[Search] [txt|pdfized|bibtex] [Tracker] [Email] [Diff1] [Diff2] [Nits]
Versions: 00 01 02 03                                                   
INTERNET-DRAFT                                          Khuzema Pithewan
Intended Status: Standard Track                                Rajan Rao
                                                                Infinera
Expires: April 20, 2014                                 October 17, 2013


              OSPF-TE extensions for MLNMRN based on OTN
              draft-rao-ccamp-mlnmrn-otn-ospfte-ext-03.txt


Abstract

   This document specifies OSPF extensions for multi-layer/multi-region
   where one of the regions is multi-layer e.g. OTN, SONET/SDH.



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/1id-abstracts.html

   The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
   http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html


Copyright and License Notice

   Copyright (c) 2013 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



Khuzema Pithewan         Expires April 20, 2014                 [Page 1]


INTERNET DRAFTdraft-rao-ccamp-mlnmrn-otn-ospfte-ext-03.txt  Oct 17, 2013


   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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   2 Layer Identification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
   3 OTN Layer ID . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   4 SONET/SDH Layer Identification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
   5 Procedure  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
   6 Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
     6.1. Ethernet and OTN  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
     6.2. OTN and FlexGrid  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
     6.3. OTN and SONET/SDH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     6.4. OTN and OTN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
   7 IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
   8 Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
   9 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
   10. Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9



























Khuzema Pithewan         Expires April 20, 2014                 [Page 2]


INTERNET DRAFTdraft-rao-ccamp-mlnmrn-otn-ospfte-ext-03.txt  Oct 17, 2013


1 Introduction

   In order to do end-to-end path computation, where a path may involve
   more than one region and part of single routing domain, TE Links
   connecting the two regions need to have bandwidth capacity advertised
   for the switch that connects the two regions. This document specifies
   the OSPF extensions that are required if any of the region is a
   multi-layer network. The specification is based on the requirement as
   specified in RFC 5212. As per the said RFC, ISCD characterizes the
   information associated to one or more network layers. Same RFC also
   says that the information about the adjustment capabilities of the
   nodes in the network allow the path computation process to select an
   end-to-end multi-layer or multi- region path that includes links with
   different switching capabilities joined by LSRs that can adapt (i.e.,
   adjust) the signal between the links. By inference, information about
   the adjustment capabilities should be able to identify a layer in
   ISCD, if ISCD specifies more than one layer.

   RFC6001 specifies how to advertise adjustment capabilities between
   two switching regions. IACD definition has provision to extend it for
   a specific technology through Adjustment Capability Specific
   information (ACSI) field, if required. ACSI field can be used to
   identify a layer in the multi-layer ISCD.

   While OTN multi-layer technology is a primary driver for this
   extension, the extensions in this document does cover specifications
   for multi-layer technologies in general. To make sure the extensions
   are extensible to other multi-layer technologies as well, this
   document covers SDH/SONET as well.

2 Layer Identification

   Multi-region path computation requires to identify a layer in the
   multi-layer region. This mandates layer identification along with
   identification of technology in the region. The technology
   identification is done via Switching capability and Encoding type.

   IACD needs to be extended to be able to carry layer identification.
   the layer Identification is OPTIONAL and used only when interface
   supports layer multiplexing and hence creating a need to identify a
   layer. A new Layer ID Sub-TLV has been defined to carry layer
   identification.









Khuzema Pithewan         Expires April 20, 2014                 [Page 3]


INTERNET DRAFTdraft-rao-ccamp-mlnmrn-otn-ospfte-ext-03.txt  Oct 17, 2013


      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          |R|  Reserved   |           Length              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                         ...                                   |
      |          Variable size field to identify layer                |
      |                         ...                                   |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   Type : Type field is used to identify a particular structure of
   variable size field, which is specific to the particular Switching
   Capability and Encoding type combination

   R : This bit is used to make sense whether the Layer ID is for Lower
   region or upper region. 1 means upper region and 0 means lower.

   IACD can have at-most 2 Layer ID TLVs, if both the regions are multi-
   layer.

   Next two sections specifies Layer ID for two multi-layer technologies
   namely, OTN and SONET/SDH


3 OTN Layer ID

   RFC6001 defines IACD sub-TLV as follows. Please refer to the RFC for
   definition of individual fields of the sub-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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      | Lower SC      | Lower Encoding| Upper SC      | Upper Encoding|
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 0              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 1              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 2              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 3              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 4              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 5              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 6              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 7              |



Khuzema Pithewan         Expires April 20, 2014                 [Page 4]


INTERNET DRAFTdraft-rao-ccamp-mlnmrn-otn-ospfte-ext-03.txt  Oct 17, 2013


      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |            Adjustment Capability-specific information         |
      |                           (variable)                          |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+



   [GMPLS-OTN-OSPF] defines attributes that identifies a layer in multi-
   layer OTN ISCD. These attributes are part of Bandwidth sub-TLV in
   Switch capability specific information of ISCD. These attributes are
   reproduced here for completeness sake.


   * Signal Type: Layer for which bandwidth is being advertised.
   * Hierarchy  : also called as multiplexing branch that specifies all
                  the layers between server layer and signal type.
   * TSG        : Time Slot Granularity


   Adjustment Capability-specific information abbreviated as ACSI
   henceforth for OTN G.709v3 carries LayerID Sub-TLV which is 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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      | Type = 1      |R|  Reserved   |           Length              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |  Signal type  | Num of stages |TSG |    Res   |   Stage#1     |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |    Stage#2    |      ...      |   Stage#N     |    Padding    |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


   This LayerID sub-TLV is applicable only when one of the regions is
   OTN, which means either lower or upper SC and Encoding type MUST have
   Switch Cap as OTN-TDM and encoding type as G.709 ODUk.

   R bit is used to make sense whether the Layer ID is for Lower region
   or upper region. 1 means upper region and 0 means lower.

   The 8 priorities of the BW as defined in main IACD structure, is
   adjustment capability between the two regions where one of the region
   is identifies by LayerID sub-TLV.


   Absence of this sub-TLV for OTN means that the OTN ISCD doesn't
   support multiplexing.



Khuzema Pithewan         Expires April 20, 2014                 [Page 5]


INTERNET DRAFTdraft-rao-ccamp-mlnmrn-otn-ospfte-ext-03.txt  Oct 17, 2013


4 SONET/SDH Layer Identification

   G.707 defines the structure of SDH multiplexing hierarchy and RFC
   4606 defines generalized label structure needed to fully specify
   SONET/SDH multiplexing hierarchy. This Label structure also referred
   as SUKLM structure identifies all the layers of the multiplexing
   hierarchy along with time slots. For the purpose of this draft, only
   layer identification is needed, hence each layer can be identified by
   a bit. Bit value 1 signifies presence of the layer and 0, its
   absence. 5 Bits, each representing one layer is sufficient to fully
   identify the SONET/SDH multiplexing hierarchy.

   Layer ID sub TLV for SONET/SDH is 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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      | Type = 2      |R|  Reserved   |           Length              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |S|U|K|L|M|                Padding                              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

   SUKLM bits signifies the presence of SONET/SDH layers and these bits
   together fully specifies the multiplexing hierarchy. Refer to Section
   3 of RFC 4606 for full specification of SUKLM bits.

   Absence of sub-TLV means that the SONET/SDH ISCD doesn't support
   multiplexing and needs only transparent mapping to other Interface.




5 Procedure

   A node advertising IACD for the bandwidth between regions where one
   or both of them are hierarchical i.e. OTN or SONET/SDH, MUST include
   the Layer ID sub-TLV as part of ACSI as defined above.

   For multi-region path computation, the path computing node MUST look
   at the LayerID sub-TLV (in ACSI part of IACD) if lower/upper {SC,Enc]
   is {OTN-TDM,G.709ODUk} or {TDM,SONET/SDH} to identify the layer for
   correct layer for BW check.

6 Examples

   This section exemplifies TLV values for various technology region
   combinations, where one of the region is OTN



Khuzema Pithewan         Expires April 20, 2014                 [Page 6]


INTERNET DRAFTdraft-rao-ccamp-mlnmrn-otn-ospfte-ext-03.txt  Oct 17, 2013


6.1. Ethernet and OTN   When upper region is Ethernet and lower region
   is OTN
      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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      | PSC-1         | Ethernet      | OTN-TDM       | G.709 ODUk    |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 0              |
      |                    / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /              |
      |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 7              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      | Type = 1      |0|  Reserved   |           Length              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |  Signal type  | Num of stages |TSG |    Res   |   Stage#1     |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |    Stage#2    |      ...      |   Stage#N     |    Padding    |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+



6.2. OTN and FlexGrid
      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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      | OTN-TDM       | G.709 ODUk    |  SCSC         | Lambda        |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 0              |
      |                    / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /              |
      |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 7              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      | Type = 1      |1|  Reserved   |           Length              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |  Signal type  | Num of stages |TSG |    Res   |   Stage#1     |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |    Stage#2    |      ...      |   Stage#N     |    Padding    |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+















Khuzema Pithewan         Expires April 20, 2014                 [Page 7]


INTERNET DRAFTdraft-rao-ccamp-mlnmrn-otn-ospfte-ext-03.txt  Oct 17, 2013


6.3. OTN and SONET/SDH
      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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      | OTN-TDM       | G.709 ODUk    |  TDM          | Sonet/SDH     |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 0              |
      |                    / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /              |
      |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 7              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      | Type = 1      |1|  Reserved   |           Length              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |  Signal type  | Num of stages |TSG |    Res   |   Stage#1     |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |    Stage#2    |      ...      |   Stage#N     |    Padding    |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      | Type = 2      |0|  Reserved   |           Length              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |S|U|K|L|M|                Padding                              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+



6.4. OTN and OTN
      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
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      | OTN-TDM       | G.709 ODUk    |  OTN-TDM       | G.709 ODUk   |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 0              |
      |                    / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /              |
      |                  Max LSP Bandwidth at priority 7              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      | Type = 1      |0|  Reserved   |           Length              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |  Signal type  | Num of stages |TSG |    Res   |   Stage#1     |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |    Stage#2    |      ...      |   Stage#N     |    Padding    |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      | Type = 1      |1|  Reserved   |           Length              |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |  Signal type  | Num of stages |TSG |    Res   |   Stage#1     |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
      |    Stage#2    |      ...      |   Stage#N     |    Padding    |
      +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+


7 IANA Considerations



Khuzema Pithewan         Expires April 20, 2014                 [Page 8]


INTERNET DRAFTdraft-rao-ccamp-mlnmrn-otn-ospfte-ext-03.txt  Oct 17, 2013


   TBD

8 Security Considerations

   TBD

9 References

   [RFC5212]  K. Shiomoto, Papadimitriou, D.,JL. Le Roux, Vigoureux, M.,
              Brungard, D., "Requirements for GMPLS-Based Multi-Layer
              and Multi-Region Networks (MLN/ MRN)",RFC 5212, July 2008.

   [RFC6001]  Papadimitriou, D., Vigoureux, M., Shiomoto, K., Brungard,
              D., and JL. Le Roux, "Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Protocol
              Extensions for Multi-Layer and Multi-Region Networks
              (MLN/MRN)", RFC 6001, October 2010.

   [RFC4606]  E. Mannie, Perceval, D. Papadimitriou, "Generalized Multi-
              Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Extensions for
              Synchronous Optical Network (SONET) and Synchronous
              Digital Hierarchy (SDH) Control", RFC 4606, Aug 2006

   [GMPLS-OTN-OSPF] Traffic Engineering Extensions to OSPF for
              Generalized MPLS (GMPLS)Control of Evolving G.709 OTN
              Networks

10. Authors' Addresses

              Khuzema Pithewan
              Infinera
              140 Caspian Ct., Sunnyvale, CA 94089
              Email: kpithewan@infinera.com

              Rajan Rao
              Infinera
              140 Caspian Ct., Sunnyvale, CA 94089
              Email: rrao@infinera.com














Khuzema Pithewan         Expires April 20, 2014                 [Page 9]