idnits 2.17.1
draft-dharinigert-ccamp-g-698-2-lmp-08.txt:
Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see
https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info):
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
No issues found here.
Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
No issues found here.
Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist :
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
** The abstract seems to contain references ([ITU.G698.2], [ITU.G694.1]),
which it shouldn't. Please replace those with straight textual mentions
of the documents in question.
Miscellaneous warnings:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
== The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not
match the current year
-- The document date (July 25, 2014) is 3556 days in the past. Is this
intentional?
Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
(See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references
to lower-maturity documents in RFCs)
== Missing Reference: 'ITU.G959.1' is mentioned on line 134, but not defined
== Missing Reference: 'G.694.1' is mentioned on line 143, but not defined
== Unused Reference: 'RFC4054' is defined on line 313, but no explicit
reference was found in the text
== Unused Reference: 'ITU.G709' is defined on line 327, but no explicit
reference was found in the text
== Unused Reference: 'ITU.G872' is defined on line 332, but no explicit
reference was found in the text
== Unused Reference: 'ITU.G874.1' is defined on line 337, but no explicit
reference was found in the text
== Unused Reference: 'I-D.galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib' is defined on
line 345, but no explicit reference was found in the text
** Downref: Normative reference to an Informational RFC: RFC 4054
-- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. 'ITU.G698.2'
-- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. 'ITU.G694.1'
-- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. 'ITU.G709'
-- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. 'ITU.G872'
-- Possible downref: Non-RFC (?) normative reference: ref. 'ITU.G874.1'
Summary: 2 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 8 warnings (==), 6 comments (--).
Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about
the items above.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2 Internet Engineering Task Force D. Hiremagalur, Ed.
3 Internet-Draft G. Grammel, Ed.
4 Intended status: Standards Track J. Drake, Ed.
5 Expires: January 26, 2015 Juniper
6 G. Galimberti, Ed.
7 Z. Ali, Ed.
8 Cisco
9 R. Kunze, Ed.
10 Deutsche Telekom
11 July 25, 2014
13 Extension to the Link Management Protocol (LMP/DWDM -rfc4209) for Dense
14 Wavelength Division Multiplexing (DWDM) Optical Line Systems to manage
15 the application code of optical interface parameters in DWDM application
16 draft-dharinigert-ccamp-g-698-2-lmp-08
18 Abstract
20 This memo defines extensions to LMP(rfc4209) for managing Optical
21 parameters associated with Wavelength Division Multiplexing (WDM)
22 systems or characterized by the Optical Transport Network (OTN) in
23 accordance with the Interface Application Identifier approach defined
24 in ITU-T Recommendation G.698.2.[ITU.G698.2], G.694.1.[ITU.G694.1]
25 and its extensions.
27 Copyright Notice
29 Copyright (c) 2011 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
30 document authors. All rights reserved.
32 Status of This Memo
34 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
35 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
37 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
38 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
39 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
40 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
42 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
43 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
44 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
45 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
47 This Internet-Draft will expire on January 26, 2015.
49 Copyright Notice
51 Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
52 document authors. All rights reserved.
54 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
55 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
56 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
57 publication of this document. Please review these documents
58 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
59 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
60 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
61 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
62 described in the Simplified BSD License.
64 Table of Contents
66 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
67 2. Extensions to LMP-WDM Protocol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
68 3. General Parameters - OCh_General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
69 4. ApplicationIdentifier - OCh_ApplicationIdentifier . . . . . . 4
70 5. OCh_Ss - OCh transmit parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
71 6. OCh_Rs - receive parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
72 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
73 8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
74 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
75 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
76 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
77 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
79 1. Introduction
81 This extension is based on "draft-galikunze-ccamp-g-698-2-snmp-mib-
82 08", for the relevant interface optical parameters described in
83 recommendations like ITU-T G.698.2 [ITU.G698.2]. The LMP Model from
84 RFC4902 provides link property correlation between a client and an
85 OLS device. LMP link property correlation, exchanges the
86 capabilities of either end of the link where the term 'link' refers
87 to the attachment link between OXC and OLS (see Figure 1). By
88 performing link property correlation, both ends of the link exchange
89 link properties, such as application identifiers. This allows either
90 end to operate within a commonly understood parameter window. Based
91 on known parameter limits, each device can supervise the received
92 signal for conformance using mechanisms defined in RFC3591. The
93 actual route selection of a specific wavelength within the allowed
94 set is outside the scope of LMP. In GMPLS, the parameter selection
95 (e.g. central frequency) is performed by RSVP-TE.
97 Figure 1 Extended LMP Model ( from [RFC4209] )
99 +------+ Ss +------+ +------+ Rs +------+
100 | | ----- | | | | ----- | |
101 | OXC1 | ----- | OLS1 | ===== | OLS2 | ----- | OXC2 |
102 | | ----- | | | | ----- | |
103 +------+ +------+ +------+ +------+
104 ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
105 | | | | | |
106 | +-----LMP-----+ +-----LMP-----+ |
107 | |
108 +----------------------LMP-----------------------+
110 OXC : is an entity that contains transponders
111 OLS : generic optical system, it can be -
112 Optical Mux, Optical Demux, Optical Add
113 Drop Mux, etc.
114 OLS to OLS : represents the black-Link itself
115 Rs/Ss : in between the OXC and the OLS
117 Figure 1: Extended LMP Model
119 2. Extensions to LMP-WDM Protocol
121 This document defines extensions to [RFC4209] to allow the Black Link
122 (BL) parameters of G.698.2, to be exchanged between a router or
123 optical switch and the optical line system to which it is attached.
124 In particular, this document defines additional Data Link sub-objects
125 to be carried in the LinkSummary message defined in [RFC4204] and
126 [RFC6205]. The OXC and OLS systems may be managed by different
127 Network management systems and hence may not know the capability and
128 status of their peer. The intent of this draft is to enable the OXC
129 and OLS systems to exchange this information. These messages and
130 their usage are defined in subsequent sections of this document.
132 The following new messages are defined for the WDM extension for
133 ITU-T G.698.2 [ITU.G698.2]/ITU-T G.698.1 [ITU.G698.1]/
134 ITU-T G.959.1 [ITU.G959.1]
135 - OCh_General (sub-object Type = TBA)
136 - OCh_ApplicationIdentier (sub-object Type = TBA)
137 - OCh_Ss (sub-object Type = TBA)
138 - OCh_Rs (sub-object Type = TBA)
140 3. General Parameters - OCh_General
142 These are the general parameters as described in [G698.2] and
143 [G.694.1]. Please refer to the "draft-galikunze-ccamp-g-698-2-snmp-
144 mib-08" for more details about these parameters [RFC6205] .
146 The general parameters are
147 1. Central Frequency - (Tera Hertz) 4 bytes (see RFC6205 sec.3.2)
148 2. Single-channel Application Identifier Number in use
149 3. Application Identifier Type in use
150 4. Application Identifier in use
152 Figure 2: The format of the this sub-object (Type = TBA, Length =
153 TBA) is as follows:
155 0 1 2 3
156 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
157 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
158 | Type | Length | (Reserved) |
159 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
160 | Central Frequency |
161 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
162 | Single-channel| A.I. Type | (Reserved) |
163 | Application | in use | |
164 | Identifier | | |
165 | Number in use | | |
166 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
167 | Single-channel Application Identifier in use |
168 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
170 Figure 2: OCh_General
172 4. ApplicationIdentifier - OCh_ApplicationIdentifier
174 This message is to exchange the application identifiers supported.
175 Please refer to the "draft-galikunze-ccamp-g-698-2-snmp-mib-08" for
176 more details about these parameters. There can be more than one
177 Application Identifier supported by the OXC/OLS. The number of
178 application identifiers supported is exchanged in the "OCh_General"
179 message. (reference [G698.1]/[G698.2]/[G959.1] and G.874.1 )
180 The parameters are
181 1. Number of Application Identifiers (A.I.) Supported
182 2. Single-channel application identifier Number
183 uniquely identifiers this entry - 8 bits
185 3. Application Indentifier Type (A.I.) (STANDARD/PROPRIETARY)
187 4. Single-channel application identifier -- 64 bytes
188 (from [G698.1]/[G698.2]/[G959.1]
190 - this parameter can have
191 multiple instances as the transceiver can support multiple
192 application identifiers.
194 Figure 3: The format of the this sub-object (Type = TBA, Length =
195 TBA) is as follows:
197 0 1 2 3
198 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
199 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
200 | Type | Length | (Reserved) |
201 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
202 | Number of Application | |
203 | Identifiers Supported | (Reserved) |
204 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
205 | Single-channel| A.I. Type | (Reserved) |
206 | Application | | |
207 | Identifier | | |
208 | Number | | |
209 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
210 | Single-channel Application Identifier |
211 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
212 // .... //
213 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
214 | Single-channel| | (Reserved) |
215 | Application | A.I. Type | |
216 | Identifier | | |
217 | Number | | |
218 | | | |
219 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
220 | Single-channel Application Identifier |
221 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
223 Figure 3: OCh_ApplicationIdentifier
225 5. OCh_Ss - OCh transmit parameters
227 These are the G.698.2 parameters at the Source(Ss reference points).
229 1. Output power
230 2. Current Status - 32 bit map of alarms TBD
232 Figure 4: The format of the OCh sub-object (Type = TBA, Length = TBA)
233 is as follows:
235 0 1 2 3
236 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
237 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
238 | Type | Length | (Reserved) |
239 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
240 | Output Power |
241 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
242 | Current Status |
243 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
245 Figure 4: OCh_Ss transmit parameters
247 6. OCh_Rs - receive parameters
249 These are the G.698.2 parameters at the Sink (Rs reference points).
251 1. Current Input Power - (0.1dbm) 4bytes
252 2. Current Status - 32 bit map of alarms TBD
254 Figure 5: The format of the OCh receive sub-object (Type = TBA,
255 Length = TBA) is as follows:
257 The format of the OCh receive/OLS Sink sub-object (Type = TBA,
258 Length = TBA) is as follows:
260 0 1 2 3
261 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1
262 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
263 | Type | Length | (Reserved) |
264 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
265 | Current Input Power |
266 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
267 | Current Status |
268 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+
270 Figure 5: OCh_Rs receive parameters
272 7. Security Considerations
274 LMP message security uses IPsec, as described in [RFC4204]. This
275 document only defines new LMP objects that are carried in existing
276 LMP messages, similar to the LMP objects in [RFC:4209]. This
277 document does not introduce new security considerations.
279 8. IANA Considerations
281 LMP defines the following name spaces and
282 the ways in which IANA can make assignments to these namespaces:
284 - LMP Message Type
285 - LMP Object Class
286 - LMP Object Class type (C-Type) unique within the Object Class
287 - LMP Sub-object Class type (Type) unique within the Object Class
288 This memo introduces the following new assignments:
290 LMP Sub-Object Class names:
292 under DATA_LINK Class name (as defined in )
293 - OCh_General (sub-object Type = TBA)
294 - OCh_ApplicationIdentifier (sub-object Type = TBA)
295 - OCh_Ss (sub-object Type = TBA)
296 - OCh_Rs (sub-object Type = TBA)
298 9. References
300 9.1. Normative References
302 [RFC4204] Lang, J., "Link Management Protocol (LMP)", RFC 4204,
303 October 2005.
305 [RFC4209] Fredette, A. and J. Lang, "Link Management Protocol (LMP)
306 for Dense Wavelength Division Multiplexing (DWDM) Optical
307 Line Systems", RFC 4209, October 2005.
309 [RFC6205] Otani, T. and D. Li, "Generalized Labels for Lambda-
310 Switch-Capable (LSC) Label Switching Routers", RFC 6205,
311 March 2011.
313 [RFC4054] Strand, J. and A. Chiu, "Impairments and Other Constraints
314 on Optical Layer Routing", RFC 4054, May 2005.
316 [ITU.G698.2]
317 International Telecommunications Union, "Amplified
318 multichannel dense wavelength division multiplexing
319 applications with single channel optical interfaces",
320 ITU-T Recommendation G.698.2, November 2009.
322 [ITU.G694.1]
323 International Telecommunications Union, ""Spectral grids
324 for WDM applications: DWDM frequency grid"", ITU-T
325 Recommendation G.698.2, February 2012.
327 [ITU.G709]
328 International Telecommunications Union, "Interface for the
329 Optical Transport Network (OTN)", ITU-T Recommendation
330 G.709, February 2012.
332 [ITU.G872]
333 International Telecommunications Union, "Architecture of
334 optical transport networks", ITU-T Recommendation G.872,
335 October 2012.
337 [ITU.G874.1]
338 International Telecommunications Union, "Optical transport
339 network (OTN): Protocol-neutral management information
340 model for the network element view", ITU-T Recommendation
341 G.874.1, October 2012.
343 9.2. Informative References
345 [I-D.galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib]
346 Kunze, R. and D. Hiremagalur, "A SNMP MIB to manage black-
347 link optical interface parameters of DWDM applications",
348 draft-galimbe-kunze-g-698-2-snmp-mib-02 (work in
349 progress), March 2012.
351 Authors' Addresses
353 Dharini Hiremagalur (editor)
354 Juniper
355 1194 N Mathilda Avenue
356 Sunnyvale - 94089 California
357 USA
359 Phone: +14089367461
360 Email: dharinih@juniper.net
362 Gert Grammel (editor)
363 Juniper
364 1194 N Mathilda Avenue
365 Sunnyvale - 94089 California
366 USA
368 Phone: +14089336958
369 Email: ggrammel@juniper.net
371 John E. Drake (editor)
372 Juniper
373 1194 N Mathilda Avenue
374 HW-US,Pennsylvania
375 USA
377 Phone: +14123703108
378 Email: jdrake@juniper.net
380 Gabriele Galimberti (editor)
381 Cisco
382 Via S. Maria Molgora, 48
383 20871 - Vimercate
384 Italy
386 Phone: +390392091462
387 Email: ggalimbe@cisco.com
388 Zafar Ali (editor)
389 Cisco
390 3000 Innovation Drive
391 KANATA
392 ONTARIO K2K 3E8
394 Email: zali@cisco.com
396 Ruediger Kunze (editor)
397 Deutsche Telekom
398 Dddd, xx
399 Berlin
400 Germany
402 Phone: +49xxxxxxxxxx
403 Email: RKunze@telekom.de