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