draft-ietf-ccamp-transport-nbi-app-statement-02.txt   draft-ietf-ccamp-transport-nbi-app-statement-03.txt 
CCAMP Working Group I. Busi CCAMP Working Group I. Busi
Internet Draft Huawei Internet Draft Huawei
Intended status: Informational D. King Intended status: Informational D. King
Lancaster University Lancaster University
H. Zheng H. Zheng
Huawei Huawei
Y. Xu Y. Xu
CAICT CAICT
Expires: January 2019 July 2, 2018 Expires: April 2019 October 22, 2018
Transport Northbound Interface Applicability Statement Transport Northbound Interface Applicability Statement
draft-ietf-ccamp-transport-nbi-app-statement-02 draft-ietf-ccamp-transport-nbi-app-statement-03
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 1, line 37 skipping to change at page 1, line 37
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 January 2, 2019. This Internet-Draft will expire on April 22, 2019.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2018 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
skipping to change at page 2, line 36 skipping to change at page 2, line 26
automation and orchestrate end-to-end services across multi-domain automation and orchestrate end-to-end services across multi-domain
networks. These functions may be enabled using standardized data networks. These functions may be enabled using standardized data
models (e.g. YANG), and appropriate protocol (e.g., RESTCONF). models (e.g. YANG), and appropriate protocol (e.g., RESTCONF).
This document analyses the applicability of the YANG models being This document analyses the applicability of the YANG models being
defined by IETF (TEAS and CCAMP WGs in particular) to support OTN defined by IETF (TEAS and CCAMP WGs in particular) to support OTN
single and multi-domain scenarios. single and multi-domain scenarios.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction...................................................4 1. Introduction 4
1.1. Scope of this document....................................4 1.1. The scope of this document 4
1.2. Assumptions...............................................5 1.2. Assumptions 5
2. Terminology....................................................6 2. Terminology 6
3. Conventions used in this document..............................6 3. Conventions used in this document 7
3.1. Topology and traffic flow processing......................6 3.1. Topology and traffic flow processing 7
3.2. JSON code.................................................7 3.2. JSON code 7
4. Scenarios Description..........................................8 4. Scenarios Description 9
4.1. Reference Network.........................................8 4.1. Reference Network 9
4.1.1. Single-Domain Scenario..............................11 4.1.1. Single-Domain Scenario 12
4.1.2. Multi-Domain Scenario...............................11 4.2. Topology Abstractions 12
4.2. Topology Abstractions....................................11 4.3. Service Configuration 14
4.3. Service Configuration....................................13 4.3.1. ODU Transit 15
4.3.1. ODU Transit.........................................14 4.3.2. EPL over ODU 16
4.3.2. EPL over ODU........................................15 4.3.3. Other OTN Clients Services 17
4.3.3. Other OTN Clients Services..........................16 4.3.4. EVPL over ODU 18
4.3.4. EVPL over ODU.......................................17 4.3.5. EVPLAN and EVPTree Services 18
4.3.5. EVPLAN and EVPTree Services.........................18 4.3.6. Dynamic Service Configuration 20
4.3.6. Dynamic Service Configuration.......................19 4.4. Multi-function Access Links 21
4.4. Multi-function Access Links..............................20 4.5. Protection and Restoration Configuration 22
4.5. Protection and Restoration Configuration.................21 4.5.1. Linear Protection (end-to-end) .................... 22
4.5.1. Linear Protection (end-to-end)......................21 4.5.2. Segmented Protection 23
4.5.2. Segmented Protection................................23 4.5.3. End-to-End Dynamic restoration 24
4.5.3. End-to-End Dynamic restoration......................23 4.5.4. Segmented Dynamic Restoration 24
4.5.4. Segmented Dynamic Restoration.......................24 4.6. Service Modification and Deletion 25
4.6. Service Modification and Deletion........................24 4.7. Notification 25
4.7. Notification.............................................25 4.8. Path Computation with Constraint 26
4.8. Path Computation with Constraint.........................25
5. YANG Model Analysis...........................................26
5.1. YANG Models for Topology Abstraction.....................26
5.1.1. Domain 1 Topology Abstraction.......................27
5.1.2. Domain 2 Grey (Type A) Topology Abstraction.........28
5.1.3. Domain 3 Grey (Type B) Topology Abstraction.........28
5.1.4. Multi-domain Topology Stitching.....................28
5.1.5. Access Links........................................29
5.2. YANG Models for Service Configuration....................31
5.2.1. ODU Transit Service.................................33
5.2.1.1. Single Domain Example..........................35
5.2.2. EPL over ODU Service................................36
5.2.3. Other OTN Client Services...........................38
5.2.4. EVPL over ODU Service...............................38
5.3. YANG Models for Protection Configuration.................39
5.3.1. Linear Protection (end-to-end)......................39
5.3.2. Segmented Protection................................39
6. Security Considerations.......................................39
7. IANA Considerations...........................................39
8. References....................................................39
8.1. Normative References.....................................39
8.2. Informative References...................................41
9. Acknowledgments...............................................41
Appendix A Validating a JSON fragment against a YANG Model....43
A.1. Manipulation of JSON fragments...........................43
A.2. Comments in JSON fragments...............................44
A.3. Validation of JSON fragments: DSDL-based approach........44
A.4. Validation of JSON fragments: why not using a XSD-based
approach......................................................45
Appendix B Detailed JSON Examples.............................46
B.1. JSON Examples for Topology Abstractions..................46
B.1.1. JSON Code: mpi1-otn-topology.json...................46
B.2. JSON Examples for Service Configuration..................73 5. YANG Model Analysis 27
B.2.1. JSON Code: mpi1-odu2-service-config.json...........73 5.1. YANG Models for Topology Abstraction 27
B.2.2. JSON Code: mpi1-odu2-tunnel-config.json.............77 5.1.1. Domain 1 Black Topology Abstraction 28
B.2.3. JSON Code: mpi1-epl-service-config.json.............80 5.1.2. Domain 2 Black Topology Abstraction 30
5.1.3. Domain 3 White Topology Abstraction 30
5.1.4. Multi-domain Topology Stitching 31
5.1.5. Access Links 33
5.2. YANG Models for Service Configuration .................. 35
5.2.1. ODU Transit Service 37
5.2.1.1. Single Domain Example 39
5.2.2. EPL over ODU Service 40
5.2.3. Other OTN Client Services ......................... 42
5.2.4. EVPL over ODU Service 42
5.3. YANG Models for Protection Configuration 43
5.3.1. Linear Protection (end-to-end) 43
5.3.2. Segmented Protection 43
6. Security Considerations 44
7. IANA Considerations 44
8. References 44
8.1. Normative References 44
8.2. Informative References 45
9. Acknowledgments 46
Validating a JSON fragment against a YANG Model 47
A.1. Manipulation of JSON fragments 47
A.2. Comments in JSON fragments 48
A.3. Validation of JSON fragments: DSDL-based approach 48
A.4. Validation of JSON fragments: why not using a XSD-based
approach 49
Detailed JSON Examples 50
B.1. JSON Examples for Topology Abstractions 50
B.1.1. JSON Code: mpi1-otn-topology.json 50
B.2. JSON Examples for Service Configuration 68
B.2.1. JSON Code: mpi1-odu2-service-config.json 68
B.2.2. JSON Code: mpi1-odu2-tunnel-config.json 72
B.2.3. JSON Code: mpi1-epl-service-config.json 72
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
Transport of packet services are critical for a wide-range of Transport of packet services are critical for a wide-range of
applications and services, including: data center and LAN applications and services, including data center and LAN
interconnects, Internet service backhauling, mobile backhaul and interconnects, Internet service backhauling mobile backhaul and
enterprise Carrier Ethernet Services. These services are typically enterprise Carrier Ethernet Services. These services are typically
setup using stovepipe NMS and EMS platforms, often requiring setup using stovepipe NMS and EMS platforms, often requiring
propriety management platforms and legacy management interfaces. A propriety management platforms and legacy management interfaces. A
clear goal of operators will be to automate setup of transport clear goal of operators will be to automate the setup of transport
services across multiple transport technology domains. services across multiple transport technology domains.
A common open interface (API) to each domain controller and or A common open interface (API) to each domain controller and or
management system is pre-requisite for network operators to control management system is pre-requisite for network operators to control
multi-vendor and multi-domain networks and enable also service multi-vendor and multi-domain networks and also enable service
provisioning coordination/automation. This can be achieved by using provisioning coordination/automation. This can be achieved by using
standardized YANG models, used together with an appropriate protocol standardized YANG models, used together with an appropriate protocol
(e.g., [RESTCONF]). (e.g., [RESTCONF]).
This document analyses the applicability of the YANG models being This document analyses the applicability of the YANG models being
defined by IETF (TEAS and CCAMP WGs in particular) to support OTN defined by IETF (TEAS and CCAMP WGs in particular) to support OTN
single and multi-domain scenarios. single and multi-domain scenarios.
1.1. Scope of this document 1.1. The scope of this document
This document assumes a reference architecture, including This document assumes a reference architecture, including
interfaces, based on the Abstraction and Control of Traffic- interfaces, based on the Abstraction and Control of Traffic-
Engineered Networks (ACTN), defined in [ACTN-Frame]. Engineered Networks (ACTN), defined in [ACTN-Frame].
The focus of this document is on the MPI (interface between the The focus of this document is on the MPI (interface between the
Multi Domain Service Coordinator (MDSC) and a Physical Network Multi Domain Service Coordinator (MDSC) and a Physical Network
Controller (PNC), controlling a transport network domain). Controller (PNC), controlling a transport network domain).
It is worth noting that the same MPI analyzed in this document could It is worth noting that the same MPI analyzed in this document could
skipping to change at page 5, line 14 skipping to change at page 5, line 12
document. However, some considerations and assumptions about the document. However, some considerations and assumptions about the
information could be described when needed. information could be described when needed.
The relationship between the current IETF YANG models and the type The relationship between the current IETF YANG models and the type
of ACTN interfaces can be found in [ACTN-YANG]. Therefore, it of ACTN interfaces can be found in [ACTN-YANG]. Therefore, it
considers the TE Topology YANG model defined in [TE-TOPO], with the considers the TE Topology YANG model defined in [TE-TOPO], with the
OTN Topology augmentation defined in [OTN-TOPO] and the TE Tunnel OTN Topology augmentation defined in [OTN-TOPO] and the TE Tunnel
YANG model defined in [TE-TUNNEL], with the OTN Tunnel augmentation YANG model defined in [TE-TUNNEL], with the OTN Tunnel augmentation
defined in [OTN-TUNNEL]. defined in [OTN-TUNNEL].
The analysis of how to use the attributes in the I2RS Topology YANG [Editors' note:] Add information about the additional models which
model, defined in [I2RS-TOPO], is for further study. are needed for service configuration.
The ONF Technical Recommendations for Functional Requirements for The ONF Technical Recommendations for Functional Requirements for
the transport API in [ONF TR-527] and the ONF transport API multi- the transport API in [ONF TR-527] and the ONF transport API multi-
domain examples in [ONF GitHub] have been considered as an input for domain examples in [ONF GitHub] have been considered as input for
defining the reference scenarios analyzed in this document. defining the reference scenarios analyzed in this document.
1.2. Assumptions 1.2. Assumptions
This document is making the following assumptions, still to be This document is making the following assumptions, still to be
validated with TEAS WG: validated with TEAS WG:
1. The MDSC can request, at the MPI, a PNC to setup a Transit Tunnel 1. The MDSC can request, at the MPI, a PNC to setup a Transit Tunnel
Segment using the TE Tunnel YANG model: in this case, since the Segment using the TE Tunnel YANG model: in this case, since the
endpoints of the E2E Tunnel are outside the domain controlled by endpoints of the E2E Tunnel are outside the domain controlled by
skipping to change at page 5, line 43 skipping to change at page 5, line 41
explicit-route-object/route-object-include-exclude list to explicit-route-object/route-object-include-exclude list to
specify the ingress and egress links for each path of the Transit specify the ingress and egress links for each path of the Transit
Tunnel Segment. Tunnel Segment.
2. Each PNC provides to the MDSC, at the MPI, the list of available 2. Each PNC provides to the MDSC, at the MPI, the list of available
timeslots on the inter-domain links using the TE Topology YANG timeslots on the inter-domain links using the TE Topology YANG
model and OTN Topology augmentation. The TE Topology YANG model model and OTN Topology augmentation. The TE Topology YANG model
in [TE-TOPO] is being updated to report the label set in [TE-TOPO] is being updated to report the label set
information. information.
[Editors' note:] These assumptions should be described in the TE
Tutorial and removed from this section (need to check the TE
Tutorial document).
This document is also making the following assumptions, still to be This document is also making the following assumptions, still to be
validated with CCAMP WG: validated with CCAMP WG:
1. The topology information for the Ethernet access links are 1. The topology information for the Ethernet access links is
modelled using the YANG model defined in [Client-Topo]. modelled using the YANG model defined in [Client-Topo].
2. The service information for Ethernet and other OTN client layer 2. The service information for Ethernet and other OTN client layer
services are modelled using the YANG model defined in [Client- services are modelled using the YANG model defined in [Client-
Signal]. Signal].
Finally, the Network Elements (NEs) described in the scenarios used
in document are using ODU switching. It is assumed that the ODU
links are pre-configured and using mechanisms such as WDM
wavelength, which are outside the scope of this document.
2. Terminology 2. Terminology
Domain: defined as a collection of network elements within a common Domain: defined as a collection of network elements within a common
realm of address space or path computation responsibility [RFC5151] realm of address space or path computation responsibility [RFC5151]
E-LINE: Ethernet Line E-LINE: Ethernet Line
EPL: Ethernet Private Line EPL: Ethernet Private Line
EVPL: Ethernet Virtual Private Line EVPL: Ethernet Virtual Private Line
skipping to change at page 6, line 41 skipping to change at page 6, line 46
UNI: User Network Interface UNI: User Network Interface
MDSC: Multi-Domain Service Coordinator MDSC: Multi-Domain Service Coordinator
CNC: Customer Network Controller CNC: Customer Network Controller
PNC: Provisioning Network Controller PNC: Provisioning Network Controller
MAC Bridging: Virtual LANs (VLANs) on IEEE 802.3 Ethernet network MAC Bridging: Virtual LANs (VLANs) on IEEE 802.3 Ethernet network
[Editors' note:] Add terminology for end-to-end data plane
connection, data plane segment connection.
3. Conventions used in this document 3. Conventions used in this document
3.1. Topology and traffic flow processing 3.1. Topology and traffic flow processing
The traffic flow between different nodes is specified as an ordered The traffic flow between different nodes is specified as an ordered
list of nodes, separated with commas, indicating within the brackets list of nodes, separated with commas, indicating within the brackets
the processing within each node: the processing within each node:
<node> (<processing>){, <node> (<processing>)} <node> (<processing>){, <node> (<processing>)}
skipping to change at page 8, line 7 skipping to change at page 8, line 16
humans to read and write. humans to read and write.
Different objects need to have an identifier. The convention used to Different objects need to have an identifier. The convention used to
create mnemonic identifiers is to use the object name (e.g., S3 for create mnemonic identifiers is to use the object name (e.g., S3 for
node S3), followed by its type (e.g., NODE), separated by an "-", node S3), followed by its type (e.g., NODE), separated by an "-",
followed by "-ID". For example, the mnemonic identifier for node S3 followed by "-ID". For example, the mnemonic identifier for node S3
would be S3-NODE-ID. would be S3-NODE-ID.
JSON language does not support the insertion of comments that have JSON language does not support the insertion of comments that have
been instead found to be useful when writing the examples. This been instead found to be useful when writing the examples. This
document inserts comments into the JSON code as JSON name/value pair document will insert comments into the JSON code as JSON name/value
with the JSON name string starting with the "//" characters. For pair with the JSON name string starting with the "//" characters.
example, when describing the example of a TE Topology instance For example, when describing the example of a TE Topology instance
representing the ODU Abstract Topology exposed by the Transport PNC, representing the ODU Abstract Topology exposed by the Transport PNC,
the following comment has been added to the JSON code: the following comment has been added to the JSON code:
"// comment": "ODU Abstract Topology @ MPI", "// comment": "ODU Abstract Topology @ MPI",
The JSON code examples provided in this document have been validated The JSON code examples provided in this document have been validated
against the YANG models following the validation process described against the YANG models following the validation process described
in Appendix A, which would not consider the comments. in Appendix A, which would not consider the comments.
In order to have successful validation of the examples, some In order to have successful validation of the examples, some
numbering scheme has been defined to assign identifiers to the numbering scheme has been defined to assign identifiers to the
different entities which would pass the syntax checks. In that case, different entities which would pass the syntax checks. In that case,
to simplify the reading, another JSON name/value pair, formatted as to simplify the reading, another JSON name/value pair formatted as a
a comment and using the mnemonic identifiers is also provided. For comment and using the mnemonic identifiers is also provided. For
example, the identifier of node S3 (S3-NODE-ID) has been assumed to example, the identifier of node S3 (S3-NODE-ID) has been assumed to
be "10.0.0.3" and would be shown in the JSON code example using the be "10.0.0.3" and would be shown in the JSON code example using the
two JSON name/value pair: two JSON name/value pair:
"// te-node-id": "S3-NODE-ID", "// te-node-id": "S3-NODE-ID",
"te-node-id": "10.0.0.3", "te-node-id": "10.0.0.3",
The first JSON name/value pair will be automatically removed in the The first JSON name/value pair will be automatically removed in the
first step of the validation process while the second JSON first step of the validation process while the second JSON
name/value pair will be validate against the YANG model definitions. name/value pair will be validated against the YANG model
definitions.
4. Scenarios Description 4. Scenarios Description
4.1. Reference Network 4.1. Reference Network
The physical topology of the reference network is shown in Figure 1. The physical topology of the reference network is shown in Figure 1.
It represents an OTN network composed of three transport network It represents an OTN network composed of three transport network
domains providing transport services to an IP customer network domains providing transport services to an IP customer network
through eight access links: through eight access links:
........................ ........................
.......... : : .......... : :
: : Network domain 1 : ............. : : Network domain 1 : .............
Customer: : : : : Customer: : : : :
domain : : S1 -------+ : : Network : domain : : S1 -------+ : : Network :
: : / \ : : domain 3 : .......... : : / \ : : domain 3 : ..........
R1 ------- S3 ----- S4 \ : : : : R1 ------- S3 ----- S4 \ : : : :
: : \ \ S2 --------+ : :Customer : : \ \ S2 --------+ : :Customer
: : \ \ | : : \ : : domain : : \ \ | : : \ : : domain
: : S5 \ | : : \ : : : : S5 \ | : : \ : :
R2 ------+ / \ \ | : : S31 --------- R7 R2 ------+ / \ \ | : : S31 --------- R7
: : \ / \ \ | : : / \ : : : : \ / \ \ | : : / \ : :
: : S6 ---- S7 ---- S8 ------ S32 S33 ------ R8 : : S6 ---- S7 ---- S8 ------ S32 S33 ------ R8
: : / | | : : / \ / : :....... : : / | | : : / \ / : :.......
R3 ------+ | | : :/ S34 : : R3 ------+ | | : :/ S34 : :
: :..........|.......|...: / / : : : :..........|.......|...: / / : :
........: | | /:.../.......: : ........: | | /:.../.......: :
| | / / : | | / / :
...........|.......|..../..../... : ...........|.......|..../..../... :
: | | / / : .............. : | | / / : ..............
: Network | | / / : : : Network | | / / : :
: domain 2 | | / / : :Customer : domain 2 | | / / : :Customer
: S11 ---- S12 / : : domain : S11 ---- S12 / : : domain
: / | \ / : : : / | \ / : :
: S13 S14 | S15 ------------- R4 : S13 S14 | S15 ------------- R4
: | \ / \ | \ : : : | \ / \ | \ : :
: | S16 \ | \ : : : | S16 \ | \ : :
: | / S17 -- S18 --------- R5 : | / S17 -- S18 --------- R5
: | / \ / : : : | / \ / : :
: S19 ---- S20 ---- S21 ------------ R6 : S19 ---- S20 ---- S21 ------------ R6
: : : : : :
:...............................: :............. :...............................: :.............
Figure 1 Reference network Figure 1 - Reference network
This document assumes that all the transport network switching nodes This document assumes that all the transport network switching nodes
Si are OTN switching nodes capable to switch only in the electrical Si are OTN switching nodes capable of switching in the electrical
domain (ODU switching only) and that all the Si-Sj OTN links within domain (ODU switching) and that all the Si-Sj OTN links within the
the transport network (intra-domain or inter-domain) are 100G links transport network (intra-domain or inter-domain) are 100G links
while the access Ri-Sj links are 10G links. Different technologies while the access Ri-Sj links are 10G links. Different technologies
can be used at the access links (e.g., Ethernet, STM-n, OTN). can be used at the access links (e.g., Ethernet, STM-n, OTN).
It is also assumed that, within the transport network, the It is also assumed that, within the transport network, the
physical/optical interconnections supporting the Si-Sj OTN links (up physical/optical interconnections supporting the Si-Sj OTN links (up
to the OTU4 trail), are pre-configured using mechanisms which are to the OTU4 trail), are pre-configured using mechanisms which are
outside the scope of this document and are not exposed at the MPIs outside the scope of this document and are not exposed at the MPIs
to the MDSC. to the MDSC.
The transport domain control architecture, shown in Figure 2, The transport domain control architecture, shown in Figure 2,
skipping to change at page 10, line 46 skipping to change at page 11, line 40
( ) ( Domain 2 ) | ( ) ( Domain 2 ) |
( ) ( ) ----- ( ) ( ) -----
( Network ) ( ) ( ) ( Network ) ( ) ( )
( Domain 1 ) ----- ( ) ( Domain 1 ) ----- ( )
( ) ( Network ) ( ) ( Network )
( ) ( Domain 3 ) ( ) ( Domain 3 )
----- ( ) ----- ( )
( ) ( )
----- -----
Figure 2 Controlling Hierarchy Figure 2 - Controlling Hierarchy
The ACTN framework facilitates the detachment of the network and The ACTN framework facilitates the detachment of the network and
service control from the underlying technology and help the customer service control from the underlying technology and helps the
express the network as desired by business needs. Therefore, care customer express the network as desired by business needs.
must be taken to keep minimal dependency on the CMI (or no Therefore, care must be taken to keep a minimal dependency on the
dependency at all) with respect to the network domain technologies. CMI (or no dependency at all) with respect to the network domain
The MPI instead requires some specialization according to the domain technologies. The MPI instead requires some specialization according
technology. to the domain technology.
This document assumes that the CNC controls the customer IP network This document assumes that the CNC controls the customer IP network
and requests, at the CMI, transport connectivity between IP routers. and requests, at the CMI, transport connectivity between IP routers.
The MDSC coordinates, via three MPIs, the control of a multi-domain The MDSC coordinates, via three MPIs, the control of a multi-domain
transport network through three PNCs. transport network through three PNCs.
The control interfaces within scope of this document are the three The control interfaces within the scope of this document are the
MPIs, while the control interface(s) between the CNC and the IP three MPIs, while the control interface(s) between the CNC and the
routers is outside the scope of this document. It is also assumed IP routers is outside the scope of this document. It is also assumed
that the CMI allows the CNC to provide all the information that is that the CMI allows the CNC to provide all the information that is
required by the MDSC to properly configure the transport required by the MDSC to properly configure the transport
connectivity requested by the customer. connectivity requested by the customer.
4.1.1. Single-Domain Scenario [Editors' note:] Check the assumption above with the latest version
of the ACTN framework: it is the CNC or "something" above the CNC
which controls the customer IP network
In case the CNC requests transport connectivity between IP routers In case the CNC requests transport connectivity between IP routers
attached to the same transport domain (e.g., between R1 and R3 in attached to different transport domains (e.g., between R1 and R5),
Figure 1), the MDSC can just pass the service request to the PNC the MDSC coordinates the setup of a multi-domain end-to-end OTN
controlling that domain (e.g., PNC1 in Figure 2) and let the PNC connection across multiple PNCs (e.g., PNC1, PNC2 and PNC3 in in
take decisions about how to implement the service (e.g., setting up Figure 2) as well as the configuration of the client signal mapping
the intra-domain end-to-end OTN connection). at the PNCs controlling the edge domains (e.g., PNC1 and PNC2 in
Figure 2).
4.1.2. Multi-Domain Scenario 4.1.1. Single-Domain Scenario
In case the CNC requests transport connectivity between IP routers In case the CNC requests transport connectivity between IP routers
attached to different transport domains (e.g., between R1 and R5), attached to the same transport domain (e.g., between R1 and R3 in
the MDSC needs to coordinate the setup of a multi-domain end-to-end Figure 1), the MDSC can request the PNC controlling that domain
OTN connection across multiple PNCs (e.g., PNC1, PNC2 and PNC3 in in (e.g., PNC1 in Figure 2) to setup an intra-domain end-to-end OTN
Figure 2) as well as to coordinate the configuration of the service connection and configure the client signal mapping.
with the PNCs controlling the edge domains (e.g., PNC1 and PNC2 in
Figure 2). Alternatively, the MDSC can just configure the client signal mapping
and let the PNC take decisions about how to implement the service
(e.g., setting up the intra-domain end-to-end OTN connection).
4.2. Topology Abstractions 4.2. Topology Abstractions
Abstraction provides a selective method for representing Abstraction provides a selective method for representing
connectivity information within a domain. There are multiple methods connectivity information within a domain. There are multiple methods
to abstract a network topology. This document assumes the to abstract a network topology. This document assumes the
abstraction method defined in [RFC7926]: abstraction method defined in [RFC7926]:
"Abstraction is the process of applying policy to the available TE "Abstraction is the process of applying the policy to the
information within a domain, to produce selective information that available TE information within a domain, to produce selective
represents the potential ability to connect across the domain. information that represents the potential ability to connect
Thus, abstraction does not necessarily offer all possible across the domain. Thus, abstraction does not necessarily offer
connectivity options, but presents a general view of potential all possible connectivity options, but presents a general view of
connectivity according to the policies that determine how the potential connectivity according to the policies that determine
domain's administrator wants to allow the domain resources to be how the domain's administrator wants to allow the domain resources
used." to be used."
[ACTN-Frame] Provides the context of topology abstraction in the [ACTN-Frame] Provides the context of topology abstraction in the
ACTN architecture and discusses a few alternatives for the ACTN architecture and discusses a few alternatives for the
abstraction methods for both packet and optical networks. This is an abstraction methods for both packet and optical networks. This is an
important consideration since the choice of the abstraction method important consideration since the choice of the abstraction method
impacts protocol design and the information it carries. According impacts protocol design and the information it carries. According
to [ACTN-Frame], there are three types of topology: to [ACTN-Frame], there are three types of topology:
o White topology: This is a case where the PNC provides the actual o White topology: This is a case where the PNC provides the actual
network topology to the MDSC without any hiding or filtering. In network topology to the MDSC without any hiding or filtering. In
this case, the MDSC has the full knowledge of the underlying this case, the MDSC has the full knowledge of the underlying
network topology; network topology;
o Black topology: The entire domain network is abstracted as a o Black topology: The entire domain network is abstracted as a
single virtual node with the access/egress links without single virtual node with the access/egress links without
disclosing any node internal connectivity information; disclosing any node internal connectivity information;
o Grey topology: This abstraction level is between black topology o Grey topology: This abstraction level is between black topology
and white topology from a granularity point of view. This is and white topology from a granularity point of view. This is an
abstraction of TE tunnels for all pairs of border nodes. We may abstraction of TE tunnels for all pairs of border nodes. We may
further differentiate from a perspective of how to abstract further differentiate from a perspective of how to abstract
internal TE resources between the pairs of border nodes: internal TE resources between the pairs of border nodes:
- Grey topology type A: border nodes with a TE links between - Grey topology type A: border nodes with TE links between them
them in a full mesh fashion; in a full mesh fashion;
- Grey topology type B: border nodes with some internal - Grey topology type B: border nodes with some internal
abstracted nodes and abstracted links. abstracted nodes and abstracted links.
Each PNC should provide the MDSC a topology abstraction of the Each PNC should provide the MDSC with a topology abstraction of the
domain's network topology. domain's network topology.
Each PNC provides topology abstraction of its own domain topology Each PNC provides topology abstraction of its own domain topology
independently from each other and therefore it is possible that independently from each other, and therefore it is possible that
different PNCs provide different types of topology abstractions. different PNCs provide different types of topology abstractions.
The MPI operates on the abstract topology regardless on the type of The MPI operates on the abstract topology regardless of, and
abstraction provided by the PNC. independently from, the type of abstraction provided by the PNC.
To analyze how the MPI operates on abstract topologies independently To analyze how the MPI operates on abstract topologies independently
from the topology abstraction provided by each PNC and, therefore, from the topology abstraction provided by each PNC and, therefore,
that that different PNCs can provide different topology that different PNCs can provide different topology abstractions,
abstractions, it is assumed that: that the following examples are assumed:
o PNC1 provides a topology abstraction which exposes at MPI1 an o PNC1 provides a black topology abstraction which exposes at MPI1
abstract node and an abstract link for each physical node and a single virtual node (representing the whole network domain 1).
link within network domain 1
o PNC2 provides a topology abstraction which exposes at MPI2 a o PNC2 provides a black topology abstraction which exposes at MPI2
single abstract node (representing the whole network domain) with a single virtual node (representing the whole network domain 2).
abstract links representing only the inter-domain physical links
o PNC3 provides a topology abstraction which exposes at MPI3 two o PNC3 provides a white topology abstraction which exposes at MPI3
abstract nodes (called AN31 and AN32). They abstract respectively all the physical nodes and links within network domain 3.
nodes S31+S33 and nodes S32+S34. At MPI3, only the abstract nodes
should be reported: the mapping between the abstract nodes (AN31
and AN32) and the physical nodes (S31, S32, S33 and S34) should
be done internally by PNC3.
The MDSC should be capable to stitch together each abstracted [Editors' note:] Evaluate whether to change the description of the
PNC2 abstraction to provide an example of a grey topology
abstraction (pending discussion about grey topology abstraction)
The MDSC should be capable of stitching together each abstracted
topology to build its own view of the multi-domain network topology. topology to build its own view of the multi-domain network topology.
The process may require suitable oversight, including administrative The process may require suitable oversight, including administrative
configuration and trust models, but this is out of scope for this configuration and trust models, but this is out of scope for this
document. document.
The MDSC can also provide topology abstraction of its own view of The MDSC can also provide topology abstraction of its own view of
the multi-domain network topology at its CMIs depending on the the multi-domain network topology at its CMIs depending on the
customers' needs: it can provide different types of topology customers' needs: it can provide different types of topology
abstractions at different CMIs. abstractions at different CMIs.
4.3. Service Configuration 4.3. Service Configuration
In the following scenarios, it is assumed that the CNC is capable to In the following scenarios, it is assumed that the CNC is capable of
request service connectivity from the MDSC to support IP routers requesting service connectivity from the MDSC to support IP routers
connectivity. connectivity.
The type of services could depend of the type of physical links The type of services could depend on the type of physical links
(e.g. OTN link, ETH link or SDH link) between the routers and (e.g. OTN link, ETH link or SDH link) between the routers and
transport network. transport network.
The control of different adaptations inside IP routers, Ri (PKT -> The control of different adaptations inside IP routers, Ri (PKT ->
foo) and Rj (foo -> PKT), are assumed to be performed by means that foo) and Rj (foo -> PKT), are assumed to be performed by means that
are not under the control of, and not visible to, the MDSC nor to are not under the control of, and not visible to, the MDSC nor to
the PNCs. Therefore, these mechanisms are outside the scope of this the PNCs. Therefore, these mechanisms are outside the scope of this
document. document.
It is just assumed that the CNC is capable to request the proper It is just assumed that the CNC is capable of requesting the proper
configuration of the different adaptation functions inside the configuration of the different adaptation functions inside the
customer's IP routers, by means which are outside the scope of this customer's IP routers, by means which are outside the scope of this
document. document.
4.3.1. ODU Transit 4.3.1. ODU Transit
The physical links interconnecting the IP routers and the transport The physical links interconnecting the IP routers and the transport
network can be OTN links. In this case, it is assumed that the network can be 10G OTN links. In this case, it is assumed that the
physical/optical interconnections below the ODU layer (up to the physical/optical interconnections below the ODU layer (up to the
OTU2 trail) are pre-configured using mechanisms which are outside OTU2 trail) are pre-configured using mechanisms which are outside
the scope of this document and not exposed at the MPIs to the MDSC. the scope of this document and not exposed at the MPIs between the
PNCs and the MDSC. For simplicity of the description, it is also
To setup a 10Gb IP link between R1 and R5, an ODU2 end-to-end data assumed that these interfaces are not channelized (i.e., they can
plane connection needs be created between R1 and R5, crossing only support one ODU2).
transport nodes S3, S1, S2, S31, S33, S34, S15 and S18 which belong
to different PNC domains.
The traffic flow between R1 and R5 can be summarized as: To setup a 10Gb IP link between R1 and R5, an ODU2 end-to-end
connection needs be created in the data plane between R1 and R5,
through transport nodes S3, S1, S2, S31, S33, S34, S15 and S18 which
belong to different PNC domains (multi-domain service request):
R1 ([PKT] -> ODU2), S3 ([ODU2]), S1 ([ODU2]), S2 ([ODU2]), R1 ([PKT] -> ODU2), S3 ([ODU2]), S1 ([ODU2]), S2 ([ODU2]),
S31 ([ODU2]), S33 ([ODU2]), S34 ([ODU2]), S31 ([ODU2]), S33 ([ODU2]), S34 ([ODU2]),
S15 ([ODU2]), S18 ([ODU2]), R5 (ODU2 -> [PKT]) S15 ([ODU2]), S18 ([ODU2]), R5 (ODU2 -> [PKT])
It is assumed that the CNC requests, via the CMI, the setup of an It is assumed that, at the CMI, the CNC requests, using mechanisms
ODU2 transit service, providing all the information that the MDSC which are outside the scope of this document, the MDSC to setup of
needs to understand that it shall setup a multi-domain ODU2 segment an ODU2 transit service between the access links on S3 and S8 and
connection between nodes S3 and S18. that the MDSC understands that it shall setup an ODU2 segment
connection between the access links on S3 and S18, which belongs to
different PNC domains (multi-domain service request).
In case the CNC needs the setup of a 10Gb IP link between R1 and R3 To setup of a 10Gb IP link between R1 and R3, an ODU2 end-to-end
(single-domain service request), the traffic flow between R1 and R3 connection needs are created in the data plane between R1 and R3,
can be summarized as: through transport nodes S3, S5 and S6 which belong to the same PNC
domain (single-domain service request):
R1 ([PKT] -> ODU2), S3 ([ODU2]), S5 ([ODU2]), S6 ([ODU2]), R1 ([PKT] -> ODU2), S3 ([ODU2]), S5 ([ODU2]), S6 ([ODU2]),
R3 (ODU2 -> [PKT]) R3 (ODU2 -> [PKT])
Since the CNC is unaware of the transport network domains, it Since the CNC is not aware of the transport network controlling
requests the setup of an ODU2 transit service in the same way as hierarchy, the mechanisms used by the CNC to request at the CMI the
before, regardless the fact the fact that this is a single-domain MDSC to setup an ODU2 transit service are independent on whether the
service. service request is single-domain or multi-domain.
It is assumed that the information provided at the CMI is sufficient
for the MDSC to understand that this is a single-domain service
request.
The MDSC can then just request PNC1 to setup a single-domain ODU2 Based on the assumption above, the MDSC understands that it shall
data plane segment connection between nodes S3 and S6. setup an ODU2 segment connection between the access links on S3 and
S6, which belong to the same PNC domain (single-domain service
request) and it can just pass the request at the MPI to PNC1 to
setup a single-domain ODU2 segment connection between its access
links on S3 and S6.
4.3.2. EPL over ODU 4.3.2. EPL over ODU
The physical links interconnecting the IP routers and the transport The physical links interconnecting the IP routers and the transport
network can be Ethernet links. In this case, it is assumed that the network can be Ethernet physical links.
Ethernet physical interconnections below the MAC layer (up to the
OTU2 trail) are pre-configured using mechanisms which are outside
the scope of this document and not exposed at the MPIs to the MDSC.
To setup a 10Gb IP link between R1 and R5, an EPL service needs to To setup a 10Gb IP link between R1 and R5, an EPL service needs to
be created between R1 and R5, supported by an ODU2 end-to-end data be created between R1 and R5, supported by an ODU2 end-to-end
plane connection between transport nodes S3 and S18, crossing connection in the data plane between transport nodes S3 and S18,
transport nodes S1, S2, S31, S33, S34 and S15 which belong to through transport nodes S1, S2, S31, S33, S34 and S15, which belong
different PNC domains. to different PNC domains (multi-domain service request:
The traffic flow between R1 and R5 can be summarized as:
R1 ([PKT] -> ETH), S3 (ETH -> [ODU2]), S1 ([ODU2]), R1 ([PKT] -> ETH), S3 (ETH -> [ODU2]), S1 ([ODU2]),
S2 ([ODU2]), S31 ([ODU2]), S33 ([ODU2]), S34 ([ODU2]), S2 ([ODU2]), S31 ([ODU2]), S33 ([ODU2]), S34 ([ODU2]),
S15 ([ODU2]), S18 ([ODU2] -> ETH), R5 (ETH -> [PKT]) S15 ([ODU2]), S18 ([ODU2] -> ETH), R5 (ETH -> [PKT])
It is assumed that the CNC requests, via the CMI, the setup of an Based on the assumptions described in section 4.3.1, the CNC
EPL service, providing all the information that the MDSC needs to requests at the CMI the MDSC to setup an EPL service between the
understand that it shall coordinate the three PNCs to setup a multi- access links on S3 and S8 and the MDSC understands that it shall
domain ODU2 end-to-end connection between nodes S3 and S18 as well setup an ODU2 end-to-end connection between nodes S3 and S18, which
as the configuration of the adaptation functions inside nodes S3 and belongs to different PNC domains (multi-domain service request). The
S18: S3 (ETH -> [ODU2]), S18 ([ODU2] -> ETH), S18 (ETH -> [ODU2]) MDSC also understands how the adaptation functions inside nodes S3
and S3 ([ODU2] -> ETH). and S18 (i.e., S3 (ETH -> [ODU2]), S18 ([ODU2] -> ETH), S18 (ETH ->
[ODU2]) and S3 ([ODU2] -> ETH)) should be configured.
In case the CNC needs the setup of a 10Gb IP link between R1 and R3 To setup a 10Gb IP link between R1 and R3, an EPL service needs to
(single-domain service request), the traffic flow between R1 and R3 be created between R1 and R3, supported by an ODU2 end-to-end
can be summarized as: connection in the data plane between transport nodes S3 and S6,
through the transport node S5, which belong to the same PNC domain
(single-domain service request):
R1 ([PKT] -> ETH), S3 (ETH -> [ODU2]), S5 ([ODU2]), R1 ([PKT] -> ETH), S3 (ETH -> [ODU2]), S5 ([ODU2]),
S6 ([ODU2] -> ETH), R3 (ETH-> [PKT]) S6 ([ODU2] -> ETH), R3 (ETH-> [PKT])
As described in section 4.3.1, the CNC requests the setup of an EPL As described in section 4.3.1, the mechanisms used by the CNC at the
service in the same way as before and the information provided at CMI are independent on whether the service request is single-domain
the CMI is sufficient for the MDSC to understand that this is a service or multi-domain.
single-domain service request.
The MDSC can then just request PNC1 to setup a single-domain EPL Based on the assumption above, the MDSC understands that it shall
service between nodes S3 and S6. PNC1 can take care of setting up setup an EPL service between the access links on S3 and S6, which
the single-domain ODU2 end-to-end connection between nodes S3 and S6 belong to the same PNC domain (single-domain service request) and it
as well as of configuring the adaptation functions on these edge can just pass the request at the MPI to PNC1 to setup a single-
nodes. domain EPL service its access links on S3 and S6. In this case, PNC1
can take care of setting up the single-domain ODU2 end-to-end
connection between nodes S3 and S6 as well as of configuring the
adaptation functions on these edge nodes.
4.3.3. Other OTN Clients Services 4.3.3. Other OTN Clients Services
[ITU-T G.709] defines mappings of different client layers into [ITU-T G.709] defines mappings of different client layers into
ODU. Most of them are used to provide Private Line services over ODU. Most of them are used to provide Private Line services over
an OTN transport network supporting a variety of types of physical an OTN transport network supporting a variety of types of physical
access links (e.g., Ethernet, SDH STM-N, Fibre Channel, InfiniBand, access links (e.g., Ethernet, SDH STM-N, Fibre Channel, InfiniBand,
etc.). etc.).
The physical links interconnecting the IP routers and the transport The physical links interconnecting the IP routers and the transport
network can be any of these types. network can be any of these types.
In order to setup a 10Gb IP link between R1 and R5 using, for In order to setup a 10Gb IP link between R1 and R5 using, for
example SDH physical links between the IP routers and the transport example SDH physical links between the IP routers and the transport
network, an STM-64 Private Line service needs to be created between network, an STM-64 Private Line service needs to be created between
R1 and R5, supported by ODU2 end-to-end data plane connection R1 and R5, supported by an ODU2 end-to-end connection in the data
between transport nodes S3 and S18, crossing transport nodes S1, S2, plane between transport nodes S3 and S18, through transport nodes
S31, S33, S34 and S15 which belong to different PNC domains. S1, S2, S31, S33, S34 and S15, which belong to different PNC domains
(multi-domain service request):
The traffic flow between R1 and R5 can be summarized as:
R1 ([PKT] -> STM-64), S3 (STM-64 -> [ODU2]), S1 ([ODU2]), R1 ([PKT] -> STM-64), S3 (STM-64 -> [ODU2]), S1 ([ODU2]),
S2 ([ODU2]), S31 ([ODU2]), S33 ([ODU2]), S34 ([ODU2]), S2 ([ODU2]), S31 ([ODU2]), S33 ([ODU2]), S34 ([ODU2]),
S15 ([ODU2]), S18 ([ODU2] -> STM-64), R5 (STM-64 -> [PKT]) S15 ([ODU2]), S18 ([ODU2] -> STM-64), R5 (STM-64 -> [PKT])
As described in section 4.3.2, it is assumed that the CNC is Based on the assumptions described in section 4.3.1, the CNC
capable, via the CMI, to request the setup of an STM-64 Private Line requests the CMI the MDSC to setup an STM-64 Private Line service
service, providing all the information that the MDSC needs to between the access links on S3 and S8 and the MDSC understands what
coordinate the setup of a multi-domain ODU2 connection as well as to do as described in section 4.3.2 (multi-domain service request).
the adaptation functions on the edge nodes.
In the single-domain case (10Gb IP link between R1 and R3), the To setup a 10Gb IP link between R1 and R3), an STM-64 Private Line
traffic flow between R1 and R3 can be summarized as: service needs to be created between R1 and R3 (single-domain service
request):
R1 ([PKT] -> STM-64), S3 (STM-64 -> [ODU2]), S5 ([ODU2]), R1 ([PKT] -> STM-64), S3 (STM-64 -> [ODU2]), S5 ([ODU2]),
S6 ([ODU2] -> STM-64), R3 (STM-64 -> [PKT]) S6 ([ODU2] -> STM-64), R3 (STM-64 -> [PKT])
As described in section 4.3.1, the CNC requests the setup of an STM- As described in section 4.3.1, the mechanisms used by the CNC at the
64 Private Line service in the same way as before and the CMI are independent on whether the service request is single-domain
information provided at the CMI is sufficient for the MDSC to or multi-domain.
understand that this is a single-domain service request.
As described in section 4.3.2, the MDSC could just request PNC1 to As described in section 4.3.2, the MDSC can just pass the request at
setup a single-domain STM-64 Private Line service between nodes S3 the MPI to PNC1 to setup a single-domain STM-64 Private Line service
and S6. between it access links on S3 and S6.
4.3.4. EVPL over ODU 4.3.4. EVPL over ODU
When the physical links interconnecting the IP routers and the When the physical links interconnecting the IP routers and the
transport network are Ethernet links, it is also possible that transport network are Ethernet physical links, it is also possible
different Ethernet services (e.g., EVPL) can share the same physical that different Ethernet services (e.g., EVPL) can share the same
link using different VLANs. physical access link using different VLANs.
To setup two 1Gb IP links between R1 to R3 and between R1 and R5, To setup two 1Gb IP links between R1 to R3 and between R1 and R5,
two EVPL services need to be created, supported by two ODU0 end-to- two EVPL services need to be created, supported by two ODU0 end-to-
end connections respectively between S3 and S6, crossing transport end connections in the data plane respectively between transport
node S5, and between S3 and S18, crossing transport nodes S1, S2, nodes S3 and S6, through transport node S5, which belong ot the same
S31, S33, S34 and S15 which belong to different PNC domains. PNC domain (single-domain service request) and between transport
nodes S3 and S18, through transport nodes S1, S2, S31, S33, S34 and
Since the two EVPL services are sharing the same Ethernet physical S15, which belong to different PNC domains (multi-domain service
link between R1 and S3, different VLAN IDs are associated with request):
different EVPL services: for example, VLAN IDs 10 and 20
respectively.
The traffic flow between R1 and R5 can be summarized as:
R1 ([PKT] -> VLAN), S3 (VLAN -> [ODU0]), S1 ([ODU0]), R1 ([PKT] -> VLAN), S3 (VLAN -> [ODU0]), S1 ([ODU0]),
S2 ([ODU0]), S31 ([ODU0]), S33 ([ODU0]), S34 ([ODU0]), S2 ([ODU0]), S31 ([ODU0]), S33 ([ODU0]), S34 ([ODU0]),
S15 ([ODU0]), S18 ([ODU0] -> VLAN), R5 (VLAN -> [PKT]) S15 ([ODU0]), S18 ([ODU0] -> VLAN), R5 (VLAN -> [PKT])
The traffic flow between R1 and R3 can be summarized as:
R1 ([PKT] -> VLAN), S3 (VLAN -> [ODU0]), S5 ([ODU0]), R1 ([PKT] -> VLAN), S3 (VLAN -> [ODU0]), S5 ([ODU0]),
S6 ([ODU0] -> VLAN), R3 (VLAN -> [PKT]) S6 ([ODU0] -> VLAN), R3 (VLAN -> [PKT])
As described in section 4.3.2, it is assumed that the CNC is Since the two EVPL services are sharing the same Ethernet physical
capable, via the CMI, to request the setup of these EVPL services, link between R1 and S3, different VLAN IDs are associated with
providing all the information that the MDSC needs to understand that different EVPL services: for example, VLAN IDs 10 and 20
it need to request PNC1 to setup an EVPL service between nodes S3 respectively.
and S6 (single-domain service request) and it also needs to
coordinate the setup of a multi-domain ODU0 connection between nodes Based on the assumptions described in section 4.3.1, the CNC
S3 and S16 as well as the adaptation functions on these edge nodes. requests at the CMI the MDSC to setup these EVPL services and the
MDSC understands what to do as described in section 4.3.2.
4.3.5. EVPLAN and EVPTree Services 4.3.5. EVPLAN and EVPTree Services
When the physical links interconnecting the IP routers and the When the physical links interconnecting the IP routers and the
transport network are Ethernet links, multipoint Ethernet services transport network are Ethernet links, multipoint Ethernet services
(e.g, EPLAN and EPTree) can also be supported. It is also possible (e.g., EPLAN and EPTree) can also be supported. It is also possible
that multiple Ethernet services (e.g, EVPL, EVPLAN and EVPTree) that multiple Ethernet services (e.g., EVPL, EVPLAN and EVPTree)
share the same physical link using different VLANs. share the same physical link using different VLANs.
Note - it is assumed that EPLAN and EPTree services can be supported Note - it is assumed that EPLAN and EPTree services can be supported
by configuring EVPLAN and EVPTree with port mapping. by configuring EVPLAN and EVPTree with port mapping.
Since this EVPLAN/EVPTree service can share the same Ethernet Since this EVPLAN/EVPTree service can share the same Ethernet
physical links between IP routers and transport nodes (e.g., with physical links between IP routers and transport nodes (e.g., with
the EVPL services described in section 4.3.4), a different VLAN ID the EVPL services described in section 4.3.4), a different VLAN ID
(e.g., 30) can be associated with this EVPLAN/EVPTree service. (e.g., 30) can be associated with this EVPLAN/EVPTree service.
In order to setup an IP subnet between R1, R2, R3 and R5, an In order to setup an IP subnet between R1, R2, R3 and R5, an
EVPLAN/EVPTree service needs to be created, supported by two ODUflex EVPLAN/EVPTree service needs to be created, supported by two ODUflex
end-to-end connections respectively between S3 and S6, crossing end-to-end connections respectively between S3 and S6, crossing
transport node S5, and between S3 and S18, crossing transport nodes transport node S5, and between S3 and S18, crossing transport nodes
S1, S2, S31, S33, S34 and S15 which belong to different PNC domains. S1, S2, S31, S33, S34 and S15 which belong to different PNC domains.
Some MAC Bridging capabilities are also required on some nodes at Some MAC Bridging capabilities are also required on some nodes at
the edge of the transport network: for example Ethernet Bridging the edge of the transport network: for example, Ethernet Bridging
capabilities can be configured in nodes S3 and S6: capabilities can be configured in nodes S3 and S6:
o MAC Bridging in node S3 is needed to select, based on the MAC o MAC Bridging in node S3 is needed to select, based on the MAC
Destination Address, whether received Ethernet frames should be Destination Address, whether received Ethernet frames should be
forwarded to R1 or to the ODUflex terminating on node S6 or to forwarded to R1 or to the ODUflex terminating on node S6 or to
the other ODUflex terminating on node S18; the other ODUflex terminating on node S18;
o MAC bridging function in node S6 is needed to select, based on o MAC bridging function in node S6 is needed to select, based on
the MAC Destination Address, whether received Ethernet frames the MAC Destination Address, whether received Ethernet frames
should be sent to R2 or to R3 or to the ODUflex terminating on should be sent to R2 or to R3 or to the ODUflex terminating on
node S3. node S3.
In order to support an EVPTree service instead of an EVPLAN, In order to support an EVPTree service instead of an EVPLAN,
additional configuration of the Ethernet Bridging capabilities on additional configuration of the Ethernet Bridging capabilities on
the nodes at the edge of the transport network is required. the nodes at the edge of the transport network is required.
The traffic flows between R1 and R3, between R3 and R5 and between The traffic flows between R1 and R3, between R3 and R5 and between
R1 and R5 can be summarized as: R1 and R5 can be summarized as:
skipping to change at page 19, line 49 skipping to change at page 20, line 38
EVPLAN/EVPTree service between nodes S3 and S6. PNC1 can take care EVPLAN/EVPTree service between nodes S3 and S6. PNC1 can take care
of setting up the single-domain ODUflex end-to-end connection of setting up the single-domain ODUflex end-to-end connection
between nodes S3 and S6 as well as of configuring the MAC bridging between nodes S3 and S6 as well as of configuring the MAC bridging
and the adaptation functions on these edge nodes. and the adaptation functions on these edge nodes.
4.3.6. Dynamic Service Configuration 4.3.6. Dynamic Service Configuration
Given the service established in the previous sections, there is a Given the service established in the previous sections, there is a
demand for an update of some service characteristics. A demand for an update of some service characteristics. A
straightforward approach would be terminate the current service and straightforward approach would be terminate the current service and
replace with a new one. Another more advanced approach would be replace with a new one. Another more advanced approach would be a
dynamic configuration, in which case there will be no interruption dynamic configuration, in which case there will be no interruption
for the connection. for the connection.
An example application would be updating the SLA information for a An example application would be updating the SLA information for a
certain connection. For example, an ODU transit connection is set up certain connection. For example, an ODU transit connection is set up
according to section 4.3.1, with the corresponding SLA level of 'no according to section 4.3.1, with the corresponding SLA level of "no
protection'. After the establishment of this connection, the user protection". After the establishment of this connection, the user
would like to enhance this service by providing a restoration after would like to enhance this service by providing a restoration after
potential failure, and a request is generated on the CMI. In this potential failure, and a request is generated on the CMI. In this
case, after receiving the request, the MDSC would need to send an case, after receiving the request, the MDSC would need to send an
update message to the PNC, changing the SLA parameters in TE Tunnel update message to the PNC, changing the SLA parameters in TE Tunnel
model. Then the connection characteristic would be changed by PNC, model. Then the connection characteristic would be changed by PNC,
and a notification would be sent to MDSC for acknowledgement. and a notification would be sent to MDSC for acknowledgement.
4.4. Multi-function Access Links 4.4. Multi-function Access Links
Some physical links interconnecting the IP routers and the transport Some physical links interconnecting the IP routers and the transport
network can be configured in different modes, e.g., as OTU2 or STM- network can be configured in different modes, e.g., as OTU2 or STM-
64 or 10GE. 64 or 10GE.
This configuration can be done a-priori by means outside the scope This configuration can be done a-priori by means outside the scope
of this document. In this case, these links will appear at the MPI of this document. In this case, these links will appear at the MPI
either as an ODU Link or as a STM-64 Link or as a 10GE Link either as an ODU Link or as an STM-64 Link or as a 10GE Link
(depending on the a-priori configuration) and will be controlled at (depending on the a-priori configuration) and will be controlled at
the MPI as discussed in section 4.3. the MPI as discussed in section 4.3.
It is also possible not to configure these links a-priori and give It is also possible not to configure these links a-priori and give
the control to the MPI to decide, based on the service the control to the MPI to decide, based on the service
configuration, how to configure it. configuration, how to configure it.
For example, if the physical link between R1 and S3 is a multi- For example, if the physical link between R1 and S3 is a multi-
functional access link while the physical links between R7 and S31 functional access link while the physical links between R7 and S31
and between R5 and S18 are STM-64 and 10GE physical links and between R5 and S18 are STM-64 and 10GE physical links
skipping to change at page 21, line 13 skipping to change at page 21, line 45
The traffic flow between R1 and R5 can be summarized as: The traffic flow between R1 and R5 can be summarized as:
R1 ([PKT] -> ETH), S3 (ETH -> [ODU2]), S1 ([ODU2]), R1 ([PKT] -> ETH), S3 (ETH -> [ODU2]), S1 ([ODU2]),
S2 ([ODU2]), S31 ([ODU2]), S33 ([ODU2]), S34 ([ODU2]), S2 ([ODU2]), S31 ([ODU2]), S33 ([ODU2]), S34 ([ODU2]),
S15 ([ODU2]), S18 ([ODU2] -> ETH), R5 (ETH -> [PKT]) S15 ([ODU2]), S18 ([ODU2] -> ETH), R5 (ETH -> [PKT])
As described in section 4.3.2, it is assumed that the CNC is As described in section 4.3.2, it is assumed that the CNC is
capable, via the CMI, to request the setup either an STM-64 Private capable, via the CMI, to request the setup either an STM-64 Private
Line service between R1 and R7 or an EPL service between R1 and R5, Line service between R1 and R7 or an EPL service between R1 and R5,
providing all the information that the MDSC needs to understand that providing all the information that the MDSC needs to understand that
it need to coordinate the setup of a multi-domain ODU2 connection, it needs to coordinate the setup of a multi-domain ODU2 connection,
either between nodes S3 and S31, or between nodes S3 and S18, as either between nodes S3 and S31, or between nodes S3 and S18, as
well as the adaptation functions on these edge nodes, and in well as the adaptation functions on these edge nodes, and in
particular whether the multi-function access link on between R1 and particular whether the multi-function access link on between R1 and
S3 should operate as an STM-64 or as a 10GE link. S3 should operate as an STM-64 or as a 10GE link.
4.5. Protection and Restoration Configuration 4.5. Protection and Restoration Configuration
Protection switching provides a pre-allocated survivability Protection switching provides a pre-allocated survivability
mechanism, typically provided via linear protection methods and mechanism, typically provided via linear protection methods and
would be configured to operate as 1+1 unidirectional (the most would be configured to operate as 1+1 unidirectional (the most
common OTN protection method), 1+1 bidirectional or 1:n common OTN protection method), 1+1 bidirectional or 1:n
bidirectional. This ensures fast and simple service survivability. bidirectional. This ensures fast and simple service survivability.
Restoration methods would provide capability to reroute and restore Restoration methods would provide the capability to reroute and
connectivity traffic around network faults, without the network restore connectivity traffic around network faults, without the
penalty imposed with dedicated 1+1 protection schemes. network penalty imposed with dedicated 1+1 protection schemes.
This section describes only services which are protected with linear This section describes only services which are protected with linear
protection and with dynamic restoration. protection and with dynamic restoration.
The MDSC needs to be capable to coordinate different PNCs to The MDSC needs to be capable of coordinating different PNCs to
configure protection switching when requesting the setup of the configure protection switching when requesting the setup of the
protected connectivity services described in section 4.3. protected connectivity services described in section 4.3.
Since in these service examples, switching within the transport Since in these service examples, switching within the transport
network domain is performed only in the OTN ODU layer, also network domain is performed only in the OTN ODU layer. Also
protection switching within the transport network domain can only be protection switching within the transport network domain can only be
provided at the OTN ODU layer. provided at the OTN ODU layer.
4.5.1. Linear Protection (end-to-end) 4.5.1. Linear Protection (end-to-end)
In order to protect any service defined in section 4.3 from failures In order to protect any service defined in section 4.3 from failures
within the OTN multi-domain transport network, the MDSC should be within the OTN multi-domain transport network, the MDSC should be
capable to coordinate different PNCs to configure and control OTN capable of coordinating different PNCs to configure and control OTN
linear protection in the data plane between nodes S3 and node S18. linear protection in the data plane between nodes S3 and node S18.
It is assumed that the OTN linear protection is configured to with It is assumed that the OTN linear protection is configured to with
1+1 unidirectional protection switching type, as defined in [ITU-T 1+1 unidirectional protection switching type, as defined in [ITU-T
G.808.1] and [ITU-T G.873.1], as well as in [RFC4427]. G.808.1] and [ITU-T G.873.1], as well as in [RFC4427].
In these scenarios, a working transport entity and a protection In these scenarios, a working transport entity and a protection
transport entity, as defined in [ITU-T G.808.1], (or a working LSP transport entity, as defined in [ITU-T G.808.1], (or a working LSP
and a protection LSP, as defined in [RFC4427]) should be configured and a protection LSP, as defined in [RFC4427]) should be configured
in the data plane. in the data plane.
Two cases can be considered: Two cases can be considered:
o In one case, the working and protection transport entities pass o In one case, the working and protection transport entities pass
through the same PNC domains: through the same PNC domains:
Working transport entity: S3, S1, S2, Working transport entity: S3, S1, S2,
S31, S33, S34, S31, S33, S34,
S15, S18 S15, S18
Protection transport entity: S3, S4, S8, Protection transport entity: S3, S4, S8,
S32, S32,
S12, S17, S18 S12, S17, S18
o In another case, the working and protection transport entities o In another case, the working and protection transport entities
can pass through different PNC domains: can pass through different PNC domains:
Working transport entity: S3, S5, S7, Working transport entity: S3, S5, S7,
S11, S12, S17, S18 S11, S12, S17, S18
Protection transport entity: S3, S1, S2, Protection transport entity: S3, S1, S2,
S31, S33, S34, S31, S33, S34,
S15, S18 S15, S18
The PNCs should be capable to report to the MDSC which is the active The PNCs should be capable to report to the MDSC which is the active
transport entity, as defined in [ITU-T G.808.1], in the data plane. transport entity, as defined in [ITU-T G.808.1], in the data plane.
Given the fast dynamic of protection switching operations in the Given the fast dynamic of protection switching operations in the
data plane (50ms recovery time), this reporting is not expected to data plane (50ms recovery time), this reporting is not expected to
be in real-time. be in real-time.
It is also worth noting that with unidirectional protection It is also worth noting that with unidirectional protection
switching, e.g., 1+1 unidirectional protection switching, the active switching, e.g., 1+1 unidirectional protection switching, the active
transport entity may be different in the two directions. transport entity may be different in the two directions.
4.5.2. Segmented Protection 4.5.2. Segmented Protection
To protect any service defined in section 4.3 from failures within To protect any service defined in section 4.3 from failures within
the OTN multi-domain transport network, the MDSC should be capable the OTN multi-domain transport network, the MDSC should be capable
to request each PNC to configure OTN intra-domain protection when of requesting each PNC to configure OTN intra-domain protection when
requesting the setup of the ODU2 data plane connection segment. requesting the setup of the ODU2 data plane connection segment.
If PNC1 provides linear protection, the working and protection If PNC1 provides linear protection, the working and protection
transport entities could be: transport entities could be:
Working transport entity: S3, S1, S2 Working transport entity: S3, S1, S2
Protection transport entity: S3, S4, S8, S2 Protection transport entity: S3, S4, S8, S2
If PNC2 provides linear protection, the working and protection If PNC2 provides linear protection, the working and protection
transport entities could be: transport entities could be:
Working transport entity: S15, S18 Working transport entity: S15, S18
Protection transport entity: S15, S12, S17, S18 Protection transport entity: S15, S12, S17, S18
If PNC3 provides linear protection, the working and protection If PNC3 provides linear protection, the working and protection
transport entities could be: transport entities could be:
Working transport entity: S31, S33, S34 Working transport entity: S31, S33, S34
Protection transport entity: S31, S32, S34 Protection transport entity: S31, S32, S34
4.5.3. End-to-End Dynamic restoration 4.5.3. End-to-End Dynamic restoration
To restore any service defined in section 4.3 from failures within To restore any service defined in section 4.3 from failures within
the OTN multi-domain transport network, the MDSC should be capable the OTN multi-domain transport network, the MDSC should be capable
to coordinate different PNCs to configure and control OTN end-to-end of coordinating different PNCs to configure and control OTN end-to-
dynamic Restoration in the data plane between nodes S3 and node S18. end dynamic Restoration in the data plane between nodes S3 and node
For example, the MDSC can request the PNC1, PNC2 and PNC3 to create S18. For example, the MDSC can request the PNC1, PNC2 and PNC3 to
a service with no-protection, MDSC set the end-to-end service with create a service with no-protection, MDSC set the end-to-end service
the dynamic restoration. with the dynamic restoration.
Working transport entity: S3, S1, S2, Working transport entity: S3, S1, S2,
S31, S33, S34, S31, S33, S34,
S15, S18 S15, S18
When a link failure between S1 and s2 occurred in network domain 1, When a link failure between S1 and s2 occurred in network domain 1,
PNC1 does not restore the tunnel and send the alarm notification to PNC1 does not restore the tunnel and send the alarm notification to
the MDSC, MDSC will perform the end-to-end restoration. the MDSC, MDSC will perform the end-to-end restoration.
Restored transport entity: S3, S4, S8, Restored transport entity: S3, S4, S8,
S12, S15, S18 S12, S15, S18
4.5.4. Segmented Dynamic Restoration 4.5.4. Segmented Dynamic Restoration
To restore any service defined in section 4.3 from failures within To restore any service defined in section 4.3 from failures within
the OTN multi-domain transport network, the MDSC should be capable the OTN multi-domain transport network, the MDSC should be capable
to coordinate different PNCs to configure and control OTN segmented of coordinating different PNCs to configure and control OTN
dynamic Restoration in the data plane between nodes S3 and node S18. segmented dynamic Restoration in the data plane between nodes S3 and
node S18.
Working transport entity: S3, S1, S2, Working transport entity: S3, S1, S2,
S31, S33, S34, S31, S33, S34,
S15, S18 S15, S18
When a link failure between S1 and s2 occurred in network domain 1, When a link failure between S1 and s2 occurred in network domain 1,
PNC1 will restore the tunnel and send the alarm or tunnel update PNC1 will restore the tunnel and send the alarm or tunnel update
notification to the MDSC, MDSC will update the restored tunnel. notification to the MDSC, MDSC will update the restored tunnel.
Restored transport entity: S3, S4, S8, S2 Restored transport entity: S3, S4, S8, S2
S31, S33, S34, S31, S33, S34,
S15, S18 S15, S18
When a link failure between network domain 1 and network domain 2 When a link failure between network domain 1 and network domain 2
occurred, PNC1 and PNC2 will send the alarm notification to the occurred, PNC1 and PNC2 will send the alarm notification to the
MDSC, MDSC will update the restored tunnel. MDSC, MDSC will update the restored tunnel.
Restored transport entity: S3, S4, S8, Restored transport entity: S3, S4, S8,
S12, S15, S18 S12, S15, S18
In order to improve the efficiency of recovery, the controller can In order to improve the efficiency of recovery, the controller can
establish a recovery path in a concurrent way. When the recovery establish a recovery path in a concurrent way. When the recovery
fails in one domain or one network element, the rollback operation fails in one domain or one network element, the rollback operation
should be supported. should be supported.
The creation of the recovery path by the controller can use the The creation of the recovery path by the controller can use the
method of "make-before-break", in order to reduce the impact of the method of "make-before-break", in order to reduce the impact of the
recovery operation on the services. recovery operation on the services.
4.6. Service Modification and Deletion 4.6. Service Modification and Deletion
[Editors' Note:] The service configuration include service creation,
modification and deletion.
For example, the service modification includes the service bandwidth
modification and service SLA level upgrade and degrade, such as
service protection type changed from no protection to 1+1
protection.
To be discussed in future versions of this document. To be discussed in future versions of this document.
4.7. Notification 4.7. Notification
To realize the topology update, service update and restoration To realize the topology update, service update and restoration
function, following notification type should be supported. function, following notification type should be supported.
1. Object create 1. Object create
2. Object delete 2. Object delete
3. Object state change 3. Object state change
4. Alarm 4. Alarm
Because there are three types of topology abstraction type defined Because there are three types of topology abstraction type defined
in section 4.2, the notification should also be abstracted. The PNC in section 4.2, the notification should also be abstracted. The PNC
and MDSC should coordinate together to determine the notification and MDSC should coordinate together to determine the notification
policy, such as when an intra-domain alarm occurred, the PNC may not policy, such as when an intra-domain alarm occurred, the PNC may not
report the alarm but the service state change notification to the report the alarm but the service state change notification to the
MDSC. MDSC.
4.8. Path Computation with Constraint 4.8. Path Computation with Constraint
It is possible to have constraint during path computation procedure, It is possible to have constraint during path computation procedure;
typical cases include IRO/XRO and so on. This information is carried typical cases include IRO/XRO and so on. This information is carried
in the TE Tunnel model and used when there is a request with in the TE Tunnel model and used when there is a request with
constraint. Consider the example in section 4.3.1. , the request can constraint. Consider the example in section 4.3.1. , the request can
be a Tunnel from R1 to R5 with an IRO from S2 to S31, then a be a Tunnel from R1 to R5 with an IRO from S2 to S31, then qualified
qualified feedback would become: feedback would become:
R1 ([PKT] -> ODU2), S3 ([ODU2]), S1 ([ODU2]), S2 ([ODU2]), R1 ([PKT] -> ODU2), S3 ([ODU2]), S1 ([ODU2]), S2 ([ODU2]),
S31 ([ODU2]), S33 ([ODU2]), S34 ([ODU2]), S31 ([ODU2]), S33 ([ODU2]), S34 ([ODU2]),
S15 ([ODU2]), S18 ([ODU2]), R5 (ODU2 -> [PKT]) S15 ([ODU2]), S18 ([ODU2]), R5 (ODU2 -> [PKT])
If the request covers the IRO from S8 to S12, then the above path If the request covers the IRO from S8 to S12, then the above path
would not be qualified, while a possible computation result may be: would not be qualified, while a possible computation result may be:
R1 ([PKT] -> ODU2), S3 ([ODU2]), S1 ([ODU2]), S2 ([ODU2]), R1 ([PKT] -> ODU2), S3 ([ODU2]), S1 ([ODU2]), S2 ([ODU2]),
S8 ([ODU2]), S12 ([ODU2]), S15 ([ODU2]), S18 ([ODU2]), R5 (ODU2 -> S8 ([ODU2]), S12 ([ODU2]), S15 ([ODU2]), S18 ([ODU2]), R5 (ODU2 ->
[PKT]) [PKT])
Similarly, the XRO can be represented by TE tunnel model as well. Similarly, the XRO can be represented by the TE tunnel model as
well.
When there is a technology specific network (e.g, OTN), the When there is a technology specific network (e.g., OTN), the
corresponding technology (OTN) model should also be used to specify corresponding technology (OTN) model should also be used to specify
the tunnel information on MPI, with the constraint included in TE the tunnel information on MPI, with the constraint included in TE
Tunnel model. Tunnel model.
5. YANG Model Analysis 5. YANG Model Analysis
This section provides a high-level overview of how IETF YANG models This section provides a high-level overview of how IETF YANG models
can be used at the MPIs, between the MDSC and the PNCs, to support can be used at the MPIs, between the MDSC and the PNCs, to support
the scenarios described in section 4. the scenarios described in section 4.
skipping to change at page 27, line 5 skipping to change at page 28, line 5
Section 5.3 describes how the protection scenarios can be deployed, Section 5.3 describes how the protection scenarios can be deployed,
including end-to-end protection and segment protection, for both including end-to-end protection and segment protection, for both
intra-domain and inter-domain scenario. intra-domain and inter-domain scenario.
5.1. YANG Models for Topology Abstraction 5.1. YANG Models for Topology Abstraction
Each PNC reports its respective abstract topology to the MDSC, as Each PNC reports its respective abstract topology to the MDSC, as
described in section 4.2. described in section 4.2.
5.1.1. Domain 1 Topology Abstraction 5.1.1. Domain 1 Black Topology Abstraction
PNC1 provides the required topology abstraction to expose at its MPI PNC1 provides the required black topology abstraction, as described
toward the MDSC (called "MPI1") one TE Topology instance for the ODU in section 4.2, to expose to the MDSC, at MPI1, one TE Topology
layer (called "MPI1 ODU Topology"), containing one TE Node (called instance for the ODU layer (MPI1 OTN Topology) containing only one
"ODU Node") for each physical node, as shown in Figure 3 below. abstract TE node (i.e., AN1) and only inter-domain and access
abstract TE links (which represent the inter-domain and access
physical links), as shown in Figure 3 below.
...................................
: :
: +-----------------+ :
: | | :
(R1)- - --------| |-------- - -(S31)
: AN1-1 | | AN1-2 :
: | | :
(R2)- - --------| | :
: AN1-3 | AN1 | :
: | | :
(R3)- - --------| |-------- - -(S32)
: AN1-7 | | AN1-4 :
: | | :
: +-----------------+ :
: | | :
: AN1-6 | | AN1-5 :
:..........|..........|...........:
| |
(S11) (S12)
Figure 3 - Abstract Topology exposed at MPI1 (MPI1 OTN Topology)
[Editors' note:] Update figure 3 to match with the new topology
abstraction
As described in section 4.1, it is assumed that the physical links
between the physical nodes are pre-configured and therefore PNC1
exports at MPI1 one abstract TE Link, within the MPI1 OTN topology,
for each OTU2 or OTU4 trail which support an abstract TE link in the
MPI1 ODU Topology.
[Editors' note:] Add some description about the relationship between
the abstract and the physical topology within the PNC1 "brain."
.................................. ..................................
: : : :
: ODU Abstract Topology @ MPI : : ODU Abstract Topology @ MPI :
: Gotham City Area : : Gotham City Area :
: Metro Transport Network : : Metro Transport Network :
: : : :
: +----+ +----+ : : +----+ +----+ :
: | |S1-1 | |S2-1: : | |S1-1 | |S2-1:
: | S1 |--------| S2 |- - - - -(R4) : | S1 |--------| S2 |----- - -(S31)
: +----+ S2-2+----+ : : +----+ S2-2+----+ :
: S1-2/ |S2-3 : : S1-2/ |S2-3 :
: S3-2/ Robinson Park | : : S3-2/ Robinson Park | :
: +----+ +----+ | : : +----+ +----+ | :
: | |3 1| | | : : | |3 1| | | :
(R1)- - - - -| S3 |---| S4 | | : (R1)- - -----| S3 |---| S4 | | :
:S3-1+----+ +----+ | : :S3-1+----+ +----+ | :
: S3-4 \ \S4-2 | : : S3-4 \ \S4-2 | :
: \S5-1 \ | : : \S5-1 \ | :
: +----+ \ | : : +----+ \ | :
: | | \S8-3| : : | | \S8-3| :
: | S5 | \ | : : | S5 | \ | :
: +----+ Metro \ |S8-2 : : +----+ Metro \ |S8-2 :
(R2)- - - - - 2/ E \3 Main \ | : (R2)- - ------ 2/ E \3 Main \ | :
:S6-1 \ /3 a E \1 Ring \| : :S6-1 \ /3 a E \1 Ring \| :
: +----+s-n+----+ +----+ : : +----+s-n+----+ +----+ :
: | |t d| | | |S8-1: : | |t d| | | |S8-1:
: | S6 |---| S7 |---| S8 |- - - - -(R5) : | S6 |---| S7 |---| S8 |----- - -(S32)
: +----+4 2+----+3 4+----+ : : +----+4 2+----+3 4+----+ :
: / : : / | | :
(R3)- - - - - : (R3)- - ------ S7-4 | | S8-5 :
:S6-2 : :S6-2 | | :
:................................: :...............|........|.......:
Figure 3 Abstract Topology exposed at MPI1 (MPI1 ODU Topology) | |
(S11) (S12)
The ODU Nodes in Figure 3 are using the same names as the physical Figure 4 - Physical Topology discovered by PNC1
nodes to simplify the description of the mapping between the ODU
Nodes exposed by the Transport PNCs at the MPI and the physical
nodes in the data plane. This does not correspond to the reality of
the usage of the topology model, as described in section 4.3 of [TE-
TOPO], in which renaming by the client it is necessary.
As described in section 4.1, it is assumed that the physical links LTP mapping table:
between the physical nodes are pre-configured and therefore PNC1
exports at MPI1 one TE Link (called "ODU Link") for each of these
OTU4 trails.
Appendix B.1.1 provides the detailed JSON code ("mpi1-otn- AN1-1 -> S3-1
AN1-2 -> S2-1
AN1-3 -> S6-1
AN1-4 -> S8-1
AN1-5 -> S8-5
AN1-6 -> S7-4
AN1-7 -> S6-2
Appendix B.1.1 provides the detailed JSON code example ("mpi1-otn-
topology.json") describing how this ODU Topology is reported by the topology.json") describing how this ODU Topology is reported by the
PNC, using the [TE-TOPO] and [OTN-TOPO] YANG models at MPI1. PNC, using the [TE-TOPO] and [OTN-TOPO] YANG models at MPI1.
5.1.2. Domain 2 Grey (Type A) Topology Abstraction It is worth noting that this JSON code example does not provide all
the attributes defined in the relevant YANG models:
PNC2 provides the required topology abstraction to expose at its MPI o YANG attributes which are outside the scope of this document are
towards the MDSC (called "MPI2") only one abstract node (i.e., AN2), not shown
with only inter-domain and access links, is reported at the MPI2.
5.1.3. Domain 3 Grey (Type B) Topology Abstraction o The attributes describing the label restrictions are also not
shown to simplify the JSON code example
PNC3 provides the required topology abstraction to expose at its MPI o The comments describing the rationale for not including some
towards the MDSC (called "MPI3") only two abstract nodes (i.e., AN31 attributes in this JSON code example even if in the scope of this
and AN32), with internal links, inter-domain links and access links. document are identified with the prefix "// __COMMENT__" and
included only in the first object instance (e.g., in the Access
Link from the AN1-1 description or in the AN1-1 LTP description)
5.1.2. Domain 2 Black Topology Abstraction
PNC2 provides the required black topology abstraction, as described
in section 4.2, to expose to the MDSC, at MPI2, one TE Topology
instance for the ODU layer (MPI2 OTN Topology) containing only one
abstract node (i.e., AN2) and only inter-domain and access abstract
TE links (which represent the inter-domain and access physical
links).
5.1.3. Domain 3 White Topology Abstraction
PNC3 provides the required white topology abstraction, as described
in section 4.2, to expose to the MDSC, at MPI3, one TE Topology
instance for the ODU layer (MPI3 OTN Topology) containing one
abstract TE node for each physical node and one abstract TE link for
each physical link (internal links, inter-domain links or access
links).
5.1.4. Multi-domain Topology Stitching 5.1.4. Multi-domain Topology Stitching
As assumed in the beginning of this section, MDSC does not have any As assumed at the beginning of this section, MDSC does not have any
knowledge of the topologies of each domain until each PNC reports knowledge of the topologies of each domain until each PNC reports
its own abstraction topology, so the MDSC needs to merge together its own abstraction topology, so the MDSC needs to merge together
the abstract topologies provided by different PNCs, at the MPIs, to the abstract topologies provided by different PNCs, at the MPIs, to
build its own topology view, as described in section 4.3 of [TE- build its own topology view, as described in section 4.3 of [TE-
TOPO]. TOPO].
Given the topologies reported from multiple PNCs, the MDSC need to Given the topologies reported from multiple PNCs, the MDSC need to
stitch the multi-domain topology and obtain the full map of stitch the multi-domain topology and obtain the full map of
topology. The topology of each domain main be in an abstracted shape topology. The topology of each domain may be in an abstracted shape
(refer to section 5.2 of [ACTN-Fwk] for different level of (refer to section 5.2 of [ACTN-Fwk] for a different level of
abstraction), while the inter-domain link information MUST be abstraction), while the inter-domain link information MUST be
complete and fully configured by the MDSC. complete and fully configured by the MDSC.
The inter-domain link information is reported to the MDSC by the two The inter-domain link information is reported to the MDSC by the two
PNCs, controlling the two ends of the inter-domain link. PNCs, controlling the two ends of the inter-domain link.
The MDSC needs to understand how to "stitch" together these inter- The MDSC needs to understand how to "stitch" together these inter-
domain links. domain links.
One possibility is to use the plug-id information, defined in [TE- One possibility is to use the plug-id information, defined in [TE-
skipping to change at page 29, line 23 skipping to change at page 31, line 44
within the two PNC domains, or it can be discovered using automatic within the two PNC domains, or it can be discovered using automatic
discovery mechanisms (e.g., LMP-based, as defined in [RFC6898]). discovery mechanisms (e.g., LMP-based, as defined in [RFC6898]).
In case the plug-id values are assigned by a central authority, it In case the plug-id values are assigned by a central authority, it
is under the central authority responsibility to assign unique is under the central authority responsibility to assign unique
values. values.
In case the plug-id values are automatically discovered, the In case the plug-id values are automatically discovered, the
information discovered by the automatic discovery mechanisms needs information discovered by the automatic discovery mechanisms needs
to be encoded as a bit string within the plug-id value. This to be encoded as a bit string within the plug-id value. This
encoding is implementation specific but the encoding rules need to encoding is implementation specific, but the encoding rules need to
be consistent across all the PNCs. be consistent across all the PNCs.
In case of co-existence within the same network of multiple sources In case of co-existence within the same network of multiple sources
for the plug-id (e.g., central authority and automatic discovery or for the plug-id (e.g., central authority and automatic discovery or
even different automatic discovery mechanisms), it is RECOMMENDED even different automatic discovery mechanisms), it is RECOMMENDED
that the plug-id namespace is partitioned to avoid that different that the plug-id namespace is partitioned to avoid that different
sources assign the same plug-id value to different inter-domain sources assign the same plug-id value to different inter-domain
link. The encoding of the plug-id namespace within the plug-id value link. The encoding of the plug-id namespace within the plug-id value
is implementation specific but needs to be consistent across all the is implementation specific but needs to be consistent across all the
PNCs. PNCs.
Another possibility is to pre-configure, either in the adjacent PNCs Another possibility is to pre-configure, either in the adjacent PNCs
or in the MDSC, the association between the inter-domain link or in the MDSC, the association between the inter-domain link
identifiers (topology-id, node-id and tp-id) assigned by the two identifiers (topology-id, node-id and tp-id) assigned by the two
adjacent PNCs to the same inter-domain link. adjacent PNCs to the same inter-domain link.
This last scenario requires further investigation and will be This last scenario requires further investigation and will be
discussed in a future version of this document. discussed in a future version of this document.
[Editors' note:] Add some description of the abstract multi-domain
topology within the MDSC "brain."
........................
: :
: Network domain 1 : .............
: Grey Topology : : :
: Abstraction : : Network :
: : : domain 3 :
(R1)- - -------+ : : (White) :
: \ +--------------+ :
: \ / : : \ :
: \ / : : \ :
(R2)- - --------- AN1 --+ : : S31 ---- - (R7)
: /|\ \ : : / \ : :
: / | \ +--------- S32 S33 - - (R8)
: / | \ : :/ \ / :
(R3)- - -------+ | +---+ : / S34 :
:..........|.......|...: /: / :
| | / :../........:
| | / /
...........|.......|.../..../....
: | | / / :
: Network | + / / :
: domain 2 | / / / :
: | / / / :
: | + / +--+ :
: | |/ / +--- - -(R4)
: Black +--- AN2 ---------+ :
: Topology | | :
: Abstraction | +-------------- - -(R5)
: | :
: +---------------- - -(R6)
: :
:...............................:
Figure 5 - Multi-domain Abstract Topology discovered by MDSC
5.1.5. Access Links 5.1.5. Access Links
Access links in Figure 3 are shown as ODU Links: the modeling of the Access links in Figure 3 are shown as ODU Links: the modeling of the
access links for other access technologies is currently an open access links for other access technologies is currently an open
issue. issue.
The modeling of the access link in case of non-ODU access technology The modeling of the access link in case of non-ODU access technology
has also an impact on the need to model ODU TTPs and layer has also an impact on the need to model ODU TTPs and layer
transition capabilities on the edge nodes (e.g., nodes S2, S3, S6 transition capabilities on the edge nodes (e.g., nodes S2, S3, S6
and S8 in Figure 3). and S8 in Figure 3).
If, for example, the physical NE S6 is implemented in a "pizza box", If, for example, the physical NE S6 is implemented in a "pizza box",
the data plane would have only set of ODU termination resources the data plane would have only set of ODU termination resources
(where up to 2xODU4, 4xODU3, 20xODU2, 80xODU1, 160xODU0 and (where up to 2xODU4, 4xODU3, 20xODU2, 80xODU1, 160xODU0 and
160xODUflex can be terminated). The traffic coming from each of the 160xODUflex can be terminated). The traffic coming from each of the
10GE access links can be mapped into any of these ODU terminations. 10GE access links can be mapped into any of these ODU terminations.
Instead if, for example, the physical NE S6 can be implemented as a Instead if, for example, the physical NE S6 can be implemented as a
multi-board system where access links reside on different/dedicated multi-board system where access links reside on different/dedicated
access cards with separated set of ODU termination resources (where access cards with a separated set of ODU termination resources
up to 1xODU4, 2xODU3, 10xODU2, 40xODU1, 80xODU0 and 80xODUflex for (where up to 1xODU4, 2xODU3, 10xODU2, 40xODU1, 80xODU0 and
each resource can be terminated). The traffic coming from one 10GE 80xODUflex for each resource can be terminated). The traffic coming
access links can be mapped only into the ODU terminations which from one 10GE access links can be mapped only into the ODU
reside on the same access card. terminations which reside on the same access card.
The more generic implementation option for a physical NE (e.g., S6) The more generic implementation option for a physical NE (e.g., S6)
would be case is of a multi-board system with multiple access cards would be the case is of a multi-board system with multiple access
with separated sets of access links and ODU termination resources cards with separated sets of access links and ODU termination
(where up to 1xODU4, 2xODU3, 10xODU2, 40xODU1, 80xODU0 and resources (where up to 1xODU4, 2xODU3, 10xODU2, 40xODU1, 80xODU0 and
80xODUflex for each resource can be terminated). The traffic coming 80xODUflex for each resource can be terminated). The traffic coming
from each of the 10GE access links on one access card can be mapped from each of the 10GE access links on one access card can be mapped
only into any of the ODU terminations which reside on the same only into any of the ODU terminations which reside on the same
access card. access card.
In the last two cases, only the ODUs terminated on the same access In the last two cases, only the ODUs terminated on the same access
card where the access links resides can carry the traffic coming card where the access links reside can carry the traffic coming from
from that 10GE access link. Terminated ODUs can instead be sent to that 10GE access link. Terminated ODUs can instead be sent to any of
any of the OTU4 interfaces the OTU4 interfaces
In all these cases, terminated ODUs can be sent to any of the OTU4 In all these cases, terminated ODUs can be sent to any of the OTU4
interfaces assuming the implementation is based on a non-blocking interfaces assuming the implementation is based on a non-blocking
ODU cross-connect. ODU cross-connect.
If the access links are reported via MPI in some, still to be If the access links are reported via MPI in some, still to be
defined, client topology, it is possible to report each set of ODU defined, client topology, it is possible to report each set of ODU
termination resources as an ODU TTP within the ODU Topology of termination resources as an ODU TTP within the ODU Topology of
Figure 3 and to use either the inter-layer lock-id or the Figure 3 and to use either the inter-layer lock-id or the
transitional link, as described in sections 3.4 and 3.10 of [TE- transitional link, as described in sections 3.4 and 3.10 of [TE-
TOPO], to correlate the access links, in the client topology, with TOPO], to correlate the access links, in the client topology, with
the ODU TTPs, in the ODU topology, to which access link are the ODU TTPs, in the OTN topology, to which access link are
connected to. connected to.
5.2. YANG Models for Service Configuration 5.2. YANG Models for Service Configuration
The service configuration procedure is assumed to be initiated (step The service configuration procedure is assumed to be initiated (step
1 in Figure 4) at the CMI from CNC to MDSC. Analysis of the CMI 1 in Figure 6) at the CMI from CNC to MDSC. Analysis of the CMI
models is (e.g., L1SM, L2SM, Transport-Service, VN, et al.) is models is (e.g., L1SM, L2SM, Transport-Service, VN, et al.) is
outside the scope of this document. outside the scope of this document.
As described in section 4.3, it is assumed that the CMI YANG models As described in section 4.3, it is assumed that the CMI YANG models
provides all the information that allows the MDSC to understand that provide all the information that allows the MDSC to understand that
it needs to coordinate the setup of a multi-domain ODU connection it needs to coordinate the setup of a multi-domain ODU connection
(or connection segment) and, when needed, also the configuration of (or connection segment) and, when needed, also the configuration of
the adaptation functions in the edge nodes belonging to different the adaptation functions in the edge nodes belonging to different
domains. domains.
| |
| {1} | {1}
V V
---------------- ----------------
| {2} | | {2} |
skipping to change at page 32, line 40 skipping to change at page 36, line 40
(Network) / ( ) \ V (Network) / ( ) \ V
( Domain 1) / ----- \ ----- ( Domain 1) / ----- \ -----
( )/ \ (Network) ( )/ \ (Network)
A===========B \ ( Domain 3) A===========B \ ( Domain 3)
/ ( ) \( ) / ( ) \( )
AP-1 ( ) X===========Z AP-1 ( ) X===========Z
----- ( ) \ ----- ( ) \
( ) AP-2 ( ) AP-2
----- -----
Figure 4 Multi-domain Service Setup Figure 6 - Multi-domain Service Setup
As an example, the objective in this section is to configure a As an example, the objective in this section is to configure a
transport service between R1 and R5. The cross-domain routing is transport service between R1 and R5. The cross-domain routing is
assumed to be R1 <-> S3 <-> S2 <-> S31 <-> S33 <-> S34 <->S15 <-> assumed to be R1 <-> S3 <-> S2 <-> S31 <-> S33 <-> S34 <->S15 <->
S18 <-> R5. S18 <-> R5.
According to the different client signal type, there is different According to the different client signal type, there is different
adaptation required. adaptation required.
After receiving such request, MDSC determines the domain sequence, After receiving such request, MDSC determines the domain sequence,
i.e., domain 1 <-> domain 2 <-> domain 3, with corresponding PNCs i.e., domain 1 <-> domain 2 <-> domain 3, with corresponding PNCs
and inter-domain links (step 2 in Figure 4). and inter-domain links (step 2 in Figure 6).
As described in [PATH-COMPUTE], the domain sequence can be As described in [PATH-COMPUTE], the domain sequence can be
determined by running the MDSC own path computation on the MDSC determined by running the MDSC own path computation on the MDSC
internal topology, defined in section 5.1.4, if and only if the MDSC internal topology, defined in section 5.1.4, if and only if the MDSC
has enough topology information. Otherwise the MDSC can send path has enough topology information. Otherwise, the MDSC can send path
computation requests to the different PNCs (steps 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3 computation requests to the different PNCs (steps 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3
in Figure 4) and use this information to determine the optimal path in Figure 6) and use this information to determine the optimal path
on its internal topology and therefore the domain sequence. on its internal topology and therefore the domain sequence.
The MDSC will then decompose the tunnel request into a few tunnel The MDSC will then decompose the tunnel request into a few tunnel
segments via tunnel model (including both TE tunnel model and OTN segments via tunnel model (including both TE tunnel model and OTN
tunnel model), and request different PNCs to setup each intra-domain tunnel model), and request different PNCs to setup each intra-domain
tunnel segment (steps 3, 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3 in Figure 4). tunnel segment (steps 3, 3.1, 3.2 and 3.3 in Figure 6).
Assume that each intra-domain tunnel segment can be set up Assume that each intra-domain tunnel segment can be set up
successfully, and each PNC response to the MDSC respectively. Based successfully, and each PNC response to the MDSC respectively. Based
on each segment, MDSC will take care of the configuration of both on each segment, MDSC will take care of the configuration of both
the intra-domain tunnel segment and inter-domain tunnel via the intra-domain tunnel segment and inter-domain tunnel via
corresponding MPI (via TE tunnel model and OTN tunnel model). More corresponding MPI (via TE tunnel model and OTN tunnel model). More
specifically, for the inter-domain configuration, the ts-bitmap and specifically, for the inter-domain configuration, the ts-bitmap and
tpn attributes need to be configured using the OTN Tunnel model tpn attributes need to be configured using the OTN Tunnel model.
[xxx]. Then the end-to-end OTN tunnel will be ready. Then the end-to-end OTN tunnel will be ready.
In any case, the access link configuration is done only on the PNCs In any case, the access link configuration is done only on the PNCs
that control the access links (e.g., PNC-1 and PNC-3 in our example) that control the access links (e.g., PNC-1 and PNC-3 in our example)
and not on the PNCs of transit domain (e.g., PNC-2 in our example). and not on the PNCs of transit domain (e.g., PNC-2 in our example).
Access link will be configured by MDSC after the OTN tunnel is set An access link will be configured by MDSC after the OTN tunnel is
up. Access configuration is different and dependent on the different set up. Access configuration is different and dependent on the
type of service. More details can be found in the following different type of service. More details can be found in the
sections. following sections.
[Editor's Note:] Add some notes for the single-domain case
5.2.1. ODU Transit Service 5.2.1. ODU Transit Service
In this scenario, described in section 4.3.1, the access links are In this scenario, described in section 4.3.1, the access links are
configured as ODU Links. configured as ODU Links.
Since it is assumed that the physical access links are pre- Since it is assumed that the physical access links are pre-
configured, each PNC exposes, at its MPI, one TE Link (called "ODU configured, each PNC exposes, at its MPI, one TE Link (called "ODU
Link") for each of these physical access link. These links are Link") for each of these physical access link. These links are
reported, together with any other ODU internal or inter-domain link, reported, together with any other ODU internal or inter-domain link,
skipping to change at page 34, line 14 skipping to change at page 38, line 16
To setup this IP link, between R1 and R5, the CNC requests, at the To setup this IP link, between R1 and R5, the CNC requests, at the
CMI, the MDSC to setup an ODU transit service. CMI, the MDSC to setup an ODU transit service.
From the topology information described in section 5.1 above, the From the topology information described in section 5.1 above, the
MDSC understands that R1 is attached to the access link terminating MDSC understands that R1 is attached to the access link terminating
on S3-1 LTP in the ODU Topology exposed by PNC1 and that R5 is on S3-1 LTP in the ODU Topology exposed by PNC1 and that R5 is
attached to the access link terminating on AN2-1 LTP in the ODU attached to the access link terminating on AN2-1 LTP in the ODU
Topology exposed by PNC2. Topology exposed by PNC2.
[Editors' note:] Add some information about the path computation
step.
MDSC would then request, at MPI1, the PNC1 to setup an ODU2 (Transit MDSC would then request, at MPI1, the PNC1 to setup an ODU2 (Transit
Segment) Tunnel with one primary path between S3-1 and S2-1 LTPs: Segment) Tunnel with one primary path between S3-1 and S2-1 LTPs:
o Source and Destination TTPs are not specified (since it is a o Source and Destination TTPs are not specified (since it is a
Transit Tunnel) Transit Tunnel)
o Ingress and egress points are indicated in the route-object- o Ingress and egress points are indicated in the route-object-
include-exclude list of the explicit-route-objects of the primary include-exclude list of the explicit-route-objects of the primary
path: path:
o The first element references the access link terminating on o The first element references the access link terminating on
S3-1 LTP S3-1 LTP
o The last two element references respectively the inter-domain [Editor's note:] The need for the second element is for further
study.
o The last two element references respectively the inter-domain
link terminating on S2-1 LTP and the data plane resources link terminating on S2-1 LTP and the data plane resources
(i.e., the timeslots and the TPN, called "OTN Label") used by (i.e., the timeslots and the TPN, called "OTN Label") used by
the ODU2 connection over that link. the ODU2 connection over that link.
The configuration of the timeslots used by the ODU2 connection on The configuration of the timeslots used by the ODU2 connection on
the internal links within a PNC domain (i.e., on the internal links the internal links within a PNC domain (i.e., on the internal links
domain) is outside the scope of this document since it is a matter domain) is outside the scope of this document since it is a matter
of the PNC domain internal implementation. of the PNC domain internal implementation.
However, the configuration of the timeslots used by the ODU2 However, the configuration of the timeslots used by the ODU2
skipping to change at page 35, line 5 skipping to change at page 39, line 14
(e.g., on node S2 within PNC1 domain and on node S31 within PNC3 (e.g., on node S2 within PNC1 domain and on node S31 within PNC3
domain). domain).
The MDSC, when coordinating the setup of a multi-domain ODU The MDSC, when coordinating the setup of a multi-domain ODU
connection, also configures the data plane resources (i.e., the connection, also configures the data plane resources (i.e., the
timeslots and the TPN) to be used on the inter-domain links. The timeslots and the TPN) to be used on the inter-domain links. The
MDSC can know the timeslots which are available on the physical OTN MDSC can know the timeslots which are available on the physical OTN
nodes terminating the inter-domain links (e.g., S2 and S31) from the nodes terminating the inter-domain links (e.g., S2 and S31) from the
OTN Topology information exposed, at the MPIs, by the PNCs OTN Topology information exposed, at the MPIs, by the PNCs
controlling the OTN physical nodes (e.g., PNC1 and PNC3 controlling controlling the OTN physical nodes (e.g., PNC1 and PNC3 controlling
respectively the physical nodes S2 and S31). the physical nodes S2 and S31 respectively).
[Editor's note:] These working assumptions seem generic and not
specific for the YANG models defined by IETF: should we move it to
section 4?
Appendix B.2.1 provides the detailed JSON code ("mpi1-odu2-service- Appendix B.2.1 provides the detailed JSON code ("mpi1-odu2-service-
config.json") describing how the setup of this ODU2 (Transit config.json") describing how the setup of this ODU2 (Transit
Segment) Tunnel can be requested by the MDSC, using the [TE-TUNNEL] Segment) Tunnel can be requested by the MDSC, using the [TE-TUNNEL]
and [OTN-TUNNEL] YANG models at MPI1. and [OTN-TUNNEL] YANG models at MPI1.
The Transport PNC performs path computation and sets up the ODU2 The Transport PNC performs path computation and sets up the ODU2
cross-connections within the physical nodes S3, S5 and S6, as shown cross-connections within the physical nodes S3, S5 and S6, as shown
in section 4.3.1. in section 4.3.1.
[Editor's note:] Complete the description to cover the other domains
as well as the status reporting.
5.2.1.1. Single Domain Example 5.2.1.1. Single Domain Example
To setup an ODU2 end-to-end connection, supporting an IP link, To setup an ODU2 end-to-end connection, supporting an IP link,
between R1 and R3, the CNC requests, at the CMI, the MDSC to setup between R1 and R3, the CNC requests, at the CMI, the MDSC to setup
an ODU transit service. an ODU transit service.
[Editor's note:] Complete the description of the single-domain
scenario.
The Transport PNC reports the status of the created ODU2 (Transit The Transport PNC reports the status of the created ODU2 (Transit
Segment) Tunnel and its path within the ODU Topology as shown in Segment) Tunnel and its path within the ODU Topology as shown in
Figure 5 below: Figure 7 below:
.................................. ..................................
: : : :
: ODU Abstract Topology @ MPI : : ODU Abstract Topology @ MPI :
: : : :
: +----+ +----+ : : +----+ +----+ :
: | | | | : : | | | | :
: | S1 |--------| S2 |- - - - -(R4) : | S1 |--------| S2 |- - - - -(R4)
: +----+ +----+ : : +----+ +----+ :
: / | : : / | :
skipping to change at page 36, line 36 skipping to change at page 40, line 36
:S6-1 \ / = \ \ | : :S6-1 \ / = \ \ | :
: +--- = +----+ +----+ : : +--- = +----+ +----+ :
: | = | | | | : : | = | | | | :
: | S6 = --| S7 |---| S8 |- - - - -(R5) : | S6 = --| S7 |---| S8 |- - - - -(R5)
: +--- = +----+ +----+ : : +--- = +----+ +----+ :
: / = : : / = :
(R3)- - - - - <<== : (R3)- - - - - <<== :
:S6-2 : :S6-2 :
:................................: :................................:
Figure 5 ODU2 Transit Tunnel Figure 7 - ODU2 Transit Tunnel
5.2.2. EPL over ODU Service 5.2.2. EPL over ODU Service
In this scenario, described in section 4.3.2, the access links are In this scenario, described in section 4.3.2, the access links are
configured as Ethernet Links. configured as Ethernet Links.
[Editors' note:] Need to add information about the use of the
Ethernet client topology.
[Editor's Note:] Add considerations for the case the access links
are multi-function access links
To setup this IP link, between R1 and R5, the CNC requests, at the To setup this IP link, between R1 and R5, the CNC requests, at the
CMI, the MDSC to setup an EPL service. CMI, the MDSC to setup an EPL service.
As described in section 5.1.5 above, it is not clear in this case As described in section 5.1.5 above, it is not clear in this case
how the Ethernet access links between the transport network and the how the Ethernet access links between the transport network and the
IP router, are reported by the PNC to the MDSC. IP router, are reported by the PNC to the MDSC.
If the 10GE physical links are not reported as ODU links within the If the 10GE physical links are not reported as ODU links within the
ODU topology information, described in section 5.1.1 above, than the OTN topology information, described in section 5.1.1 above than the
MDSC will not have sufficient information to know that R1 and R5 are MDSC will not have sufficient information to know that R1 and R5 are
attached to the access links terminating on S3 and S6. attached to the access links terminating on S3 and S6.
Assuming that the MDSC knows how R1 and R3 are attached to the Assuming that the MDSC knows how R1 and R3 are attached to the
transport network, the MDSC would request the Transport PNC to setup transport network, the MDSC would request the Transport PNC to setup
an ODU2 end-to-end Tunnel between S3 and S6. an ODU2 end-to-end Tunnel between S3 and S6.
This ODU Tunnel is setup between two TTPs of nodes S3 and S6. In This ODU Tunnel is setup between two TTPs of nodes S3 and S6. In
case nodes S3 and S6 support more than one TTP, the MDSC should case of nodes S3 and S6 support more than one TTP, the MDSC should
decide which TTP to use. decide which TTP to use.
As discussed in 5.1.5, depending on the different hardware As discussed in 5.1.5, depending on the different hardware
implementations of the physical nodes S3 and S6, not all the access implementations of the physical nodes S3 and S6, not all the access
links can be connected to all the TTPs. The MDSC should therefore links can be connected to all the TTPs. The MDSC should therefore
not only select the optimal TTP but also a TTP that would allow the select not only the optimal TTP but also a TTP that would allow the
Tunnel to be used by the service. Tunnel to be used by the service.
It is assumed that in case node S3 or node S6 supports only one TTP, It is assumed that in case of node S3 or node S6 supports only one
this TTP can be accessed by all the access links. TTP, this TTP can be accessed by all the access links.
Appendix B.2.2 provides the detailed JSON code ("mpi1-odu2-tunnel- Appendix B.2.2 provides the detailed JSON code ("mpi1-odu2-tunnel-
config.json") describing how the setup of this ODU2 (Head Segment) config.json") describing how the setup of this ODU2 (Head Segment)
Tunnel can be requested by the MDSC, using the [TE-TUNNEL] and [OTN- Tunnel can be requested by the MDSC, using the [TE-TUNNEL] and [OTN-
TUNNEL] YANG models at MPI1. TUNNEL] YANG models at MPI1.
Once the ODU2 Tunnel setup has been requested, unless there is a Once the ODU2 Tunnel setup has been requested, unless there is a
one-to-one relationship between the S3 and S6 TTPs and the Ethernet one-to-one relationship between the S3 and S6 TTPs and the Ethernet
access links toward R1 and R3 (as in the case, described in section access links toward R1 and R3 (as in the case, described in section
5.1.5, where the Ethernet access links reside on different/dedicated 5.1.5, where the Ethernet access links reside on different/dedicated
skipping to change at page 38, line 7 skipping to change at page 42, line 12
the setup of an EPL service from the access links on S3 and S6, the setup of an EPL service from the access links on S3 and S6,
attached to R1 and R3, and this ODU2 Tunnel. attached to R1 and R3, and this ODU2 Tunnel.
Appendix B.2.3 provides the detailed JSON code ("mpi1-epl-service- Appendix B.2.3 provides the detailed JSON code ("mpi1-epl-service-
config.json") describing how the setup of this EPL service using the config.json") describing how the setup of this EPL service using the
ODU2 Tunnel can be requested by the MDSC, using the [CLIENT-SVC] ODU2 Tunnel can be requested by the MDSC, using the [CLIENT-SVC]
YANG model at MPI1. YANG model at MPI1.
5.2.3. Other OTN Client Services 5.2.3. Other OTN Client Services
[Editor's Note:] Update this section to describe the multi-domain
scenario
In this scenario, the access links are configured as one of the OTN In this scenario, the access links are configured as one of the OTN
clients (e.g., STM-64) links. clients (e.g., STM-64) links.
[Editor's Note:] Add considerations for the case the access links
are multi-function access links
As described in section 4.3.3, the CNC needs to setup an STM-64 As described in section 4.3.3, the CNC needs to setup an STM-64
Private Link service, supporting an IP link, between R1 and R3 and Private Link service, supporting an IP link, between R1 and R3 and
requests this service at the CMI to the MDSC. requests this service at the CMI to the MDSC.
MDSC needs to setup an STM-64 Private Link service between R1 and R3 MDSC needs to setup an STM-64 Private Link service between R1 and R3
supported by an ODU2 end-to-end connection between S3 and S6. supported by an ODU2 end-to-end connection between S3 and S6.
As described in section 5.1.5 above, it is not clear in this case As described in section 5.1.5 above, it is not clear in this case
how the access links (e.g., the STM-N access links) between the how the access links (e.g., the STM-N access links) between the
transport network and the IP router, are reported by the PNC to the transport network and the IP router, are reported by the PNC to the
MDSC. MDSC.
The same issues, as described in section 5.2.2, apply here: The same issues, as described in section 5.2.2, apply here:
o the MDSC needs to understand that R1 and R3 are connected, o the MDSC needs to understand that R1 and R3 are connected,
thought STM-64 access links, with S3 and S6 thought STM-64 access links, with S3 and S6
o the MDSC needs to understand which TTPs in S3 and S6 can be o the MDSC needs to understand which TTPs in S3 and S6 can be
accessed by these access links accessed by these access links
o the MDSC needs to configure the private line service from these o the MDSC needs to configure the private line service from these
access links through the ODU2 tunnel access links through the ODU2 tunnel
5.2.4. EVPL over ODU Service 5.2.4. EVPL over ODU Service
[Editor's Note:] Update this section to describe the multi-domain
scenario
In this scenario, the access links are configured as Ethernet links, In this scenario, the access links are configured as Ethernet links,
as described in section 5.2.2 above. as described in section 5.2.2 above.
As described in section 4.3.4, the CNC needs to setup EVPL services, As described in section 4.3.4, the CNC needs to setup EVPL services,
supporting IP links, between R1 and R3, as well as between R1 and R4 supporting IP links, between R1 and R3, as well as between R1 and R4
and requests these services at the CMI to the MDSC. and requests these services at the CMI to the MDSC.
MDSC needs to setup two EVPL services, between R1 and R3, as well as MDSC needs to setup two EVPL services, between R1 and R3, as well as
between R1 and R4, supported by ODU0 end-to-end connections between between R1 and R4, supported by ODU0 end-to-end connections between
S3 and S6 and between S3 and S2 respectively. S3 and S6 and between S3 and S2 respectively.
As described in section 5.1.5 above, it is not clear in this case As described in section 5.1.5 above, it is not clear in this case
how the Ethernet access links between the transport network and the how the Ethernet access links between the transport network and the
IP router, are reported by the PNC to the MDSC. IP router, are reported by the PNC to the MDSC.
The same issues, as described in section 5.1.5 above, apply here: The same issues, as described in section 5.1.5 above, apply here:
o the MDSC needs to understand that R1, R3 and R4 are connected, o the MDSC needs to understand that R1, R3 and R4 are connected,
thought the Ethernet access links, with S3, S6 and S2 thought the Ethernet access links, with S3, S6 and S2
o the MDSC needs to understand which TTPs in S3, S6 and S2 can be o the MDSC needs to understand which TTPs in S3, S6 and S2 can be
accessed by these access links accessed by these access links
o the MDSC needs to configure the EVPL services from these access o the MDSC needs to configure the EVPL services from these access
links through the ODU0 tunnels links through the ODU0 tunnels
In addition, the MDSC needs to get the information that the access In addition, the MDSC needs to get the information that the access
links on S3, S6 and S2 are capable to support EVPL (rather than just links on S3, S6 and S2 are capable of supporting EVPL (rather than
EPL) as well as to coordinate the VLAN configuration, for each EVPL just EPL) as well as to coordinate the VLAN configuration, for each
service, on these access links (this is a similar issue as the EVPL service, on these access links (this is a similar issue as the
timeslot configuration on access links discussed in section 4.3.1 timeslot configuration on access links discussed in section 4.3.1
above). above).
5.3. YANG Models for Protection Configuration 5.3. YANG Models for Protection Configuration
5.3.1. Linear Protection (end-to-end) 5.3.1. Linear Protection (end-to-end)
To be discussed in future versions of this document. To be discussed in future versions of this document.
5.3.2. Segmented Protection 5.3.2. Segmented Protection
To be discussed in future versions of this document. To be discussed in future versions of this document.
6. Security Considerations 6. Security Considerations
This section is for further study Inherently OTN networks ensure privacy and security via hard
partitioning of traffic onto dedicated circuits. The separation of
network traffic makes it difficult to intercept data transferred
between nodes over OTN-channelized links.
This document analyses the applicability of the YANG models being
defined by the IETF to support OTN single and multi-domain scenarios
There are no specific new security considerations introduced by this
document.
In OTN the (General Communication Channel) GCC is used for OAM
functions such as performance monitoring, fault detection, and
signaling. The GCC control channel should be secured using a
suitable mechanism.
7. IANA Considerations 7. IANA Considerations
This document requires no IANA actions. This document requires no IANA actions.
8. References 8. References
8.1. Normative References 8.1. Normative References
[RFC7926] Farrel, A. et al., "Problem Statement and Architecture for [RFC7926] Farrel, A. et al., "Problem Statement and Architecture for
skipping to change at page 40, line 30 skipping to change at page 45, line 15
[ITU-T G.873.1] ITU-T Recommendation G.873.1 (05/14), "Optical [ITU-T G.873.1] ITU-T Recommendation G.873.1 (05/14), "Optical
transport network (OTN): Linear protection", May 2014. transport network (OTN): Linear protection", May 2014.
[TE-TOPO] Liu, X. et al., "YANG Data Model for TE Topologies", [TE-TOPO] Liu, X. et al., "YANG Data Model for TE Topologies",
draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo, work in progress. draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo, work in progress.
[OTN-TOPO] Zheng, H. et al., "A YANG Data Model for Optical [OTN-TOPO] Zheng, H. et al., "A YANG Data Model for Optical
Transport Network Topology", draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-topo- Transport Network Topology", draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-topo-
yang, work in progress. yang, work in progress.
[CLIENT-TOPO] Zheng, H. et al., "A YANG Data Model for Client-layer [CLIENT-TOPO] Zheng, H. et al., "A YANG Data Model for Client-layer
Topology", draft-zheng-ccamp-client-topo-yang, work in Topology", draft-zheng-ccamp-client-topo-yang, work in
progress. progress.
[TE-TUNNEL] Saad, T. et al., "A YANG Data Model for Traffic [TE-TUNNEL] Saad, T. et al., "A YANG Data Model for Traffic
Engineering Tunnels and Interfaces", draft-ietf-teas-yang- Engineering Tunnels and Interfaces", draft-ietf-teas-yang-
te, work in progress. te, work in progress.
[PATH-COMPUTE] Busi, I., Belotti, S. et al, "Yang model for [PATH-COMPUTE] Busi, I., Belotti, S. et al, "Yang model for
requesting Path Computation", draft-busibel-teas-yang- requesting Path Computation", draft-busibel-teas-yang-
path-computation, work in progress. path-computation, work in progress.
[OTN-TUNNEL] Zheng, H. et al., "OTN Tunnel YANG Model", draft- [OTN-TUNNEL] Zheng, H. et al., "OTN Tunnel YANG Model", draft-
ietf-ccamp-otn-tunnel-model, work in progress. ietf-ccamp-otn-tunnel-model, work in progress.
[CLIENT-SVC] Zheng, H. et al., "A YANG Data Model for Optical [CLIENT-SVC] Zheng, H. et al., "A YANG Data Model for Optical
Transport Network Client Signals", draft-zheng-ccamp-otn- Transport Network Client Signals", draft-zheng-ccamp-otn-
client-signal-yang, work in progress. client-signal-yang, work in progress.
8.2. Informative References 8.2. Informative References
[RFC5151] Farrel, A. et al., "Inter-Domain MPLS and GMPLS Traffic [RFC5151] Farrel, A. et al., "Inter-Domain MPLS and GMPLS Traffic
Engineering --Resource Reservation Protocol-Traffic Engineering --Resource Reservation Protocol-Traffic
Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions", RFC 5151, February Engineering (RSVP-TE) Extensions", RFC 5151, February
2008. 2008.
skipping to change at page 41, line 26 skipping to change at page 46, line 12
[RFC8309] Wu, Q. et al., "Service Models Explained", RFC 8309, [RFC8309] Wu, Q. et al., "Service Models Explained", RFC 8309,
January 2018. January 2018.
[ACTN-YANG] Zhang, X. et al., "Applicability of YANG models for [ACTN-YANG] Zhang, X. et al., "Applicability of YANG models for
Abstraction and Control of Traffic Engineered Networks", Abstraction and Control of Traffic Engineered Networks",
draft-zhang-teas-actn-yang, work in progress. draft-zhang-teas-actn-yang, work in progress.
[I2RS-TOPO] Clemm, A. et al., "A Data Model for Network Topologies", [I2RS-TOPO] Clemm, A. et al., "A Data Model for Network Topologies",
draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-network-topo, work in progress. draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-network-topo, work in progress.
[RFC-FOLD] Watsen, K. et al., " Handling Long Lines in Artwork in
Internet-Drafts and RFCs", work in progress
[ONF TR-527] ONF Technical Recommendation TR-527, "Functional [ONF TR-527] ONF Technical Recommendation TR-527, "Functional
Requirements for Transport API", June 2016. Requirements for Transport API", June 2016.
[ONF GitHub] ONF Open Transport (SNOWMASS) [ONF GitHub] ONF Open Transport (SNOWMASS)
https://github.com/OpenNetworkingFoundation/Snowmass- https://github.com/OpenNetworkingFoundation/Snowmass-
ONFOpenTransport ONFOpenTransport
9. Acknowledgments 9. Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank all members of the Transport NBI The authors would like to thank all members of the Transport NBI
skipping to change at page 42, line 5 skipping to change at page 46, line 40
Belotti, Tara Cummings, Michael Scharf, Karthik Sethuraman, Oscar Belotti, Tara Cummings, Michael Scharf, Karthik Sethuraman, Oscar
Gonzalez de Dios, Hans Bjursrom and Italo Busi for having initiated Gonzalez de Dios, Hans Bjursrom and Italo Busi for having initiated
the work on gap analysis for transport NBI and having provided the work on gap analysis for transport NBI and having provided
foundations work for the development of this document. foundations work for the development of this document.
The authors would like to thank the authors of the TE Topology and The authors would like to thank the authors of the TE Topology and
Tunnel YANG models [TE-TOPO] and [TE-TUNNEL], in particular Igor Tunnel YANG models [TE-TOPO] and [TE-TUNNEL], in particular Igor
Bryskin, Vishnu Pavan Beeram, Tarek Saad and Xufeng Liu, for their Bryskin, Vishnu Pavan Beeram, Tarek Saad and Xufeng Liu, for their
support in addressing any gap identified during the analysis work. support in addressing any gap identified during the analysis work.
The authors would like to thank Henry Yu and Aihua Guo for their
input and review of the URIs structures used within the JSON code
examples.
This document was prepared using 2-Word-v2.0.template.dot. This document was prepared using 2-Word-v2.0.template.dot.
Appendix A Validating a JSON fragment against a YANG Model Validating a JSON fragment against a YANG Model
The objective is to have a tool that allows validating whether a The objective is to have a tool that allows validating whether a
piece of JSON code embedded in an Internet-Draft is compliant with a piece of JSON code embedded in an Internet-Draft is compliant with a
YANG model without using a client/server. YANG model without using a client/server.
A.1. Manipulation of JSON fragments A.1. Manipulation of JSON fragments
This section describes the various ways JSON fragments are used in This section describes the various ways JSON fragments are used in
the I-D processing and how to manage them. the I-D processing and how to manage them.
skipping to change at page 44, line 28 skipping to change at page 48, line 28
"ietf-routing-types@2017-12-04": "rfc8294",} which can be used to "ietf-routing-types@2017-12-04": "rfc8294",} which can be used to
automatically download from the network the relevant I-Ds or RFCs automatically download from the network the relevant I-Ds or RFCs
and extract from them the YANG models of interest. This is and extract from them the YANG models of interest. This is
particularly useful to keep consistency when the drafting work is particularly useful to keep consistency when the drafting work is
rapidly evolving. rapidly evolving.
A.3. Validation of JSON fragments: DSDL-based approach A.3. Validation of JSON fragments: DSDL-based approach
The idea is to generate a JSON driver file (JTOX) from YANG, then The idea is to generate a JSON driver file (JTOX) from YANG, then
use it to translate JSON to XML and validate it against the DSDL use it to translate JSON to XML and validate it against the DSDL
schemas, as shown in Figure 6. schemas, as shown in Figure 8.
Useful link: https://github.com/mbj4668/pyang/wiki/XmlJson Useful link: https://github.com/mbj4668/pyang/wiki/XmlJson
(2) (2)
YANG-module ---> DSDL-schemas (RNG,SCH,DSRL) YANG-module ---> DSDL-schemas (RNG,SCH,DSRL)
| | | |
| (1) | | (1) |
| | | |
Config/state JTOX-file | (4) Config/state JTOX-file | (4)
\ | | \ | |
\ | | \ | |
\ V V \ V V
JSON-file------------> XML-file ----------------> Output JSON-file------------> XML-file ----------------> Output
(3) (3)
Figure 6 - DSDL-based approach for JSON code validation Figure 8 - DSDL-based approach for JSON code validation
In order to allow the use of comments following the convention In order to allow the use of comments following the convention
defined in section 3without impacting the validation process, these defined in section 3without impacting the validation process, these
comments will be automatically removed from the JSON-file that will comments will be automatically removed from the JSON-file that will
be validate. be validate.
A.4. Validation of JSON fragments: why not using a XSD-based approach A.4. Validation of JSON fragments: why not using a XSD-based approach
This approach has been analyzed and discarded because no longer This approach has been analyzed and discarded because no longer
supported by pyang. supported by pyang.
The idea is to convert YANG to XSD, JSON to XML and validate it The idea is to convert YANG to XSD, JSON to XML and validate it
against the XSD, as shown in Figure 7: against the XSD, as shown in Figure 9:
(1) (1)
YANG-module ---> XSD-schema - \ (3) YANG-module ---> XSD-schema - \ (3)
+--> Validation +--> Validation
JSON-file------> XML-file ----/ JSON-file------> XML-file ----/
(2) (2)
Figure 7 - XSD-based approach for JSON code validation Figure 9 - XSD-based approach for JSON code validation
The pyang support for the XSD output format was deprecated in 1.5 The pyang support for the XSD output format was deprecated in 1.5
and removed in 1.7.1. However pyang 1.7.1 is necessary to work with and removed in 1.7.1. However pyang 1.7.1 is necessary to work with
YANG 1.1 so the process shown in Figure 7 will stop just at step YANG 1.1 so the process shown in Figure 9 will stop just at step
(1). (1).
Appendix B Detailed JSON Examples Detailed JSON Examples
The JSON code examples provided in this appendix have been validated
using the tools in Appendix A and folded using the tool in [FOLD].
B.1. JSON Examples for Topology Abstractions B.1. JSON Examples for Topology Abstractions
B.1.1. JSON Code: mpi1-otn-topology.json B.1.1. JSON Code: mpi1-otn-topology.json
This is the JSON code reporting the OTN Topology @ MPI:
========== NOTE: '\\' line wrapping per BCP XX (RFC XXXX)
===========
{ {
"// __TITLE__": "ODU Abstract Topology @ MPI1", "// __TITLE__": "ODU Black Topology @ MPI1",
"// __LAST_UPDATE__": "July 2, 2018", "// __LAST_UPDATE__": "October 18, 2018",
"// __RESTCONF_OPERATION__": { "// __MISSING_ATTRIBUTES__": true,
"operation": "GET",
"url":
"http://{{PNC1-ADDR}}/restconf/data/ietf-network:networks"
},
"// __REFERENCE_DRAFTS__": { "// __REFERENCE_DRAFTS__": {
"ietf-network@2017-12-18":
"draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-network-topo-20",
"ietf-network-topology@2017-12-18":
"draft-ietf-i2rs-yang-network-topo-20",
"ietf-te-topology@2018-02-21":
"draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo-15",
"ietf-te-types@2018-02-19": "draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-12",
"ietf-routing-types@2017-12-04": "rfc8294", "ietf-routing-types@2017-12-04": "rfc8294",
"ietf-otn-topology@2017-10-30": "ietf-otn-types@2017-10-30": "draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-tunnel-model-
"draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-topo-yang-02", \
"ietf-otn-types@2017-10-30": \01",
"draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-tunnel-model-01" "ietf-network@2018-02-26": "rfc8345",
"ietf-network-topology@2018-02-26": "rfc8345",
"ietf-te-types@2018-06-12": "draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-15",
"ietf-te-topology@2018-06-15": "draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-topo-
18",
"ietf-otn-topology@2017-10-30": "draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-topo-yang-
\
\02"
},
"// __RESTCONF_OPERATION__": {
"operation": "GET",
"url": "http://{{PNC1-ADDR}}/restconf/data/ietf-
network:networks"
}, },
"// __MISSING_ATTRIBUTES__": true,
"ietf-network:networks": { "ietf-network:networks": {
"network": [ "network": [
{ {
"network-id": "tnbi", "network-id": "providerId/201/clientId/300/topologyId/otn-
bl\
\ack-topology",
"network-types": { "network-types": {
"ietf-te-topology:te-topology": { "ietf-te-topology:te-topology": {
"ietf-otn-topology:otn-topology": {} "ietf-otn-topology:otn-topology": {}
} }
}, },
"// __DISCUSS__ ietf-te-topology:provider-id": null, "ietf-te-topology:provider-id": 201,
"ietf-te-topology:provider-id": 0, "ietf-te-topology:client-id": 300,
"// __DISCUSS__ ietf-te-topology:client-id": 0, "ietf-te-topology:te-topology-id": "otn-black-topology",
"ietf-te-topology:client-id": 0, "// ietf-te-topology:te": "presence container requires:
"// __DISCUSS__ ietf-te-topology:te-topology-id": null, prov\
"ietf-te-topology:te-topology-id": "tnbi", \ider, client and te-topology-id",
"// comment": [
"te container presence requires: ",
" provider-id, client-id and te-topology-id"
],
"ietf-te-topology:te": { "ietf-te-topology:te": {
"name": "gotham-city:metro-transport-network" "name": "OTN Black Topology @ MPI1"
}, },
"// ietf-network:node": "Access LTPs to be reviewed in a
fut\
\ure update",
"ietf-network:node": [ "ietf-network:node": [
{ {
"// __NODE__:__DESCRIPTION__": [ "// __NODE__:__DESCRIPTION__": {
"S3", "name": "AN1",
"10.0.0.3", "identifier": "10.0.0.1",
"ADM" "type": "Abstract Node",
], "physical node(s)": "whole network domain 1"
"node-id": "10.0.0.3",
"ietf-te-topology:te-node-id": "10.0.0.3",
"ietf-te-topology:te": {
"oper-status": "up",
"te-node-attributes": {
"// comment-on-name": [
"Often transport domains contain subdomain ",
"topological partitioning that may be reported ",
"in node te name "
],
"name": "S3-metro_main_ring-gateway",
"admin-status": "up",
"// __DISCUSS__ domain-id": 65001
},
"// __DISCUSS__ tunnel-termination-point": []
},
"ietf-network-topology:termination-point": [
{
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LTP__": [
"S3-1 LTP",
"connected to (C-R1)",
"unnumberd/ifIndex: 1",
"OTU-2",
"tributary port"
],
"tp-id": "1",
"ietf-te-topology:te-tp-id": 1,
"ietf-te-topology:te": {
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:client-facing": [
null
],
"admin-status": "up",
"oper-status": "up",
"// ietf-otn-topology:supported-payload-types":
"__DISCUSS__",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:protocol-type":
"ietf-transport-types:prot-OTU2",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:adaptation-type":
"ODU"
}
},
{
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LTP__": [
"S3-2 LTP",
"connected to S1-2",
"unnumberd/ifIndex: 2",
"OTU-4",
"line port"
],
"tp-id": "2",
"ietf-te-topology:te-tp-id": 2,
"ietf-te-topology:te": {
"admin-status": "up",
"oper-status": "up",
"// ietf-otn-topology:supported-payload-types":
"__DISCUSS__",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:protocol-type":
"ietf-transport-types:prot-OTU4",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:adaptation-type":
"ODU"
}
},
{
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LTP__": [
"S3-3 LTP",
"connected to S4-1",
"unnumberd/ifIndex: 3",
"OTU-4",
"line port"
],
"tp-id": "3",
"ietf-te-topology:te-tp-id": 3,
"ietf-te-topology:te": {
"admin-status": "up",
"oper-status": "up",
"// ietf-otn-topology:supported-payload-types":
"__DISCUSS__",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:protocol-type":
"ietf-transport-types:prot-OTU4",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:adaptation-type":
"ODU"
}
},
{
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LTP__": [
"S3-4 LTP",
"connected to S5-1",
"unnumberd/ifIndex: 4",
"OTU-4",
"line port"
],
"tp-id": "4",
"ietf-te-topology:te-tp-id": 4,
"ietf-te-topology:te": {
"admin-status": "up",
"oper-status": "up",
"// ietf-otn-topology:supported-payload-types":
"__DISCUSS__",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:protocol-type":
"ietf-transport-types:prot-OTU4",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:adaptation-type":
"ODU"
}
}
]
},
{
"// __NODE__:__DESCRIPTION__": [
"S4",
"10.0.0.4",
"pizza-box"
],
"node-id": "10.0.0.4",
"ietf-te-topology:te-node-id": "10.0.0.4",
"ietf-te-topology:te": {
"// comment": "TO BE COMPLETED",
"oper-status": "up",
"te-node-attributes": {
"name": "S4-line-metro_main_ring",
"admin-status": "up",
"// __DISCUSS__ domain-id": 65001
},
"// __DISCUSS__ tunnel-termination-point": []
}, },
"ietf-network-topology:termination-point": [
{
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LTP__": [
"S4-1 LTP",
"connected to S3-3",
"unnumberd/ifIndex: 1",
"OTU-4",
"line port"
],
"// comment": "S4-1 LTP",
"tp-id": "1",
"ietf-te-topology:te-tp-id": 1,
"ietf-te-topology:te": {
"admin-status": "up",
"oper-status": "up",
"// ietf-otn-topology:supported-payload-types":
"__DISCUSS__",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:protocol-type":
"ietf-transport-types:prot-OTU4",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:adaptation-type":
"ODU"
}
},
{
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LTP__": [
"S4-2 LTP",
"connected to S8-3",
"unnumberd/ifIndex: 2",
"OTU-4",
"line port"
],
"// comment": "S4-2 LTP",
"tp-id": "2",
"ietf-te-topology:te-tp-id": 2,
"ietf-te-topology:te": {
"admin-status": "up",
"oper-status": "up",
"// ietf-otn-topology:supported-payload-types":
"__DISCUSS__",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:protocol-type":
"ietf-transport-types:prot-OTU4",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:adaptation-type":
"ODU"
}
}
]
},
{
"// __NODE__:__DESCRIPTION__": [
"S1",
"10.0.0.1",
"pizza-box"
],
"node-id": "10.0.0.1", "node-id": "10.0.0.1",
"ietf-te-topology:te-node-id": "10.0.0.1", "ietf-te-topology:te-node-id": "10.0.0.1",
"ietf-te-topology:te": { "ietf-te-topology:te": {
"// comment": "TO BE COMPLETED",
"oper-status": "up",
"te-node-attributes": { "te-node-attributes": {
"name": "S1-robinson_park_ring-line", "name": "AN11",
"admin-status": "up",
"// __DISCUSS__ domain-id": 65001
},
"// __DISCUSS__ tunnel-termination-point": []
},
"ietf-network-topology:termination-point": [
{
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LTP__": [
"S1-1 LTP",
"connected to S2-2",
"unnumberd/ifIndex: 1",
"OTU-4",
"line port"
],
"// comment": "S1-1 LTP",
"tp-id": "1",
"ietf-te-topology:te-tp-id": 1,
"ietf-te-topology:te": {
"admin-status": "up",
"oper-status": "up",
"// ietf-otn-topology:supported-payload-types":
"__DISCUSS__",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:protocol-type":
"ietf-transport-types:prot-OTU4",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:adaptation-type":
"ODU"
}
},
{
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LTP__": [
"S1-2 LTP",
"connected to S3-2",
"unnumberd/ifIndex: 2",
"OTU-4",
"line port"
],
"// comment": "S1-2 LTP",
"tp-id": "2",
"ietf-te-topology:te-tp-id": 2,
"ietf-te-topology:te": {
"admin-status": "up",
"oper-status": "up",
"// ietf-otn-topology:supported-payload-types":
"__DISCUSS__",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:protocol-type":
"ietf-transport-types:prot-OTU4",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:adaptation-type":
"ODU"
}
}
]
},
{
"// __NODE__:__DESCRIPTION__": [
"S2",
"10.0.0.2",
"ADM"
],
"node-id": "10.0.0.2",
"ietf-te-topology:te-node-id": "10.0.0.2",
"ietf-te-topology:te": {
"// comment": "TO BE COMPLETED",
"oper-status": "up",
"te-node-attributes": {
"name": "S2-robinson_park_ring-access",
"admin-status": "up",
"// __DISCUSS__ domain-id": 65001
},
"// __DISCUSS__ tunnel-termination-point": []
},
"ietf-network-topology:termination-point": [
{
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LTP__": [
"S2-1 LTP",
"connected to (C-R4)",
"unnumberd/ifIndex: 1",
"OTU-2",
"tributary port"
],
"// comment": "S2-1 LTP",
"tp-id": "1",
"ietf-te-topology:te-tp-id": 1,
"ietf-te-topology:te": {
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:client-facing": [
null
],
"admin-status": "up",
"oper-status": "up",
"// ietf-otn-topology:supported-payload-types":
"__DISCUSS__",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:protocol-type":
"ietf-transport-types:prot-OTU2",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:adaptation-type":
"ODU"
}
},
{
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LTP__": [
"S2-2 LTP",
"connected to S1-1",
"unnumberd/ifIndex: 2",
"OTU-4",
"line port"
],
"// comment": "S2-2 LTP",
"tp-id": "2",
"ietf-te-topology:te-tp-id": 2,
"ietf-te-topology:te": {
"admin-status": "up",
"oper-status": "up",
"// ietf-otn-topology:supported-payload-types":
"__DISCUSS__",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:protocol-type":
"ietf-transport-types:prot-OTU4",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:adaptation-type":
"ODU"
}
},
{
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LTP__": [
"S2-3 LTP",
"connected to S8-2",
"unnumberd/ifIndex: 3",
"OTU-4",
"line port"
],
"// comment": "S2-3 LTP",
"tp-id": "3",
"ietf-te-topology:te-tp-id": 3,
"ietf-te-topology:te": {
"admin-status": "up",
"oper-status": "up",
"// ietf-otn-topology:supported-payload-types":
"__DISCUSS__",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:protocol-type":
"ietf-transport-types:prot-OTU4",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:adaptation-type":
"ODU"
}
}
]
},
{
"// __NODE__:__DESCRIPTION__": [
"S7",
"10.0.0.7",
"ADM"
],
"node-id": "10.0.0.7",
"ietf-te-topology:te-node-id": "10.0.0.7",
"ietf-te-topology:te": {
"// comment": "TO BE COMPLETED",
"oper-status": "up",
"te-node-attributes": {
"name": "S7-east_end_ring-gateway",
"admin-status": "up", "admin-status": "up",
"// __DISCUSS__ domain-id": 65001 "// __DISCUSS__ is-abstract": "To be discussed with
}, \
"// __DISCUSS__ tunnel-termination-point": [] \TE Topology authors",
}, "// __DISCUSS__ underlay-topology": "To be
"ietf-network-topology:termination-point": [ discussed\
{ \ with TE Topology authors"
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LTP__": [
"S7-1 LTP",
"connected to S5-3",
"unnumberd/ifIndex: 1",
"OTU-4",
"line port"
],
"// comment": "S7-1 LTP",
"tp-id": "1",
"ietf-te-topology:te-tp-id": 1,
"ietf-te-topology:te": {
"admin-status": "up",
"oper-status": "up",
"// ietf-otn-topology:supported-payload-types":
"__DISCUSS__",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:protocol-type":
"ietf-transport-types:prot-OTU4",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:adaptation-type":
"ODU"
}
},
{
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LTP__": [
"S7-2 LTP",
"connected to S6-4",
"unnumberd/ifIndex: 2",
"OTU-4",
"line port"
],
"// comment": "S7-2 LTP",
"tp-id": "2",
"ietf-te-topology:te-tp-id": 2,
"ietf-te-topology:te": {
"admin-status": "up",
"oper-status": "up",
"// ietf-otn-topology:supported-payload-types":
"__DISCUSS__",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:protocol-type":
"ietf-transport-types:prot-OTU4",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:adaptation-type":
"ODU"
}
}, },
{
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LTP__": [
"S7-3 LTP",
"connected to S8-4",
"unnumberd/ifIndex: 3",
"OTU-4",
"line port"
],
"// comment": "S7-3 LTP",
"tp-id": "3",
"ietf-te-topology:te-tp-id": 3,
"ietf-te-topology:te": {
"admin-status": "up",
"oper-status": "up",
"// ietf-otn-topology:supported-payload-types":
"__DISCUSS__",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:protocol-type":
"ietf-transport-types:prot-OTU4",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:adaptation-type":
"ODU"
}
}
]
},
{
"// __NODE__:__DESCRIPTION__": [
"S8",
"10.0.0.8",
"ADM"
],
"node-id": "10.0.0.8",
"ietf-te-topology:te-node-id": "10.0.0.8",
"ietf-te-topology:te": {
"// comment": "TO BE COMPLETED",
"oper-status": "up", "oper-status": "up",
"te-node-attributes": {
"name": "S8-metro_main_ring-access",
"admin-status": "up",
"// __DISCUSS__ domain-id": 65001
},
"// __DISCUSS__ tunnel-termination-point": [] "// __DISCUSS__ tunnel-termination-point": []
}, },
"ietf-network-topology:termination-point": [ "ietf-network-topology:termination-point": [
{ {
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LTP__": [ "// __DESCRIPTION__:__LTP__": {
"S8-1 LTP", "name": "AN1-1 LTP",
"connected to (C-R5)", "link type(s)": "OTU-2",
"unnumberd/ifIndex: 1", "physical node": "S3",
"OTU-2", "unnumberd/ifIndex": 1,
"tributary port" "port type": "tributary port",
], "connected to": "R1"
"// comment": "S8-1 LTP", },
"tp-id": "1", "tp-id": "1",
"ietf-te-topology:te-tp-id": 1, "ietf-te-topology:te-tp-id": 1,
"ietf-te-topology:te": { "ietf-te-topology:te": {
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:client-facing": [ "name": "AN1-1 LTP",
null
],
"admin-status": "up", "admin-status": "up",
"// __DISCUSS__ interface-switching-capability":
"\
\See Link attributes (teNodeId/10.0.0.1/teLinkId/1)",
"// __DISCUSS__ inter-domain-plug-id": "Access
Lin\
\k",
"// __COMMENT__ inter-layer-lock-id": "Empty: OTN
\
\Links are pre-configured",
"oper-status": "up", "oper-status": "up",
"// ietf-otn-topology:supported-payload-types": "// __DISCUSS__ ietf-otn-topology:supported-
"__DISCUSS__", payloa\
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:protocol-type": \d-types": "List of ODU clients?",
"ietf-transport-types:prot-OTU2", "// __DISCUSS__ ietf-otn-topology:client-facing":
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:adaptation-type": \
"ODU" \true
} }
}, },
{ {
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LTP__": [ "// __DESCRIPTION__:__LTP__": {
"S8-2 LTP", "name": "AN1-2 LTP",
"connected to S2-3", "link type(s)": "OTU-4",
"unnumberd/ifIndex: 2", "physical node": "S2",
"OTU-4", "unnumberd/ifIndex": 1,
"line port" "port type": "inter-domain port",
], "connected to": "S31"
"// comment": "S8-2 LTP", },
"tp-id": "2", "tp-id": "2",
"ietf-te-topology:te-tp-id": 2, "ietf-te-topology:te-tp-id": 2,
"ietf-te-topology:te": { "ietf-te-topology:te": {
"name": "AN1-2 LTP",
"admin-status": "up", "admin-status": "up",
"// __DISCUSS__ interface-switching-capability":
"\
\See Link attributes (teNodeId/10.0.0.1/teLinkId/2)",
"// __DISCUSS__ inter-domain-plug-id": "Inter-
doma\
\in Link",
"oper-status": "up", "oper-status": "up",
"// ietf-otn-topology:supported-payload-types": "// __DISCUSS__ ietf-otn-topology:supported-
"__DISCUSS__", payloa\
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:protocol-type": \d-types": "Empty? (inter-domain OTN link)",
"ietf-transport-types:prot-OTU4", "// __DEFAULT__ ietf-otn-topology:client-facing":
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:adaptation-type": \
"ODU" \false
} }
}, },
{ {
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LTP__": [ "// __DESCRIPTION__:__LTP__": {
"S8-3 LTP", "name": "AN1-3 LTP",
"connected to S4-2", "link type(s)": "OTU-2",
"unnumberd/ifIndex: 3", "physical node": "S6",
"OTU-4", "unnumberd/ifIndex": 1,
"line port" "port type": "tributary port",
], "connected to": "R2"
"// comment": "S8-3 LTP", },
"tp-id": "3", "tp-id": "3",
"ietf-te-topology:te-tp-id": 3, "ietf-te-topology:te-tp-id": 3,
"ietf-te-topology:te": { "ietf-te-topology:te": {
"name": "AN1-3 LTP",
"admin-status": "up", "admin-status": "up",
"// __DISCUSS__ interface-switching-capability":
"\
\See Link attributes (teNodeId/10.0.0.1/teLinkId/3)",
"// __DISCUSS__ inter-domain-plug-id": "Access
Lin\
\k",
"oper-status": "up", "oper-status": "up",
"// ietf-otn-topology:supported-payload-types": "// __DISCUSS__ ietf-otn-topology:supported-
"__DISCUSS__", payloa\
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:protocol-type": \d-types": "List of ODU clients?",
"ietf-transport-types:prot-OTU4", "// __DISCUSS__ ietf-otn-topology:client-facing":
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:adaptation-type": \
"ODU" \true
} }
}, },
{ {
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LTP__": [ "// __DESCRIPTION__:__LTP__": {
"S8-4 LTP", "name": "AN1-4 LTP",
"connected to S7-3", "link type(s)": "OTU-4",
"unnumberd/ifIndex: 4", "physical node": "S8",
"OTU-4", "unnumberd/ifIndex": 1,
"line port" "port type": "inter-domain port",
], "connected to": "S32"
"// comment": "S8-4 LTP", },
"tp-id": "4", "tp-id": "4",
"ietf-te-topology:te-tp-id": 4, "ietf-te-topology:te-tp-id": 4,
"ietf-te-topology:te": { "ietf-te-topology:te": {
"name": "AN1-4 LTP",
"admin-status": "up", "admin-status": "up",
"// __DISCUSS__ interface-switching-capability":
"\
\See Link attributes (teNodeId/10.0.0.1/teLinkId/4)",
"// __DISCUSS__ inter-domain-plug-id": "Inter-
doma\
\in Link",
"oper-status": "up", "oper-status": "up",
"// ietf-otn-topology:supported-payload-types": "// __DISCUSS__ ietf-otn-topology:supported-
"__DISCUSS__", payloa\
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:protocol-type": \d-types": "Empty? (inter-domain OTN link)",
"ietf-transport-types:prot-OTU4", "// __DEFAULT__ ietf-otn-topology:client-facing":
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:adaptation-type": \
"ODU" \false
}
}
]
},
{
"// __NODE__:__DESCRIPTION__": [
"S5",
"10.0.0.5",
"ADM"
],
"node-id": "10.0.0.5",
"ietf-te-topology:te-node-id": "10.0.0.5",
"ietf-te-topology:te": {
"// comment": "TO BE COMPLETED",
"oper-status": "up",
"te-node-attributes": {
"name": "S5-east_end_ring-gateway",
"admin-status": "up",
"// __DISCUSS__ domain-id": 65001
},
"// __DISCUSS__ tunnel-termination-point": []
},
"ietf-network-topology:termination-point": [
{
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LTP__": [
"S5-1 LTP",
"connected to S3-4",
"unnumberd/ifIndex: 1",
"OTU-4",
"line port"
],
"// comment": "S5-1 LTP",
"tp-id": "1",
"ietf-te-topology:te-tp-id": 1,
"ietf-te-topology:te": {
"admin-status": "up",
"oper-status": "up",
"// ietf-otn-topology:supported-payload-types":
"__DISCUSS__",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:protocol-type":
"ietf-transport-types:prot-OTU4",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:adaptation-type":
"ODU"
}
},
{
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LTP__": [
"S5-2 LTP",
"connected to S6-3",
"unnumberd/ifIndex: 2",
"OTU-4",
"line port"
],
"// comment": "S5-2 LTP",
"tp-id": "2",
"ietf-te-topology:te-tp-id": 2,
"ietf-te-topology:te": {
"admin-status": "up",
"oper-status": "up",
"// ietf-otn-topology:supported-payload-types":
"__DISCUSS__",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:protocol-type":
"ietf-transport-types:prot-OTU4",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:adaptation-type":
"ODU"
}
},
{
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LTP__": [
"S5-3 LTP",
"connected to S7-1",
"unnumberd/ifIndex: 3",
"OTU-4",
"line port"
],
"// comment": "S5-3 LTP",
"tp-id": "3",
"ietf-te-topology:te-tp-id": 3,
"ietf-te-topology:te": {
"admin-status": "up",
"oper-status": "up",
"// ietf-otn-topology:supported-payload-types":
"__DISCUSS__",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:protocol-type":
"ietf-transport-types:prot-OTU4",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:adaptation-type":
"ODU"
}
}
]
},
{
"// __NODE__:__DESCRIPTION__": [
"S6",
"10.0.0.6",
"ADM"
],
"node-id": "10.0.0.6",
"ietf-te-topology:te-node-id": "10.0.0.6",
"ietf-te-topology:te": {
"// comment": "TO BE COMPLETED",
"oper-status": "up",
"te-node-attributes": {
"name": "S6-east_end_ring-access",
"admin-status": "up",
"// __DISCUSS__ domain-id": 65001
},
"// __DISCUSS__ tunnel-termination-point": []
},
"ietf-network-topology:termination-point": [
{
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LTP__": [
"S6-1 LTP",
"connected to (C-R2)",
"unnumberd/ifIndex: 1",
"OTU-2",
"tributary port"
],
"// comment": "S6-1 LTP",
"tp-id": "1",
"ietf-te-topology:te-tp-id": 1,
"ietf-te-topology:te": {
"admin-status": "up",
"oper-status": "up",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:client-facing": [
null
],
"// ietf-otn-topology:supported-payload-types":
"__DISCUSS__",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:protocol-type":
"ietf-transport-types:prot-OTU2",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:adaptation-type":
"ODU"
} }
}, },
{ {
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LTP__": [ "// __DESCRIPTION__:__LTP__": {
"S6-2 LTP", "name": "AN1-5 LTP",
"connected to (C-R3)", "link type(s)": "OTU-4",
"unnumberd/ifIndex: 2", "physical node": "S8",
"OTU-2", "unnumberd/ifIndex": 5,
"tributary port" "port type": "inter-domain port",
], "connected to": "S12"
"// comment": "S6-2 LTP", },
"tp-id": "2", "tp-id": "5",
"ietf-te-topology:te-tp-id": 2, "ietf-te-topology:te-tp-id": 5,
"ietf-te-topology:te": { "ietf-te-topology:te": {
"name": "AN1-5 LTP",
"admin-status": "up", "admin-status": "up",
"// __DISCUSS__ interface-switching-capability":
"\
\See Link attributes (teNodeId/10.0.0.1/teLinkId/5)",
"// __DISCUSS__ inter-domain-plug-id": "Inter-
doma\
\in Link",
"oper-status": "up", "oper-status": "up",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:client-facing": [ "// __DISCUSS__ ietf-otn-topology:supported-
null payloa\
], \d-types": "Empty? (inter-domain OTN link)",
"// ietf-otn-topology:supported-payload-types": "// __DEFAULT__ ietf-otn-topology:client-facing":
"__DISCUSS__", \
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:protocol-type": \false
"ietf-transport-types:prot-OTU2",
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:adaptation-type":
"ODU"
} }
}, },
{ {
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LTP__": [ "// __DESCRIPTION__:__LTP__": {
"S6-3 LTP", "name": "AN1-6 LTP",
"connected to S5-2", "link type(s)": "OTU-4",
"unnumberd/ifIndex: 3", "physical node": "S7",
"OTU-4", "unnumberd/ifIndex": 4,
"line port" "port type": "inter-domain port",
], "connected to": "S11"
"// comment": "S6-3 LTP", },
"tp-id": "3", "tp-id": "6",
"ietf-te-topology:te-tp-id": 3, "ietf-te-topology:te-tp-id": 6,
"ietf-te-topology:te": { "ietf-te-topology:te": {
"name": "AN1-6 LTP",
"admin-status": "up", "admin-status": "up",
"// __DISCUSS__ interface-switching-capability":
"\
\See Link attributes (teNodeId/10.0.0.1/teLinkId/6)",
"// __DISCUSS__ inter-domain-plug-id": "Inter-
doma\
\in Link",
"oper-status": "up", "oper-status": "up",
"// ietf-otn-topology:supported-payload-types": "// __DISCUSS__ ietf-otn-topology:supported-
"__DISCUSS__", payloa\
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:protocol-type": \d-types": "Empty? (inter-domain OTN link)",
"ietf-transport-types:prot-OTU4", "// __DEFAULT__ ietf-otn-topology:client-facing":
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:adaptation-type": \
"ODU" \false
} }
}, },
{ {
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LTP__": [ "// __DESCRIPTION__:__LTP__": {
"S6-4 LTP", "name": "AN1-7 LTP",
"connected to S7-2", "link type(s)": "OTU-2",
"unnumberd/ifIndex: 4", "physical node": "S6",
"OTU-4", "unnumberd/ifIndex": 2,
"line port" "port type": "tributary port",
], "connected to": "R3"
"// comment": "S6-4 LTP", },
"tp-id": "4", "tp-id": "7",
"ietf-te-topology:te-tp-id": 4, "ietf-te-topology:te-tp-id": 7,
"ietf-te-topology:te": { "ietf-te-topology:te": {
"name": "AN1-7 LTP",
"admin-status": "up", "admin-status": "up",
"// __DISCUSS__ interface-switching-capability":
"\
\See Link attributes (teNodeId/10.0.0.1/teLinkId/7)",
"// __DISCUSS__ inter-domain-plug-id": "Access
Lin\
\k",
"oper-status": "up", "oper-status": "up",
"// ietf-otn-topology:supported-payload-types": "// __DISCUSS__ ietf-otn-topology:supported-
"__DISCUSS__", payloa\
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:protocol-type": \d-types": "List of ODU clients?",
"ietf-transport-types:prot-OTU4", "// __DISCUSS__ ietf-otn-topology:client-facing":
"// _OBSOLETE_ ietf-otn-topology:adaptation-type": \
"ODU" \true
} }
} }
] ]
} }
], ],
"// ietf-network-topology:link": "// ietf-network-topology:link": "Access links to be
"Access links to be added in a future update.", reviewe\
\d in a future update",
"ietf-network-topology:link": [ "ietf-network-topology:link": [
{ {
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LINK__": [ "// __DESCRIPTION__:__LINK__": {
"Link from S1-2 to S3-2", "name": "Access Link from AN1-1",
"internal link" "type": "access link",
], "physical link": "Link from S3-1 to R1"
"// link-id": "S1, S1-2, S3, S3-2", },
"link-id": "10.0.0.1,2,10.0.0.3,2", "link-id": "teNodeId/10.0.0.1/teLinkId/1",
"ietf-te-topology:te": { "ietf-te-topology:te": {
"oper-status": "up",
"te-link-attributes": { "te-link-attributes": {
"name": "Access Link from AN1-1",
"// __DISCUSS__ access-type": "Can we assume point-
t\
\o-point as the default value?",
"access-type": "point-to-point", "access-type": "point-to-point",
"// comment": [ "// __COMMENT__ external-domain": "Empty: the plug-
"external-domain container", i\
"not present for internal links" \d is used instead of this container",
], "// __DISCUSS__ is-abstract": "To be discussed with
"name": "Link between S1 and S3", \
\TE Topology authors",
"// __DISCUSS__ underlay": "To be discussed with TE
\
\Topology authors",
"admin-status": "up", "admin-status": "up",
"interface-switching-capability": [ "interface-switching-capability": [
{ {
"switching-capability": "switching-capability": "ietf-te-
"ietf-te-types:switching-otn", types:switching\
\-otn",
"encoding": "ietf-te-types:lsp-encoding-oduk", "encoding": "ietf-te-types:lsp-encoding-oduk",
"max-lsp-bandwidth": [ "max-lsp-bandwidth": [
{ {
"priority": 0, "priority": 0,
"te-bandwidth": { "// __DISCUSS__ te-bandwidth": "ODU2"
"// _OBSOLETE_ otn": [
"_WARNING_ : technology specific bandwidth definition",
{
"rate-type": "ietf-te-types:odu2",
"counter": 1
}
]
}
},
{
"priority": 1,
"te-bandwidth": {
"// _OBSOLETE_ otn": [
"_WARNING_ : technology specific bandwidth definition",
{
"rate-type": "ietf-te-types:odu2",
"counter": 1
}
]
}
},
{
"priority": 2,
"te-bandwidth": {
"// _OBSOLETE_ otn": [
"_WARNING_ : technology specific bandwidth definition",
{
"rate-type": "ietf-te-types:odu2",
"counter": 1
}
]
}
},
{
"priority": 3,
"te-bandwidth": {
"// _OBSOLETE_ otn": [
"_WARNING_ : technology specific bandwidth definition",
{
"rate-type": "ietf-te-types:odu2",
"counter": 1
}
]
}
},
{
"priority": 4,
"te-bandwidth": {
"// _OBSOLETE_ otn": [
"_WARNING_ : technology specific bandwidth definition",
{
"rate-type": "ietf-te-types:odu2",
"counter": 1
}
]
}
},
{
"priority": 5,
"te-bandwidth": {
"// _OBSOLETE_ otn": [
"_WARNING_ : technology specific bandwidth definition",
{
"rate-type": "ietf-te-types:odu2",
"counter": 1
}
]
}
},
{
"priority": 6,
"te-bandwidth": {
"// _OBSOLETE_ otn": [
"_WARNING_ : technology specific bandwidth definition",
{
"rate-type": "ietf-te-types:odu2",
"counter": 1
}
]
}
},
{
"priority": 7,
"te-bandwidth": {
"// _OBSOLETE_ otn": [
"_WARNING_ : technology specific bandwidth definition",
{
"rate-type": "ietf-te-types:odu2",
"counter": 1
}
]
}
} }
] ]
} }
],
"// __COMMENT__ label-restrictions": "Not described
\
\in this JSON example",
"// __DISCUSS__ link-protection-type": "Can we
assum\
\e unprotected as the default value?",
"link-protection-type": "unprotected",
"max-link-bandwidth": {
"// __DISCUSS__ te-bandwidth": "1xODU2"
},
"max-resv-link-bandwidth": {
"// __DISCUSS__ te-bandwidth": "1xODU2"
},
"unreserved-bandwidth": [
{
"priority": 0,
"// __DISCUSS__ te-bandwidth": "1xODU2"
}
] ]
} },
}
},
{
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LINK__": [
"Link from S5-2 to S6-3",
"internal link"
],
"// link-id": "S5, S5-2, S6, S6-3",
"link-id": "10.0.0.5,2,10.0.0.6,3",
"ietf-te-topology:te": {
"oper-status": "up",
"te-link-attributes": {
"access-type": "point-to-point",
"name": "Link between S5 and S6",
"admin-status": "up"
}
}
},
{
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LINK__": [
"Link from S3-3 to S4-1",
"internal link"
],
"// link-id": "S3, S3-3, S4, S4-1",
"link-id": "10.0.0.3,3,10.0.0.4,1",
"ietf-te-topology:te": {
"oper-status": "up",
"te-link-attributes": {
"access-type": "point-to-point",
"name": "Link between S3 and S4",
"admin-status": "up"
}
}
},
{
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LINK__": [
"Link from S5-3 to S7-1",
"internal link"
],
"// link-id": "S5, S5-3, S7, S7-1",
"link-id": "10.0.0.5,3,10.0.0.7,1",
"ietf-te-topology:te": {
"oper-status": "up",
"te-link-attributes": {
"access-type": "point-to-point",
"name": "Link between S5 and S7",
"admin-status": "up"
}
}
},
{
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LINK__": [
"Link from S3-4 to S5-1",
"internal link"
],
"// link-id": "S3, S3-4, S5, S5-1",
"link-id": "10.0.0.3,4,10.0.0.5,1",
"ietf-te-topology:te": {
"oper-status": "up",
"te-link-attributes": {
"access-type": "point-to-point",
"name": "Link between S3 and S5",
"admin-status": "up"
}
}
},
{
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LINK__": [
"Link from S4-2 to S8-3",
"internal link"
],
"// link-id": "S4, S4-2, S8, S8-3",
"link-id": "10.0.0.4,2,10.0.0.8,3",
"ietf-te-topology:te": {
"oper-status": "up",
"te-link-attributes": {
"access-type": "point-to-point",
"name": "Link between S4 and S8",
"admin-status": "up"
}
}
},
{
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LINK__": [
"Link from S2-3 to S8-2",
"internal link"
],
"// link-id": "S2, S2-3, S8, S8-2",
"link-id": "10.0.0.2,3,10.0.0.8,2",
"ietf-te-topology:te": {
"oper-status": "up",
"te-link-attributes": {
"access-type": "point-to-point",
"name": "Link between S2 and S8",
"admin-status": "up"
}
}
},
{
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LINK__": [
"Link from S8-2 to S2-3",
"internal link"
],
"// link-id": "S8, S8-2, S2, S2-3",
"link-id": "10.0.0.8,2,10.0.0.2,3",
"ietf-te-topology:te": {
"oper-status": "up", "oper-status": "up",
"te-link-attributes": { "// __EMPTY__ is-transitional": "It is not a
"access-type": "point-to-point", transitio\
"name": "Link between S8 and S2", \nal link",
"admin-status": "up" "// __DISCUSS__ underlay ": "To be discussed with TE
} T\
} \opology authors"
},
"source": {
"source-node": "10.0.0.1",
"source-tp": 1
},
"// __EMPTY__ destination": "access link"
}, },
{ {
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LINK__": [ "// __DESCRIPTION__:__LINK__": {
"Link from S3-2 to S1-2", "name": "Inter-domain Link from AN1-2",
"internal link" "type": "inter-domain link",
], "physical link": "Link from S2-1 to S31"
"// link-id": "S3, S3-2, S1, S1-2", },
"link-id": "10.0.0.3,2,10.0.0.1,2", "link-id": "teNodeId/10.0.0.1/teLinkId/2",
"ietf-te-topology:te": { "ietf-te-topology:te": {
"oper-status": "up",
"te-link-attributes": { "te-link-attributes": {
"name": "Inter-domain Link from AN1-2",
"// __DISCUSS__ access-type": "Can we assume point-
t\
\o-point as the default value?",
"access-type": "point-to-point", "access-type": "point-to-point",
"name": "Link between S3 and S1", "// __DISCUSS__ is-abstract": "To be discussed with
"admin-status": "up" \
} \TE Topology authors",
} "// __DISCUSS__ underlay": "To be discussed with TE
}, \
{ \Topology authors",
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LINK__": [ "admin-status": "up",
"Link from S7-1 to S5-3", "interface-switching-capability": [
"internal link" {
], "switching-capability": "ietf-te-
"// link-id": "S7, S7-1, S5, S5-3", types:switching\
"link-id": "10.0.0.7,1,10.0.0.5,3", \-otn",
"ietf-te-topology:te": { "encoding": "ietf-te-types:lsp-encoding-oduk",
"max-lsp-bandwidth": [
{
"priority": 0,
"// __DISCUSS__ te-bandwidth": "ODU4"
}
],
"// __DISCUSS__ label-restrictions": "To be
adde\
\d?"
}
],
"// __DISCUSS__ link-protection-type": "Can we
assum\
\e unprotected as the default value?",
"link-protection-type": "unprotected",
"max-link-bandwidth": {
"// __DISCUSS__ te-bandwidth": "1xODU4, ..."
},
"max-resv-link-bandwidth": {
"// __DISCUSS__ te-bandwidth": "1xODU4, ..."
},
"unreserved-bandwidth": [
{
"priority": 0,
"// __DISCUSS__ te-bandwidth": "1xODU4, ..."
}
]
},
"oper-status": "up", "oper-status": "up",
"te-link-attributes": { "// __EMPTY__ is-transitional": "It is not a
"access-type": "point-to-point", transitio\
"name": "Link between S7 and S5", \nal link",
"admin-status": "up" "// __DISCUSS__ underlay ": "To be discussed with TE
} T\
} \opology authors"
},
"source": {
"source-node": "10.0.0.1",
"source-tp": 2
},
"// __EMPTY__ destination": "inter-domain link"
}, },
{ {
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LINK__": [ "// __DESCRIPTION__:__LINK__": {
"Link from S8-3 to S4-2", "name": "Access Link from AN1-3",
"internal link" "type": "access link",
], "physical link": "Link from S6-1 to R2"
"// link-id": "S8, S8-3, S4, S4-2", },
"link-id": "10.0.0.8,3,10.0.0.4,2", "link-id": "teNodeId/10.0.0.1/teLinkId/3",
"ietf-te-topology:te": { "ietf-te-topology:te": {
"oper-status": "up",
"te-link-attributes": { "te-link-attributes": {
"name": "Access Link from AN1-3",
"// __DISCUSS__ access-type": "Can we assume point-
t\
\o-point as the default value?",
"access-type": "point-to-point", "access-type": "point-to-point",
"name": "Link between S8 and S4", "// __DISCUSS__ is-abstract": "To be discussed with
"admin-status": "up" \
} \TE Topology authors",
} "// __DISCUSS__ underlay": "To be discussed with TE
}, \
{ \Topology authors",
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LINK__": [ "admin-status": "up",
"Link from S5-1 to S3-4", "interface-switching-capability": [
"internal link" {
], "switching-capability": "ietf-te-
"// link-id": "S5, S5-1, S3, S3-4", types:switching\
"link-id": "10.0.0.5,1,10.0.0.3,4", \-otn",
"ietf-te-topology:te": { "encoding": "ietf-te-types:lsp-encoding-oduk",
"max-lsp-bandwidth": [
{
"priority": 0,
"// __DISCUSS__ te-bandwidth": "ODU2"
}
],
"// __DISCUSS__ label-restrictions": "To be
adde\
\d?"
}
],
"// __DISCUSS__ link-protection-type": "Can we
assum\
\e unprotected as the default value?",
"link-protection-type": "unprotected",
"max-link-bandwidth": {
"// __DISCUSS__ te-bandwidth": "1xODU2"
},
"unreserved-bandwidth": [
{
"priority": 0,
"// __DISCUSS__ te-bandwidth": "1xODU2"
}
],
"max-resv-link-bandwidth": {
"// __DISCUSS__ te-bandwidth": "1xODU2"
}
},
"oper-status": "up", "oper-status": "up",
"te-link-attributes": { "// __EMPTY__ is-transitional": "It is not a
"access-type": "point-to-point", transitio\
"name": "Link between S5 and S3", \nal link",
"admin-status": "up" "// __DISCUSS__ underlay ": "To be discussed with TE
} T\
} \opology authors"
},
"source": {
"source-node": "10.0.0.1",
"source-tp": 3
},
"// __EMPTY__ destination": "access link"
}, },
{ {
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LINK__": [ "// __DESCRIPTION__:__LINK__": {
"Link from S2-2 to S1-1", "name": "Inter-domain Link from AN1-4",
"internal link" "type": "inter-domain link",
], "physical link": "Link from S8-1 to S32"
"// link-id": "S2, S2-2, S1, S1-1", },
"link-id": "10.0.0.2,2,10.0.0.1,1", "link-id": "teNodeId/10.0.0.1/teLinkId/4",
"ietf-te-topology:te": { "ietf-te-topology:te": {
"oper-status": "up",
"te-link-attributes": { "te-link-attributes": {
"name": "Inter-domain Link from AN1-4",
"// __DISCUSS__ access-type": "Can we assume point-
t\
\o-point as the default value?",
"access-type": "point-to-point", "access-type": "point-to-point",
"name": "Link between S2 and S1", "// __DISCUSS__ is-abstract": "To be discussed with
"admin-status": "up" \
} \TE Topology authors",
} "// __DISCUSS__ underlay": "To be discussed with TE
}, \
{ \Topology authors",
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LINK__": [ "admin-status": "up",
"Link from S7-2 to S6-4", "interface-switching-capability": [
"internal link" {
], "switching-capability": "ietf-te-
"// link-id": "S7, S7-2, S6, S6-4", types:switching\
"link-id": "10.0.0.7,2,10.0.0.6,4", \-otn",
"ietf-te-topology:te": { "encoding": "ietf-te-types:lsp-encoding-oduk",
"max-lsp-bandwidth": [
{
"priority": 0,
"// __DISCUSS__ te-bandwidth": "ODU4"
}
],
"// __DISCUSS__ label-restrictions": "To be
adde\
\d?"
}
],
"// __DISCUSS__ link-protection-type": "Can we
assum\
\e unprotected as the default value?",
"link-protection-type": "unprotected",
"max-link-bandwidth": {
"// __DISCUSS__ te-bandwidth": "1xODU4, ..."
},
"unreserved-bandwidth": [
{
"priority": 0,
"// __DISCUSS__ te-bandwidth": "1xODU4, ..."
}
],
"max-resv-link-bandwidth": {
"// __DISCUSS__ te-bandwidth": "1xODU4, ..."
}
},
"oper-status": "up", "oper-status": "up",
"te-link-attributes": { "// __EMPTY__ is-transitional": "It is not a
"access-type": "point-to-point", transitio\
"name": "Link between S7 and S6", \nal link",
"admin-status": "up" "// __DISCUSS__ underlay ": "To be discussed with TE
} T\
} \opology authors"
},
"source": {
"source-node": "10.0.0.1",
"source-tp": 4
},
"// __EMPTY__ destination": "inter-domain link"
}, },
{ {
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LINK__": [ "// __DESCRIPTION__:__LINK__": {
"Link from S8-4 to S7-3", "name": "Inter-domain Link from AN1-5",
"internal link" "type": "inter-domain link",
], "physical link": "Link from S8-5 to S12"
"// link-id": "S8, S8-4, S7, S7-3", },
"link-id": "10.0.0.8,4,10.0.0.7,3", "link-id": "teNodeId/10.0.0.1/teLinkId/5",
"ietf-te-topology:te": { "ietf-te-topology:te": {
"oper-status": "up",
"te-link-attributes": { "te-link-attributes": {
"name": "Inter-domain Link from AN1-5",
"// __DISCUSS__ access-type": "Can we assume point-
t\
\o-point as the default value?",
"access-type": "point-to-point", "access-type": "point-to-point",
"name": "Link between S8 and S7", "// __DISCUSS__ is-abstract": "To be discussed with
"admin-status": "up" \
} \TE Topology authors",
} "// __DISCUSS__ underlay": "To be discussed with TE
}, \
{ \Topology authors",
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LINK__": [ "admin-status": "up",
"Link from S6-3 to S5-2", "interface-switching-capability": [
"internal link" {
], "switching-capability": "ietf-te-
"// link-id": "S6, S6-3, S5, S5-2", types:switching\
"link-id": "10.0.0.6,3,10.0.0.5,2", \-otn",
"ietf-te-topology:te": { "encoding": "ietf-te-types:lsp-encoding-oduk",
"max-lsp-bandwidth": [
{
"priority": 0,
"// __DISCUSS__ te-bandwidth": "ODU4"
}
],
"// __DISCUSS__ label-restrictions": "To be
adde\
\d?"
}
],
"// __DISCUSS__ link-protection-type": "Can we
assum\
\e unprotected as the default value?",
"link-protection-type": "unprotected",
"max-link-bandwidth": {
"// __DISCUSS__ te-bandwidth": "1xODU4, ..."
},
"max-resv-link-bandwidth": {
"// __DISCUSS__ te-bandwidth": "1xODU4, ..."
},
"unreserved-bandwidth": [
{
"priority": 0,
"// __DISCUSS__ te-bandwidth": "1xODU4, ..."
}
]
},
"oper-status": "up", "oper-status": "up",
"te-link-attributes": { "// __EMPTY__ is-transitional": "It is not a
"access-type": "point-to-point", transitio\
"name": "Link between S6 and S5", \nal link",
"admin-status": "up" "// __DISCUSS__ underlay ": "To be discussed with TE
} T\
} \opology authors"
},
"source": {
"source-node": "10.0.0.1",
"source-tp": 5
},
"// __EMPTY__ destination": "inter-domain link"
}, },
{ {
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LINK__": [ "// __DESCRIPTION__:__LINK__": {
"Link from S4-1 to S3-3", "name": "Inter-domain Link from AN1-6",
"internal link" "type": "inter-domain link",
], "physical link": "Link from S7-4 to S11"
"// link-id": "S4, S4-1, S3, S3-3", },
"link-id": "10.0.0.4,1,10.0.0.3,3", "link-id": "teNodeId/10.0.0.1/teLinkId/6",
"ietf-te-topology:te": { "ietf-te-topology:te": {
"oper-status": "up",
"te-link-attributes": { "te-link-attributes": {
"name": "Inter-domain Link from AN1-6",
"// __DISCUSS__ access-type": "Can we assume point-
t\
\o-point as the default value?",
"access-type": "point-to-point", "access-type": "point-to-point",
"name": "Link between S4 and S3", "// __DISCUSS__ is-abstract": "To be discussed with
"admin-status": "up" \
} \TE Topology authors",
} "// __DISCUSS__ underlay": "To be discussed with TE
}, \
{ \Topology authors",
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LINK__": [ "admin-status": "up",
"Link from S6-4 to S7-2", "interface-switching-capability": [
"internal link" {
], "switching-capability": "ietf-te-
"// link-id": "S6, S6-4, S7, S7-2", types:switching\
"link-id": "10.0.0.6,4,10.0.0.7,2", \-otn",
"ietf-te-topology:te": { "encoding": "ietf-te-types:lsp-encoding-oduk",
"max-lsp-bandwidth": [
{
"priority": 0,
"// __DISCUSS__ te-bandwidth": "ODU4"
}
],
"// __DISCUSS__ label-restrictions": "To be
adde\
\d?"
}
],
"// __DISCUSS__ link-protection-type": "Can we
assum\
\e unprotected as the default value?",
"link-protection-type": "unprotected",
"max-link-bandwidth": {
"// __DISCUSS__ te-bandwidth": "1xODU4, ..."
},
"max-resv-link-bandwidth": {
"// __DISCUSS__ te-bandwidth": "1xODU4, ..."
},
"unreserved-bandwidth": [
{
"priority": 0,
"// __DISCUSS__ te-bandwidth": "1xODU4, ..."
}
]
},
"oper-status": "up", "oper-status": "up",
"te-link-attributes": { "// __EMPTY__ is-transitional": "It is not a
"access-type": "point-to-point", transitio\
"name": "Link between S6 and S7", \nal link",
"admin-status": "up" "// __DISCUSS__ underlay ": "To be discussed with TE
} T\
} \opology authors"
},
"source": {
"source-node": "10.0.0.1",
"source-tp": 6
},
"// __EMPTY__ destination": "inter-domain link"
}, },
{ {
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LINK__": [ "// __DESCRIPTION__:__LINK__": {
"Link from S1-1 to S2-2", "name": "Access Link from AN1-7",
"internal link" "type": "access link",
], "physical link": "Link from S6-2 to R3"
"// link-id": "S1, S1-1, S2, S2-2", },
"link-id": "10.0.0.1,1,10.0.0.2,2", "link-id": "teNodeId/10.0.0.1teLinkId/7",
"ietf-te-topology:te": { "ietf-te-topology:te": {
"oper-status": "up",
"te-link-attributes": { "te-link-attributes": {
"name": "Access Link from AN1-7",
"// __DISCUSS__ access-type": "Can we assume point-
t\
\o-point as the default value?",
"access-type": "point-to-point", "access-type": "point-to-point",
"name": "Link between S1 and S2", "// __DISCUSS__ is-abstract": "To be discussed with
"admin-status": "up" \
} \TE Topology authors",
} "// __DISCUSS__ underlay": "To be discussed with TE
}, \
{ \Topology authors",
"// __DESCRIPTION__:__LINK__": [ "admin-status": "up",
"Link from S7-3 to S8-4", "interface-switching-capability": [
"internal link" {
], "switching-capability": "ietf-te-
"// link-id": "S7, S7-3, S8, S8-4", types:switching\
"link-id": "10.0.0.7,3,10.0.0.8,4", \-otn",
"ietf-te-topology:te": { "encoding": "ietf-te-types:lsp-encoding-oduk",
"max-lsp-bandwidth": [
{
"priority": 0,
"// __DISCUSS__ te-bandwidth": "ODU2"
}
],
"// __DISCUSS__ label-restrictions": "To be
adde\
\d?"
}
],
"// __DISCUSS__ link-protection-type": "Can we
assum\
\e unprotected as the default value?",
"link-protection-type": "unprotected",
"max-link-bandwidth": {
"// __DISCUSS__ te-bandwidth": "1xODU2"
},
"max-resv-link-bandwidth": {
"// __DISCUSS__ te-bandwidth": "1xODU2"
},
"unreserved-bandwidth": [
{
"priority": 0,
"// __DISCUSS__ te-bandwidth": "1xODU2"
}
]
},
"oper-status": "up", "oper-status": "up",
"te-link-attributes": { "// __EMPTY__ is-transitional": "It is not a
"access-type": "point-to-point", transitio\
"name": "Link between S7 and S8", \nal link",
"admin-status": "up" "// __DISCUSS__ underlay ": "To be discussed with TE
T\
} \opology authors"
} },
"source": {
"source-node": "10.0.0.1",
"source-tp": 7
},
"// __EMPTY__ destination": "access link"
} }
] ]
} }
] ]
} }
} }
B.2. JSON Examples for Service Configuration B.2. JSON Examples for Service Configuration
B.2.1. JSON Code: mpi1-odu2-service-config.json B.2.1. JSON Code: mpi1-odu2-service-config.json
This is the JSON code reporting the ODU2 transit service
configuration @ MPI:
========== NOTE: '\\' line wrapping per BCP XX (RFC XXXX)
===========
{ {
"// __TITLE__": "ODU2 Service Configuration @ MPI1", "// __TITLE__": "ODU2 Service Configuration @ MPI1",
"// __LAST_UPDATE__": "July 2, 2018", "// __LAST_UPDATE__": "October 22, 2018",
"// __MISSING_ATTRIBUTES__": true,
"// __REFERENCE_DRAFTS__": {
"ietf-routing-types@2017-12-04": "rfc8294",
"ietf-otn-types@2018-06-07": "draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-tunnel-model-
\
\02",
"ietf-te-types@2018-07-01": "draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-16",
"ietf-te@2018-07-01": "draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-16",
"ietf-otn-tunnel@2018-06-07": "draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-tunnel-
model\
\-02"
},
"// __RESTCONF_OPERATION__": { "// __RESTCONF_OPERATION__": {
"operation": "PUT", "operation": "PUT",
"url": "http://{{PNC1-ADDR}}/restconf/data/ietf-te:te" "url": "http://{{PNC1-ADDR}}/restconf/data/ietf-te:te"
}, },
"// __REFERENCE_DRAFTS__": {
"ietf-te-types@2018-06-12": "draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-15",
"ietf-routing-types@2017-12-04": "rfc8294",
"ietf-te@2018-06-12": "draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-15",
"ietf-otn-types@2018-06-07":
"draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-tunnel-model-02",
"ietf-otn-tunnel@2018-06-07":
"draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-tunnel-model-02"
},
"// __MISSING_ATTRIBUTES__": true,
"ietf-te:te": { "ietf-te:te": {
"tunnels": { "tunnels": {
"tunnel": [ "tunnel": [
{ {
"name": "mpi1-odu2-service", "name": "mpi1-odu2-service",
"// identifier": "ODU2-SERVICE-TUNNEL-ID @ MPI1", "// identifier": "ODU2-SERVICE-TUNNEL-ID @ MPI1",
"identifier": 1, "identifier": 1,
"description": "description": "ODU2 Service implemented by ODU2 OTN
"ODU2 Service implemented by ODU2 OTN Tunnel Segment @ MPI1", Tunne\
\l Segment @ MPI1",
"// encoding and switching-type": "ODU", "// encoding and switching-type": "ODU",
"encoding": "ietf-te-types:lsp-encoding-oduk ", "encoding": "ietf-te-types:lsp-encoding-oduk ",
"switching-type": "ietf-te-types:switching-otn", "switching-type": "ietf-te-types:switching-otn",
"// source": "None: transit tunnel segment", "// source": "None: transit tunnel segment",
"// destination": "None: transit tunnel segment", "// destination": "None: transit tunnel segment",
"// src-tp-id": "None: transit tunnel segment", "// src-tp-id": "None: transit tunnel segment",
"// dst-tp-id": "None: transit tunnel segment", "// dst-tp-id": "None: transit tunnel segment",
"// __ ACTION __ ietf-otn-tunnel:payload-treatment": [ "// ietf-otn-tunnel:src-client-signal": "None: ODU
"This attribute should be removed in the next otn-tunnel", transit\
" model update" \ tunnel segment",
], "// ietf-otn-tunnel:dst-client-signal": "None: ODU
"ietf-otn-tunnel:src-client-signal": transit\
"ietf-otn-types:client-signal-ODU2", \ tunnel segment",
"// __ ACTION __ src-tpn": [
"This attribute should be removed in the next otn-tunnel",
" model update"
],
"// __ ACTION __ src-tsg": [
"This attribute should be removed in the next otn-tunnel",
" model update"
],
"// __ ACTION __ src-tributary-slot-count": [
"This attribute should be removed in the next otn-tunnel",
" model update"
],
"// __ ACTION __ src-tributary-slots": [
"This attribute should be removed in the next otn-tunnel",
" model update"
],
"ietf-otn-tunnel:dst-client-signal":
"ietf-otn-types:client-signal-ODU2",
"// __ ACTION __ dst-tpn": [
"This attribute should be removed in the next otn-tunnel",
" model update"
],
"// __ ACTION __ dst-tsg": [
"This attribute should be removed in the next otn-tunnel",
" model update"
],
"// __ ACTION __ dst-tributary-slot-count": [
"This attribute should be removed in the next otn-tunnel",
" model update"
],
"// __ ACTION __ dst-tributary-slots": [
"This attribute should be removed in the next otn-tunnel",
" model update"
],
"bidirectional": true, "bidirectional": true,
"// protection": "No protection",
"// __ DEFAULT __ protection": { "// __ DEFAULT __ protection": {
"// __ DEFAULT __ enable": false "// __ DEFAULT __ enable": false
}, },
"// restoration": "No restoration",
"// __ DEFAULT __ restoration": { "// __ DEFAULT __ restoration": {
"// __ DEFAULT __ enable": false "// __ DEFAULT __ enable": false
}, },
"// __ DISCUSS __ te-topology-identifier": [ "// te-topology-identifier": "ODU Black Topology @ MPI1",
"Need to add the te-topology-identifier", "te-topology-identifier": {
"information. Waiting for updates to topology identifiers" "provider-id": 201,
], "client-id": 300,
"topology-id": "otn-black-topology"
},
"te-bandwidth": { "te-bandwidth": {
"ietf-otn-tunnel:odu-type": "ietf-otn-types:prot-ODU2" "ietf-otn-tunnel:odu-type": "ietf-otn-types:prot-ODU2"
}, },
"// hierarchical-link": "// hierarchical-link": "None: transit tunnel segment",
"Not to be specified: transit tunnel segment",
"p2p-primary-paths": { "p2p-primary-paths": {
"p2p-primary-path": [ "p2p-primary-path": [
{ {
"name": "mpi1-odu2-tunnel-primary-path", "name": "mpi1-odu2-service-primary-path",
"// __ DISCUSS __ path-scope": [
"Need to align the model based on the on-going",
" disucssion of the related open issue"
],
"path-scope": "ietf-te-types:path-scope-segment", "path-scope": "ietf-te-types:path-scope-segment",
"// te-bandwidth": [ "// te-bandwidth": "None: only the tunnel bandwidth
"None: only the tunnel bandwidth needs to be specified", \
" in transport applications" \needs to be specified in transport applications",
],
"explicit-route-objects": { "explicit-route-objects": {
"route-object-include-exclude": [ "route-object-include-exclude": [
{ {
"// comment": "// comment": "Tunnel hand-off OTU2 ingress
"Tunnel hand-off OTU2 ingress interface (S3-1)", in\
\terface (S3-1)",
"index": 1, "index": 1,
"explicit-route-usage": "explicit-route-usage": "ietf-te-types:route-
"ietf-te-types:route-include-ero", i\
\nclude-ero",
"num-unnum-hop": { "num-unnum-hop": {
"// node-id": "S3-NODE-ID", "// node-id": "AN1 Node",
"node-id": "10.0.0.3", "node-id": "10.0.0.1",
"// link-tp-id": "S3-1-LTP-ID", "// link-tp-id": "AN1-1 LTP",
"link-tp-id": 1, "link-tp-id": 1,
"hop-type": "STRICT", "hop-type": "STRICT",
"direction": "INCOMING" "direction": "INCOMING"
} }
}, },
{ {
"// comment": [ "// comment": "Tunnel hand-off ODU2 ingress
"Tunnel hand-off ODU2 ingress label (ODU2 over", la\
" OTU2) at S3-1" \bel (ODU2 over OTU2) at S3-1",
],
"index": 2, "index": 2,
"explicit-route-usage": "explicit-route-usage": "ietf-te-types:route-
"ietf-te-types:route-include-ero", i\
\nclude-ero",
"label-hop": { "label-hop": {
"te-label": { "te-label": {
"// __ DISCUSS __ odu-label": [ "// __ DISCUSS __ odu-label": "How are HO-
"How are HO-ODU (ODUk voer OTUk) label", \
" represented?" \ODU (ODUk over OTUk) label represented?",
], "// __ DISCUSS __ direction": "Check with
"// __ ACTION __ direction": \
"Check with TE Tunnel authors", \TE Tunnel authors",
"direction": "FORWARD " "direction": "FORWARD "
} }
} }
}, },
{ {
"// comment": "// comment": "Tunnel hand-off OTU4 egress
"Tunnel hand-off OTU4 egress interface (S2-1)", int\
\erface (S2-1)",
"index": 3, "index": 3,
"explicit-route-usage": "explicit-route-usage": "ietf-te-types:route-
"ietf-te-types:route-include-ero", i\
\nclude-ero",
"num-unnum-hop": { "num-unnum-hop": {
"// node-id": "S2-NODE-ID", "// node-id": "AN1 Node",
"node-id": "10.0.0.2", "node-id": "10.0.0.1",
"// link-tp-id": "S2-1-LTP-ID", "// link-tp-id": "AN1-2 LTP",
"link-tp-id": 1, "link-tp-id": 1,
"hop-type": "STRICT", "hop-type": "STRICT",
"direction": "OUTGOING" "direction": "OUTGOING"
} }
}, },
{ {
"// comment": [ "// comment": "Tunnel hand-off ODU2 egress
"Tunnel hand-off ODU2 egress label (ODU2 over", lab\
" OTU4) at S2-1" \el (ODU2 over OTU4) at S2-1",
],
"index": 4, "index": 4,
"explicit-route-usage": "explicit-route-usage": "ietf-te-types:route-
"ietf-te-types:route-include-ero", i\
\nclude-ero",
"label-hop": { "label-hop": {
"te-label": { "te-label": {
"ietf-otn-tunnel:tpn": 1, "ietf-otn-tunnel:tpn": 1,
"ietf-otn-tunnel:tsg": "ietf-otn-tunnel:tsg": "ietf-otn-
"ietf-otn-types:tsg-1.25G", types:tsg\
\-1.25G",
"ietf-otn-tunnel:ts-list": "1-8", "ietf-otn-tunnel:ts-list": "1-8",
"// __ ACTION __ direction": "// __ DISCUSS __ direction": "Check with
"Check with TE Tunnel authors", \
\TE Tunnel authors",
"direction": "FORWARD " "direction": "FORWARD "
} }
} }
} }
] ]
} }
} }
] ]
} }
} }
] ]
} }
} }
} }
B.2.2. JSON Code: mpi1-odu2-tunnel-config.json B.2.2. JSON Code: mpi1-odu2-tunnel-config.json
{ The JSON code for this use case will be added in a future version of
"// __TITLE__": "ODU2 Tunnel Configuration @ MPI1", this document
"// __LAST_UPDATE__": "July 2, 2018",
"// __RESTCONF_OPERATION__": {
"operation": "PUT",
"url": "http://{{PNC1-ADDR}}/restconf/data/ietf-te:te"
},
"// __REFERENCE_DRAFTS__": {
"ietf-te-types@2018-06-12": "draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-15",
"ietf-routing-types@2017-12-04": "rfc8294",
"ietf-te@2018-06-12": "draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-15",
"ietf-otn-types@2018-06-07":
"draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-tunnel-model-02",
"ietf-otn-tunnel@2018-06-07":
"draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-tunnel-model-02"
},
"// __MISSING_ATTRIBUTES__": true,
"ietf-te:te": {
"tunnels": {
"tunnel": [
{
"name": "mpi1-odu2-tunnel",
"// identifier": "ODU2-TUNNEL-ID @ MPI1",
"identifier": 2,
"description":
"TNBI Example for an ODU2 Head Tunnel Segment @ MPI1", An incomplete version is located on GitHub at:
"// encoding and switching-type": "ODU",
"encoding": "ietf-te-types:lsp-encoding-oduk ",
"switching-type": "ietf-te-types:switching-otn",
"source": "10.0.0.3",
"// destination": "None: head tunnel segment",
"src-tp-id": "AAAB",
"// dst-tp-id": "None: head tunnel segment",
"ietf-otn-tunnel:src-client-signal":
"ietf-otn-types:client-signal-ODU2",
"ietf-otn-tunnel:dst-client-signal":
"ietf-otn-types:client-signal-ODU2",
"bidirectional": true,
"// __ DEFAULT __ protection": {
"// __ DEFAULT __ enable": false
},
"// __ DEFAULT __ restoration": {
"// __ DEFAULT __ enable": false
},
"// __ DISCUSS __ te-topology-identifier":
"Need to add the te-topology-identifier information",
"te-bandwidth": {
"ietf-otn-tunnel:odu-type": "ietf-otn-types:prot-ODU2"
},
"// __ DISCUSS __ hierarchical-link":
"Optional: tunnel supports service, not link in the client layer",
"p2p-primary-paths": {
"p2p-primary-path": [
{
"name": "mpi1-odu2-tunnel-primary-path",
"// __ DISCUSS __ path-scope":
"Need to align the model",
"path-scope": "ietf-te-types:path-scope-segment",
"// te-bandwidth":
"None: only the tunnel bandwidth needed in transport",
"explicit-route-objects": {
"route-object-include-exclude": [
{
"// comment": "Tunnel TTP in node S3",
"index": 1,
"explicit-route-usage":
"ietf-te-types:route-include-ero",
"num-unnum-hop": {
"// node-id": "S3-NODE-ID",
"node-id": "10.0.0.3",
"hop-type": "STRICT",
"// __ ACTION __ direction":
"Check with TE Tunnel authors",
"direction": "OUTGOING"
}
},
{
"// comment":
"Tunnel hand-off OTU4 egress interface (S2-1)",
"index": 2,
"explicit-route-usage":
"ietf-te-types:route-include-ero",
"num-unnum-hop": {
"// node-id": "S2-NODE-ID",
"node-id": "10.0.0.2",
"// link-tp-id": "S2-1-LTP-ID",
"link-tp-id": 1,
"hop-type": "STRICT",
"direction": "OUTGOING"
}
},
{
"// comment":
"Tunnel hand-off ODU2 egress label (ODU2 over OTU4) at S2-1",
"index": 3,
"explicit-route-usage":
"ietf-te-types:route-include-ero",
"label-hop": {
"te-label": {
"ietf-otn-tunnel:tpn": 2,
"ietf-otn-tunnel:tsg":
"ietf-otn-types:tsg-1.25G",
"ietf-otn-tunnel:ts-list": "9-16",
"// __ ACTION __ direction":
"Check with TE Tunnel authors",
"direction": "FORWARD "
}
}
}
]
}
}
]
}
}
] https://github.com/danielkinguk/transport-nbi
}
}
}
B.2.3. JSON Code: mpi1-epl-service-config.json B.2.3. JSON Code: mpi1-epl-service-config.json
{ The JSON code for this use case will be added in a future version of
"// __TITLE__": "EPL Configuration @ MPI1", this document
"// __LAST_UPDATE__": "July 2, 2018",
"// __RESTCONF_OPERATION__": { An incomplete version is located on GitHub at:
"operation": "PUT",
"url": https://github.com/danielkinguk/transport-nbi
"http://{{PNC1}}/restconf/data/ietf-trans-client-service:etht-svc"
},
"// __REFERENCE_DRAFTS__": {
"ietf-te-types@2018-03-05": "draft-ietf-teas-yang-te-14",
"ietf-eth-tran-types@2018-03-01":
"draft-zheng-ccamp-otn-client-signal-yang-02",
"ietf-routing-types@2017-12-04": "rfc8294",
"ietf-eth-tran-service@2018-03-01":
"draft-zheng-ccamp-otn-client-signal-yang-02"
},
"// __MISSING_ATTRIBUTES__": true,
"ietf-eth-tran-service:etht-svc": {
"etht-svc-instances": [
{
"etht-svc-name": "mpi1-epl-service",
"etht-svc-descr":
"TNBI Example for an EPL over ODU2 Service @ MPI1",
"// __ DEFAULT __ etht-svc-type": "p2p-svc",
"// __ DISCUSS __ te-topology-identifier": [
"Would it be possible to use this grouping instead of",
" re-defining the three attributes below?"
],
"// __ ACTION __ access-provider-id":
"Need to add the te-topology-identifier information",
"// __ ACTION __ access-client-id":
"Need to add the te-topology-identifier information",
"// __ ACTION __ topology-id":
"Need to add the te-topology-identifier information",
"etht-svc-access-ports": [
{
"// comment": "10GE access interface (S3-1)",
"access-port-id": 1,
"// access-node-id": "S3-NODE-ID",
"access-node-id": "10.0.0.3",
"// access-ltp-id": "S3-1-LTP-ID",
"access-ltp-id": 1,
"service-classification-type":
"ietf-eth-tran-types:port-classification",
"// __ DISCUSS __ ingress-egress-bandwidth-profile-name":
"10G-EPL-BWP",
"// vlan-operations":
"None: transparent VLAN operations"
}
],
"etht-svc-tunnels": [
{
"tunnel-name": "mpi1-odu2-tunnel"
}
],
"admin-status": "ietf-te-types:tunnel-state-up"
}
]
}
}
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Italo Busi (Editor) Italo Busi (Editor)
Huawei Huawei
Email: italo.busi@huawei.com Email: italo.busi@huawei.com
Daniel King (Editor) Daniel King (Editor)
Lancaster University Lancaster University
 End of changes. 294 change blocks. 
1809 lines changed or deleted 1352 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.47. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/