Internet Engineering Task Force D. Hiremagalur, Ed.
Internet-Draft G. Grammel, Ed.
Intended status: Standards Track Juniper
Expires: April 25, 2019 G. Galimberti, Ed.
Cisco
R. Kunze, Ed.
Deutsche Telekom
D. Beller
Nokia
October 22, 2018
Extension to the Link Management Protocol (LMP/DWDM -rfc4209) for Dense
Wavelength Division Multiplexing (DWDM) Optical Line Systems to manage
the application code of optical interface parameters in DWDM application
draft-dharinigert-ccamp-dwdm-if-lmp-08
Abstract
This memo defines extensions to LMP(rfc4209) for managing Optical
parameters associated with Wavelength Division Multiplexing (WDM)
systems in accordance with the Interface Application Identifier
approach defined in ITU-T Recommendation G.694.1.[ITU.G694.1] and its
extensions.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
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 April 25, 2019.
Hiremagalur, et al. Expires April 25, 2019 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft draft-dharinigert-ccamp-dwdm-if-lmp-08 October 2018
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 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 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.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. DWDM line system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Extensions to LMP-WDM Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. General Parameters - OCh_General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6. ApplicationIdentifier - OCh_ApplicationIdentifier . . . . . . 6
7. OCh_Ss - OCh transmit parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
8. OCh_Rs - receive parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
11. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
12.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
1. Introduction
This extension addresses the use cases described by "draft-ietf-
ccamp-dwdm-if-mng-ctrl-fwk". LMP [RFC4902] provides link property
correlation capabilities that can be used between a transceiver
device and an Optical Line System (OLS) device. Link property
correlation is a procedure by which, intrinsic parameters and
capabilities are exchanged between two ends of a link. Link property
correlation as defined in RFC3591 allows either end of the link to
supervise the received signal and operate within a commonly
understood parameter window. Here the term 'link' refers in
particular to the attachment link between OXC and OLS (see Figure 1).
The relevant interface parameters are in line with "draft-dharini-
ccamp-dwdm-if-yang".
Hiremagalur, et al. Expires April 25, 2019 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft draft-dharinigert-ccamp-dwdm-if-lmp-08 October 2018
2. DWDM line system
Figure 1 shows a set of reference points (Rs and Ss), for a single-
channel connection between transmitter (Tx) and receiver (Rx)
devices. Here the DWDM network elements in between those devices
include an Optical Multiplexer (OM) and an Optical Demultiplexer
(OD). In addition it may include one or more Optical Amplifiers (OA)
and one or more Optical Add-Drop Multiplexers (OADM).
+-------------------------------------------------+
Ss | DWDM Network Elements | Rs
+--+ | | | \ / | | | +--+
Tx L1--|->| \ +------+ +------+ / |--|-->Rx L1
+---+ | | | | | +------+ | | | | | +--+
+---+ | | | | | | | | | | | | +--+
Tx L2--|->| OM |-->|------|->|ROADM |--|------|->| OD |--|-->Rx L2
+---+ | | | | | | | | | | | | +--+
+---+ | | | | | +------+ | | | | | +--+
Tx L3--|->| / | DWDM | | ^ | DWDM | \ |--|-->Rx L3
+---+ | | / | Link +----|--|----+ Link | \ | | +--+
+-----------+ | | +----------+
+--+ +--+
| |
Rs v | Ss
+-----+ +-----+
|RxLx | |TxLx |
+-----+ +-----+
Ss = Sender reference point at the DWDM network element
tributary output
Rs = Receiver reference point at the DWDM network element
tributary input
Lx = Lambda x
OM = Optical Mux
OD = Optical Demux
ROADM = Reconfigurable Optical Add Drop Mux
from Fig. 5.1/G.698.2
Figure 1: Linear Single Channel approach
Hiremagalur, et al. Expires April 25, 2019 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft draft-dharinigert-ccamp-dwdm-if-lmp-08 October 2018
Figure 2 Extended LMP Model ( from [RFC4209] )
+------+ Ss +------+ +------+ Rs +------+
| | ----- | | | | ----- | |
| OXC1 | ----- | OLS1 | ===== | OLS2 | ----- | OXC2 |
| | ----- | | | | ----- | |
+------+ +------+ +------+ +------+
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
| | | | | |
| +-----LMP-----+ +-----LMP-----+ |
| |
+----------------------LMP-----------------------+
OXC : is an entity that contains transponders
OLS : generic optical system, it can be -
Optical Mux, Optical Demux, Optical Add
Drop Mux, Amplifier etc.
OLS to OLS : represents the Optical Multiplex section
<xref target="ITU.G709"/>
Rs/Ss : reference points in between the OXC and the OLS
Figure 2: Extended LMP Model
3. Use Cases
The use cases are described in draft-ietf-ccamp-dwdm-if-mng-ctrl-fwk
4. Extensions to LMP-WDM Protocol
This document defines extensions to [RFC4209] to allow a set of
characteristic parameters, to be exchanged between a router or
optical switch (e.g. OTN cross connect) and the optical line system
to which it is attached. In particular, this document defines
additional Data Link sub-objects to be carried in the LinkSummary
message defined in [RFC4204] and [RFC6205]. The OXC and OLS systems
may be managed by different Network management systems and hence may
not know the capability and status of their peer. These messages and
their usage are defined in subsequent sections of this document.
Hiremagalur, et al. Expires April 25, 2019 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft draft-dharinigert-ccamp-dwdm-if-lmp-08 October 2018
The following new messages are defined for the WDM extension for
ITU-T G.698.2 [ITU.G698.2]/ITU-T G.698.1 [ITU.G698.1]/
ITU-T G.959.1 [ITU.G959.1]
- OCh_General (sub-object Type = TBA)
- OCh_ApplicationIdentier (sub-object Type = TBA)
- OCh_Ss (sub-object Type = TBA)
- OCh_Rs (sub-object Type = TBA)
5. General Parameters - OCh_General
These are a set of general parameters as described in [G698.2] and
[G.694.1]. Please refer to the "draft-galikunze-ccamp-dwdm-if-snmp-
mib" and "draft-dharini-ccamp-dwdm-if-yang" for more details about
these parameters and the [RFC6205] for the wavelength definition.
The general parameters are
1. Central Frequency - (Tera Hz) 4 bytes (see RFC6205 sec.3.2)
2. Number of Application Identifiers (A.I.) Supported
3. Single-channel Application Identifier in use
4. Application Identifier Type in use
5. Application Identifier in use
Figure 3: The format of the this sub-object (Type = TBA, Length =
TBA) is 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length | (Reserved) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Central Frequency |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Number of Application | |
| Identifiers Supported | (Reserved) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Single-channel| A.I. Type | A.I. length |
| Application | in use | |
| Identifier | | |
| Number in use | | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Single-channel Application Identifier in use |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Single-channel Application Identifier in use |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Single-channel Application Identifier in use |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Hiremagalur, et al. Expires April 25, 2019 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft draft-dharinigert-ccamp-dwdm-if-lmp-08 October 2018
A.I. Type in use: STANDARD, PROPRIETARY
A.I. Type in use: STANDARD
Refer to G.698.2 recommendation : B-DScW-ytz(v)
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Single-channel Application Code |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Single-channel Application Code |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Single-channel Application Code |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
A.I. Type in use: PROPRIETARY
Note: if the A.I. type = PROPRIETARY, the first 6 Octets of the
Application Identifier in use are six characters of the
PrintableString must contain the Hexadecimal representation of
an OUI (Organizationally Unique Identifier) assigned to the
vendor whose implementation generated the Application
Identifier; the remaining octets of the PrintableString are
unspecified.
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| OUI |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| OUI cont. | Vendor value |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Vendor Value |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 3: OCh_General
6. ApplicationIdentifier - OCh_ApplicationIdentifier
This message is to exchange the application identifiers supported as
described in [G698.2]. There can be more than one Application
Identifier supported by the transmitter/receiver in the OXC. The
number of application identifiers supported is exchanged in the
"OCh_General" message. (from [G698.1]/[G698.2]/[G959.1] and G.874.1
)
Hiremagalur, et al. Expires April 25, 2019 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft draft-dharinigert-ccamp-dwdm-if-lmp-08 October 2018
The parameters are
1. Number of Application Identifiers (A.I.) Supported
2. Single-channel application identifier Number
uniquely identifiers this entry - 8 bits
3. Application Indentifier Type (A.I.) (STANDARD/PROPRIETARY)
4. Single-channel application identifier -- 96 bits
(from [G698.1]/[G698.2]/[G959.1]
- this parameter can have
multiple instances as the transceiver can support multiple
application identifiers.
Figure 4: The format of the this sub-object (Type = TBA, Length =
TBA) is 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length | (Reserved) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Number of Application | |
| Identifiers Supported | (Reserved) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Single-channel| A.I. Type | A.I. length |
| Application | | |
| Identifier | | |
| Number | | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Single-channel Application Identifier |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Single-channel Application Identifier |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Single-channel Application Identifier |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
// .... //
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Single-channel| | A.I. length |
| Application | A.I. Type | |
| Identifier | | |
| Number | | |
| | | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Hiremagalur, et al. Expires April 25, 2019 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft draft-dharinigert-ccamp-dwdm-if-lmp-08 October 2018
| Single-channel Application Identifier |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Single-channel Application Identifier |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Single-channel Application Identifier |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
A.I. Type in use: STANDARD, PROPRIETARY
A.I. Type in use: STANDARD
Refer to G.698.2 recommendation : B-DScW-ytz(v)
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Single-channel Application Code |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Single-channel Application Code |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Single-channel Application Code |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
A.I. Type in use: PROPRIETARY
Note: if the A.I. type = PROPRIETARY, the first 6 Octets of the
Application Identifier in use are six characters of the
PrintableString must contain the Hexadecimal representation of
an OUI (Organizationally Unique Identifier) assigned to the
vendor whose implementation generated the Application
Identifier; the remaining octets of the PrintableString are
unspecified.
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| OUI |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| OUI cont. | Vendor value |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Vendor Value |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 4: OCh_ApplicationIdentifier
Hiremagalur, et al. Expires April 25, 2019 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft draft-dharinigert-ccamp-dwdm-if-lmp-08 October 2018
7. OCh_Ss - OCh transmit parameters
These are the G.698.2 parameters at the Source(Ss reference points).
Please refer to "draft-dharini-ccamp-dwdm-if-yang" for more details
about these parameters.
1. Output power
Figure 5: The format of the OCh sub-object (Type = TBA, Length = TBA)
is 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length | (Reserved) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Output Power |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 5: OCh_Ss transmit parameters
8. OCh_Rs - receive parameters
These are the G.698.2 parameters at the Sink (Rs reference points).
1. Current Input Power - (0.1dbm) 4bytes
Hiremagalur, et al. Expires April 25, 2019 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft draft-dharinigert-ccamp-dwdm-if-lmp-08 October 2018
Figure 6: The format of the OCh receive sub-object (Type = TBA,
Length = TBA) is as follows:
The format of the OCh receive/OLS Sink sub-object (Type = TBA,
Length = TBA) is 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type | Length | (Reserved) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Current Input Power |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 6: OCh_Rs receive parameters
9. Security Considerations
LMP message security uses IPsec, as described in [RFC4204]. This
document only defines new LMP objects that are carried in existing
LMP messages, similar to the LMP objects in [RFC:4209]. This
document does not introduce new security considerations.
10. IANA Considerations
LMP <xref target="RFC4204"/> defines the following name spaces and
the ways in which IANA can make assignments to these namespaces:
- LMP Message Type
- LMP Object Class
- LMP Object Class type (C-Type) unique within the Object Class
- LMP Sub-object Class type (Type) unique within the Object Class
This memo introduces the following new assignments:
LMP Sub-Object Class names:
under DATA_LINK Class name (as defined in <xref target="RFC4204"/>)
- OCh_General (sub-object Type = TBA)
- OCh_ApplicationIdentifier (sub-object Type = TBA)
- OCh_Ss (sub-object Type = TBA)
- OCh_Rs (sub-object Type = TBA)
Hiremagalur, et al. Expires April 25, 2019 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft draft-dharinigert-ccamp-dwdm-if-lmp-08 October 2018
11. Contributors
Arnold Mattheus
Deutsche Telekom
Darmstadt
Germany
email a.mattheus@telekom.de
John E. Drake
Juniper
1194 N Mathilda Avenue
HW-US,Pennsylvania
USA
jdrake@juniper.net
Zafar Ali
Cisco
3000 Innovation Drive
KANATA
ONTARIO K2K 3E8
zali@cisco.com
12. References
12.1. Normative References
[I-D.ietf-ccamp-dwdm-if-mng-ctrl-fwk]
Kunze, R., Grammel, G., Beller, D., Galimberti, G., and J.
Meuric, "A framework for Management and Control of DWDM
optical interface parameters", draft-ietf-ccamp-dwdm-if-
mng-ctrl-fwk-11 (work in progress), June 2018.
[ITU.G694.1]
International Telecommunications Union, ""Spectral grids
for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid"",
ITU-T Recommendation G.698.2, February 2012.
[ITU.G698.2]
International Telecommunications Union, "Amplified
multichannel dense wavelength division multiplexing
applications with single channel optical interfaces",
ITU-T Recommendation G.698.2, November 2009.
[ITU.G709]
International Telecommunications Union, "Interface for the
Optical Transport Network (OTN)", ITU-T Recommendation
G.709, June 2016.
Hiremagalur, et al. Expires April 25, 2019 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft draft-dharinigert-ccamp-dwdm-if-lmp-08 October 2018
[ITU.G872]
International Telecommunications Union, "Architecture of
optical transport networks", ITU-T Recommendation G.872,
January 2017.
[ITU.G874.1]
International Telecommunications Union, "Optical transport
network (OTN): Protocol-neutral management information
model for the network element view", ITU-T Recommendation
G.874.1, November 2016.
[RFC4054] Strand, J., Ed. and A. Chiu, Ed., "Impairments and Other
Constraints on Optical Layer Routing", RFC 4054,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4054, May 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4054>.
[RFC4204] Lang, J., Ed., "Link Management Protocol (LMP)", RFC 4204,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4204, October 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4204>.
[RFC4209] Fredette, A., Ed. and J. Lang, Ed., "Link Management
Protocol (LMP) for Dense Wavelength Division Multiplexing
(DWDM) Optical Line Systems", RFC 4209,
DOI 10.17487/RFC4209, October 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4209>.
[RFC6205] Otani, T., Ed. and D. Li, Ed., "Generalized Labels for
Lambda-Switch-Capable (LSC) Label Switching Routers",
RFC 6205, DOI 10.17487/RFC6205, March 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6205>.
12.2. Informative References
[RFC2629] Rose, M., "Writing I-Ds and RFCs using XML", RFC 2629,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2629, June 1999,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2629>.
[RFC3410] Case, J., Mundy, R., Partain, D., and B. Stewart,
"Introduction and Applicability Statements for Internet-
Standard Management Framework", RFC 3410,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3410, December 2002,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3410>.
[RFC4181] Heard, C., Ed., "Guidelines for Authors and Reviewers of
MIB Documents", BCP 111, RFC 4181, DOI 10.17487/RFC4181,
September 2005, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4181>.
Hiremagalur, et al. Expires April 25, 2019 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft draft-dharinigert-ccamp-dwdm-if-lmp-08 October 2018
Authors' Addresses
Dharini Hiremagalur (editor)
Juniper
1194 N Mathilda Avenue
Sunnyvale - 94089 California
USA
Phone: +1408
Email: dharinih@juniper.net
Gert Grammel (editor)
Juniper
Oskar-Schlemmer Str. 15
80807 Muenchen
Germany
Phone: +49 1725186386
Email: ggrammel@juniper.net
Gabriele Galimberti (editor)
Cisco
Via S. Maria Molgora, 48 c
20871 - Vimercate
Italy
Phone: +390392091462
Email: ggalimbe@cisco.com
Ruediger Kunze (editor)
Deutsche Telekom
Winterfeldtstr. 21-27
10781 Berlin
Germany
Phone: +491702275321
Email: RKunze@telekom.de
Hiremagalur, et al. Expires April 25, 2019 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft draft-dharinigert-ccamp-dwdm-if-lmp-08 October 2018
Dieter Beller
Nokia
Lorenzstrasse, 10
70435 Stuttgart
Germany
Phone: +4971182143125
Email: Dieter.Beller@nokia.com
Hiremagalur, et al. Expires April 25, 2019 [Page 14]