Network Working Group Fatai Zhang, Ed.
Internet Draft Huawei
Category: Standards Track Guoying Zhang
CATR
Sergio Belotti
Alcatel-Lucent
D. Ceccarelli
Ericsson
Khuzema Pithewan
Infinera
Expires: September 9, 2012 March 9, 2012
Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling
Extensions for the evolving G.709 Optical Transport Networks Control
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-02.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 September 9, 2012.
Abstract
Recent progress in ITU-T Recommendation G.709 standardization has
introduced new ODU containers (ODU0, ODU4, ODU2e and ODUflex) and
Zhang Expires September 2012 [Page 1]
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-02.txt March 2012
enhanced Optical Transport Networking (OTN) flexibility. Several
recent documents have proposed ways to modify GMPLS signaling
protocols to support these new OTN features.
It is important that a single solution is developed for use in GMPLS
signaling and routing protocols. This solution must support ODUk
multiplexing capabilities, address all of the new features, be
acceptable to all equipment vendors, and be extensible considering
continued OTN evolution.
This document describes the extensions to the Generalized Multi-
Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) signaling to control the evolving
Optical Transport Networks (OTN) addressing ODUk multiplexing and new
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 ................................................... 4
3. GMPLS Extensions for the Evolving G.709 - Overview ............ 4
4. Generalized Label Request ..................................... 5
5. Extensions for Traffic Parameters for the Evolving G.709 ...... 5
5.1. Usage of ODUflex(CBR) Traffic Parameters ................. 7
5.2. Usage of ODUflex(GFP) Traffic Parameters ................. 9
6. Generalized Label ............................................. 9
6.1. New definition of ODU Generalized Label ................. 10
6.2. Examples ................................................ 12
6.3. Label Distribution Procedure ............................ 14
6.3.1. Notification on Label Error ........................ 15
6.4. Supporting Virtual Concatenation and Multiplication ..... 15
7. Supporting Multiplexing Hierarchy ............................ 16
7.1. ADAPTATION Object ....................................... 17
7.2. ODU FA-LSP Creation ..................................... 19
8. Supporting Hitless Adjustment of ODUflex (GFP) ............... 20
9. Control Plane Backward Compatibility Considerations........... 21
10. Security Considerations ..................................... 22
11. IANA Considerations.......................................... 22
Zhang Expires September 2012 [Page 2]
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-02.txt March 2012
12. References .................................................. 23
12.1. Normative References ................................... 23
12.2. Informative References ................................. 24
13. Contributors ................................................ 25
14. Authors' Addresses .......................................... 25
15. Acknowledgment .............................................. 28
1. Introduction
Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) [RFC3945] extends
MPLS to include Layer-2 Switching (L2SC), Time-Division Multiplex
(e.g., SONET/SDH, PDH, and ODU), Wavelength (OCh, Lambdas) Switching,
and Spatial Switching (e.g., incoming port or fiber to outgoing port
or fiber). [RFC3471] presents a functional description of the
extensions to Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) signaling
required to support Generalized MPLS. RSVP-TE-specific formats and
mechanisms and technology specific details are defined in [RFC3473].
With the evolution and deployment of G.709 technology, it is
necessary that appropriate enhanced control technology support be
provided for G.709. [RFC4328] describes the control technology
details that are specific to foundation G.709 Optical Transport
Networks (OTN), as specified in the ITU-T Recommendation G.709 [G709-
V1], for ODUk deployments without multiplexing.
In addition to increasing need to support ODUk multiplexing, the
evolution of OTN has introduced additional containers and new
flexibility. For example, ODU0, ODU2e, ODU4 containers and ODUflex
are developed in [G709-V3].
In addition, the following issues require consideration:
- Support for Hitless Adjustment of ODUflex (GFP) (HAO), which is
defined in [G.7044].
- Support for Tributary Port Number. The Tributary Port Number
has to be negotiated on each link for flexible assignment of
tributary ports to tributary slots in case of LO-ODU over HO-
ODU (e.g., ODU2 into ODU3).
Therefore, it is clear that [RFC4328] has to be updated or superceded
in order to support ODUk multiplexing, as well as other ODU
enhancements introduced by evolution of OTN standards.
This document updates [RFC4328] extending the G.709 ODUk traffic
parameters and also presents a new OTN label format which is very
flexible and scalable.
Zhang Expires September 2012 [Page 3]
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-02.txt March 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-V3]. 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 (TS) granularity (i.e., 1.25 Gbps) is also
described in [G709-V3]. Thus, there are now two TS granularities for
the foundation OTN ODU1, ODU2 and ODU3 containers. The TS granularity
at 2.5 Gbps is used on legacy interfaces while the new 1.25 Gbps is
used on the new interfaces.
In addition to the support of ODUk mapping into OTUk (k = 1, 2, 3, 4),
the evolving OTN [G.709-V3] 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 OPUk (OPUk-Xv, k = 1/2/3, X = 1...256)
is also supported by [OTN-V3]. Note that VCAT of OPU0 / OPU2e / OPU4
/ OPUflex is not supported per [OTN-V3].
[RFC4328] describes GMPLS signaling extensions to support the control
for G.709 Optical Transport Networks (OTN) [G709-V1]. However,
[RFC4328] needs to be updated because it 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-MSI mode which assumes that the Tributary Port Number
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 label format.
Zhang Expires September 2012 [Page 4]
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-02.txt March 2012
Additionally, procedures about Tributary Port Number assignment
through control plane are also provided in this document.
4. Generalized Label Request
The Generalized Label Request, as described in [RFC3471], carries the
LSP Encoding Type, the Switching Type and the Generalized Protocol
Identifier (G-PID).
[RFC4328] extends the Generalized Label Request, 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 [G709-v1].
This document follows these extensions and a new Switching Type is
introduced to indicate the ODUk switching capability [G709-V3] in
order to support backward compatibility with [RFC4328], as described
in [OTN-FWK]. The new Switching Type (101, TBA by IANA) is defined in
[OTN-OSPF].
5. Extensions for Traffic Parameters for the Evolving G.709
The traffic parameters for G.709 are 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 | NMC/ Tolerance |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| NVC | Multiplier (MT) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Bit_Rate |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
The Signal Type needs to be extended in order to cover the new Signal
Type introduced by the evolving OTN. The new Signal Type values are
extended as follows:
Value Type
----- ----
0 Not significant
1 ODU1 (i.e., 2.5 Gbps)
2 ODU2 (i.e., 10 Gbps)
3 ODU3 (i.e., 40 Gbps)
Zhang Expires September 2012 [Page 5]
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-02.txt March 2012
4 ODU4 (i.e., 100 Gbps)
5 Reserved (for future use)
6 OCh at 2.5 Gbps
7 OCh at 10 Gbps
8 OCh at 40 Gbps
9 OCh at 100 Gbps
10 ODU0 (i.e., 1.25 Gbps)
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(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)
NMC/Tolerance:
This field is redefined from the original definition in [RFC4328].
NMC field defined in [RFC4328] cannot be fixed value for an end-to-
end circuit involving dissimilar OTN link types. For example, ODU2e
requires 9 TS on ODU3 and 8 TS on ODU4. Usage of NMC field is
deprecated and should be used only with [RFC4328] generalized label
format for backwards compatibility reasons. For the new generalized
label format as defined in this document this field is interpreted as
Tolerance.
In case of ODUflex(CBR), the Bit_Rate and Tolerance fields MUST be
used together to represent the actual bandwidth of ODUflex, where:
- The Bit_Rate field indicates the nominal bit rate of ODUflex(CBR)
expressed in bytes per second, encoded as a 32-bit IEEE single-
precision floating-point number (referring to [RFC4506] and
[IEEE]). The value contained in the Bit Rate field has to keep
into account both 239/238 factor and the Transcoding factor.
- The Tolerance field indicates the bit rate tolerance (part per
million, ppm) of the ODUflex(CBR) encoded as an unsigned integer,
which is bounded in 0~100ppm.
For example, for an ODUflex(CBR) service with Bit_Rate = 2.5Gbps and
Tolerance = 100ppm, the actual bandwidth of the ODUflex is:
2.5Gbps * (1 +/- 100ppm)
In case of ODUflex(GFP), the Bit_Rate field is used to indicate the
nominal bit rate of the ODUflex(GFP), which implies the number of
Zhang Expires September 2012 [Page 6]
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-02.txt March 2012
tributary slots requested for the ODUflex(GFP). Since the tolerance
of ODUflex(GFP) makes no sense on tributary slot resource reservation,
the Tolerance field for ODUflex(GFP) is not necessary and MUST be
filled with 0.
In case of other ODUk signal types, the Bit_Rate and Tolerance fields
are not necessary and MUST be set to 0.
The usage of the NVC and Multiplier (MT) fields are the same as
[RFC4328].
5.1. Usage of ODUflex(CBR) Traffic Parameters
In case of ODUflex(CBR), the information of Bit_Rate and Tolerance in
the ODUflex traffic parameters MUST be used to determine the total
number of tributary slots N in the HO ODUk link to be reserved. Here:
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-V3]) 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-V3]:
ODUflex(CBR) nominal bit rate = CBR client bit rate * (239/238) / T
The ODTUk.ts nominal bit rate is the nominal bit rate of the
tributary slot of ODUk, as shown in Table 1 (referring to [G709-V3]).
Table 1 - Actual TS bit rate of ODUk (in Gbps)
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:
Minimum bit rate of ODUTk.ts =
ODTUk.ts nominal bit rate * (1 - HO OPUk bit rate tolerance)
Zhang Expires September 2012 [Page 7]
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-02.txt March 2012
Maximum bit rate of ODTUk.ts =
ODTUk.ts nominal bit rate * (1 + HO OPUk bit rate tolerance)
Where: HO OPUk bit rate tolerance = 20ppm
Therefore, a node receiving a PATH message containing ODUflex(CBR)
nominal bit rate and tolerance 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.
As shown in Figure 1, assume there is an ODUflex(CBR) service
requesting a bandwidth of (2.5Gbps, +/-100ppm) 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 and Tolerance is
100ppm.
+-----+ +---------+ +-----+
| +-------------+ +-----+ +-------------+ |
| +=============+\| ODU |/+=============+ |
| +=============+/| flex+-+=============+ |
| +-------------+ | |\+=============+ |
| +-------------+ +-----+ +-------------+ |
| | | | | |
| | ....... | | ....... | |
| A +-------------+ B +-------------+ C |
+-----+ HO ODU4 +---------+ HO ODU2 +-----+
=========: TS occupied by ODUflex
---------: free TS
Figure 1 - Example of ODUflex(CBR) Traffic Parameters
- 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
Zhang Expires September 2012 [Page 8]
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-02.txt March 2012
equals 1.301 683 217Gbps, so the total number of tributary slots
N1 to be reserved on this link is:
N1 = ceiling (2.5Gbps * (1 + 100ppm) / 1.301 683 217Gbps) = 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 632Gbps, so the total number of tributary slots N2 to
be reserved on this link is:
N2 = ceiling (2.5Gbps * (1 + 100ppm) / 1.249 384 632Gbps) = 3
5.2. Usage of ODUflex(GFP) Traffic Parameters
[G709-V3-A2] 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 TS, 1<=n<=8 | n * ODU2.ts | +/-100 ppm
ODUflex(GFP) of n TS, 9<=n<=32 | n * ODU3.ts | +/-100 ppm
ODUflex(GFP) of n TS, 33<=n<=80 | n * ODU4.ts | +/-100 ppm
According to this table, the Bit_Rate field for ODUflex(GFP) MUST
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.
6. Generalized Label
[RFC3471] has defined the Generalized Label which extends the
traditional label by allowing the representation of not only labels
Zhang Expires September 2012 [Page 9]
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-02.txt March 2012
which are sent in-band with associated data packets, but also labels
which identify time-slots, wavelengths, or space division multiplexed
positions. The format of the corresponding RSVP-TE Generalized Label
object is defined in the Section 2.3 of [RFC3473].
However, for different technologies, we usually need use specific
label rather than the Generalized Label. For example, the label
format described in [RFC4606] could be used for SDH/SONET, the label
format in [RFC4328] for G.709.
6.1. New definition of ODU Generalized Label
In order to be compatible with new types of ODU signal and new types
of tributary slot, the following new ODU label format MUST be 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
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| TPN | Reserved | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
~ Bit Map ......... ~
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
The ODU Generalized Label 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 of HO ODUk
link can be figured out locally according to the identifier of the
selected interface carried in the IF_ID RSVP_HOP Object.
TPN (12 bits): indicates the Tributary Port Number (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.
As per [G709-V3], The TPN is used to allow for correct demultiplexing
in the data plane. When an LO ODUj is multiplexed into HO ODUk
Zhang Expires September 2012 [Page 10]
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-02.txt March 2012
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-V3], 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 |
+-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+
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 is not
corresponding to the TS number as per [G709-V3].
Zhang Expires September 2012 [Page 11]
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-02.txt March 2012
Length (12 bits): indicates the number of bit of the Bit Map field,
i.e., the total number of TS in the HO ODUk link.
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.
Padded bits are added behind the Bit Map to make the whole label a
multiple of four bytes if necessary. Padded bit MUST be set to 0 and
MUST be ignored.
Note that the Length field in the label format can also be used to
indicate the TS type of the HO ODUk (i.e., TS granularity at 1.25Gbps
or 2.5Gbps) since the HO ODUk type can be known from IF_ID RSVP_HOP
Object. In some cases when there is no LMP (Link Management Protocol)
or routing to make the two end points of the link to know the TSG,
the TSG information used by another end can be deduced from the label
format. For example, for HO ODU2 link, the value of the length filed
will be 4 or 8, which indicates the TS granularity is 2.5Gbps or
1.25Gbps, respectively.
6.2. Examples
The following examples are given in order to illustrate the label
format described in the previous sections 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:
Zhang Expires September 2012 [Page 12]
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-02.txt March 2012
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| Padded Bits (0) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
This above label indicates an ODU0 multiplexed into the second
tributary slot of ODU2, wherein there are 8 TS 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| Padded Bits (0) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
This above label indicates an ODU1 multiplexed into the 2nd and the
4th tributary slot of ODU2, wherein there are 8 TS 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| Padded Bits (0) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
This above label indicates an ODU2 multiplexed into the 2nd, 3rd, 5th
and 7th tributary slot of ODU3, wherein there are 16 TS in ODU3 (i.e.,
the type of the tributary slot is 2.5Gbps), and the TPN value is 1.
Zhang Expires September 2012 [Page 13]
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-02.txt March 2012
6.3. Label Distribution Procedure
This document does not change the existing label distribution
procedures [RFC4328] for GMPLS except that the new ODUk label MUST be
processed as follows.
When a node receives a generalized label request for setting up an
ODUj LSP from its upstream neighbor node, the node MUST generate an
ODU label according to the signal type of the requested LSP and the
free resources (i.e., free 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 does not collide with other TPN
value used by existing LO ODU connections in the selected HO ODU link,
and configure the expected multiplex structure identifier (ExMSI)
using this TPN. Then, the assigned TPN is filled into the label.
In case of ODUk to OTUk mapping, the node only needs to fill the ODUj
and the ODUk fields with corresponding values in the label. Other
bits are reserved and MUST be set to 0.
In order to process a received ODU label, the node MUST firstly learn
which ODU signal type is multiplexed or mapped into which ODU signal
type accordingly 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 type (according to the total TS
number of the ODUk, or pre-configured TS type), so that the node,
based on the TS type, can multiplex the ODUj into the ODUk. The node
MUST also retrieve the TPN value assigned by its downstream neighbor
node from the label, 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.
Zhang Expires September 2012 [Page 14]
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-02.txt March 2012
Note that the procedures of other label related objects (e.g.,
Upstream Label, Label Set) are similar to the one described above.
Note also that the TPN in the label_ERO MAY not be assigned (i.e.,
TPN field = 0) if the TPN is requested to be assigned locally.
6.3.1. Notification on Label Error
When receiving an ODUk label from the neighbor node, the node SHOULD
check the integrity of the label. An error message containing an
"Unacceptable label value" indication ([RFC3209]) SHOULD be sent if
one of the following cases occurs:
- 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 reserved resources (i.e., the number of "1" in the Bit Map
field) do not match with the Traffic Parameters.
6.4. Supporting Virtual Concatenation and Multiplication
As per [RFC6344], the 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
reflects the order of VCG members, which is similar to [RFC4328]. In
case of multiplexed virtually concatenated signals (NVC > 1), the
first label indicates the components of the first virtually
concatenated signal; the second label indicates 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 indicates the components of the first multiplexed
virtually concatenated signal; the second label indicates components
of the second multiplexed virtually concatenated signal; and so on.
In case of Multiple LSPs style, multiple control plane LSPs are
created with a single VCG and the VCAT Call can be used to associate
the control plane LSPs. The procedures are similar to section 6 of
[RFC6344].
Zhang Expires September 2012 [Page 15]
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-02.txt March 2012
7. Supporting Multiplexing Hierarchy
As described in [OTN-FWK], one ODUj connection can be nested into
another ODUk (j<k) connection, which forms the multiplexing hierarchy
in the ODU layer. This is useful if there are some intermediate nodes
in the network which only support ODUk but not ODUj switching.
For example, in Figure 2, assume that N3 is a legacy node which only
supports [G709-V1] and does not support ODU0 switching. If an ODU0
connection between N1 and N5 is required, then we can create an ODU2
connection between N2 and N4 (or ODU1 / ODU3 connection, depending on
policies and the capabilities of the two ends of the connection), and
nest the ODU0 into the ODU2 connection. In this way, N3 only needs to
perform ODU2 switching and does not need to be aware of the ODU0
connection.
| |
|<------------------- ODU0 Connection -------------------->|
| | | |
| |<---- ODU2 Connection ----->| |
| | | |
+----+ +----+ +----+ +----+ +----+
| N1 +---------+ N2 +=========+ N3 +=========+ N4 +---------+ N5 |
+----+ +----+ +----+ +----+ +----+
ODU3 link ODU3 link ODU3 link ODU3 link
Figure 2 - Example of multiplexing hierarchy
The control plane signaling should support the provisioning of
hierarchical multiplexing. Two methods are provided below (taking
Figure 2 as example):
- Using the multi-layer network signaling described in [RFC4206],
[RFC6107] and [RFC6001] (including related modifications, if
needed). That is, when the signaling message for ODUO connection
arrives at N2, a new RSVP session between N2 and N4 is triggered
to create the ODU2 connection. This ODU2 connection is treated as
a Forwarding Adjacency (FA) after it is created. And then the
signaling procedure for the ODU0 connection can be continued using
the resource of the ODU2 FA.
- The ODU2 FA-LSP is created in advance based on network planning,
which is treated as an FA. Then the ODU0 connection can be created
using the resource of the ODU2 FA. In this case, the ODU2 FA-LSP
and inner ODU0 connections are created separately.
Zhang Expires September 2012 [Page 16]
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-02.txt March 2012
For both methods, when creating an FA-LSP(e.g., ODU2 FA-LSP), the
penultimate hop needs to choose a correct outgoing interface for the
ODU2 connection, so that the destination node can support
multiplexing and de-multiplexing LO ODU signal(e.g., ODU0). In order
to choose a correct outgoing interface for the penultimate hop of the
FA-LSP, multiplexing capability (i.e., what client signal type that
can be adapted directly to this FA-LSP) should be carried in the
signaling to setup this FA-LSP. In addition, when Auto_Negotiation in
the data plane is not enabled, TS granularity may also be needed.
7.1. ADAPTATION Object
In order to create ODU FA-LSP (i.e., the server layer LSP) for
carrying the client LSP, a new object called ADAPTATION Object is
introduced, with two TLVs defined in this document:
- Type 1 = Server TSG signaling
- Type 2 = Hierarchy signaling
(1) Type=1 - Server TSG TLV
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 = 1 (TSG) | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| TSG | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
TSG: Tributary Slot Granularity (8bit): Used for signaling the server
layer TSG:
- 0 - Reserved
- 1 - either 1.25Gbps or 2.5Gbps
- 2 - 2.5Gbps
- 3 - 1.25Gbps
- 4~255 - Reserved
Where value 1 is used where the fallback procedure at the source end
of FA is enabled and the default value of 1.25Gbps can be fallen back
to 2.5Gbps. This means that either 1.25 Gpbs or 2.5 Gbps can be used
as the server TSG at the sink end of FA.
Values 2 and 3 are used to signal a 2.5Gbps or 1.25Gbps interfaces
respectively and there is no chance to modify it.
Zhang Expires September 2012 [Page 17]
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-02.txt March 2012
Other values are reserved for future extension.
(2) Type=2 - Hierarchy TLV
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 = 2 (Hierarchy) | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| LSP Enc. Type |Switching Type | Signal Type | Mapping |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| LSP Enc. Type |Switching Type | Signal Type | Mapping |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
A Hierarchy TLV for each branch of the client signal multiplexing
supported by the server LSP MUST be used. Inside each TLV a row for
each stage of the hierarchy MUST be included.
A row for the server stage MUST NOT be included as it is already
signaled via the Traffic Parameters.
The number of stages is implicitly inferred from the length value.
The meaning of the fields is defined as follow:
LSP Encoding Type and Switching Type: These fields can assume any
value inherited from the Generalized Label Request Object in GMPLS
signaling, defined in [RFC3471] and following related RFCs and
drafts.
Signal Type: In the case of non OTN signal types, this field MUST
be set to 0, while in the case of OTN signal types if MUST be
filled accordingly to [RFC4328] and this document.
Mapping: This field indicates the mapping function used in each
client-server relationship of the hierarchy. The values of this
field are listed below:
Value Type
----- ------
0 Reserved
1 AMP
2 BMP
3 GMP
Zhang Expires September 2012 [Page 18]
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-02.txt March 2012
4 GFP-F
5 GFP-T
6-255 Reserved
For example, in order to create ODU3 FA-LSP passing through a set of
ODU4 links to perform ODU1->ODU2->ODU3 hierarchy, the Hierarchy TLV
can be used to indicate the ODU2 into ODU3 multiplexing and ODU1 into
ODU2 multiplexing stages.
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type = 2 (Hierarchy) | Length = 8 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Enc.=12(ODUk) | Switching=101 | Sig. = ODU2 | Mapping = AMP |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Enc.=12(ODUk) | Switching=101 | Sig. = ODU1 | Mapping = AMP |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
7.2. ODU FA-LSP Creation
When creating an ODU FA-LSP, the source node (e.g., node N2 in Figure
2) can include the ADAPTATION object to specify the desired hierarchy
capabilities.
On receiving the Path message, the penultimate node on the FA-LSP
(e.g., node N3 in Figure 2) MUST select an outgoing link which has
the ability to carry the requested ODU FA-LSP which can support the
TS granularity and the multiplexing hierarchy listed in the
ADAPTATION object at the remote end of the link (Note that such
remote capability information can be obtained through LMP, routing
protocol or configuration). Then the penultimate node uses the IF_ID
RSVP_HOP Object to indicate the selected link for carrying the FA-LSP,
as described in [RFC3473]. If no link supporting the specified
hierarchy capabilities, a ParhErr message with Error Code = 38 (LSP
Hierarchy Issue) and Error Value = y1(new value) MUST be sent back to
upstream.
Other intermediate nodes along the FA-LSP don't need to process the
ADAPTATION object, just forwarding it to the next node in the Path
message, without any modification.
Zhang Expires September 2012 [Page 19]
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-02.txt March 2012
8. Supporting Hitless Adjustment of ODUflex (GFP)
[G.7044] describes the procedure of ODUflex (GFP) hitless resizing
using LCR (Link Connection Resize) and BWR (Bandwidth Resize)
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 Share Explicit (SE) style is used in 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 SHOULD be used at the beginning when creating
a resizable ODUflex connection (Signal Type = 21). Otherwise an error
with Error Code "Conflicting reservation style" will be generated
when performing bandwidth adjustment.
If any node along the ODUflex connection doesn't support hitless
resizing, a Notify message with Error Code = x2 and Error Value = y1
will be sent to the source node. The source node MAY keep the
connection and treat it as a non resizable ODUflex connection, or MAY
tear it down, depending on the local policy.
- Bandwidth increasing
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) is sent along the path.
A downstream node 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 free TS, the downstream node sends back a Resv
message carrying both the old and new LABEL Objects in the SE
flow descriptor, so that its upstream neighbor can determine
which TS are added. And the LCR protocol between each pair of
neighbor nodes is triggered.
On the source node, the BWR protocol will be triggered by the
successful completion of LCR protocols on every hop after Resv
message is processed. On success of BWR, the source node SHOULD
send a PathTear message to delete the old control state (i.e.,
the control state of the ODUflex (GFP) before resizing) on the
control plane.
- Bandwidth decreasing
Zhang Expires September 2012 [Page 20]
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-02.txt March 2012
The SE style can also be used for ODUflex bandwidth decreasing.
For each pair of neighbor nodes, the sending and receiving Resv
message with old and new LABEL Objects will trigger the first
step of LCR between them to perform LCR handshake. On the source
node, the BWR protocol will be triggered by the 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.
Similarly, after completion of bandwidth decreasing, a ResvErr
message SHOULD be sent to tear down the old control state.
9. Control Plane Backward Compatibility Considerations
Since the [RFC4328] has been deployed in the network for the nodes
that support [G709-V1], control plane backward compatibility SHOULD
be taken into consideration when the new nodes (supporting [G709-V3]
and RSVP-TE extensions defined in this document) and the legacy nodes
(supporting [G709-V1] and [RFC4328]) are interworking.
The backward compatibility needs to be considered only when
controlling ODU1 or ODU2 or ODU3 connection, because legacy nodes can
only support these three ODU signal types. In such case, new nodes
can fall back to use signaling message defined in [RFC4328] when
detecting legacy node on the path. More detailedly:
o When receiving Path message using [RFC4328] (i.e., Switching Type
= 100), a new node SHOULD follow [RFC4328] to process and reply it.
o A source node of an ODU LSP can send Path message using new OTN
control message (with new Switching Type = 101, TBA by IANA). If
there is legacy node on the LSP, it will fail to process the
Generalized Label Request Object because of unknown of the new
Switching Type, and reply a PathErr message indicating unknown of
this object. The source node MAY re-signal the Path message using
[RFC4328], depending on local policies.
o Alternatively, if a new node has known that its neighbor only
supports [RFC4328] in advance (e.g., through manual configuration
or auto discovery mechanism), the new node MAY act as an RSVP
agent to translate new RSVP-TE message into old one before sending
to its neighbor.
No special compatibility consideration needs to be taken if the
legacy device has updated its control plane to support this document.
Zhang Expires September 2012 [Page 21]
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-02.txt March 2012
10. Security Considerations
This document introduces no new security considerations to the
existing GMPLS signaling protocols. Referring to [RFC3473], further
details of the specific security measures are provided. Additionally,
[GMPLS-SEC] provides an overview of security vulnerabilities and
protection mechanisms for the GMPLS control plane.
11. IANA Considerations
- G.709 SENDER_TSPEC and FLOWSPEC objects:
The traffic parameters, which are carried in the G.709
SENDER_TSPEC and FLOWSPEC objects, do not require any new object
class and type based on [RFC4328]:
o G.709 SENDER_TSPEC Object: Class = 12, C-Type = 5 [RFC4328]
o G.709 FLOWSPEC Object: Class = 9, C-Type = 5 [RFC4328]
- Generalized Label Object:
The new defined ODU label (Section 6) is a kind of generalized
label. Therefore, the Class-Num and C-Type of the ODU label is
the same as that of generalized label described in [RFC3473],
i.e., Class-Num = 16, C-Type = 2.
- ADAPTATION Object:
New object with Class-Num = xx, C-Type = xx. See Section 7 for
the detail definition.
- Error Code = 38 (LSP Hierarchy Issue, referring to [RFC6107]):
A new Error Value is added to the Error Code "LSP Hierarchy
Issue":
Error Value Error case
--------------------------------------------------------------
y1 Last hop of an ODU FA-LSP doesn't support
specified adaption capabilities (Section 7.2).
- Error Code = x2:
Zhang Expires September 2012 [Page 22]
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-02.txt March 2012
New Error Code, indicating errors occurring when controlling a
resizable ODUflex connection.
Error Value Error case
--------------------------------------------------------------
y1 Do not support hitless assignment of ODUflex (GFP)
(Section 8).
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.
[RFC4328] D. Papadimitriou, Ed. "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label
Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Extensions for G.709 Optical
Transport Networks Control", RFC 4328, Jan 2006.
[RFC3209] D. Awduche et al, "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP
Tunnels", RFC3209, December 2001.
[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.
[RFC3945] Mannie, E., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
(GMPLS) Architecture", RFC 3945, October 2004.
[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.
[RFC4206] K. Kompella, Y. Rekhter, Ed., " Label Switched Paths (LSP)
Hierarchy with Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
(GMPLS) Traffic Engineering (TE)", RFC 4206, October 2005.
[RFC6107] K. Shiomoto, A. Farrel, "Procedures for Dynamically
Signaled Hierarchical Label Switched Paths", RFC6107,
February 2011.
Zhang Expires September 2012 [Page 23]
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-02.txt March 2012
[RFC6001] Dimitri Papadimitriou et al, "Generalized Multi-Protocol
Label Switching (GMPLS) Protocol Extensions for Multi-Layer
and Multi-Region Networks (MLN/MRN)", RFC6001, February 21,
2010.
[OTN-FWK] Fatai Zhang et al, "Framework for GMPLS and PCE Control of
G.709 Optical Transport Networks", draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-
g709-framework-05.txt, September 9, 2011.
[OTN-INFO] S. Belotti et al, "Information model for G.709 Optical
Transport Networks (OTN)", draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-g709-info-
model-01.txt, September 21, 2011.
[OTN-OSPF] D. Ceccarelli et al, "Traffic Engineering Extensions to
OSPF for Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Control of Evolving G.709
OTN Networks", draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ospf-g709v3-00.txt,
October 13, 2011
[OTN-LMP] Fatai Zhang, Ed., "Link Management Protocol (LMP)
extensions for G.709 Optical Transport Networks", draft-
zhang-ccamp-gmpls-g.709-lmp-discovery-04.txt, April 6, 2011.
[G709-V3] ITU-T, "Interfaces for the Optical Transport Network (OTN)
", G.709/Y.1331, December 2009.
[G709-V3-A2] ITU-T, "Interfaces for the Optical Transport Network
(OTN) Amendment 2", G.709/y.1331 Amendment 2, April 2011.
12.2. Informative References
[G709-V1] ITU-T, "Interface for the Optical Transport Network (OTN),"
G.709 Recommendation (and Amendment 1), February 2001
(November 2001).
[G709-V2] ITU-T, "Interface for the Optical Transport Network (OTN),"
G.709 Recommendation, March 2003.
[G798-V2] ITU-T, "Characteristics of optical transport network
hierarchy equipment functional blocks", G.798, December
2006.
[G798-V3] ITU-T, "Characteristics of optical transport network
hierarchy equipment functional blocks", G.798v3, consented
June 2010.
[G.7044] ITU-T, "Hitless adjustment of ODUflex", G.7044 (and
Amendment 1), February 2012.
Zhang Expires September 2012 [Page 24]
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-02.txt March 2012
[RFC4506] M. Eisler, Ed., "XDR: External Data Representation
Standard", RFC 4506, May 2006.
[IEEE] "IEEE Standard for Binary Floating-Point Arithmetic",
ANSI/IEEE Standard 754-1985, Institute of Electrical and
Electronics Engineers, August 1985.
[GMPLS-SEC] Fang, L., Ed., "Security Framework for MPLS and GMPLS
Networks", Work in Progress, October 2009.
13. Contributors
Jonathan Sadler, Tellabs
Email: jonathan.sadler@tellabs.com
Kam LAM, Alcatel-Lucent
Email: kam.lam@alcatel-lucent.com
Xiaobing Zi, Huawei Technologies
Email: zixiaobing@huawei.com
Francesco Fondelli, Ericsson
Email: francesco.fondelli@ericsson.com
Lyndon Ong, Ciena
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
Zhang Expires September 2012 [Page 25]
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-02.txt March 2012
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
Infinera Corporation
169, Java Drive
Sunnyvale, CA-94089, USA
Email: kpithewan@infinera.com
Yi Lin
Huawei Technologies
F3-5-B R&D Center, Huawei Base
Bantian, Longgang District
Shenzhen 518129 P.R.China
Phone: +86-755-28972914
Zhang Expires September 2012 [Page 26]
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-02.txt March 2012
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
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
Zhang Expires September 2012 [Page 27]
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-02.txt March 2012
Adva Optical
EMail: IBryskin@advaoptical.com
15. Acknowledgment
The authors would like to thank Lou Berger and Deborah Brungard 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 September 2012 [Page 28]
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-02.txt March 2012
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) 2010 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 September 2012 [Page 29]
