Internet Engineering Task Force G. Galimberti, Ed.
Internet-Draft D. La Fauci
Intended status: Experimental Cisco
Expires: September 2, 2018 A. Zanardi, Ed.
L. Galvagni
FBK-CreateNet
March 1, 2018
Signaling extensions for Media Channel sub-carriers configuration in
Spectrum Switched Optical Networks (SSON) in Lambda Switch Capable (LSC)
Optical Line Systems.
draft-ggalimbe-ccamp-flexigrid-carrier-label-03
Abstract
This memo defines the signaling extensions for managing Spectrum
Switched Optical Network (SSON) parameters shared between the Client
and the Network and inside the Network in accordance to the model
described in RFC 7698. The extensions are in accordance and
extending the parameters defined in ITU-T Recommendation
G.694.1.[ITU.G694.1] and its extensions and G.872.[ITU.G872].
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 September 2, 2018.
Galimberti, et al. Expires September 2, 2018 [Page 1]
Internet-Drafdraft-ggalimbe-ccamp-flexigrid-carrier-label-03 March 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. Client interface parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Use Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. Signalling Extensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.1. New LSP set-up parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4.2. Extension to LSP set-up reservation . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.3. RSVP Protocol Extensions considerations . . . . . . . . . 12
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
7. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
1. Introduction
Generalised Multiprotocol Label Switched (GMPLS) is widely used in
Wavelength Switched Optical Network (WSON) to support the optical
circuits set-up through the signalling between Core Nodes and Edge
Nodes. This extension addresses the use cases described by [RFC7698]
Ch.3.3 and supports the information, needed in Spectrum Switched
Optical Network (SSON), to signal a Media Channel and the associated
carriers set request. The new set of parameters is related to the
Media Channel and the carrier(s) routed with it and keep the backward
compatibility with the WSON signalling. In particular this memo
wants do address the use cases where the SSON LSP (the Media Channel
in RFC7698) carries multiple carrier (OTSi) containing same Payload.
The set of the carriers can be seen as single Logical circuit. This
memo can be considered as the extension of [RFC7792]. The contents
Galimberti, et al. Expires September 2, 2018 [Page 2]
Internet-Drafdraft-ggalimbe-ccamp-flexigrid-carrier-label-03 March 2018
and the parameters reflect the experimental activity on IP over SSON
recently done by some vendors and research consortia.
Figure 1 shows how the multiple carrier are mapped into a Media
Channel. A set of parameters must be shared on the UNI to allow the
GMPLS to do the proper routing and Spectrum Assignment and decide the
carrier position.
+------+ +------+ _________ +------+ +------+
| E.N. | | C.N. | / /\ | C.N. | | E.N. |
| OTS1| ----- | || | || | ----- |OTS1 |
==| OTS2| ----- | || Media | || | ----- |OTS2 |==
==| OTS3| ----- | || Channel| || | ----- |OTS3 |==
| OTS4| ----- | || | || | ----- |OTS4 |
| | | ROADM| \________\/ | ROADM| | |
+------+ +------+ +------+ +------+
^ ^ ^ ^
| | | |
+---UNI---+ +---UNI---+
E.N. = Edge Node - UNI Client
C.N. = Core Node - UNI Network
ROADM = Lambda/Spectrum switch
Media Channel = the optical circuit
OTSi = Carriers belonging to the same Network Media Channel (or
Super Channel)
UNI = Signalig interface
Figure 1: Multi carrier LSP
2. Client interface parameters
The Edge Node interface can have one or multiple carriers (OTSi).
All the carrier have the same characteristics and are provisionable
in terms of:
Number of subcarriers:
This parameter indicates the number of subcarriers available for
the super-channel in case the Transceiver can support multiple
carrier circuits.
Central frequency (see G.694.1 Table 1):
This parameter indicates the Central frequency value that Ss and
Rs will be set to work (in THz). See the details in Section 6/
Galimberti, et al. Expires September 2, 2018 [Page 3]
Internet-Drafdraft-ggalimbe-ccamp-flexigrid-carrier-label-03 March 2018
G.694.1 or based on "n" value explanation and the following "k"
values definition in case of multicarrier transceivers.
Central frequency granularity:
This parameter indicates the Central frequency granularity
supported by the transceiver, this value is combined with k and n
value to calculate the central frequency of the carrier or sub-
carriers.
Minimum channel spacing:
This is the minimum nominal difference in frequency (in GHz)
between two adjacent channels (or carriers) depending on the
Transceiver characteristics.
Bit rate / Baud rate of optical tributary signals:
Optical Tributary Signal bit (for NRZ signals) rate or Symbol (for
Multiple bit per symbol) rate .
FEC Coding:
This parameter indicate what Forward Error Correction (FEC) code
is used at Ss and Rs (R/W) (not mentioned in G.698.2). .
Wavelength Range (see G.694.1): [ITU.G694.1]
This parameter indicate minimum and maximum wavelength spectrum in
a definite wavelength Band (L, C and S).
Modulation format:
This parameter indicates the list of supported Modulation Formats
and the provisioned Modulation Format..
Inter carrier skew:
This parameter indicates, in case of multi-carrier transceivers
the maximum skew between the sub-carriers supported by the
transceiver.
Laser Output power:
This parameter provisions the Transceiver Output power, it can be
either a setting and measured value.
receiver input power:
This parameter provisions the Min and MAX input pover suppotred by
the Transceiver, i.e. Receiver Sensitivity.
The above parameters are related to the Edge Node Transceiver and are
used by the Core Network GMPLS in order to calculate the optical
feasibility and the spectrum allocation. The parameters can be
shared between the Client and the Network via LMP or provisioned to
the Network by an EMS or an operator OSS.
Galimberti, et al. Expires September 2, 2018 [Page 4]
Internet-Drafdraft-ggalimbe-ccamp-flexigrid-carrier-label-03 March 2018
3. Use Cases
The use cases are described in draft-ietf-ccamp-dwdm-if-mng-ctrl-fwk
and [RFC7698]
4. Signalling Extensions
Some of the above parameters can be applied to RFC7792 (SENDER_TSPEC/
FLOWSPEC). The above parameters could be applied to [RFC4208]
scenarios but they are valid also in case of non UNI scenarios. The
[RFC6205] parameters remain valid.
4.1. New LSP set-up parameters
When the E.N. wants to request to the C.N. a new circuit set-up
request or the GMPLS wants to signal in the SSON network the Optical
Interface characteristics the following parameters will be provided
to the C.N.:
Number of available subcarriers (c):
This parameter is an integer and identifies the number of Client
ports connected to the Core ports available to suport the
requested circuit
Total bandwidth request:
e.g. 200Gb, 400Gb, 1Tb - it is the bandwidth (payload) to be
carried by the multiple carrier circuit
Policy (strict/loose):
Strict/loose referred to B/W and subcarrier number. This is to
give some flexibility to the GMPLS in order to commit client
request.
Subcarrier bandwidth tunability:
(optional) e.g. 34Ghz, 48GHz.
Galimberti, et al. Expires September 2, 2018 [Page 5]
Internet-Drafdraft-ggalimbe-ccamp-flexigrid-carrier-label-03 March 2018
Figure 2: The format of the this sub-object is as follows:
The TLV define the resource constraints for the requested Media
Channel.
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
|S|B| Reserved | Carrier Number |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Total Bandwidth |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 2: SSON LSP set-up request
Galimberti, et al. Expires September 2, 2018 [Page 6]
Internet-Drafdraft-ggalimbe-ccamp-flexigrid-carrier-label-03 March 2018
Carrier Number: number of carrier to be allocated for the requested
channel (16-bit unsigned integer)
If Carrier Number == 0 no constraint set on the number of
carriers to be used
S strict number of subcarrier
- S = 0 the number of requested carriers is the maximum number
that can be allocated (a lower value can be allocated if
the requested bandwidth is satisfied)
- S = 1 the number of requested carriers is strict (must be > 0)
Total Bandwidth: the requested total bandwidth to be supported by
the Media Channel (32-bit IEEE float, bytes/s)
If Total Bandwidth == 0: no bandwidth constraint is defined
(B must be 0)
B Bandwidth constraints
- B = 0: the value is the maximum requested bandwidth (a lower
value can be allocated if resources are not available)
- B = 1: the requested bandwidth is the minimum value to be
allocated (a higher value can be allocated if requested
by the physical constraints of the ports)
Reserved: unused bit (for future use, should be 0)
Note: bandwidth unit is defined in accordance to RFC 3471
chap. 3.1.2 Bandwith Encoding specification. Bandwidth higher
than 40Gb/s values must be defined (e.g. 100Gb/s, 150Gb/s
400Gb/s, etc.)
TLV Usage:
Head UNI-C PATH: requested traffic constraints, the Head UNI-N node
must satisfy when reserving the optical resources and defining
the carriers configuration
The TLV can be omitted: no traffic constraints is defined (resources
allocated by UNI-N based on a local policy)
4.2. Extension to LSP set-up reservation
Once the GMPLS has calculated the Media Channel path, the Spectrum
Allocation, the Sub-carrier number and frequency, the modulation
format, the FEC and the Transmit power, sends back to the E.N. the
path set-up confirmation providing the values of the calculated
paramenters:
Media Channel:
(Grid, C.S., Identifier m and n). as indicated in RFC7699
Section 4.1
Galimberti, et al. Expires September 2, 2018 [Page 7]
Internet-Drafdraft-ggalimbe-ccamp-flexigrid-carrier-label-03 March 2018
Modulation format:
This parameter indicates the Modulation Formats to be set in the
Transceivers.
FEC Coding:
This parameter indicate what Forward Error Correction (FEC) code
must be used by the Transceivers (not mentioned in G.698). .
Bit rate / Baud rate of optical tributary signals:
Optical tributary signal bit (for NRZ signals) rate or Symbol (for
Multiple bit per symbol) rate.
List of subcarriers:
This parameter indicates the subcarriers to be used for the super-
channel in case the Transceiver can support multiple carrier
Circuits.
Central frequency granularity (J):
This parameter indicates the Central frequency granularity
supported by the transceiver, this value is combined with K and n
value to calculate the central frequency on the carrier or sub-
carriers.
Central frequency (see G.694.1 Table 1):
Grid, Identifiers, central frequency and granularity.
Laser Output power:
This parameter provisions the Transceiver Output power, it can be
either a setting and measured value.
Circuit Path, RRO, etc:
All these info are defined in [RFC4208].
Path Error:
e.g. no path exist, all the path error defined in [RFC4208].
Galimberti, et al. Expires September 2, 2018 [Page 8]
Internet-Drafdraft-ggalimbe-ccamp-flexigrid-carrier-label-03 March 2018
Figure 3: The format of this sub-object (Type = TBA, Length = TBA) is
as follows:
The TLV defines the carriers signal configuration.
All carriers in a Media Channel MUST have the same configuration.
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Modulation Format | FEC |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| baud rate (Symbol Rate) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 3: OCh_General
Traffic Type
- Modulation Format: is the modulation type:
BPSK, DC DP BSPSK, QPSK, DP QPSK, 8QAM, 16QAM, 64QAM,
Hybrid, etc.
- <TBD> (ITU-T reference)
- value > 32768 (first bit is 1): custom defined values
Value 0 is reserved to be used if no value is defined
- FEC: the signal Forward Error Corrections type (16-bit
unsigned integer), the defined values are:
- <TBD> (ITU-T reference)
- 32768 (first bit is 1): custom defined values
Value 0 is reserved to be used if no value is defined
- Baud Rate: the signal symbol rate (IEEE 32-bit float,
in bauds/s)
Value 0 is reserved to be used if no value is defined
Notes:
- The request from the Head UNI-C node can specify only a subset
of the parameters (e.g. the Modulation and the baud rate but
not the FEC) but setting to 0 the undefined parameters.
- Custom codes (values > 0x8000) interpretation is a local
installation matter.
TLV Usage:
- Head UNI-C PATH: used to force specific transponder
configurations
- Head UNI-N RESV: set selected configuration on head node
- Tail UNI-N PATH: set selected configuration on tail node
Galimberti, et al. Expires September 2, 2018 [Page 9]
Internet-Drafdraft-ggalimbe-ccamp-flexigrid-carrier-label-03 March 2018
Figure 4: The format of this sub-object (Type = TBA, Length = TBA) is
as follows:
For Each carrier inside the Media Channel the TLV is used:
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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Carrier Identifier | j |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| k |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| sub-TLVs |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 4: Sub-Carrier parameters
Carrier set-up:
- Carrier identifier field: sub-carrier
identifier inside the mediachannel. Identifies the carrier
position inside the Media Channel (16-bit unsigned integer)
- J field: granularity of the channel spacing, can be a
multiple of 0.01GHz. - default value is 0.1GHz.
- K field: positive or negative integer (including 0) to multiply
by J and identify the Carrier Position inside the
Media Channel, offset from media Channel Central frequency
- sub-TLVs: additional information related to carriers if needed.
In summary Carrier Frequency = MC-C.F. (in THz) + K * J GHz
m=8
+-------------------------------X------------------------------+
| | |
| sub-carrier sub-carrier |
| +----------X----------+ | +----------X----------+ |
| | OTSi | | OTSi | |
| | o | | | o | |
| | | | | | | |
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
--+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+---+-
| n=4 |
K1 -236 | +236 K2
<------------------------ Media Channel ----------------------->
Galimberti, et al. Expires September 2, 2018 [Page 10]
Internet-Drafdraft-ggalimbe-ccamp-flexigrid-carrier-label-03 March 2018
Figure 5: The format of this sub-object (Type = TBA, Length = TBD) is
as follows:
The defined sub-TLVs are:
Port Identifier
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 (TBA) | Length (TBD) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Port Identifier |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 5: Port Identifier
Port Identifier: the local upstream optical logical identifier
(32-bits integer, ifindex)
Notes:
- The Carrier Identifier is the logical circuit sub-lane position,
a TLV for each value from 1 to the number of allocated carriers
must be present.
- The association of a carrier to a local link optical port is a
local link association (depending on the local ports physical
configuration), the sub-TLV value MUST be set by head/tail nodes
(with transit nodes not signaling its value).
The local port identifier is the identifier of the local link
port on the upstream node (with respect to the LSP nominal
direction):
- UNI-C port in head UNI link
- UNI-N port in tail UNI link
TLV Usage:
- Head UNI-C PATH: used to force specific carrier frequency/ports
[optional use, e.g. with external PCE scenario]
- Head UNI-N RESV: set selected configuration on head node
- Tail UNI-N PATH: set selected configuration on tail node
Galimberti, et al. Expires September 2, 2018 [Page 11]
Internet-Drafdraft-ggalimbe-ccamp-flexigrid-carrier-label-03 March 2018
Figure 6: The format of this sub-object (Type = TBA, Length = TBD) is
as follows:
Carrier Power:
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 (TBA) | Length (TBD) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| carrier power |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 6: Carrier Power
Carrier Power: the requested carrier transmit power (32-bits IEEE
Float, dBm), optionally used to notify the configured
power (in UNI client side) or force the power to the
to the UNI client).
TLV Usage:
- Head UNI-C PATH: used to force specific carrier frequency/ports
(optional use, e.g. with external PCE scenario)
- Head UNI-N RESV: set selected configuration on head node
- Tail UNI-N PATH: set selected configuration on tail node
4.3. RSVP Protocol Extensions considerations
The additional information described in the draft, is related to the
Media Channel supported traffic. It could be encoded in the
SENDER_TSPEC/FLOW_SPEC objects by extending the SSON_SENDER_TSPEC/
SSON_FLOW_SPEC defined in RFC 7792 (or defining a new C-Type) with an
optional TLV list or it could be encoded in a newly defined entry
(new OBJECT or new LSP_ATTRIBUTES OBJECT TLV)
This solution is consistent with other technology specific extensions
(e.g. SDH), but requires the explicit handling of the extensions by
all nodes.
Beside this, some of the additional information defined is local to
the head/tail UNI link (e.g. the carrier/port association), while the
traffic spec info should be valid end-to-end.
Galimberti, et al. Expires September 2, 2018 [Page 12]
Internet-Drafdraft-ggalimbe-ccamp-flexigrid-carrier-label-03 March 2018
5. Security Considerations
GMPLS message security uses IPsec, as described in xxxx. This
document only defines new UNI objects that are carried in existing
UNI messages, similar to the UNI objects in xxx. This document does
not introduce new security considerations.
6. IANA Considerations
T.B.D.
7. Contributors
Antonello Bonfanti
Cisco
Via Santa Maria Molgora, 48 c
20871 - Vimercate (MB)
Italy
abonfant@cisco.com</email>
8. References
8.1. Normative References
[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, February 2012.
[ITU.G872]
International Telecommunications Union, "Architecture of
optical transport networks", ITU-T Recommendation G.872,
October 2012.
Galimberti, et al. Expires September 2, 2018 [Page 13]
Internet-Drafdraft-ggalimbe-ccamp-flexigrid-carrier-label-03 March 2018
[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.
[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>.
[RFC3473] Berger, L., Ed., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label
Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Resource ReserVation Protocol-
Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions", RFC 3473,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3473, January 2003,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3473>.
[RFC3945] Mannie, E., Ed., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label
Switching (GMPLS) Architecture", RFC 3945,
DOI 10.17487/RFC3945, October 2004,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3945>.
[RFC4208] Swallow, G., Drake, J., Ishimatsu, H., and Y. Rekhter,
"Generalized Multiprotocol Label Switching (GMPLS) User-
Network Interface (UNI): Resource ReserVation Protocol-
Traffic Engineering (RSVP-TE) Support for the Overlay
Model", RFC 4208, DOI 10.17487/RFC4208, October 2005,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4208>.
[RFC5920] Fang, L., Ed., "Security Framework for MPLS and GMPLS
Networks", RFC 5920, DOI 10.17487/RFC5920, July 2010,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc5920>.
[RFC6163] Lee, Y., Ed., Bernstein, G., Ed., and W. Imajuku,
"Framework for GMPLS and Path Computation Element (PCE)
Control of Wavelength Switched Optical Networks (WSONs)",
RFC 6163, DOI 10.17487/RFC6163, April 2011,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6163>.
[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>.
Galimberti, et al. Expires September 2, 2018 [Page 14]
Internet-Drafdraft-ggalimbe-ccamp-flexigrid-carrier-label-03 March 2018
[RFC7698] Gonzalez de Dios, O., Ed., Casellas, R., Ed., Zhang, F.,
Fu, X., Ceccarelli, D., and I. Hussain, "Framework and
Requirements for GMPLS-Based Control of Flexi-Grid Dense
Wavelength Division Multiplexing (DWDM) Networks",
RFC 7698, DOI 10.17487/RFC7698, November 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7698>.
[RFC7699] Farrel, A., King, D., Li, Y., and F. Zhang, "Generalized
Labels for the Flexi-Grid in Lambda Switch Capable (LSC)
Label Switching Routers", RFC 7699, DOI 10.17487/RFC7699,
November 2015, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7699>.
[RFC7792] Zhang, F., Zhang, X., Farrel, A., Gonzalez de Dios, O.,
and D. Ceccarelli, "RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions in
Support of Flexi-Grid Dense Wavelength Division
Multiplexing (DWDM) Networks", RFC 7792,
DOI 10.17487/RFC7792, March 2016,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7792>.
8.2. 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>.
Authors' Addresses
Gabriele Galimberti (editor)
Cisco
Via S. Maria Molgora, 48 c
20871 - Vimercate
Italy
Phone: +390392091462
Email: ggalimbe@cisco.com
Galimberti, et al. Expires September 2, 2018 [Page 15]
Internet-Drafdraft-ggalimbe-ccamp-flexigrid-carrier-label-03 March 2018
Domenico La Fauci
Cisco
Via S. Maria Molgora, 48 c
20871 - Vimercate
Italy
Phone: +390392091946
Email: dlafauci@cisco.com
Andrea Zanardi (editor)
FBK-CreateNet
via alla Cascata 56/D
38123 Povo, Trento
Italy
Phone: +390461312450
Email: azanardi@fbk.eu
Lorenzo Galvagni
FBK-CreateNet
via alla Cascata 56/D
38123 Povo, Trento
Italy
Phone: +390461312427
Email: lgalvagni@fbk.eu
Galimberti, et al. Expires September 2, 2018 [Page 16]