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft Abbreviated-Title April 2022
Birgit Witschurke
Deutsche Telekom
Winterfeldstrasse 21
10781 Berlin
Germany
Email: b.witschurke@telekom.de
Li, et al. Expires 3 October 2022 [Page 15]