Network Working Group Y. Lee
Internet Draft Huawei
Intended status: Informational G. Bernstein
Expires: March 2010 Grotto Networking
D. Li
Huawei
W. Imajuku
NTT
September 9, 2009
Routing and Wavelength Assignment Information Model for Wavelength
Switched Optical Networks
draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-info-04.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 March 9, 2009.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2009 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 in effect on the date of
Bernstein and Lee Expires March 9, 2010 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft Wavelength Switched Optical Networks September 2009
publication of this document (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info).
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
and restrictions with respect to this document.
Abstract
This document provides a model of information needed by the routing
and wavelength assignment (RWA) process in wavelength switched
optical networks (WSONs). The purpose of the information described
in this model is to facilitate constrained lightpath computation in
WSONs, particularly in cases where there are no or a limited number
of wavelength converters available. This model does not include
optical impairments.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction...................................................3
1.1. Revision History..........................................3
1.1.1. Changes from 01......................................3
1.1.2. Changes from 02......................................3
1.1.3. Changes from 03......................................4
2. Terminology....................................................4
3. Routing and Wavelength Assignment Information Model............5
3.1. Dynamic and Relatively Static Information.................5
3.2. Node Information..........................................5
3.2.1. Connectivity Matrix..................................6
3.2.2. Shared Risk Node Group...............................7
3.2.3. Wavelength Converter Pool............................7
3.2.4. OEO Wavelength Converter Info.......................10
3.3. Link Information.........................................10
3.3.1. Administrative Group................................10
3.3.2. Interface Switching Capability Descriptor...........11
3.3.3. Link Protection Type (for this link)................11
3.3.4. Shared Risk Link Group Information..................11
3.3.5. Traffic Engineering Metric..........................11
3.3.6. Port Wavelength (label) Restrictions................11
3.4. Dynamic Link Information.................................13
3.5. Dynamic Node Information.................................13
4. Security Considerations.......................................14
5. IANA Considerations...........................................14
6. Acknowledgments...............................................14
7. References....................................................15
7.1. Normative References.....................................15
7.2. Informative References...................................15
8. Contributors..................................................16
Bernstein and Lee Expires March 9, 2010 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft Wavelength Switched Optical Networks September 2009
Author's Addresses...............................................17
Intellectual Property Statement..................................17
Disclaimer of Validity...........................................18
1. Introduction
The purpose of the following information model for WSONs is to
facilitate constrained lightpath computation and as such is not a
general purpose network management information model. In particular
this model has particular value in the cases where there are no or a
limited number of wavelength converters available in the WSON. This
constraint is frequently referred to as the "wavelength continuity"
constraint, and the corresponding constrained lightpath computation
is known as the routing and wavelength assignment (RWA) problem.
Hence the information model must provide sufficient topology and
wavelength restriction and availability information to support this
computation. More details on the RWA process and WSON subsystems and
their properties can be found in [WSON-Frame]. The model defined here
does not currently include impairments however optical impairments
can be accommodated by the general framework presented here.
1.1. Revision History
1.1.1. Changes from 01
Added text on multiple fixed and switched connectivity matrices.
Added text on the relationship between SRNG and SRLG and encoding
considerations.
Added clarifying text on the meaning and use of port/wavelength
restrictions.
Added clarifying text on wavelength availability information and how
to derive wavelengths currently in use.
1.1.2. Changes from 02
Integrated switched and fixed connectivity matrices into a single
"connectivity matrix" model. Added numbering of matrices to allow for
wavelength (time slot, label) dependence of the connectivity.
Discussed general use of this node parameter beyond WSON.
Integrated switched and fixed port wavelength restrictions into a
single port wavelength restriction of which there can be more than
one and added a reference to the corresponding connectivity matrix if
there is one. Also took into account port wavelength restrictions in
the case of symmetric switches, developed a uniform model and
Bernstein and Lee Expires March 9, 2010 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft Wavelength Switched Optical Networks September 2009
specified how general label restrictions could be taken into account
with this model.
Removed the Shared Risk Node Group parameter from the node info, but
left explanation of how the same functionality can be achieved with
existing GMPLS SRLG constructs.
Removed Maximum bandwidth per channel parameter from link
information.
1.1.3. Changes from 03
Removed signal related text from section 3.2.4 as signal related
information is deferred to a new signal compatibility draft.
Removed encoding specific text from Section 3.3.1 of version 03.
2. Terminology
CWDM: Coarse Wavelength Division Multiplexing.
DWDM: Dense Wavelength Division Multiplexing.
FOADM: Fixed Optical Add/Drop Multiplexer.
ROADM: Reconfigurable Optical Add/Drop Multiplexer. A reduced port
count wavelength selective switching element featuring ingress and
egress line side ports as well as add/drop side ports.
RWA: Routing and Wavelength Assignment.
Wavelength Conversion. The process of converting an information
bearing optical signal centered at a given wavelength to one with
"equivalent" content centered at a different wavelength. Wavelength
conversion can be implemented via an optical-electronic-optical (OEO)
process or via a strictly optical process.
WDM: Wavelength Division Multiplexing.
Wavelength Switched Optical Network (WSON): A WDM based optical
network in which switching is performed selectively based on the
center wavelength of an optical signal.
Bernstein and Lee Expires March 9, 2010 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft Wavelength Switched Optical Networks September 2009
3. Routing and Wavelength Assignment Information Model
We group the following WSON RWA information model into four
categories regardless of whether they stem from a switching subsystem
or from a line subsystem:
o Node Information
o Link Information
o Dynamic Node Information
o Dynamic Link Information
Note that this is roughly the categorization used in [G.7715] section
7.
In the following we use where applicable the reduced Backus-Naur form
(RBNF) syntax of [RBNF] to aid in defining the RWA information model.
3.1. Dynamic and Relatively Static Information
All the RWA information of concern in a WSON network is subject to
change over time. Equipment can be upgraded; links may be placed in
or out of service and the like. However, from the point of view of
RWA computations there is a difference between information that can
change with each successive connection establishment in the network
and that information that is relatively static on the time scales of
connection establishment. A key example of the former is link
wavelength usage since this can change with connection setup/teardown
and this information is a key input to the RWA process. Examples of
relatively static information are the potential port connectivity of
a WDM ROADM, and the channel spacing on a WDM link.
In this document we will separate, where possible, dynamic and static
information so that these can be kept separate in possible encodings
and hence allowing for separate updates of these two types of
information thereby reducing processing and traffic load caused by
the timely distribution of the more dynamic RWA WSON information.
3.2. Node Information
The node information described here contains the relatively static
information related to a WSON node. This includes connectivity
constraints amongst ports and wavelengths since WSON switches can
exhibit asymmetric switching properties. Additional information could
include properties of wavelength converters in the node if any are
Bernstein and Lee Expires March 9, 2010 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft Wavelength Switched Optical Networks September 2009
present. In [Switch] it was shown that the wavelength connectivity
constraints for a large class of practical WSON devices can be
modeled via switched and fixed connectivity matrices along with
corresponding switched and fixed port constraints. We include these
connectivity matrices with our node information the switched and
fixed port wavelength constraints with the link information.
Formally,
<Node_Information> ::= <Node_ID> [<ConnectivityMatrix>...]
[<WavelengthConverterPool>]
Where the Node_ID would be an appropriate identifier for the node
within the WSON RWA context.
Note that multiple connectivity matrices are allowed and hence can
fully support the most general cases enumerated in [Switch].
3.2.1. Connectivity Matrix
The connectivity matrix (ConnectivityMatrix) represents either the
potential connectivity matrix for asymmetric switches (e.g. ROADMs
and such) or fixed connectivity for an asymmetric device such as a
multiplexer. Note that this matrix does not represent any particular
internal blocking behavior but indicates which ingress ports and
wavelengths could possibly be connected to a particular output port.
Representing internal state dependent blocking for a switch or ROADM
is beyond the scope of this document and due to it's highly
implementation dependent nature would not be subject to
standardization. This is a conceptual M by N matrix representing the
potential switched or fixed connectivity, where M represents the
number of ingress ports and N the number of egress ports. We say this
is a "conceptual" since this matrix tends to exhibit structure that
allows for very compact representations that are useful for both
transmission and path computation [Encode].
Note that the connectivity matrix concept can be useful in any
context where asymmetric switches are utilized.
ConnectivityMatrix(i, j) ::= <MatrixID> <ConnType> <Matrix>
Where
<MatrixID> is a unique identifier for the matrix. The MatrixID of 0
(zero) is reserved (see section 3.3.6.
<ConnType> can be either 0 or 1 depending upon whether the
connectivity is either fixed or potentially switched.
Bernstein and Lee Expires March 9, 2010 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft Wavelength Switched Optical Networks September 2009
<Matrix> represents the fixed or switched connectivity in that
Matrix(i, j) = 0 or 1 depending on whether ingress port i can connect
to egress port j for one or more wavelengths.
3.2.2. Shared Risk Node Group
SRNG: Shared risk group for nodes. The concept of a shared risk link
group was defined in [RFC4202]. This can be used to achieve a desired
"amount" of link diversity. It is also desirable to have a similar
capability to achieve various degrees of node diversity. This is
explained in [G.7715]. Typical risk groupings for nodes can include
those nodes in the same building, within the same city, or geographic
region.
Since the failure of a node implies the failure of all links
associated with that node a sufficiently general shared risk link
group (SRLG) encoding, such as that used in GMPLS routing extensions
can explicitly incorporate SRNG information.
3.2.3. Wavelength Converter Pool
A WSON node may include wavelength converters. These are usually
arranged into some type of pool to promote resource sharing. There
are a number of different approaches used in the design of switches
with converter pools. However, from the point of view of path
computation we need to know the following:
1. The nodes that support wavelength conversion.
2. The accessibility and availability of a wavelength converter to
convert from a given ingress wavelength on a particular ingress
port to a desired egress wavelength on a particular egress port.
3. Limitations on the types of signals that can be converted and the
conversions that can be performed.
To model point 2 above we can use a similar technique as used to
model ROADMs and optical switches this technique was generally
discussed in [WSON-Frame] and consisted of a matrix to indicate
possible connectivity along with wavelength constraints for
links/ports. Since wavelength converters are considered a scarce
resource we will also want to our model to include as a minimum the
usage state of individual wavelength converters in the pool. Models
that incorporate more state to further reveal blocking conditions on
ingress or egress to particular converters are for further study.
We utilize a three stage model as shown schematically in Figure 1. In
this model we assume N ingress ports (fibers), P wavelength
Bernstein and Lee Expires March 9, 2010 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft Wavelength Switched Optical Networks September 2009
converters, and M egress ports (fibers). Since not all ingress ports
can necessarily reach the converter pool, the model starts with a
wavelength pool ingress matrix WI(i,p) = {0,1} whether ingress port i
can reach potentially reach wavelength converter p.
Since not all wavelength can necessarily reach all the converters or
the converters may have limited input wavelength range we have a set
of ingress port constraints for each wavelength converter. Currently
we assume that a wavelength converter can only take a single
wavelength on input. We can model each wavelength converter ingress
port constraint via a wavelength set mechanism.
Next we have a state vector WC(j) = {0,1} dependent upon whether
wavelength converter j in the pool is in use. This is the only state
kept in the converter pool model. This state is not necessary for
modeling "fixed" transponder system, i.e., systems where there is no
sharing. In addition, this state information may be encoded in a
much more compact form depending on the overall connectivity
structure [WC-Pool].
After that, we have a set of wavelength converter egress wavelength
constraints. These constraints indicate what wavelengths a particular
wavelength converter can generate or are restricted to generating due
to internal switch structure.
Finally, we have a wavelength pool egress matrix WE(p,k) = {0,1}
depending on whether the output from wavelength converter p can reach
egress port k. Examples of this method being used to model wavelength
converter pools for several switch architectures from the literature
are given in reference [WC-Pool].
Bernstein and Lee Expires March 9, 2010 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft Wavelength Switched Optical Networks September 2009
I1 +-------------+ +-------------+ E1
----->| | +--------+ | |----->
I2 | +------+ WC #1 +-------+ | E2
----->| | +--------+ | |----->
| Wavelength | | Wavelength |
| Converter | +--------+ | Converter |
| Pool +------+ WC #2 +-------+ Pool |
| | +--------+ | |
| Ingress | | Egress |
| Connection | . | Connection |
| Matrix | . | Matrix |
| | . | |
| | | |
IN | | +--------+ | | EM
----->| +------+ WC #P +-------+ |----->
| | +--------+ | |
+-------------+ ^ ^ +-------------+
| |
| |
| |
| |
Ingress wavelength Egress wavelength
constraints for constraints for
each converter each converter
Figure 1 Schematic diagram of wavelength converter pool model.
Formally we can specify the model as:
<WavelengthConverterPool> ::= <PoolIngressMatrix>
<IngressPoolConstraints> [<WCPoolState>] <EgressPoolConstraints>
<PoolEgressMatrix>
Bernstein and Lee Expires March 9, 2010 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft Wavelength Switched Optical Networks September 2009
Note that except for <WCPoolState> all the other components of
<WavelengthConverterPool> are relatively static. In addition
<WCPoolState> is a relatively small structure compared potentially to
the others and hence in a future revision of this document maybe
moved to a new section on dynamic node information.
3.2.4. OEO Wavelength Converter Info
An OEO based wavelength converter can be characterized by an input
wavelength set and an output wavelength set. Such a wavelength
converter can be modeled by:
<OEOWavelengthConverterInfo> ::= [<InputWavelengthSet>]
[<OutputWavelengthSet>]
3.3. Link Information
MPLS-TE routing protocol extensions for OSPF and IS-IS [RFC3630],
[RFC5305] along with GMPLS routing protocol extensions for OSPF and
IS-IS [RFC4203, RFC5307] provide the bulk of the relatively static
link information needed by the RWA process. WSON networks bring in
additional link related constraints. These stem from WDM line system
characterization, laser transmitter tuning restrictions, and
switching subsystem port wavelength constraints, e.g., colored ROADM
drop ports.
In the following summarize both information from existing route
protocols and new information that maybe needed by the RWA process.
<LinkInfo> ::= <LinkID> [<AdministrativeGroup>] [<InterfaceCapDesc>]
[<Protection>] [<SRLG>]... [<TrafficEngineeringMetric>]
[<PortWavelengthRestriction>]
3.3.1. Administrative Group
AdministrativeGroup: Defined in [RFC3630]. Each set bit corresponds
to one administrative group assigned to the interface. A link may
belong to multiple groups. This is a configured quantity and can be
used to influence routing decisions.
Bernstein and Lee Expires March 9, 2010 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft Wavelength Switched Optical Networks September 2009
3.3.2. Interface Switching Capability Descriptor
InterfaceSwCapDesc: Defined in [RFC4202], lets us know the different
switching capabilities on this GMPLS interface. In both [RFC4203] and
[RFC5307] this information gets combined with the maximum LSP
bandwidth that can be used on this link at eight different priority
levels.
3.3.3. Link Protection Type (for this link)
Protection: Defined in [RFC4202] and implemented in [RFC4203,
RFC5307]. Used to indicate what protection, if any, is guarding this
link.
3.3.4. Shared Risk Link Group Information
SRLG: Defined in [RFC4202] and implemented in [RFC4203, RFC5307].
This allows for the grouping of links into shared risk groups, i.e.,
those links that are likely, for some reason, to fail at the same
time.
3.3.5. Traffic Engineering Metric
TrafficEngineeringMetric: Defined in [RFC3630]. This allows for the
definition of one additional link metric value for traffic
engineering separate from the IP link state routing protocols link
metric. Note that multiple "link metric values" could find use in
optical networks, however it would be more useful to the RWA process
to assign these specific meanings such as link mile metric, or
probability of failure metric, etc...
3.3.6. Port Wavelength (label) Restrictions
Port wavelength (label) restrictions (PortWavelengthRestriction)
model the wavelength (label) restrictions that the link and various
optical devices such as OXCs, ROADMs, and waveband multiplexers may
impose on a port. These restrictions tell us what wavelength may or
may not be used on a link and are relatively static. This plays an
important role in fully characterizing a WSON switching device
[Switch]. Port wavelength restrictions are specified relative to the
port in general or to a specific connectivity matrix (section 3.2.1.
Reference [Switch] gives an example where both switch and fixed
connectivity matrices are used and both types of constraints occur on
the same port. Such restrictions could be applied generally to other
label types in GMPLS by adding new kinds of restrictions.
<PortWavelengthRestriction> ::= [<GeneralPortRestrictions>...]
[<MatrixSpecificRestrictions>...]
Bernstein and Lee Expires March 9, 2010 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft Wavelength Switched Optical Networks September 2009
<GeneralPortRestrictions> ::= <RestrictionType>
[<RestrictionParameters>]
<MatrixSpecificRestriction> ::= <MatrixID> <RestrictionType>
[<RestrictionParameters>]
<RestrictionParameters> ::= [<WavelengthSet>...] [<MaxNumChannels>]
[<MaxWaveBandWidth>]
Where
MatrixID is the ID of the corresponding connectivity matrix (section
3.2.1.
The RestrictionType parameter is used to specify general port
restrictions and matrix specific restrictions. It can take the
following values and meanings:
SIMPLE_WAVELENGTH: Simple wavelength set restriction; The
wavelength set parameter is required.
CHANNEL_COUNT: The number of channels is restricted to be less than
or equal to the Max number of channels parameter (which is required).
WAVEBAND1: Waveband device with a tunable center frequency and
passband. This constraint is characterized by the MaxWaveBandWidth
parameters which indicates the maximum width of the waveband in terms
of channels. Note that an additional wavelength set can be used to
indicate the overall tuning range. Specific center frequency tuning
information can be obtained from dynamic channel in use information.
It is assumed that both center frequency and bandwidth (Q) tuning can
be done without causing faults in existing signals.
Restriction specific parameters are used with one or more of the
previously listed restriction types. The currently defined parameters
are:
WavelengthSet is a conceptual set of wavelengths (labels).
MaxNumChannels is the maximum number of channels that can be
simultaneously used (relative to either a port or a matrix).
MaxWaveBandWidth is the maximum width of a tunable waveband switching
device.
Bernstein and Lee Expires March 9, 2010 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft Wavelength Switched Optical Networks September 2009
For example, if the port is a "colored" drop port of a ROADM then we
have two restrictions: (a) CHANNEL_COUNT, with MaxNumChannels = 1,
and (b) SIMPLE_WAVELENGTH, with the wavelength set consisting of a
single member corresponding to the frequency of the permitted
wavelength. See [Switch] for a complete waveband example.
This information model for port wavelength (label) restrictions is
fairly general in that it can be applied to ports that have label
restrictions only or to ports that are part of an asymmetric switch
and have label restrictions. In addition, the types of label
restrictions that can be supported is extensible.
3.4. Dynamic Link Information
By dynamic information we mean information that is subject to change
on a link with subsequent connection establishment or teardown.
Currently for WSON the only information we currently envision is
wavelength availability and wavelength in use for shared backup
purposes.
<DynamicLinkInfo> ::= <LinkID> <AvailableWavelengths>
[<SharedBackupWavelengths>]
Where
<LinkID> ::= <LocalLinkID> <LocalNodeID> <RemoteLinkID>
<RemoteNodeID>
AvailableWavelengths is a set of wavelengths (labels) currently
available on the link. Given this information and the port wavelength
restrictions we can also determine which wavelengths are currently in
use. This parameter could potential be used with other technologies
that GMPLS currently covers or may cover in the future.
SharedBackupWavelengths is a set of wavelengths (labels)currently
used for shared backup protection on the link. An example usage of
this information in a WSON setting is given in [Shared]. This
parameter could potential be used with other technologies that GMPLS
currently covers or may cover in the future.
3.5. Dynamic Node Information
Dynamic node information is used to hold information for a node that
can change frequently. Currently only wavelength converter pool
information is included as a possible (but not required) information
sub-element.
<DynamicNodeInfo> ::= <NodeID> [<WavelengthConverterPoolStatus>]
Bernstein and Lee Expires March 9, 2010 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft Wavelength Switched Optical Networks September 2009
Where NodeID is a node identifier and the exact form of the
wavelength converter pool status information is TBD.
4. Security Considerations
This document discussed an information model for RWA computation in
WSONs. Such a model is very similar from a security standpoint of the
information that can be currently conveyed via GMPLS routing
protocols. Such information includes network topology, link state
and current utilization, and well as the capabilities of switches and
routers within the network. As such this information should be
protected from disclosure to unintended recipients. In addition, the
intentional modification of this information can significantly affect
network operations, particularly due to the large capacity of the
optical infrastructure to be controlled.
5. IANA Considerations
This informational document does not make any requests for IANA
action.
6. Acknowledgments
This document was prepared using 2-Word-v2.0.template.dot.
Bernstein and Lee Expires March 9, 2010 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft Wavelength Switched Optical Networks September 2009
7. References
7.1. Normative References
[Encode] G. Bernstein, Y. Lee, D. Li, W. Imajuku, "Routing and
Wavelength Assignment Information Encoding for Wavelength
Switched Optical Networks", work in progress: draft-ietf-
ccamp-rwa-wson-encode.
[RBNF] A. Farrel, "Reduced Backus-Naur Form (RBNF) A Syntax Used in
Various Protocol Specifications", RFC 5511, April 2009.
[RFC3630] Katz, D., Kompella, K., and D. Yeung, "Traffic Engineering
(TE) Extensions to OSPF Version 2", RFC 3630, September
2003.
[RFC4202] Kompella, K., Ed., and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "Routing Extensions
in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
(GMPLS)", RFC 4202, October 2005
[RFC4203] Kompella, K., Ed., and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "OSPF Extensions in
Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
(GMPLS)", RFC 4203, October 2005.
[RFC5305] Li, T. and H. Smit, "IS-IS Extensions for Traffic
Engineering", RFC 5305, October 2008.
[RFC5307] Kompella, K., Ed., and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "IS-IS Extensions
in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
(GMPLS)", RFC 5307, October 2008.
[WSON-Frame] Y. Lee, G. Bernstein, W. Imajuku, "Framework for GMPLS
and PCE Control of Wavelength Switched Optical Networks",
work in progress: draft-ietf-ccamp-rwa-wson-framework.
7.2. Informative References
[Shared] G. Bernstein, Y. Lee, "Shared Backup Mesh Protection in PCE-
based WSON Networks", iPOP 2008, http://www.grotto-
networking.com/wson/iPOP2008_WSON-shared-mesh-poster.pdf .
[Switch] G. Bernstein, Y. Lee, A. Gavler, J. Martensson, " Modeling
WDM Wavelength Switching Systems for Use in GMPLS and Automated
Path Computation", Journal of Optical Communications and
Networking, vol. 1, June, 2009, pp. 187-195.
Bernstein and Lee Expires March 9, 2010 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft Wavelength Switched Optical Networks September 2009
[G.Sup39] ITU-T Series G Supplement 39, Optical system design and
engineering considerations, February 2006.
[WC-Pool] G. Bernstein, Y. Lee, "Modeling WDM Switching Systems
including Wavelength Converters" to appear www.grotto-
networking.com, 2008.
8. Contributors
Diego Caviglia
Ericsson
Via A. Negrone 1/A 16153
Genoa Italy
Phone: +39 010 600 3736
Email: diego.caviglia@(marconi.com, ericsson.com)
Anders Gavler
Acreo AB
Electrum 236
SE - 164 40 Kista Sweden
Email: Anders.Gavler@acreo.se
Jonas Martensson
Acreo AB
Electrum 236
SE - 164 40 Kista, Sweden
Email: Jonas.Martensson@acreo.se
Itaru Nishioka
NEC Corp.
1753 Simonumabe, Nakahara-ku, Kawasaki, Kanagawa 211-8666
Japan
Phone: +81 44 396 3287
Email: i-nishioka@cb.jp.nec.com
Lyndon Ong
Ciena
Email: lyong@ciena.com
Bernstein and Lee Expires March 9, 2010 [Page 16]
Internet-Draft Wavelength Switched Optical Networks September 2009
Author's Addresses
Greg M. Bernstein (ed.)
Grotto Networking
Fremont California, USA
Phone: (510) 573-2237
Email: gregb@grotto-networking.com
Young Lee (ed.)
Huawei Technologies
1700 Alma Drive, Suite 100
Plano, TX 75075
USA
Phone: (972) 509-5599 (x2240)
Email: ylee@huawei.com
Dan Li
Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
F3-5-B R&D Center, Huawei Base,
Bantian, Longgang District
Shenzhen 518129 P.R.China
Phone: +86-755-28973237
Email: danli@huawei.com
Wataru Imajuku
NTT Network Innovation Labs
1-1 Hikari-no-oka, Yokosuka, Kanagawa
Japan
Phone: +81-(46) 859-4315
Email: imajuku.wataru@lab.ntt.co.jp
Intellectual Property Statement
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
Bernstein and Lee Expires March 9, 2010 [Page 17]
Internet-Draft Wavelength Switched Optical Networks September 2009
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.
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.
Acknowledgment
Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
Internet Society.
Bernstein and Lee Expires March 9, 2010 [Page 18]
