Liaison statement
LS/r on clarification of ITU-T G.698.2 (11/2018) application codes (reply to IETF ccamp WG-LS19)

Additional information about IETF liaison relationships is available on the IETF webpage and the Internet Architecture Board liaison webpage.
State Posted
Submitted Date 2023-05-05
From Group ITU-T-SG-15
From Contact Hiroshi Ota
To Group ccamp
To Contacts Daniele Ceccarelli <daniele.ietf@gmail.com>
Fatai Zhang <zhangfatai@huawei.com>
Luis Contreras <luismiguel.contrerasmurillo@telefonica.com>
Cc John Scudder <jgs@juniper.net>
Jim Guichard <james.n.guichard@futurewei.com>
Fatai Zhang <zhangfatai@huawei.com>
Scott Mansfield <Scott.Mansfield@Ericsson.com>
Andrew Alston <andrew-ietf@liquid.tech>
Daniele Ceccarelli <daniele.ietf@gmail.com>
Common Control and Measurement Plane Discussion List <ccamp@ietf.org>
Luis Contreras <luismiguel.contrerasmurillo@telefonica.com>
itu-t-liaison@iab.org <itu-t-liaison@iab.org>
John Drake <jdrake@juniper.net>
Response Contact fabio.cavaliere@ericsson.com
Purpose For information
Attachments SG15-LS052
Body 
This document contains the response discussed in Q6/15 to the IETF liaison
statement in TD40/WP2 on clarification of ITU-T G.698.2 (11/2018) application
codes.

As regards your request for clarification about DP-DQPSK 100G application codes
in Rec. ITU-T G.698.2 (11/2018), we confirm that:

– OTL4.4-SC or FOIC1.4-SC share the same application code, as specified in the
Bit rate/line coding field of Table 8-7;

– Your understanding that OTL4.4-SC and FOIC1.4-SC are incompatible with each
other is correct;

– The same type of tributary signal must be present at both ends of the link.
The type of signal must be specified by the user of the Application Code.

Moreover, we concluded that generating different application codes having the
same set of optical parameters would be misleading, so there was no support in
Q6 for this solution.