Internet Engineering Task Force D. Hiremagalur, Ed.
Internet-Draft G. Grammel, Ed.
Intended status: Standards Track J. Drake, Ed.
Expires: September 7, 2015 Juniper
G. Galimberti, Ed.
Z. Ali, Ed.
Cisco
R. Kunze, Ed.
Deutsche Telekom
March 6, 2015
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-g-698-2-lmp-09
Abstract
This memo defines extensions to LMP(rfc4209) for managing Optical
parameters associated with Wavelength Division Multiplexing (WDM)
systems or characterized by the Optical Transport Network (OTN) in
accordance with the Interface Application Code approach defined in
ITU-T Recommendation G.698.2.[ITU.G698.2], 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 http://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 September 7, 2015.
Hiremagalur, et al. Expires September 7, 2015 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft draft-dharinigert-ccamp-g-698-2-lmp-09 March 2015
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2015 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.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Extensions to LMP-WDM Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. General Parameters - OCh_General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. ApplicationIdentifier - OCh_ApplicationIdentifier . . . . . . 5
5. OCh_Ss - OCh transmit parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6. OCh_Rs - receive parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1. Introduction
This extension is based on "draft-galikunze-ccamp-g-698-2-snmp-mib-
09", for the relevant interface optical parameters described in
recommendations like ITU-T G.698.2 [ITU.G698.2] and
G.694.1.[ITU.G694.1]. The LMP Model from RFC4902 provides link
property correlation between a client and an OLS device. LMP link
property correlation, exchanges the capabilities of either end of the
link where the term 'link' refers to the attachment link between OXC
and OLS (see Figure 1). By performing link property correlation,
both ends of the link exchange link properties, such as application
identifiers. This allows either end to operate within a commonly
understood parameter window. Based on known parameter limits, each
device can supervise the received signal for conformance using
mechanisms defined in RFC3591. For example if the Client transmitter
power (OXC1) has a value of 0dBm and the ROADM interface measured
power (at OLS1) is -6dBm the fiber patch cord connecting the two
nodes may be pinched or the connectors are dirty. More, the
Hiremagalur, et al. Expires September 7, 2015 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft draft-dharinigert-ccamp-g-698-2-lmp-09 March 2015
interface characteristics can be used by the OLS network Control
Plane in order to check the Optical Channels feasibility. Finally
the OXC1 transceivers parameters (Application Code) can be shared
with OXC2 using the LMP protocol to verify the Transceivers
compatibility. The actual route selection of a specific wavelength
within the allowed set is outside the scope of LMP. In GMPLS, the
parameter selection (e.g. central frequency) is performed by RSVP-TE.
Figure 1 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, etc.
OLS to OLS : represents the black-Link itself
Rs/Ss : in between the OXC and the OLS
Figure 1: Extended LMP Model
2. Extensions to LMP-WDM Protocol
This document defines extensions to [RFC4209] to allow the Black Link
(BL) parameters of G.698.2, to be exchanged between a router or
optical switch 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. The intent of this draft is to enable the OXC
and OLS systems to exchange this information. These messages and
their usage are defined in subsequent sections of this document.
Hiremagalur, et al. Expires September 7, 2015 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft draft-dharinigert-ccamp-g-698-2-lmp-09 March 2015
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)
3. General Parameters - OCh_General
These are the general parameters as described in [G698.2] and
[G.694.1]. Please refer to the "draft-galikunze-ccamp-g-698-2-snmp-
mib-09" for more details about these parameters and the [RFC6205] for
the wavelength definition.
The general parameters are
1. Central Frequency - (Tera Hertz) 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 2: 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 September 7, 2015 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft draft-dharinigert-ccamp-g-698-2-lmp-09 March 2015
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 2: OCh_General
4. ApplicationIdentifier - OCh_ApplicationIdentifier
This message is to exchange the application identifiers supported as
described in [G698.2]. Please refer to the "draft-galikunze-ccamp-
g-698-2-snmp-mib-09". For more details about these parameters.
There can be more than one Application Identifier supported by the
OXC/OLS. The number of application identifiers supported is
Hiremagalur, et al. Expires September 7, 2015 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft draft-dharinigert-ccamp-g-698-2-lmp-09 March 2015
exchanged in the "OCh_General" message. (from
[G698.1]/[G698.2]/[G959.1] and G.874.1 )
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 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) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| 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 | | |
Hiremagalur, et al. Expires September 7, 2015 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft draft-dharinigert-ccamp-g-698-2-lmp-09 March 2015
| Number | | |
| | | |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| 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 3: OCh_ApplicationIdentifier
Hiremagalur, et al. Expires September 7, 2015 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft draft-dharinigert-ccamp-g-698-2-lmp-09 March 2015
5. OCh_Ss - OCh transmit parameters
These are the G.698.2 parameters at the Source(Ss reference points).
Please refer to "draft-galikunze-ccamp-g-698-2-snmp-mib-09" for more
details about these parameters.
1. Output power
Figure 4: 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 4: OCh_Ss transmit parameters
6. OCh_Rs - receive parameters
These are the G.698.2 parameters at the Sink (Rs reference points).
Please refer to the "draft-galikunze-ccamp-g-698-2-snmp-mib-09" for
more details about these parameters.
1. Current Input Power - (0.1dbm) 4bytes
Hiremagalur, et al. Expires September 7, 2015 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft draft-dharinigert-ccamp-g-698-2-lmp-09 March 2015
Figure 5: 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 5: OCh_Rs receive parameters
7. 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.
8. 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 September 7, 2015 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft draft-dharinigert-ccamp-g-698-2-lmp-09 March 2015
9. References
9.1. Normative References
[RFC4204] Lang, J., "Link Management Protocol (LMP)", RFC 4204,
October 2005.
[RFC4209] Fredette, A. and J. Lang, "Link Management Protocol (LMP)
for Dense Wavelength Division Multiplexing (DWDM) Optical
Line Systems", RFC 4209, October 2005.
[RFC6205] Otani, T. and D. Li, "Generalized Labels for Lambda-
Switch-Capable (LSC) Label Switching Routers", RFC 6205,
March 2011.
[RFC4054] Strand, J. and A. Chiu, "Impairments and Other Constraints
on Optical Layer Routing", RFC 4054, May 2005.
[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.G694.1]
International Telecommunications Union, ""Spectral grids
for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid"", ITU-T
Recommendation G.698.2, February 2012.
[ITU.G709]
International Telecommunications Union, "Interface for the
Optical Transport Network (OTN)", ITU-T Recommendation
G.709, February 2012.
[ITU.G872]
International Telecommunications Union, "Architecture of
optical transport networks", ITU-T Recommendation G.872,
October 2012.
[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, October 2012.
Hiremagalur, et al. Expires September 7, 2015 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft draft-dharinigert-ccamp-g-698-2-lmp-09 March 2015
9.2. Informative References
[I-D.galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib]
Kunze, R. and D. Hiremagalur, "A SNMP MIB to manage black-
link optical interface parameters of DWDM applications",
draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-02 (work in
progress), March 2012.
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
John E. Drake (editor)
Juniper
1194 N Mathilda Avenue
HW-US,Pennsylvania
USA
Phone: +1408
Email: jdrake@juniper.net
Gabriele Galimberti (editor)
Cisco
Via S. Maria Molgora, 48
20871 - Vimercate
Italy
Phone: +390392091462
Email: ggalimbe@cisco.com
Hiremagalur, et al. Expires September 7, 2015 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft draft-dharinigert-ccamp-g-698-2-lmp-09 March 2015
Zafar Ali (editor)
Cisco
3000 Innovation Drive
KANATA
ONTARIO K2K 3E8
Email: zali@cisco.com
Ruediger Kunze (editor)
Deutsche Telekom
Dddd, xx
Berlin
Germany
Phone: +49xxxxxxxxxx
Email: RKunze@telekom.de
Hiremagalur, et al. Expires September 7, 2015 [Page 12]