draft-ietf-ccamp-rsvp-te-bandwidth-availability-00.txt   draft-ietf-ccamp-rsvp-te-bandwidth-availability-01.txt 
Network Working Group H. Long, M. Ye Network Working Group H. Long, M. Ye
Internet Draft Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd Internet Draft Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd
Intended status: Standards Track G. Mirsky Intended status: Standards Track G. Mirsky
Ericsson Ericsson
A. Alessandro A. D'Alessandro
Telecom Italia S.p.A Telecom Italia S.p.A
H. Shah H. Shah
Ciena Ciena
Expires: April 2015 October 8, 2014 Expires: September 2015 March 4, 2015
RSVP-TE Signaling Extension for Links with Variable Discrete RSVP-TE Signaling Extension for Links with Variable Discrete
Bandwidth Bandwidth
draft-ietf-ccamp-rsvp-te-bandwidth-availability-00.txt draft-ietf-ccamp-rsvp-te-bandwidth-availability-01.txt
Abstract Abstract
Packet switching network MAY contain links with variable bandwidth, A Packet switching network MAY contain links with variable bandwidth,
e.g., copper, radio, etc. The bandwidth of such link is sensitive to e.g., copper, radio, etc. The bandwidth of such linkS is sensitive
external environment. Availability is typically used for describing to external environment. Availability is typically used for
the link during network planning. This document describes an describing the link during network planning. This document
extension for RSVP-TE signaling for setting up a label switching introduces an Extended Ethernet Bandwidth Profile TLV and an
path (LSP) in a Packet Switched Network (PSN) network which contains OPTIONAL Availability sub-TLV in RSVP-TE signaling. This extension
links with discretely variable bandwidth by introducing an Extended can be used to set up a label switching path (LSP) in a Packet
Ethernet Bandwidth Profile TLV and an OPTIONAL Availability sub_TLV Switched Network (PSN) that contains links with discretely variable
in RSVP-TE signaling. bandwidth.
Status of this Memo Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 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 2, line 4 skipping to change at page 2, line 4
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six
months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents
at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as
reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." reference 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 April 8, 2014. This Internet-Draft will expire on September 6, 2015.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with
respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this
document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in
Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without
skipping to change at page 2, line 37 skipping to change at page 2, line 37
3.1.2. Availability sub-TLV............................... 6 3.1.2. Availability sub-TLV............................... 6
3.2. FLOWSPEC Object......................................... 6 3.2. FLOWSPEC Object......................................... 6
3.3. Signaling Process....................................... 6 3.3. Signaling Process....................................... 6
4. Security Considerations...................................... 7 4. Security Considerations...................................... 7
5. IANA Considerations ......................................... 7 5. IANA Considerations ......................................... 7
5.1 Ethernet Sender TSpec TLVs ............................. 7 5.1 Ethernet Sender TSpec TLVs ............................. 7
5.2 Extended Ethernet Bandwidth Profile TLV ................ 8 5.2 Extended Ethernet Bandwidth Profile TLV ................ 8
6. References .................................................. 8 6. References .................................................. 8
6.1. Normative References.................................... 8 6.1. Normative References.................................... 8
6.2. Informative References.................................. 9 6.2. Informative References.................................. 9
7. Acknowledgments ............................................. 9 7. Appendix: Bandwidth Availability Example..................... 9
Appendix A ..................................................... 9 8. Acknowledgments ............................................ 10
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 RFC-2119 [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in RFC-2119 [RFC2119].
The following acronyms are used in this draft: The following acronyms are used in this draft:
RSVP-TE Resource Reservation Protocol-Traffic Engineering RSVP-TE Resource Reservation Protocol-Traffic Engineering
skipping to change at page 3, line 25 skipping to change at page 3, line 25
The RSVP-TE specification [RFC3209] and GMPLS extensions [RFC3473] The RSVP-TE specification [RFC3209] and GMPLS extensions [RFC3473]
specify the signaling message including the bandwidth request for specify the signaling message including the bandwidth request for
setting up a label switching path in a PSN network. setting up a label switching path in a PSN network.
Some data communication technologies allow seamless change of Some data communication technologies allow seamless change of
maximum physical bandwidth through a set of known discrete values. maximum physical bandwidth through a set of known discrete values.
For example, in mobile backhaul network, microwave links are very For example, in mobile backhaul network, microwave links are very
popular for providing connection of last hops. In case of heavy rain, popular for providing connection of last hops. In case of heavy rain,
to maintain the link connectivity, the microwave link MAY lower the to maintain the link connectivity, the microwave link MAY lower the
modulation level since demodulating lower modulation level need modulation level since demodulating the lower modulation level needs
lower signal-to-noise ratio (SNR). This is called adaptive a lower Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR). This is called adaptive
modulation technology [EN 302 217]. However, lower modulation level modulation technology [EN 302 217]. However, a lower modulation
also means lower link bandwidth. When link bandwidth reduced because level also means lower link bandwidth. When link bandwidth is
of modulation down-shifting, high priority traffic can be maintained, reduced because of modulation down-shifting, high-priority traffic
while lower priority traffic is dropped. Similarly the cooper links can be maintained, while lower-priority traffic is dropped.
MAY change their link bandwidth due to external interference. Similarly, the copper links MAY change their link bandwidth due to
external interference.
The parameter availability [G.827, F.1703, P.530] is often used to The parameter availability [G.827, F.1703, P.530] is often used to
describe the link capacity during network planning. A more detailed describe the link capacity during network planning. A more detailed
example on the bandwidth availability can be found in Appendix A. example on the bandwidth availability can be found in Appendix A.
Assigning different availability classes to different types of Assigning different availability classes to different types of
service over such kind of links provides more efficient planning of service over such kind of links provides more efficient planning of
link capacity. To set up an LSP across these links, availability link capacity. To set up an LSP across these links, availability
information is required for the nodes to verify bandwidth information is required for the nodes to verify bandwidth
satisfaction and make bandwidth reservation. The availability satisfaction and make bandwidth reservation. The availability
information SHOULD be inherited from the availability requirements information SHOULD be inherited from the availability requirements
of the services expected to be carried on the LSP. For example, of the services expected to be carried on the LSP. For example,
voice service usually needs ''five nines'' availability, while non- voice service usually needs "five nines" availability, while non-
real time services MAY adequately perform at four or three nines real time services MAY adequately perform at four or three nines
availability. Since different service types MAY need different availability. Since different service types MAY need different
availabilities guarantee, multiple <availability, bandwidth> pairs availabilities guarantees, multiple <availability, bandwidth> pairs
MAY be required when signaling. MAY be required when signaling.
If the availability requirement is not specified in the signaling If the availability requirement is not specified in the signaling
message, the bandwidth will be reserved as the highest availability. message, the bandwidth will be reserved as the highest availability.
For example, the bandwidth with 99.999% availability of a link is For example, the bandwidth with 99.999% availability of a link is
100Mbps; the bandwidth with 99.99% availability is 200Mbps. When a 100 Mbps; the bandwidth with 99.99% availability is 200 Mbps. When a
video application requests for 120Mbps without availability video application requests for 120 Mbps without availability
requirement, the system will compare 120Mbps with 100Mbps, therefore requirement, the system will consider the request as 120 Mbps with
cannot set up the LSP path. But in fact, video application doesn't 99.999% availability, while the available bandwidth with 99.999%
need 99.999% availability, 99.99% availability is enough. In this availability is only 100 Mbps, therefore the LSP path cannot be set
case, the LSP could be set up if availability is specified in the up. But in fact, video application doesn't need 99.999% availability;
signaling message. 99.99% availability is enough. In this case, the LSP could be set up
if availability is specified in the signaling message.
To fulfill LSP setup by signaling in these scenarios, this document To fulfill LSP setup by signaling in these scenarios, this document
specifies an Extended Ethernet Bandwidth Profile and an Availability specifies an Extended Ethernet Bandwidth Profile and an Availability
sub-TLV. The Availability sub-TLV can be applicable to any kind of sub-TLV. The Availability sub-TLV can be applicable to any kind of
physical links with variable discrete bandwidth, such as microwave physical links with variable discrete bandwidth, such as microwave
or DSL. Multiple Extended Ethernet Bandwidth Profiles with different or DSL. Multiple Extended Ethernet Bandwidth Profiles with different
availability can be carried in the Ethernet SENDER_TSPEC object. availability can be carried in the Ethernet SENDER_TSPEC object.
2. Overview 2. Overview
skipping to change at page 5, line 7 skipping to change at page 5, line 10
When a PE node initiates a PATH/RESV signaling to set up an LSP, the When a PE node initiates a PATH/RESV signaling to set up an LSP, the
PATH message SHOULD carry the <bandwidth, availability> requirement PATH message SHOULD carry the <bandwidth, availability> requirement
list as bandwidth request. Intermediate node(s) will allocate the list as bandwidth request. Intermediate node(s) will allocate the
bandwidth resource for each availability requirement from the bandwidth resource for each availability requirement from the
remaining bandwidth with corresponding availability. An error remaining bandwidth with corresponding availability. An error
message MAY be returned if any <bandwidth, availability> request message MAY be returned if any <bandwidth, availability> request
cannot be satisfied. cannot be satisfied.
3. Extension to RSVP-TE Signaling 3. Extension to RSVP-TE Signaling
The initial idea is to define an Availability sub_TLV under Ethernet The initial idea is to define an Availability sub-TLV under Ethernet
Bandwidth Profile TLV [RFC6003]. However the Ethernet Bandwidth Bandwidth Profile TLV [RFC6003]. However the Ethernet Bandwidth
Profile TLV doesn't have the ability to carry a sub_TLV according to Profile TLV doesn't have the ability to carry a sub-TLV according to
RFC6003. Therefore, an Extend Ethernet Bandwidth Profile TLV is RFC6003. Therefore, an Extend Ethernet Bandwidth Profile TLV is
defined in this document to avoid the backward compatibility issue. defined in this document to avoid the backward compatibility issue.
The Extended Ethernet Bandwidth Profile TLV includes Ethernet BW TLV The Extended Ethernet Bandwidth Profile TLV includes Ethernet BW TLV
and has variable length. It MAY include Availability sub-TLV which and has variable length. It MAY include Availability sub-TLV which
is also defined in this document. is also defined in this document.
3.1.1. Extended Ethernet Bandwidth Profile TLV 3.1.1. Extended Ethernet Bandwidth Profile TLV
The Extended Ethernet Bandwidth Profile TLV is included in the The Extended Ethernet Bandwidth Profile TLV is included in the
Ethernet SENDER_TSPEC, and MAY be included for more than one time. Ethernet SENDER_TSPEC, and MAY be included for more than one time.
skipping to change at page 5, line 37 skipping to change at page 5, line 40
|Pro|A| | Index | Reserved | |Pro|A| | Index | Reserved |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| CIR | | CIR |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| CBS | | CBS |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| EIR | | EIR |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| EBS | | EBS |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
| sub_TLV(OPTIONAL) | | sub-TLV(OPTIONAL) |
+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
Figure 1: A new ''AF'' filed in Extended Ethernet Bandwidth Profile TLV Figure 1: A new "AF" filed in Extended Ethernet Bandwidth Profile TLV
The difference between the Extended Ethernet Bandwidth Profile TLV The difference between the Extended Ethernet Bandwidth Profile TLV
and Ethernet Bandwidth Profile TLV is that a new AF field to and Ethernet Bandwidth Profile TLV is that a new AF field to
indicate the sub_TLV is defined in the Extended Ethernet Bandwidth indicate the sub-TLV is defined in the Extended Ethernet Bandwidth
Profile TLV. The rest definitions are the same. Profile TLV. The rest definitions are the same.
A new filed is defined in this document: A new filed is defined in this document:
AF filed (bit 2): Availability Field (AF) AF filed (bit 2): Availability Field (AF)
If the AF filed is set to 1, Availability sub-TLV MUST be included If the AF filed is set to 1, Availability sub-TLV MUST be included
in the Extended Ethernet Bandwidth Profile TLV. If the AF field is in the Extended Ethernet Bandwidth Profile TLV. If the AF field is
set to value 0, then an Availability sub-TLV SHOULD NOT be included. set to value 0, then an Availability sub-TLV SHOULD NOT be included.
skipping to change at page 6, line 43 skipping to change at page 6, line 45
Availability sub-TLV can also be present for one or more times. Availability sub-TLV can also be present for one or more times.
3.2. FLOWSPEC Object 3.2. FLOWSPEC Object
The FLOWSPEC object (Class-Num = 9, Class-Type = TBD) has the same The FLOWSPEC object (Class-Num = 9, Class-Type = TBD) has the same
format as the Ethernet SENDER_TSPEC object. format as the Ethernet SENDER_TSPEC object.
3.3. Signaling Process 3.3. Signaling Process
The source node initiates PATH messages including one or more The source node initiates PATH messages including one or more
Extended Bandwidth Profile TLVs with different availability value in Extended Bandwidth Profile TLVs with different availability values
the SENDER_TSPEC object. Each Extended Bandwidth Profile TLV in the SENDER_TSPEC object. Each Extended Bandwidth Profile TLV
specifies the portion of bandwidth request with referred specifies the portion of the bandwidth request with referred
availability requirement. availability requirement.
The intermediate and destination nodes checks whether they can The intermediate and destination nodes check whether they can
satisfy the bandwidth requirements by comparing each bandwidth satisfy the bandwidth requirements by comparing each bandwidth
requirement inside the SENDER_TSPEC objects with the remaining link requirement inside the SENDER_TSPEC objects with the remaining link
sub-bandwidth resource with respective availability guarantee when sub-bandwidth resource with respective availability guarantee when
received the PATH message. received the PATH message.
o If all <bandwidth, availability> requirements can be o If all <bandwidth, availability> requirements can be
satisfied, it SHOULD reserve the bandwidth resource from each satisfied, it SHOULD reserve the bandwidth resource from each
remaining sub-bandwidth portion to set up this LSP. Optionally, remaining sub-bandwidth portion to set up this LSP. Optionally,
the higher availability bandwidth can be allocated to lower the higher availability bandwidth can be allocated to lower
availability request when the lower availability bandwidth availability request when the lower availability bandwidth
skipping to change at page 7, line 42 skipping to change at page 7, line 43
existing RSVP-TE signaling protocol. existing RSVP-TE signaling protocol.
5. IANA Considerations 5. IANA Considerations
IANA maintains registries and sub-registries for RSVP-TE used by IANA maintains registries and sub-registries for RSVP-TE used by
GMPLS. IANA is requested to make allocations from these registries GMPLS. IANA is requested to make allocations from these registries
as set out in the following sections. as set out in the following sections.
5.1 Ethernet Sender TSpec TLVs 5.1 Ethernet Sender TSpec TLVs
IANA maintains a registry of GMPLS parameters called ''Generalized IANA maintains a registry of GMPLS parameters called "Generalized
Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Parameters''. Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Parameters".
IANA has created a new sub-registry called ''Ethernet Sender TSpec IANA has created a new sub-registry called "Ethernet Sender TSpec
TLVs / Ethernet Flowspec TLVs'' to contain the TLV type values for TLVs / Ethernet Flowspec TLVs" to contain the TLV type values for
TLVs carried in the Ethernet SENDER_TSPEC object. A new value is as TLVs carried in the Ethernet SENDER_TSPEC object. A new value is as
follow: follow:
Type Description Reference Type Description Reference
----- ----------------------------------- --------- ----- ----------------------------------- ---------
TBD Extended Ethernet Bandwidth Profile [This ID] TBD Extended Ethernet Bandwidth Profile [This ID]
5.2 Extended Ethernet Bandwidth Profile TLV 5.2 Extended Ethernet Bandwidth Profile TLV
IANA has created a new sub-registry called ''Extended Ethernet IANA has created a new sub-registry called "Extended Ethernet
Bandwidth Profiles'' to contain bit flags carried in the Extended Bandwidth Profiles" to contain bit flags carried in the Extended
Ethernet Bandwidth Profile TLV of the Ethernet SENDER_TSPEC object. Ethernet Bandwidth Profile TLV of the Ethernet SENDER_TSPEC object.
Bits are to be allocated by IETF Standards Action. Bits are numbered Bits are to be allocated by Standards Action. Bits are numbered from
from bit 0 as the low order bit. A new bit field is as follow: bit 0 as the low order bit. A new bit field is as follow:
Bit Hex Description Reference Bit Hex Description Reference
--- ---- ------------------ ----------- --- ---- ------------------ -----------
0 0x01 Coupling Flag (CF) [RFC6003] 0 0x01 Coupling Flag (CF) [RFC6003]
1 0x02 Color Mode (CM) [RFC6003] 1 0x02 Color Mode (CM) [RFC6003]
2 0x03 Availability Field (AF) [This ID] 2 0x04 Availability Field (AF) [This ID]
Sub-TLV types for Extended Ethernet Bandwidth Profiles are to be Sub-TLV types for Extended Ethernet Bandwidth Profiles are to be
allocated by IETF Standard Action. Initial values are as follows: allocated by Standards Action. Initial values are as follows:
Type Length Format Description Type Length Format Description
--- ---- ------------------ ----------- --- ---- ------------------ -----------
0 - Reserved Reserved value 0 - Reserved Reserved value
0x01 4 see Section 3.1.2 Availability sub-TLV 0x01 4 see Section 3.1.2 of this ID Availability
6. References 6. References
6.1. Normative References 6.1. Normative References
[RFC2210] Wroclawski, J., ''The Use of RSVP with IETF Integrated [RFC2210] Wroclawski, J., "The Use of RSVP with IETF Integrated
Services'', RFC 2210, September 1997. Services", RFC 2210, September 1997.
[RFC3209] Awduche, D., Berger, L., Gan, D., Li, T., Srinivasan, [RFC3209] Awduche, D., Berger, L., Gan, D., Li, T., Srinivasan,
V.,and G. Swallow, "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP V.,and G. Swallow, "RSVP-TE: Extensions to RSVP for LSP
Tunnels", RFC 3209, December 2001. Tunnels", RFC 3209, December 2001.
[RFC3473] Berger, L., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching [RFC3473] Berger, L., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching
(GMPLS) Signaling Resource ReserVation Protocol-Traffic (GMPLS) Signaling Resource ReserVation Protocol-Traffic
Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions", RFC 3473, January 2003. Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions", RFC 3473, January 2003.
[RFC6003] Papadimitriou, D. ''Ethernet Traffic Parameters'', RFC 6003, [RFC6003] Papadimitriou, D. "Ethernet Traffic Parameters", RFC 6003,
October 2010. October 2010.
[G.827] ITU-T Recommendation, ''Availability performance parameters [G.827] ITU-T Recommendation, "Availability performance parameters
and objectives for end-to-end international constant bit- and objectives for end-to-end international constant bit-
rate digital paths'', September, 2003. rate digital paths", September, 2003.
[F.1703] ITU-R Recommendation, ''Availability objectives for real [F.1703] ITU-R Recommendation, "Availability objectives for real
digital fixed wireless links used in 27 500 km digital fixed wireless links used in 27 500 km
hypothetical reference paths and connections'', January, hypothetical reference paths and connections", January,
2005. 2005.
[P.530] ITU-R Recommendation,'' Propagation data and prediction [P.530] ITU-R Recommendation," Propagation data and prediction
methods required for the design of terrestrial line-of- methods required for the design of terrestrial line-of-
sight systems'', February, 2012 sight systems", February, 2012
[EN 302 217] ETSI standard, ''Fixed Radio Systems; Characteristics [EN 302 217] ETSI standard, "Fixed Radio Systems; Characteristics
and requirements for point-to-point equipment and and requirements for point-to-point equipment and
antennas'', April, 2009 antennas", April, 2009
[ARTE] H., Long, M., Ye, Mirsky, G., Alessandro, A., Shah, H., [ARTE] H., Long, M., Ye, Mirsky, G., Alessandro, A., Shah, H.,
''OSPF Routing Extension for Links with Variable Discrete "OSPF Routing Extension for Links with Variable Discrete
Bandwidth'', Work in Progress, February, 2014 Bandwidth", Work in Progress, February, 2014
6.2. Informative References 6.2. Informative References
[MCOS] Minei, I., Gan, D., Kompella, K., and X. Li, "Extensions [MCOS] Minei, I., Gan, D., Kompella, K., and X. Li, "Extensions
for Differentiated Services-aware Traffic Engineered for Differentiated Services-aware Traffic Engineered
LSPs", Work in Progress, June 2006. LSPs", Work in Progress, June 2006.
7. Acknowledgments 7. Appendix: Bandwidth Availability Example
The authors would like to thank Khuzema Pithewan, Lou Berger, Yuji
Tochio, Dieter Beller, and Autumn Liu for their comments on the
document.
Appendix A
Presuming that a link has three discrete bandwidth levels: Presuming that a link has three discrete bandwidth levels:
The link bandwidth under modulation level 1, e.g., QPSK, is 100Mbps; The link bandwidth under modulation level 1, e.g., QPSK, is 100 Mbps;
The link bandwidth under modulation level 2, e.g., 16QAM, is 200Mbps; The link bandwidth under modulation level 2, e.g., 16QAM, is 200
The link bandwidth under modulation level 3, e.g., 256QAM, is Mbps;
400Mbps. The link bandwidth under modulation level 3, e.g., 256QAM, is 400
Mbps.
In sunny day, the modulation level 3 can be used to achieve 400Mbps In sunny day, the modulation level 3 can be used to achieve 400 Mbps
link bandwidth. link bandwidth.
A light rain with X mm/h rate triggers the system to change the A light rain with X mm/h rate triggers the system to change the
modulation level from level 3 to level 2, with bandwidth changing modulation level from level 3 to level 2, with bandwidth changing
from 400Mbps to 200Mbps. The probability of X mm/h rain in the local from 400 Mbps to 200 Mbps. The probability of X mm/h rain in the
area is 52 minutes in a year. Then the dropped 200Mbps bandwidth has local area is 52 minutes in a year. Then the dropped 200 Mbps
99.99% availability. bandwidth has 99.99% availability.
A heavy rain with Y(Y>X) mm/h rate triggers the system to change the A heavy rain with Y(Y>X) mm/h rate triggers the system to change the
modulation level from level 2 to level 1, with bandwidth changing modulation level from level 2 to level 1, with bandwidth changing
from 200Mbps to 100Mbps. The probability of Y mm/h rain in the local from 200 Mbps to 100 Mbps. The probability of Y mm/h rain in the
area is 26 minutes in a year. Then the dropped 100Mbps bandwidth has local area is 26 minutes in a year. Then the dropped 100 Mbps
99.995% availability. bandwidth has 99.995% availability.
For the 100M bandwidth of the modulation level 1, only the extreme For the 100M bandwidth of the modulation level 1, only the extreme
weather condition can cause the whole system unavailable, which only weather condition can cause the whole system unavailable, which only
happens for 5 minutes in a year. So the 100Mbps bandwidth of the happens for 5 minutes in a year. So the 100 Mbps bandwidth of the
modulation level 1 owns the availability of 99.999%. modulation level 1 owns the availability of 99.999%.
In a word, the maximum bandwidth is 400Mbps. According to the In a word, the maximum bandwidth is 400 Mbps. According to the
weather condition, the sub-bandwidth and its availability are shown weather condition, the sub-bandwidth and its availability are shown
as follows: as follows:
Sub-bandwidth(Mbps) Availability Sub-bandwidth(Mbps) Availability
------------------ ------------ ------------------ ------------
200 99.99% 200 99.99%
100 99.995% 100 99.995%
100 99.999% 100 99.999%
8. Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Khuzema Pithewan, Lou Berger, Yuji
Tochio, Dieter Beller, and Autumn Liu for their comments on the
document.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Hao Long Hao Long
Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd. Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd.
No.1899, Xiyuan Avenue, Hi-tech Western District No.1899, Xiyuan Avenue, Hi-tech Western District
Chengdu 611731, P.R.China Chengdu 611731, P.R.China
Phone: +86-18615778750 Phone: +86-18615778750
Email: longhao@huawei.com Email: longhao@huawei.com
 End of changes. 49 change blocks. 
89 lines changed or deleted 92 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.42. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/