CCAMP Working Group                                               Z. Fan
Internet-Draft                                       Huawei Technologies
Intended status: Standards Track                             R. Valiveti
                                                              I. Hussain
                                                                Infinera
                                                                 Q. Wang
                                                                     ZTE
                                                                  Z. Ali
                                                                   Cisco
Expires: April 30, 2018                                 October 30, 2017


       OSPF Extensions for the GMPLS Control of OTN B100G Network

                draft-merge-ccamp-otn-b100g-routing-ext-00


Abstract

   ODUCn signal is recently introduced to OTN to support B100G feature.
   This document provides the OSPF extensions to control the OTN B100G
   Network.

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 April XX, 2018.

Copyright Notice




Fan, et al               Expires April 2018                   [Page 1]


Internet-Draft          GMPLS B100G Routing Ext            October 2017

   Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with
   respect to this document.  Code Components extracted from this
   document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in
   Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without
   warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1. Introduction ................................................ 2
      1.1. Requirements Language .................................. 3
   2. Terminology ................................................. 3
   3. Overview of OSPF-TE Extensions for Support ODUCn ............ 3
   4. ISCD Format Extensions ...................................... 3
      4.1. Switching Capability Specific Information .............. 4
         4.1.1. Modification of Type 1 Container .................. 4
         4.1.2. Type 3 Container for advertising Unreserved ODUCn . 5
   5. Examples .................................................... 6
      5.1. Multiplexing ODUk over ODUCn ........................... 6
      5.2. Advertising Unavailable TS Information of ODUCn ........ 7
   6. Security Considerations ..................................... 9
   7. IANA considerations ......................................... 9
   8. Contributors' Addresses ..................................... 9
   9. References ................................................. 10
      9.1. Normative References .................................. 10
      9.2. Informative References ................................ 10
   Authors' Addresses ............................................ 10



1. Introduction

   G.709 edition 5 [G709-2016] introduces ODUCn signal to support
   beyond 100G data rate.  ODUCn signal, as a HO ODU, can carry OTN
   signals such as ODUk and ODUflex.  The tributary slot granularity of
   ODUCn is 5 Gbps.  The OSPF-TE extensions defined in [RFC7138] cannot
   support the OTN B100G features.

   B100G framework document [I-D.merge-ccamp-otn-b100g-fwk] provides
   the requirements of protocol extensions to support the GMPLS control
   of OTN B100G.  This document provides OSPF-TE extensions to support
   the control of ODUCn.


Fan, et al               Expires April 2018                   [Page 2]


Internet-Draft          GMPLS B100G Routing Ext            October 2017

   Note: This document considers routing information for OTN electrical
   layer only.  Routing information for OTN optical layer (i.e., OCh,
   OTSiA, and FlexO interfaces) is beyond the scope of this document.

1.1. Requirements Language

   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 [RFC2119].

2. Terminology

   OPUCn: Optical Payload Unit-Cn

   ODUCn: Optical Data Unit-Cn

   OTUCn: completely standardized Optical Transport Unit-Cn

   OTUCn-M: Optical Transport Unit-Cn with n OxUC overhead instances
   and M 5G tributary slots

   TS: Tributary Slot

   TSG: Tributary Slot Granularity

3. Overview of OSPF-TE Extensions for Support ODUCn

   As described in [I-D.merge-ccamp-otn-b100g-fwk], OSPF-TE should be
   extended to advertise the 5G tributary slot granularity, the
   multiplexing capabilities of ODUCn, and the available bandwidth
   information of ODUCn.

   The advertisement of ODUCn information is used to synchronize the
   two end nodes of an ODUCn link.  If the two ends have different
   tributary slot granularities, this ODUCn link should not be setup.
   If the two ends have different multiplexing hierarchies for ODUCn,
   the supported ODUk multiplexing should be the ODUk supported by both
   ends.  If the two ends mark different tributary slots as unavailable,
   each end node should calculate the actual available TS (i.e., the
   intersection of available TS from two ends), and convert the actual
   available bandwidth to equivalent available ODUk bandwidth.

4. ISCD Format Extensions

   As defined in [RFC4203], ISCD is used to describe the switching
   capability.  Although ODUCn is not switchable, as discussed in
   Section 3, we still need advertise some capabilities to the other
   end of the ODUCn link.  We re-use the OTN-TDM switching capability


Fan, et al               Expires April 2018                   [Page 3]


Internet-Draft          GMPLS B100G Routing Ext            October 2017

   defined in [RFC7138].  A new LSP encoding type is defined for ODUCn
   in [I-D.merge-ccamp-b100g-signaling].

4.1. Switching Capability Specific Information

   Besides ODUCn signal, [G709-2016] also introduces ODUflex for FlexE-
   aware signal and ODUflex with IMP.  Three new signal type need to be
   defined:

   o TBA1 - ODUCn

   o TBA2 - ODUflex (IMP)

   o TBA3 - ODUflex (FlexE-aware)

   The Bandwidth sub-TLV defined in [RFC7138] contains two types. As
   ODUCn is a HO ODU, the multiplexing hierarchy is affected to have
   more stages.  Type 1 Bandwidth sub-TLV need to be modified, and a
   new type Bandwidth sub-TLV is needed for ODUCn.

4.1.1. Modification of Type 1 Container

   The multiplexing hierarchy is represented by stages in [RFC7138].
   As ODUk can be multiplexed into ODUCn, one more multiplexing stage
   can be introduced in both type 1 (fixed container) and type 2
   (flexible container) Bandwidth sub-TLV.  The extreme case for type 1
   is that ODU0->ODU1->ODU2->ODU3->ODU4->ODUCn, which contains 5 stages.
   The original one-row space for stage field could be insufficient.
   Therefore, the Stage field needs to be modified to support
   multiplexing to ODUCn. The modified format of type 1 Bandwidth sub-
   TLV is depicted in the following figure:

    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 (Unres-fix)   |            Length             |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |  Signal Type  | Num of stages |T|S| TSG | Res |    Priority   |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   ~    Stage#1    |      ...      |    Stage#N    |    Padding    ~
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   Unreserved ODUk at Prio 0   |             ......            |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |   Unreserved ODUk at Prio 7   |     Unreserved Padding        |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
       Figure 1: Modified Bandwidth sub-TLV for Type 1 containers




Fan, et al               Expires April 2018                   [Page 4]


Internet-Draft          GMPLS B100G Routing Ext            October 2017

4.1.2. Type 3 Container for advertising Unreserved ODUCn

   The format of the Bandwidth sub-TLV for ODUCn is depicted in the
   following figure:

    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 = 3 (Unres-ODUCn)    |            Length             |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |  Signal Type  |       n       |Res| TSG |P|Res|    Priority   |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |  Unreserved ODUCn at Prio 0   |             ......            |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |  Unreserved ODUCn at Prio 7   |     Unreserved Padding        |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   ~     Bit Map for Unavailable TS        |       Padding         ~
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      Figure 2: Extended Bandwidth sub-TLV for Type 3 containers

   o Signal Type (8 bits): Same as the definition in [RFC7138]. The
     value can only be ODUCn signal.

   o n (8 bits): Indicates the number of ODUC instance in an ODUCn
     signal.

   o Flags (8 bits):

     * P Flag (bit 22): Indicates whether the advertised ODUCn link is
       mapped to sub-rate OTUCn-M, which means some TS in this link are
       marked as unavailable. When ODUCn contains unavailable TS, P MUST
       be set, while when ODUCn does not contain unavailable TS, P MUST
       be cleard.

   o TSG (3 bits): Inherits the definition in [RFC7138] by adding a new
     value indicating the 5 Gbps TSG:

     * 4 - 5 Gbps only

   Priority (8 bits): Same as the definition in [RFC7138].

   Unreserved ODUCn (16 bits): Indicates the Unreserved Bandwidth at a
   particular priority level. This field MUST be set to the number of
   the specific ODUCn, which is identified by the Signal Type field,
   the n field, and the Bit Map for Unavailable TS field, for a
   particular priority level. One field MUST be present for each bit
   set in the Priority field, and the fields are ordered to match the



Fan, et al               Expires April 2018                   [Page 5]


Internet-Draft          GMPLS B100G Routing Ext            October 2017

   Priority field. Fields MUST NOT be present for priority levels that
   are not indicated in the Priority field.

   Unreserved Padding (16 bits): Same as the definition in [RFC7138].

   Bit Map for Unavailable TS (variable): Indicates which tributary
   slots are marked as unavailable due to the bandwidth limitation from
   lower layer connection, which is different from occupied/allocated
   TS. The total number of unavailable TS can be calculated by summing
   this field. The length of this field is derived from the n field
   (the length is 20 x n). The sequence of this field follows the joint
   sequence of the tributary slots in the ODUCn and the order of ODUC
   instances. The first 20 bits are respectively for ODUC#1, the second
   20 bits are respectively for ODUC#2, and so on. Each bit in the bit
   map represents the corresponding tributary slot in the ODUCn with a
   value of 1 or 0 indicating whether the tributary slot is marked as
   unavailable or not. When P bit is cleared, the Bit Map field is not
   required and MUST NOT be included.

   Padding (variable): Are added after the Bit Map field to make the
   whole label a multiple of four bytes if necessary. Padding bits MUST
   be set to 0 and MUST be ignored on receipt.

5. Examples

   The examples in the following pages are not normative and are not
   intended to imply or mandate any specific implementation.

5.1. Multiplexing ODUk over ODUCn

   This example shows the advertisement of the ISCD for ODUCn. An OTUC2
   link is considered with supported priorities 0,3 and multiplexing
   hierarchy ODU4->ODUC2.

   The format of the advertised ISCD is depicted by the following
   figure:

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   | SwCap=OTN_TDM | Encoding=ODUCn|     Reserved (all zeros)      |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 0 = 200 Gbps         |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 1 = 0                |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 2 = 0                |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


Fan, et al               Expires April 2018                   [Page 6]


Internet-Draft          GMPLS B100G Routing Ext            October 2017

   |            Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 3 = 200 Gbps         |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 4 = 0                |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 5 = 0                |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 6 = 0                |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 7 = 0                |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |        Type = 1 (Unres-fix)   |          Length = 12          |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   | SigType=ODU4  |  #stages = 1  |X|X|  3  |0 0 0|1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0|
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   | Stage#1=ODUCn |              Padding (all zeros)              |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   | Unreserved ODU4 at Prio 0 = 2 | Unreserved ODU4 at Prio 3 = 2 |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |     Type = 3 (Unres-ODUCn)    |          Length = 8           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   | SigType=ODUCn |     n = 2     |0 0|  4  |0|0 0|1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0|
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   | Unreserved ODUC2 at Prio 0 =1 | Unreserved ODUC2 at Prio 3 =1 |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
               Figure 3: ISCD for ODU4 over OTUC2 link

   The Max LSP Bandwidth is filled with the bandwidth of ODUC2 (i.e.,
   200 Gbps).

   According to the multiplexing hierarchy, the advertised ODU4 has one
   stage to ODUCn. The number of unreserved ODU4 is 2 in this example.

   The advertised ODUC2 has signal type as ODUCn, n as 2, and P bit
   cleared. The TSG value is 4, which means 5 Gbps granularity. The
   number of unreserved ODUC2 is 1 in this example.

5.2. Advertising Unavailable TS Information of ODUCn

   This example shows the advertisement of unavailable TS information.
   An OTUC2-30 link is considered with supported priorities 0,3 and
   multiplexing hierarchy ODU4->ODUC2.

   The format of the advertised ISCD is depicted by the following
   figure:






Fan, et al               Expires April 2018                   [Page 7]


Internet-Draft          GMPLS B100G Routing Ext            October 2017

    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
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   | SwCap=OTN_TDM | Encoding=ODUCn|     Reserved (all zeros)      |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 0 = 150 Gbps         |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 1 = 0                |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 2 = 0                |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 3 = 150 Gbps         |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 4 = 0                |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 5 = 0                |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 6 = 0                |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |            Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 7 = 0                |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |        Type = 1 (Unres-fix)   |          Length = 12          |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   | SigType=ODU4  |  #stages = 1  |X|X|  3  |0 0 0|1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0|
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   | Stage#1=ODUCn |              Padding (all zeros)              |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   | Unreserved ODU4 at Prio 0 = 1 | Unreserved ODU4 at Prio 3 = 1 |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |     Type = 3 (Unres-ODUCn)    |         Length = 16           |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   | SigType=ODUCn |     n = 2     |0 0|  4  |1|0 0|1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0|
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   | Unreserved ODUC2 at Prio 0 =1 | Unreserved ODUC2 at Prio 3 =1 |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1|
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
   |0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1|             Padding (all zeros)               |
   +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
              Figure 4: ISCD for ODU4 over OTUC2-30 link

   The Max LSP Bandwidth is filled with 150 Gbps, as ODUC2 has 10
   unavailable tributary slots.

   As the bandwidth of ODUC2 is reduced, the number of unreserved ODU4
   is 1 in this example.




Fan, et al               Expires April 2018                   [Page 8]


Internet-Draft          GMPLS B100G Routing Ext            October 2017

   The advertised ODUC2 has signal type as ODUCn, n as 2, and P bit set.
   The TSG value is 4, which means 5 Gbps granularity. The number of
   unreserved ODUC2 is 1 in this example. The Bit Map field indicates
   which tributary slot is marked as unavailable, where the marking
   policy is vendor specific. In this example, bit-4, bit-8, bit-12,
   bit-16, bit-20, bit-24, bit-28, bit-32, bit-36, and bit-40 are set,
   which means the corresponding tributary slots are marked as
   unavailable.

6. Security Considerations

   TBD.

7. IANA considerations

   TBD.

8. Contributors' Addresses

   Haomian Zheng
   Huawei Technologies

   Email: zhenghaomian@huawei.com


   Sergio Belotti
   Nokia

   Email: sergio.belotti@nokia.com


   Yunbin Xu
   CAICT

   Email: xuyunbin@ritt.cn


   Rajan Rao
   Infinera

   Email: rrao@infinera.com


   Huub van Helvoort
   Hai Gaoming B.V


Fan, et al               Expires April 2018                   [Page 9]


Internet-Draft          GMPLS B100G Routing Ext            October 2017


   Email: huubatwork@gmail.com


9. References

9.1. Normative References

   [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to indicate
             requirements levels", RFC 2119, March 1997.

   [G709-2016] ITU-T, "Interface for the Optical Transport Network
             (OTN)", G.709/Y.1331 Recommendation, June 2016.

   [RFC7138] Ceccarelli D., Zhang, F., Belotti, S., Rao, R., and J.
             Drake, "Traffic Engineering Extensions to OSPF for GMPLS
             Control of Evolving G.709 Optical Transport Networks",
             RFC7138, March 2014.

   [RFC4203] Kompella, K., Ed., and Y. Rekhter, Ed., "OSPF Extensions
             in Support of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
             (GMPLS)", RFC4203, October 2005.

9.2. Informative References

   [I-D.merge-ccamp-otn-b100g-fwk] Wang, Q., Ed., Valiveti, R., Ed.,
             Zheng, H., Ed., Helvoort, H., and S. Belotti, "GMPLS
             Routing and Signaling Framework for B100G", draft-merge-
             ccamp-otn-b100g-fwk-02 (work in process), July 2017.

   [I-D.merge-ccamp-b100g-signaling] Wang, Q., Ed., Zheng, H., Valiveti,
             R., Helvoort, H., and Z. Ali, " GMPLS Signalling
             Extensions for control of B100G OTUCn/ODUCn Network ",
             draft-merge-ccamp-100g-signalling-00 (work in process),
             October 2017.


Authors' Addresses

   Zheyu Fan
   Huawei Technologies

   Email: fanzheyu2@huawei.com

   Radhakrishna Valiveti
   Infinera



Fan, et al               Expires April 2018                  [Page 10]


Internet-Draft          GMPLS B100G Routing Ext            October 2017

   Email: rvaliveti@infinera.com

   Iftekhar Hussain
   Infinera

   Email: IHussain@infinera.com

   Qilei Wang
   ZTE

   Email: wang.qilei@zte.com.cn

   Zafar Ali
   Cisco

   Email: zali@cisco.com

































Fan, et al               Expires April 2018                  [Page 11]