draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-03.txt   draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-04.txt 
Network Working Group Fatai Zhang, Ed. Network Working Group Fatai Zhang, Ed.
Internet Draft Huawei Internet Draft Huawei
Category: Standards Track Guoying Zhang Category: Standards Track Guoying Zhang
CATR CATR
Sergio Belotti Sergio Belotti
Alcatel-Lucent Alcatel-Lucent
D. Ceccarelli D. Ceccarelli
Ericsson Ericsson
Khuzema Pithewan Khuzema Pithewan
Infinera Infinera
Expires: January 13, 2013 July 13, 2012 Expires: February 27, 2013 August 27, 2012
Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling
Extensions for the evolving G.709 Optical Transport Networks Control Extensions for the evolving G.709 Optical Transport Networks Control
draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-03.txt draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-04.txt
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with
the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet- other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Drafts. Drafts.
skipping to change at page 1, line 40 skipping to change at page 1, line 40
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on January 13, 2013. This Internet-Draft will expire on February 27, 2013.
Abstract Abstract
Recent progress in ITU-T Recommendation G.709 standardization has Recent progress in ITU-T Recommendation G.709 standardization has
introduced new ODU containers (ODU0, ODU4, ODU2e and ODUflex) and introduced new ODU containers (ODU0, ODU4, ODU2e and ODUflex) and
enhanced Optical Transport Networking (OTN) flexibility. Several enhanced Optical Transport Networking (OTN) flexibility. Several
recent documents have proposed ways to modify GMPLS signaling recent documents have proposed ways to modify GMPLS signaling
protocols to support these new OTN features. protocols to support these new OTN features.
It is important that a single solution is developed for use in GMPLS It is important that a single solution is developed for use in GMPLS
skipping to change at page 2, line 27 skipping to change at page 2, line 27
features including ODU0, ODU4, ODU2e and ODUflex. features including ODU0, ODU4, ODU2e and ODUflex.
Conventions used in this document Conventions used in this document
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction ................................................ 3 1. Introduction .................................................. 3
2. Terminology ................................................. 4 2. Terminology ................................................... 4
3. GMPLS Extensions for the Evolving G.709 - Overview ........... 4 3. GMPLS Extensions for the Evolving G.709 - Overview ............ 4
4. Generalized Label Request .................................... 5 4. Generalized Label Request ..................................... 5
5. Extensions for Traffic Parameters for the Evolving G.709 ..... 6 5. Extensions for Traffic Parameters for the Evolving G.709 ...... 7
5.1. Usage of ODUflex(CBR) Traffic Parameters ................ 8 5.1. Usage of ODUflex(CBR) Traffic Parameters ................. 8
5.2. Usage of ODUflex(GFP) Traffic Parameters ............... 10 5.2. Usage of ODUflex(GFP) Traffic Parameters ................ 10
6. Generalized Label ........................................... 11 6. Generalized Label ............................................ 11
6.1. New definition of ODU Generalized Label ................ 11 6.1. New definition of ODU Generalized Label ................. 11
6.2. Examples ............................................... 14 6.2. Examples ................................................ 14
6.3. Label Distribution Procedure ........................... 15 6.3. Label Distribution Procedure ............................ 15
6.3.1. Notification on Label Error ....................... 16 6.3.1. Notification on Label Error ........................ 16
6.4. Supporting Virtual Concatenation and Multiplication .... 17 6.4. Supporting Virtual Concatenation and Multiplication ..... 17
7. Supporting Multiplexing Hierarchy ........................... 17 7. Supporting Hitless Adjustment of ODUflex (GFP) ............... 17
7.1. Extension to LSP_ATTRIBUTES Object ..................... 18 8. Control Plane Backward Compatibility Considerations........... 18
7.2. ODU FA-LSP Creation .................................... 19 9. Security Considerations ...................................... 19
8. Supporting Hitless Adjustment of ODUflex (GFP) .............. 20 10. IANA Considerations.......................................... 19
9. Control Plane Backward Compatibility Considerations.......... 21 11. References .................................................. 20
10. Security Considerations................................. ... 22 11.1. Normative References ................................... 20
11. IANA Considerations.................................. ...... 22 11.2. Informative References ................................. 21
12. References ................................................. 23
12.1. Normative References................................... 23 12. Contributors ................................................ 21
12.2. Informative References................................. 25 13. Authors' Addresses .......................................... 22
13. Contributors ............................................... 25 14. Acknowledgment .............................................. 24
14. Authors' Addresses ......................................... 26
15. Acknowledgment ............................................. 28
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) [RFC3945] extends Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) [RFC3945] extends
MPLS to include Layer-2 Switching (L2SC), Time-Division Multiplex MPLS to include Layer-2 Switching (L2SC), Time-Division Multiplex
(e.g., SONET/SDH, PDH, and ODU), Wavelength (OCh, Lambdas) Switching, (e.g., SONET/SDH, PDH, and ODU), Wavelength (OCh, Lambdas) Switching,
and Spatial Switching (e.g., incoming port or fiber to outgoing port and Spatial Switching (e.g., incoming port or fiber to outgoing port
or fiber). [RFC3471] presents a functional description of the or fiber). [RFC3471] presents a functional description of the
extensions to Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) signaling extensions to Multi-Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) signaling
required to support Generalized MPLS. RSVP-TE-specific formats and required to support Generalized MPLS. RSVP-TE-specific formats and
skipping to change at page 3, line 36 skipping to change at page 3, line 34
Networks (OTN), as specified in the ITU-T Recommendation G.709 [G709- Networks (OTN), as specified in the ITU-T Recommendation G.709 [G709-
V1], for ODUk deployments without multiplexing. V1], for ODUk deployments without multiplexing.
In addition to increasing need to support ODUk multiplexing, the In addition to increasing need to support ODUk multiplexing, the
evolution of OTN has introduced additional containers and new evolution of OTN has introduced additional containers and new
flexibility. For example, ODU0, ODU2e, ODU4 containers and ODUflex flexibility. For example, ODU0, ODU2e, ODU4 containers and ODUflex
are developed in [G709-V3]. are developed in [G709-V3].
In addition, the following issues require consideration: In addition, the following issues require consideration:
- Support for Hitless Adjustment of ODUflex (GFP) (HAO), which is - Support for Hitless Adjustment of ODUflex (GFP) (HAO), which is
defined in [G.7044]. defined in [G.7044].
- Support for Tributary Port Number. The Tributary Port Number - Support for Tributary Port Number. The Tributary Port Number
has to be negotiated on each link for flexible assignment of has to be negotiated on each link for flexible assignment of
tributary ports to tributary slots in case of LO-ODU over HO- tributary ports to tributary slots in case of LO-ODU over HO-
ODU (e.g., ODU2 into ODU3). ODU (e.g., ODU2 into ODU3).
Therefore, it is clear that [RFC4328] has to be updated or superceded Therefore, it is clear that [RFC4328] has to be updated or superceded
in order to support ODUk multiplexing, as well as other ODU in order to support ODUk multiplexing, as well as other ODU
enhancements introduced by evolution of OTN standards. enhancements introduced by evolution of OTN standards.
This document updates [RFC4328] extending the G.709 ODUk traffic This document updates [RFC4328] extending the G.709 ODUk traffic
parameters and also presents a new OTN label format which is very parameters and also presents a new OTN label format which is very
skipping to change at page 4, line 17 skipping to change at page 4, line 17
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
3. GMPLS Extensions for the Evolving G.709 - Overview 3. GMPLS Extensions for the Evolving G.709 - Overview
New features for the evolving OTN, for example, new ODU0, ODU2e, ODU4 New features for the evolving OTN, for example, new ODU0, ODU2e, ODU4
and ODUflex containers are specified in [G709-V3]. The corresponding and ODUflex containers are specified in [G709-V3]. The corresponding
new signal types are summarized below: new signal types are summarized below:
- Optical Channel Transport Unit (OTUk): - Optical Channel Transport Unit (OTUk):
. OTU4 . OTU4
- Optical Channel Data Unit (ODUk): - Optical Channel Data Unit (ODUk):
. ODU0 . ODU0
. ODU2e . ODU2e
. ODU4 . ODU4
. ODUflex . ODUflex
A new Tributary Slot Granularity (TSG) (i.e., 1.25 Gbps) is also A new Tributary Slot Granularity (TSG) (i.e., 1.25 Gbps) is also
described in [G709-V3]. Thus, there are now two TS granularities for described in [G709-V3]. Thus, there are now two TS granularities for
the foundation OTN ODU1, ODU2 and ODU3 containers. The TS granularity 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 at 2.5 Gbps is used on legacy interfaces while the new 1.25 Gbps is
used on the new interfaces. used on the new interfaces.
skipping to change at page 5, line 27 skipping to change at page 5, line 27
to accommodate [G709-v1]. to accommodate [G709-v1].
This document follows these extensions and a new Switching Type is This document follows these extensions and a new Switching Type is
introduced to indicate the ODUk switching capability [G709-V3] in introduced to indicate the ODUk switching capability [G709-V3] in
order to support backward compatibility with [RFC4328], as described order to support backward compatibility with [RFC4328], as described
in [OTN-FWK]. The new Switching Type (101, TBA by IANA) is defined in in [OTN-FWK]. The new Switching Type (101, TBA by IANA) is defined in
[OTN-OSPF]. [OTN-OSPF].
This document also updates the G-PID values defined in [RFC4328]: This document also updates the G-PID values defined in [RFC4328]:
Value G-PID Type Value G-PID Type
----- ---------- ----- ----------
47 ODU-2.5G: transport of Digital Paths at 2.5, 10 and 40 47 ODU-2.5G: transport of Digital Paths at 2.5, 10 and 40 Gbps
Gbps via 2.5Gbps TSG via 2.5Gbps TSG
49 CBRa: asynchronous Constant Bit Rate (i.e., mapping of 49 CBRa: asynchronous Constant Bit Rate (i.e., mapping of
CBR2G5, CBR10G and CBR40G) CBR2G5, CBR10G and CBR40G)
50 CBRb: bit synchronous Constant Bit Rate (i.e., mapping of 50 CBRb: bit synchronous Constant Bit Rate (i.e., mapping of
CBR2G5, CBR10G, CBR40G, CBR10G3 and supra-2.488 CBR CBR2G5, CBR10G, CBR40G, CBR10G3 and supra-2.488 CBR
Gbit/s signal (carried by OPUflex)) Gbit/s signal (carried by OPUflex))
32 ATM: mapping at 1.25, 2.5, 10 and 40 Gbps 32 ATM: mapping at 1.25, 2.5, 10 and 40 Gbps
skipping to change at page 6, line 9 skipping to change at page 6, line 11
52 BSNT: non-specific client Bit Stream without Octet Timing 52 BSNT: non-specific client Bit Stream without Octet Timing
(i.e., Mapping of 1.25, 2.5, 10, 40 and 100 Gbps Bit (i.e., Mapping of 1.25, 2.5, 10, 40 and 100 Gbps Bit
Stream) Stream)
Note: Values 32, 47, 49 and 50 include mapping of SDH. Note: Values 32, 47, 49 and 50 include mapping of SDH.
In the case of ODU multiplexing, the LO ODU (i.e., the client signal) In the case of ODU multiplexing, the LO ODU (i.e., the client signal)
may be multiplexed into HO ODU via 1.25G TSG, 2.5G TSG or any one of may be multiplexed into HO ODU via 1.25G TSG, 2.5G TSG or any one of
them (i.e., TSG Auto_Negotiation is enabled). Since the G-PID type them (i.e., TSG Auto_Negotiation is enabled). Since the G-PID type
"ODUk" defined in [RFC4328] is only used for 2.5Gbps TSG, two new G- "ODUk" defined in [RFC4328] is only used for 2.5Gbps TSG, two new G-
PID types are needed: PID types are defined as follows:
- ODU-1.25G: transport of Digital Paths at 1.25, 2.5, 10, 40 and - ODU-1.25G: transport of Digital Paths at 1.25, 2.5, 10, 40 and
100 Gbps via 1.25Gbps TSG 100 Gbps via 1.25Gbps TSG
- ODU-any: transport of Digital Paths at 1.25, 2.5, 10, 40 and 100 - ODU-any: transport of Digital Paths at 1.25, 2.5, 10, 40 and 100
Gbps via 1.25 or 2.5Gbps TSG (i.e., the fallback Gbps via 1.25 or 2.5Gbps TSG (i.e., the fallback
procedure is enabled and the default value of 1.25Gbps procedure is enabled and the default value of 1.25Gbps
TSG can be fallen back to 2.5Gbps if needed) TSG can be fallen back to 2.5Gbps if needed)
In addition, some other new G-PID types are defined to support other In addition, some other new G-PID types are defined to support other
new client signals described in [G709-V3]: new client signals described in [G709-V3]:
- CBRc: Mapping of constant bit-rate signals with justification - CBRc: Mapping of constant bit-rate signals with justification
into OPUk (k = 0, 1, 2, 3, 4) via GMP (i.e., mapping of into OPUk (k = 0, 1, 2, 3, 4) via GMP (i.e., mapping of
sub-1.238, supra-1.238 to sub-2.488, close-to 9.995, sub-1.238, supra-1.238 to sub-2.488, close-to 9.995,
close-to 40.149 and close-to 104.134 Gbit/s CBR client close-to 40.149 and close-to 104.134 Gbit/s CBR client
signal) signal)
- 1000BASE-X: Mapping of a 1000BASE-X signal via timing - 1000BASE-X: Mapping of a 1000BASE-X signal via timing
transparent transcoding into OPU0 transparent transcoding into OPU0
- FC-1200: Mapping of a FC-1200 signal via timing transparent - FC-1200: Mapping of a FC-1200 signal via timing transparent
transcoding into OPU2e transcoding into OPU2e
The following table summarizes the new G-PID values with respect to The following table summarizes the new G-PID values with respect to
the LSP Encoding Type: the LSP Encoding Type:
Value G-PID Type LSP Encoding Type Value G-PID Type LSP Encoding Type
----- ---------- ----------------- ----- ---------- -----------------
59(TBA) G.709 ODU-1.25G G.709 ODUk 59(TBA) G.709 ODU-1.25G G.709 ODUk
60(TBA) G.709 ODU-any G.709 ODUk 60(TBA) G.709 ODU-any G.709 ODUk
61(TBA) CBRc G.709 ODUk 61(TBA) CBRc G.709 ODUk
62(TBA) 1000BASE-X G.709 ODUk (k=0) 62(TBA) 1000BASE-X G.709 ODUk (k=0)
63(TBA) FC-1200 G.709 ODUk (k=2e) 63(TBA) FC-1200 G.709 ODUk (k=2e)
Note: Values 59 and 60 include mapping of SDH. Note: Values 59 and 60 include mapping of SDH.
5. Extensions for Traffic Parameters for the Evolving G.709 5. Extensions for Traffic Parameters for the Evolving G.709
The traffic parameters for G.709 are defined as follows: The traffic parameters for G.709 are defined as follows:
0 1 2 3 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 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 | | Signal Type | Reserved | NMC/ Tolerance |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| NVC | Multiplier (MT) | | NVC | Multiplier (MT) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Bit_Rate | | Bit_Rate |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
The Signal Type needs to be extended in order to cover the new Signal The Signal Type MUST be extended in order to cover the new Signal
Type introduced by the evolving OTN. The new Signal Type values are Type introduced by the evolving OTN. The new Signal Type values are
extended as follows: extended as follows:
Value Type Value Type
----- ---- ----- ----
0 Not significant 0 Not significant
1 ODU1 (i.e., 2.5 Gbps) 1 ODU1 (i.e., 2.5 Gbps)
2 ODU2 (i.e., 10 Gbps) 2 ODU2 (i.e., 10 Gbps)
3 ODU3 (i.e., 40 Gbps) 3 ODU3 (i.e., 40 Gbps)
4 ODU4 (i.e., 100 Gbps) 4 ODU4 (i.e., 100 Gbps)
skipping to change at page 7, line 45 skipping to change at page 8, line 4
21 ODUflex(GFP-F), resizable (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) 22 ODUflex(GFP-F), non resizable (i.e., 1.25*N Gbps)
23~255 Reserved (for future use) 23~255 Reserved (for future use)
NMC/Tolerance: NMC/Tolerance:
This field is redefined from the original definition in [RFC4328]. This field is redefined from the original definition in [RFC4328].
NMC field defined in [RFC4328] cannot be fixed value for an end-to- NMC field defined in [RFC4328] cannot be fixed value for an end-to-
end circuit involving dissimilar OTN link types. For example, ODU2e 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 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 deprecated and SHOULD be used only with [RFC4328] generalized label
format for backwards compatibility reasons. For the new generalized format for backwards compatibility reasons. For the new generalized
label format as defined in this document this field is interpreted as label format as defined in this document this field MUST be
Tolerance. interpreted as Tolerance.
In case of ODUflex(CBR), the Bit_Rate and Tolerance fields MUST be In case of ODUflex(CBR), the Bit_Rate and Tolerance fields MUST be
used together to represent the actual bandwidth of ODUflex, where: used together to represent the actual bandwidth of ODUflex, where:
- The Bit_Rate field indicates the nominal bit rate of ODUflex(CBR) - The Bit_Rate field indicates the nominal bit rate of ODUflex(CBR)
expressed in bytes per second, encoded as a 32-bit IEEE single- expressed in bytes per second, encoded as a 32-bit IEEE single-
precision floating-point number (referring to [RFC4506] and precision floating-point number (referring to [RFC4506] and
[IEEE]). The value contained in the Bit Rate field has to keep [IEEE]). The value contained in the Bit Rate field has to keep
into account both 239/238 factor and the Transcoding factor. into account both 239/238 factor and the Transcoding factor.
- The Tolerance field indicates the bit rate tolerance (part per - The Tolerance field indicates the bit rate tolerance (part per
million, ppm) of the ODUflex(CBR) encoded as an unsigned integer, million, ppm) of the ODUflex(CBR) encoded as an unsigned integer,
which is bounded in 0~100ppm. which is bounded in 0~100ppm.
For example, for an ODUflex(CBR) service with Bit_Rate = 2.5Gbps and For example, for an ODUflex(CBR) service with Bit_Rate = 2.5Gbps and
Tolerance = 100ppm, the actual bandwidth of the ODUflex is: Tolerance = 100ppm, the actual bandwidth of the ODUflex is:
2.5Gbps * (1 +/- 100ppm) 2.5Gbps * (1 +/- 100ppm)
In case of ODUflex(GFP), the Bit_Rate field is used to indicate the 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 nominal bit rate of the ODUflex(GFP), which implies the number of
skipping to change at page 9, line 37 skipping to change at page 9, line 41
Where: HO OPUk bit rate tolerance = 20ppm Where: HO OPUk bit rate tolerance = 20ppm
Therefore, a node receiving a PATH message containing ODUflex(CBR) Therefore, a node receiving a PATH message containing ODUflex(CBR)
nominal bit rate and tolerance can allocate precise number of nominal bit rate and tolerance can allocate precise number of
tributary slots and set up the cross-connection for the ODUflex tributary slots and set up the cross-connection for the ODUflex
service. service.
Note that for different ODUk, the bit rates of the tributary slots Note that for different ODUk, the bit rates of the tributary slots
are different, and so the total number of tributary slots to be 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 reserved for the ODUflex(CBR) MAY not be the same on different HO
ODUk links. ODUk links.
An example is given below to illustrate the usage of ODUflex(CBR) An example is given below to illustrate the usage of ODUflex(CBR)
traffic parameters. traffic parameters.
As shown in Figure 1, assume there is an ODUflex(CBR) service 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. requesting a bandwidth of (2.5Gbps, +/-100ppm) from node A to node C.
In other words, the ODUflex traffic parameters indicate that Signal In other words, the ODUflex traffic parameters indicate that Signal
Type is 20 (ODUflex(CBR)), Bit_Rate is 2.5Gbps and Tolerance is Type is 20 (ODUflex(CBR)), Bit_Rate is 2.5Gbps and Tolerance is
100ppm. 100ppm.
skipping to change at page 11, line 30 skipping to change at page 11, line 33
6. Generalized Label 6. Generalized Label
[RFC3471] has defined the Generalized Label which extends the [RFC3471] has defined the Generalized Label which extends the
traditional label by allowing the representation of not only labels traditional label by allowing the representation of not only labels
which are sent in-band with associated data packets, but also labels which are sent in-band with associated data packets, but also labels
which identify time-slots, wavelengths, or space division multiplexed which identify time-slots, wavelengths, or space division multiplexed
positions. The format of the corresponding RSVP-TE Generalized Label positions. The format of the corresponding RSVP-TE Generalized Label
object is defined in the Section 2.3 of [RFC3473]. object is defined in the Section 2.3 of [RFC3473].
However, for different technologies, we usually need use specific However, for different technologies, it usually needs to use specific
label rather than the Generalized Label. For example, the label label rather than the Generalized Label. For example, the label
format described in [RFC4606] could be used for SDH/SONET, the label format described in [RFC4606] could be used for SDH/SONET, the label
format in [RFC4328] for G.709. format in [RFC4328] for G.709.
6.1. New definition of ODU Generalized Label 6.1. New definition of ODU Generalized Label
In order to be compatible with new types of ODU signal and new types 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: of tributary slot, the following new ODU label format MUST be used:
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
skipping to change at page 12, line 13 skipping to change at page 12, line 13
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
The ODU Generalized Label is used to indicate how the LO ODUj signal 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 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 type is indicated by traffic parameters, while the type of HO ODUk
link can be figured out locally according to the identifier of the link can be figured out locally according to the identifier of the
selected interface carried in the IF_ID RSVP_HOP Object. selected interface carried in the IF_ID RSVP_HOP Object.
TPN (12 bits): indicates the Tributary Port Number (TPN) for the TPN (12 bits): indicates the Tributary Port Number (TPN) for the
assigned Tributary Slot(s). assigned Tributary Slot(s).
- In case of LO ODUj multiplexed into HO ODU1/ODU2/ODU3, only the - 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 lower 6 bits of TPN field are significant and the other bits of
TPN MUST be set to 0. TPN MUST be set to 0.
- In case of LO ODUj multiplexed into HO ODU4, only the lower 7 - 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 bits of TPN field are significant and the other bits of TPN
MUST be set to 0. MUST be set to 0.
- In case of ODUj mapped into OTUk (j=k), the TPN is not needed - In case of ODUj mapped into OTUk (j=k), the TPN is not needed
and this field MUST be set to 0. and this field MUST be set to 0.
As per [G709-V3], The TPN is used to allow for correct demultiplexing 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 in the data plane. When an LO ODUj is multiplexed into HO ODUk
occupying one or more TSs, a new TPN value is configured at the two 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 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 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 the other end of the link can learn which TS(s) is/are used by the LO
ODUj in the data plane. ODUj in the data plane.
skipping to change at page 13, line 26 skipping to change at page 13, line 26
| +-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ | +-------+----+----------------------------------------------+
| | ODU2 |1~4 |Flexible, != other existing LO ODU2s' TPNs | | | ODU2 |1~4 |Flexible, != other existing LO ODU2s' TPNs |
| ODU3 +-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ | ODU3 +-------+----+----------------------------------------------+
| |ODU0 & | |Flexible, != other existing LO ODU0s and | | |ODU0 & | |Flexible, != other existing LO ODU0s and |
| |ODU2e &|1~32|ODU2es and ODUflexes' TPNs | | |ODU2e &|1~32|ODU2es and ODUflexes' TPNs |
| |ODUflex| | | | |ODUflex| | |
+-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+ +-------+-------+----+----------------------------------------------+
| ODU4 |Any ODU|1~80|Flexible, != ANY other existing LO ODUs' TPNs | | 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 Note that in the case of "Flexible", the value of TPN MAY not be
corresponding to the TS number as per [G709-V3]. corresponding to the TS number as per [G709-V3].
Length (12 bits): indicates the number of bit of the Bit Map field, 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. 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 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 which tributary slots will be used, so the length field MUST be set
to 0. to 0.
Bit Map (variable): indicates which tributary slots in HO ODUk that 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 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 consistent with the sequence of the tributary slots in HO ODUk. Each
bit in the bit map represents the corresponding tributary slot in HO 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 ODUk with a value of 1 or 0 indicating whether the tributary slot
will be used by LO ODUj or not. will be used by LO ODUj or not.
Padded bits are added behind the Bit Map to make the whole label a 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 multiple of four bytes if necessary. Padded bit MUST be set to 0 and
MUST be ignored. MUST be ignored.
Note that the Length field in the label format can also be used to Note that the Length field in the label format MAY also be used to
indicate the TS type of the HO ODUk (i.e., TS granularity at 1.25Gbps 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 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) 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, 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 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 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 will be 4 or 8, which indicates the TS granularity is 2.5Gbps or
1.25Gbps, respectively. 1.25Gbps, respectively.
6.2. Examples 6.2. Examples
skipping to change at page 15, line 48 skipping to change at page 15, line 48
ODUj LSP from its upstream neighbor node, the node MUST generate 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 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 free resources (i.e., free tributary slots of ODUk) that will be
reserved for the LSP, and send the label to its upstream neighbor reserved for the LSP, and send the label to its upstream neighbor
node. node.
In case of ODUj to ODUk multiplexing, the node MUST firstly determine 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 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 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 Map field corresponding to the reserved tributary slots. The node
MUST also assign a valid TPN, which does not collide with other TPN MUST also assign a valid TPN, which MUST not collide with other TPN
value used by existing LO ODU connections in the selected HO ODU link, value used by existing LO ODU connections in the selected HO ODU link,
and configure the expected multiplex structure identifier (ExMSI) and configure the expected multiplex structure identifier (ExMSI)
using this TPN. Then, the assigned TPN is filled into the label. using this TPN. Then, the assigned TPN MUST be filled into the label.
In case of ODUk to OTUk mapping, the node only needs to fill the ODUj In case of ODUk to OTUk mapping, TPN field MUST be set to 0. Bit Map
and the ODUk fields with corresponding values in the label. Other information is not REQUIRED and MUST not be included, so Length field
bits are reserved and MUST be set to 0. MUST be set to 0 as well.
In order to process a received ODU label, the node MUST firstly learn 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 which ODU signal type is multiplexed or mapped into which ODU signal
type accordingly to the traffic parameters and the IF_ID RSVP_HOP type accordingly to the traffic parameters and the IF_ID RSVP_HOP
Object in the received message. Object in the received message.
In case of ODUj to ODUk multiplexing, the node MUST retrieve the In case of ODUj to ODUk multiplexing, the node MUST retrieve the
reserved tributary slots in the ODUk by its downstream neighbor node 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 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 Map field. The node determines the TS type (according to the total TS
skipping to change at page 16, line 43 skipping to change at page 16, line 43
Note also that the TPN in the label_ERO MAY not be assigned (i.e., 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. TPN field = 0) if the TPN is requested to be assigned locally.
6.3.1. Notification on Label Error 6.3.1. Notification on Label Error
When receiving an ODUk label from the neighbor node, the node SHOULD When receiving an ODUk label from the neighbor node, the node SHOULD
check the integrity of the label. An error message containing an check the integrity of the label. An error message containing an
"Unacceptable label value" indication ([RFC3209]) SHOULD be sent if "Unacceptable label value" indication ([RFC3209]) SHOULD be sent if
one of the following cases occurs: one of the following cases occurs:
- Invalid value in the length field. - Invalid value in the length field.
- The selected link only supports 2.5Gbps TS granularity while the - The selected link only supports 2.5Gbps TS granularity while the
Length field in the label along with ODUk signal type indicates Length field in the label along with ODUk signal type indicates
the 1.25Gbps TS granularity; the 1.25Gbps TS granularity;
- The label includes an invalid TPN value that breaks the TPN - The label includes an invalid TPN value that breaks the TPN
assignment rules; assignment rules;
- The reserved resources (i.e., the number of "1" in the Bit Map - The reserved resources (i.e., the number of "1" in the Bit Map
field) do not match with the Traffic Parameters. field) do not match with the Traffic Parameters.
6.4. Supporting Virtual Concatenation and Multiplication 6.4. Supporting Virtual Concatenation and Multiplication
As per [RFC6344], the VCGs can be created using Co-Signaled style or As per [RFC6344], the VCGs can be created using Co-Signaled style or
Multiple LSPs style. Multiple LSPs style.
In case of Co-Signaled style, the explicit ordered list of all labels 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 reflects the order of VCG members, which is similar to [RFC4328]. In
case of multiplexed virtually concatenated signals (NVC > 1), the case of multiplexed virtually concatenated signals (NVC > 1), the
skipping to change at page 17, line 29 skipping to change at page 17, line 29
multiplication of multiplexed virtually concatenated signals (MT > 1), multiplication of multiplexed virtually concatenated signals (MT > 1),
the first label indicates the components of the first multiplexed the first label indicates the components of the first multiplexed
virtually concatenated signal; the second label indicates components virtually concatenated signal; the second label indicates components
of the second multiplexed virtually concatenated signal; and so on. of the second multiplexed virtually concatenated signal; and so on.
In case of Multiple LSPs style, multiple control plane LSPs are 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 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 the control plane LSPs. The procedures are similar to section 6 of
[RFC6344]. [RFC6344].
7. Supporting Multiplexing Hierarchy 7. Supporting Hitless Adjustment of ODUflex (GFP)
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.
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. Extension to LSP_ATTRIBUTES Object
In order to indicate the adaptation information for a requested FA-
LSP (i.e., the server layer LSP) to carry the client LSP, a new type
of Attributes TLV of the LSP_ATTRIBUTES Object (Class-Num = 197, C-
Type = 1, defined in [RFC5420]) is defined:
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 (ODU adaptation) | Length |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Reserved | Signal Type | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| |
| ... |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Reserved | Signal Type | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
One or more ODU adaptation TLVs can be carried to indicate the
desired adaptation capabilities. Each of an ODU adaptation 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.
Signal Type: as defined in [RFC4328] and this document.
For example, in order to create ODU3 FA-LSP passing through a set of
ODU4 links to perform ODU1->ODU2->ODU3 hierarchy, the ODU adaptation
TLV can be used to indicate the ODU2 into ODU3 multiplexing and ODU1
into ODU2 multiplexing stages.
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Type = 2 (ODU adaptation) | Length = 8 |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Reserved | Sig. = ODU2 | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| Reserved | Sig. = ODU1 | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
7.2. ODU FA-LSP Creation
When creating an ODU FA-LSP to carry lower ODU, the source node (e.g.,
node N2 in Figure 2) can include the LSP_ATTRIBUTES object to specify
the desired ODU adaptation 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 can
support the TS granularity (indicated in the G-PID filed in Section 4)
and the multiplexing hierarchy (listed in the LSP_ATTRIBUTES object).
If no link supporting the specified hierarchy capabilities or TSG, a
ParhErr message with Error Code = 38 (LSP Hierarchy Issue) and Error
Value = y1(TBA) MUST be sent back to upstream.
Intermediate nodes (except end points and penultimate node) along the
FA-LSP don't need to process the ODU adaptation TLV, which SHOULD be
forwarded to the next node in the Path message without any
modification.
8. Supporting Hitless Adjustment of ODUflex (GFP)
[G.7044] describes the procedure of ODUflex (GFP) hitless resizing [G.7044] describes the procedure of ODUflex (GFP) hitless resizing
using LCR (Link Connection Resize) and BWR (Bandwidth Resize) using LCR (Link Connection Resize) and BWR (Bandwidth Resize)
protocols in OTN data plane. protocols in OTN data plane.
For the control plane, signaling messages are required to initiate For the control plane, signaling messages are REQUIRED to initiate
the adjustment procedure. Section 2.5 and Section 4.6.4 of [RFC3209] 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 describe how the Share Explicit (SE) style is used in TE network for
bandwidth increasing and decreasing, which is still applicable for bandwidth increasing and decreasing, which SHOULD be still applicable
triggering the ODUflex (GFP) adjustment procedure in data plane. for triggering the ODUflex (GFP) adjustment procedure in data plane.
Note that the SE style SHOULD be used at the beginning when creating Note that the SE style SHOULD be used at the beginning when creating
a resizable ODUflex connection (Signal Type = 21). Otherwise an error a resizable ODUflex connection (Signal Type = 21). Otherwise an error
with Error Code "Conflicting reservation style" will be generated with Error Code "Conflicting reservation style" SHOULD be generated
when performing bandwidth adjustment. 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 - Bandwidth increasing
In order to increase the bandwidth of an ODUflex (GFP) connection, In order to increase the bandwidth of an ODUflex (GFP) connection,
a Path message with SE style (keeping Tunnel ID unchanged and a Path message with SE style (keeping Tunnel ID unchanged and
assigning a new LSP ID) is sent along the path. assigning a new LSP ID) is sent along the path.
A downstream node compares the old Traffic Parameters (stored A downstream node compares the old Traffic Parameters (stored
locally) with the new one carried in the Path message, to locally) with the new one carried in the Path message, to
determine the number of TS to be added. After choosing and determine the number of TS to be added. After choosing and
reserving new free TS, the downstream node sends back a Resv reserving new free TS, the downstream node sends back a Resv
skipping to change at page 21, line 19 skipping to change at page 18, line 24
On the source node, the BWR protocol will be triggered by the On the source node, the BWR protocol will be triggered by the
successful completion of LCR protocols on every hop after Resv successful completion of LCR protocols on every hop after Resv
message is processed. On success of BWR, the source node SHOULD message is processed. On success of BWR, the source node SHOULD
send a PathTear message to delete the old control state (i.e., send a PathTear message to delete the old control state (i.e.,
the control state of the ODUflex (GFP) before resizing) on the the control state of the ODUflex (GFP) before resizing) on the
control plane. control plane.
- Bandwidth decreasing - Bandwidth decreasing
The SE style can also be used for ODUflex bandwidth decreasing. The SE style SHOULD also be used for ODUflex bandwidth decreasing.
For each pair of neighbor nodes, the sending and receiving Resv For each pair of neighbor nodes, the sending and receiving Resv
message with old and new LABEL Objects will trigger the first message with old and new LABEL Objects will trigger the first
step of LCR between them to perform LCR handshake. On the source step of LCR between them to perform LCR handshake. On the source
node, the BWR protocol will be triggered by the successful node, the BWR protocol will be triggered by the successful
completion of LCR handshake on every hop after Resv message is completion of LCR handshake on every hop after Resv message is
processed. On success of BWR, the second step of LCR, i.e., link 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 decrease procedure will be started on every hop of the
connection. connection.
Similarly, after completion of bandwidth decreasing, a ResvErr Similarly, after completion of bandwidth decreasing, a ResvErr
message SHOULD be sent to tear down the old control state. message SHOULD be sent to tear down the old control state.
9. Control Plane Backward Compatibility Considerations 8. Control Plane Backward Compatibility Considerations
Since the [RFC4328] has been deployed in the network for the nodes As described in [OTN-FWK], since the [RFC4328] has been deployed in
that support [G709-V1], control plane backward compatibility SHOULD the network for the nodes that support [G709-V1], control plane
be taken into consideration when the new nodes (supporting [G709-V3] backward compatibility SHOULD be taken into consideration. More
and RSVP-TE extensions defined in this document) and the legacy nodes specifically:
(supporting [G709-V1] and [RFC4328]) are interworking.
The backward compatibility needs to be considered only when o Nodes supporting this document SHOULD support [OTN-OSPF].
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 o Nodes supporting this document MAY support [RFC4328] signaling.
= 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 o A node supporting both sets of procedures (i.e., [RFC4328] and
control message (with new Switching Type = 101, TBA by IANA). If this document) is NOT REQUIRED to signal an LSP using both
there is legacy node on the LSP, it will fail to process the procedures, i.e., to act as a signaling version translator.
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 o Ingress nodes that support both sets of procedures MAY select
supports [RFC4328] in advance (e.g., through manual configuration which set of procedures to follow based on routing information or
or auto discovery mechanism), the new node MAY act as an RSVP local policy.
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 o Per [RFC3473], nodes that do not support this document will
legacy device has updated its control plane to support this document. generate a PathErr message, with a "Routing problem/Switching
Type" indication.
10. Security Considerations 9. Security Considerations
This document introduces no new security considerations to the This document introduces no new security considerations to the
existing GMPLS signaling protocols. Referring to [RFC3473], further existing GMPLS signaling protocols. Referring to [RFC3473], further
details of the specific security measures are provided. Additionally, details of the specific security measures are provided. Additionally,
[GMPLS-SEC] provides an overview of security vulnerabilities and [GMPLS-SEC] provides an overview of security vulnerabilities and
protection mechanisms for the GMPLS control plane. protection mechanisms for the GMPLS control plane.
11. IANA Considerations 10. IANA Considerations
- G.709 SENDER_TSPEC and FLOWSPEC objects: - G.709 SENDER_TSPEC and FLOWSPEC objects:
The traffic parameters, which are carried in the G.709 The traffic parameters, which are carried in the G.709
SENDER_TSPEC and FLOWSPEC objects, do not require any new object SENDER_TSPEC and FLOWSPEC objects, do not require any new object
class and type based on [RFC4328]: class and type based on [RFC4328]:
o G.709 SENDER_TSPEC Object: Class = 12, C-Type = 5 [RFC4328] o G.709 SENDER_TSPEC Object: Class = 12, C-Type = 5 [RFC4328]
o G.709 FLOWSPEC Object: Class = 9, C-Type = 5 [RFC4328] o G.709 FLOWSPEC Object: Class = 9, C-Type = 5 [RFC4328]
- Generalized Label Object: - Generalized Label Object:
The new defined ODU label (Section 6) is a kind of generalized 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 label. Therefore, the Class-Num and C-Type of the ODU label is
the same as that of generalized label described in [RFC3473], the same as that of generalized label described in [RFC3473],
i.e., Class-Num = 16, C-Type = 2. i.e., Class-Num = 16, C-Type = 2.
- LSP_ATTIBUTES Object: 11. References
New TLV with Type = 2 (TBA). This TLV is carried in the
LSP_ATTIBUTES Object (Class-Num = 197, C-Type = 1). 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 adaptation capabilities (Section 7.2).
- Error Code = x2:
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 11.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC4328] D. Papadimitriou, Ed. "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label [RFC4328] D. Papadimitriou, Ed. "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label
Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Extensions for G.709 Optical Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Extensions for G.709 Optical
Transport Networks Control", RFC 4328, Jan 2006. Transport Networks Control", RFC 4328, Jan 2006.
[RFC3209] D. Awduche et al, "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP [RFC3209] D. Awduche et al, "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP
Tunnels", RFC3209, December 2001. Tunnels", RFC3209, December 2001.
skipping to change at page 24, line 13 skipping to change at page 20, line 35
Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions", RFC 3473, January 2003. Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions", RFC 3473, January 2003.
[RFC3945] Mannie, E., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching [RFC3945] Mannie, E., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
(GMPLS) Architecture", RFC 3945, October 2004. (GMPLS) Architecture", RFC 3945, October 2004.
[RFC6344] G. Bernstein et al, "Operating Virtual Concatenation (VCAT) [RFC6344] G. Bernstein et al, "Operating Virtual Concatenation (VCAT)
and the Link Capacity Adjustment Scheme (LCAS) with and the Link Capacity Adjustment Scheme (LCAS) with
Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)", Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)",
RFC6344, August 2011. 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.
[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.
[RFC5420] A. Farrel, Ed., "Encoding of Attributes for MPLS LSP
Establishment Using Resource Reservation Protocol Traffic
Engineering (RSVP-TE)", RFC5420, February 2009.
[OTN-FWK] Fatai Zhang et al, "Framework for GMPLS and PCE Control of [OTN-FWK] Fatai Zhang et al, "Framework for GMPLS and PCE Control of
G.709 Optical Transport Networks", draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls- G.709 Optical Transport Networks", draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-
g709-framework, Work in Progress, June 2012. g709-framework, Work in Progress, August 2012.
[OTN-INFO] S. Belotti et al, "Information model for G.709 Optical [OTN-INFO] S. Belotti et al, "Information model for G.709 Optical
Transport Networks (OTN)", draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-g709-info- Transport Networks (OTN)", draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-g709-info-
model, Work in Progress, January 2012. model, Work in Progress, July 2012.
[OTN-OSPF] D. Ceccarelli et al, "Traffic Engineering Extensions to [OTN-OSPF] D. Ceccarelli et al, "Traffic Engineering Extensions to
OSPF for Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Control of Evolving G.709 OSPF for Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) Control of Evolving G.709
OTN Networks", draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ospf-g709v3, Work in OTN Networks", draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ospf-g709v3, Work in
Progress, April 2012. Progress, April 2012.
[OTN-LMP] Fatai Zhang, Ed., "Link Management Protocol (LMP)
extensions for G.709 Optical Transport Networks", draft-
zhang-ccamp-gmpls-g.709-lmp-discovery, Work in Progress,
July 2012.
[G709-V3] ITU-T, "Interfaces for the Optical Transport Network (OTN) [G709-V3] ITU-T, "Interfaces for the Optical Transport Network (OTN)
", G.709/Y.1331, December 2009. ", G.709/Y.1331, December 2009.
[G709-V3-A2] ITU-T, "Interfaces for the Optical Transport Network [G709-V3-A2] ITU-T, "Interfaces for the Optical Transport Network
(OTN) Amendment 2", G.709/y.1331 Amendment 2, April 2011. (OTN) Amendment 2", G.709/y.1331 Amendment 2, April 2011.
12.2. Informative References 11.2. Informative References
[G709-V1] ITU-T, "Interface for the Optical Transport Network (OTN)," [G709-V1] ITU-T, "Interface for the Optical Transport Network (OTN),"
G.709 Recommendation (and Amendment 1), February 2001 G.709 Recommendation (and Amendment 1), February 2001
(November 2001). (November 2001).
[G709-V2] ITU-T, "Interface for the Optical Transport Network (OTN)," [G709-V2] ITU-T, "Interface for the Optical Transport Network (OTN),"
G.709 Recommendation, March 2003. G.709 Recommendation, March 2003.
[G798-V2] ITU-T, "Characteristics of optical transport network [G798-V2] ITU-T, "Characteristics of optical transport network
hierarchy equipment functional blocks", G.798, December hierarchy equipment functional blocks", G.798, December
skipping to change at page 25, line 38 skipping to change at page 21, line 38
[RFC4506] M. Eisler, Ed., "XDR: External Data Representation [RFC4506] M. Eisler, Ed., "XDR: External Data Representation
Standard", RFC 4506, May 2006. Standard", RFC 4506, May 2006.
[IEEE] "IEEE Standard for Binary Floating-Point Arithmetic", [IEEE] "IEEE Standard for Binary Floating-Point Arithmetic",
ANSI/IEEE Standard 754-1985, Institute of Electrical and ANSI/IEEE Standard 754-1985, Institute of Electrical and
Electronics Engineers, August 1985. Electronics Engineers, August 1985.
[GMPLS-SEC] Fang, L., Ed., "Security Framework for MPLS and GMPLS [GMPLS-SEC] Fang, L., Ed., "Security Framework for MPLS and GMPLS
Networks", Work in Progress, October 2009. Networks", Work in Progress, October 2009.
13. Contributors 12. Contributors
Jonathan Sadler, Tellabs Jonathan Sadler, Tellabs
Email: jonathan.sadler@tellabs.com Email: jonathan.sadler@tellabs.com
Kam LAM, Alcatel-Lucent Kam LAM, Alcatel-Lucent
Email: kam.lam@alcatel-lucent.com Email: kam.lam@alcatel-lucent.com
Xiaobing Zi, Huawei Technologies Xiaobing Zi, Huawei Technologies
Email: zixiaobing@huawei.com Email: zixiaobing@huawei.com
Francesco Fondelli, Ericsson Francesco Fondelli, Ericsson
Email: francesco.fondelli@ericsson.com Email: francesco.fondelli@ericsson.com
Lyndon Ong, Ciena Lyndon Ong, Ciena
Email: lyong@ciena.com Email: lyong@ciena.com
Biao Lu, infinera Biao Lu, infinera
Email: blu@infinera.com Email: blu@infinera.com
14. Authors' Addresses 13. Authors' Addresses
Fatai Zhang (editor) Fatai Zhang (editor)
Huawei Technologies Huawei Technologies
F3-5-B R&D Center, Huawei Base F3-5-B R&D Center, Huawei Base
Bantian, Longgang District Bantian, Longgang District
Shenzhen 518129 P.R.China Shenzhen 518129 P.R.China
Phone: +86-755-28972912 Phone: +86-755-28972912
Email: zhangfatai@huawei.com Email: zhangfatai@huawei.com
Guoying Zhang Guoying Zhang
skipping to change at page 28, line 24 skipping to change at page 24, line 26
Email: rrao@infinera.com Email: rrao@infinera.com
John E Drake John E Drake
Juniper Juniper
Email: jdrake@juniper.net Email: jdrake@juniper.net
Igor Bryskin Igor Bryskin
Adva Optical Adva Optical
EMail: IBryskin@advaoptical.com EMail: IBryskin@advaoptical.com
15. Acknowledgment 14. Acknowledgment
The authors would like to thank Lou Berger and Deborah Brungard for The authors would like to thank Lou Berger and Deborah Brungard for
their useful comments to the document. their useful comments to the document.
Intellectual Property Intellectual Property
The IETF Trust takes no position regarding the validity or scope of The IETF Trust takes no position regarding the validity or scope of
any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be
claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology
described in any IETF Document or the extent to which any license described in any IETF Document or the extent to which any license
 End of changes. 60 change blocks. 
286 lines changed or deleted 98 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.41. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/