CCAMP Working Group Stefan Ansorge (Alcatel) Internet Draft Peter Ashwood-Smith (Nortel) Expiration Date: November 2001 Ayan Banerjee (Calient) Lou Berger (Movaz) Greg Bernstein (Ciena) Angela Chiu (Celion) John Drake (Calient) Yanhe Fan (Axiowave) Michele Fontana (Alcatel) Gert Grammel (Alcatel) Juergen Heiles(Siemens) Suresh Katukam (Cisco) Kireeti Kompella (Juniper) Jonathan P. Lang (Calient) Fong Liaw (Zaffire) Zhi-Wei Lin (Lucent) Ben Mack-Crane (Tellabs) Dimitri Papadimitriou (Alcatel) Dimitrios Pendarakis (Tellium) Mike Raftelis (White Rock) Bala Rajagopalan (Tellium) Yakov Rekhter (Juniper) Debanjan Saha (Tellium) Vishal Sharma (Jasmine) George Swallow (Cisco) Z. Bo Tang (Tellium) Eve Varma (Lucent) Maarten Vissers (Lucent) Yangguang Xu (Lucent) Eric Mannie (Ebone) - Editor May 2001 GMPLS Extensions for SONET and SDH Control draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-sonet-sdh-00.txt Status of this Memo This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with all provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." E. Mannie Editor 1 draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-sonet-sdh-00.txt May, 2001 To view the current status of any Internet-Draft, please check the "1id-abstracts.txt" listing contained in an Internet-Drafts Shadow Directory, see http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. Abstract This document is a companion to the Generalized MPLS signaling documents, [GMPLS-SIG], [GMPLS-RSVP] and [GMPLS-LDP]. It defines the SONET/SDH technology specific information needed when using GMPLS signaling. 1. Introduction Generalized MPLS extends MPLS from supporting packet (Packet Switching Capable - PSC) interfaces and switching to include support of three new classes of interfaces and switching: Time- Division Multiplex (TDM), Lambda Switch (LSC) and Fiber-Switch (FSC). A functional description of the extensions to MPLS signaling needed to support the new classes of interfaces and switching is provided in [GMPLS-SIG]. [GMPLS-RSVP] describes RSVP- TE specific formats and mechanisms needed to support all four classes of interfaces, and CR-LDP extensions can be found in [GMPLS-LDP]. This document presents details that are specific to SONET/SDH. Per [GMPLS-SIG], SONET/SDH specific parameters are carried in the signaling protocol in traffic parameter specific objects. The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. 2. SDH and SONET Traffic Parameters This section defines the GMPLS traffic parameters for SONET/SDH. The protocol specific formats, for the SDH/SONET-specific RSVP-TE objects and CR-LDP TLVs are described in sections 2.2 and 2.3 respectively. These traffic parameters specify indeed a base set of capabilities for SONET (ANSI T1.105) and SDH (G.707) such as concatenation and transparency. Other documents could enhance this set of capabilities in the future. For instance, extensions to G.707 such as SDH over PDH, or sub-STM-0 interfaces could be defined. The traffic parameters defined hereafter MUST be used when SONET/SDH is specified in the LSP Encoding Type field of a Generalized Label Request [GMPLS-SIG]. E. Mannie Editor Internet-Draft November 2001 2 draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-sonet-sdh-00.txt May, 2001 2.1. SONET/SDH Traffic Parameters The traffic parameters for SONET/SDH is organized as follows: 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Signal Type | Resv | CCT | NCC | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | NVC | Multiplier (MT) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Transparency (T) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Signal Type (ST): 8 bits This field indicates the type of Elementary Signal that comprises the requested LSP. Several transforms can be applied successively on the Elementary Signal to build the Final Signal being actually requested for the LSP. Each transform is optional and must be ignored if zero. Transforms must be applied strictly in the following order: -First, contiguous concatenation (by using the CCT and NCC fields) can be optionally applied on the Elementary Signal, resulting in a contiguously concatenated signal. -Second, virtual concatenation (by using the NVC field) can be optionally applied either directly on the Elementary Signal, or on the contiguously concatenated signal obtained from the previous phase. This allows requesting the virtual concatenation of a contiguously concatenated signal, for instance the virtual concatenation of STS-3c's, or any STS- Xc's. -Third, some transparency can be optionally specified when requesting a frame as signal rather than an SPE or VC based signal (by using the Transparency field). -Fourth, a multiplication (by using the Multiplier field) can be optionally applied either directly on the Elementary Signal, or on the contiguously concatenated signal obtained from the first phase, or on the virtually concatenated signal obtained from the second phase, or on these signals combined with some transparency. E. Mannie Editor Internet-Draft November 2001 3 draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-sonet-sdh-00.txt May, 2001 Permitted Signal Type values for SDH are: Value Type ----- ---- 1 VC-11 2 VC-12 3 VC-2 4 TUG-2 5 VC-3 6 "VC-3 via AU-3 at the end" (see comment hereafter) 7 TUG-3 8 VC-4 9 AUG-1 10 AUG-4 11 AUG-16 12 AUG-64 13 AUG-256 14 STM-1 (only when requesting transparency) 15 STM-4 (only when requesting transparency) 16 STM-16 (only when requesting transparency) 17 STM-64 (only when requesting transparency) 18 STM-256 (only when requesting transparency) According to the G.707 standard a VC-3 in the TU-3/TUG-3/VC- 4/AU-4 branch of the SDH multiplex cannot be structured in TUG- 2's, however a VC-3 in the AU-3 branch can be. In addition, a VC-3 could be switched between the two branches if required. In some cases, it could be useful to indicate that the destination LSR needs to receive a VC-3 via the AU-3 branch in order to be able to demultiplex it into TUG-2's. This is achieved by using the "VC-3 via AU-3 at the end" signal type. This information can be used, for instance, by the penultimate LSR to switch the incoming VC-3 into the AU-3 branch on the outgoing interface to the destination LSR. The "VC-3 via AU-3 at the end" signal type does not imply that the VC-3 must be switched in the AU-3 at some other places. The VC-3 signal type indicates that a VC-3 in any branch is suitable. Administrative Unit Group-N's (AUG-N's) are either a homogeneous collection of AU-3s or AU-4s. When used as a signal type this means that all the VC-3s or VC-4s in the AU-3s or AU-4s that comprise the AUG-N are switched together as one unique signal. In addition any contiguous concatenation relationships between the VC-3s or VC-4s in the AUG-N are preserved and are allowed to change over the life of an AUG-N. It is this flexibility in the concatenation relationships between the component virtual containers that differentiates this signal from a set of VC-3s or VC-4s. In addition whether the AUG-N is structured with AU-3s or AU-4s does not need to be specified and is allowed to change over time. The same reasoning applies to TUG-2 and TUG-3 signal types. E. Mannie Editor Internet-Draft November 2001 4 draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-sonet-sdh-00.txt May, 2001 Permitted Signal Type values for SONET are: Value Type ----- ---- 1 VT1.5 2 VT2 3 VT3 4 VT6 5 VTG 6 STS-1 SPE 7 STS Group-3 8 STS Group-12 9 STS Group-48 10 STS Group-192 11 STS Group-768 12 STS-1 (only when requesting transparency) 13 STS-3 (only when requesting transparency) 14 STS-12 (only when requesting transparency) 15 STS-48 (only when requesting transparency) 16 STS-192 (only when requesting transparency) 17 STS-768 (only when requesting transparency) STS Group-N is a collection of STS-1 SPE signals whose contiguous concatenation relationship within the group need not be defined and is permitted to change during the life of the STS-Group-N. It is this flexibility in the concatenation relationships between the component STS-1 SPE's that differentiates this signal from a set of STS-1 SPE's. For example an STS Group-48 could at one time consist of four STS-12c signals and at another point in times of three STS-12c signals and four STS-3c signals. The same reasoning applies to the VTG signal type. Reserved: 5 bits Reserved bits should be set to zero when sent and must be ignored when received. Contiguous Concatenation Type (CCT): 3 bits This field indicates the type of SONET/SDH contiguous concatenation to apply on the Elementary Signal. It is set to zero to indicate that no contiguous concatenation is requested (default value). The values are defined in the following table: Bits Contiguous Concatenation Type ----- ---------------------------------- 000 No contiguous concatenation requested 001 Standard contiguous concatenation 010 Arbitrary contiguous concatenation others Vendor specific concatenation types E. Mannie Editor Internet-Draft November 2001 5 draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-sonet-sdh-00.txt May, 2001 Number of Contiguous Components (NCC): 16 bits This field indicates the number of identical SONET/SDH SPE's/VC's that are requested to be contiguously concatenated, as specified in the CCT field. This field is irrelevant if no contiguous concatenation is requested (CCT = 0), in that case it must be set to zero when generated. A CCT value different from 0 must imply a number of components greater than 1. Number of Virtual Components (NVC): 16 bits This field indicates the number of identical signals that are requested to be virtually concatenated. These signals can be either identical Elementary Signal's SPE's/VC's, or identical contiguously concatenated signals. In this last case, it allows to request the virtual concatenation of contiguously concatenated signals, for instance the virtual concatenation of several STS-3c SPE's, or any STS-Xc SPE's (to obtain an STS-Xc- Yv SPE). This field is set to 0 (default value) to indicate that no virtual concatenation is requested. Multiplier (MT): 16 bits This field indicates the number of identical signals that are requested for the LSP, i.e. that form the Final Signal. These signals can be either identical Elementary Signal's, or identical contiguously concatenated signals, or identical virtually concatenated signals. Note that all these signals belongs thus to the same LSP. The distinction between the components of multiple virtually concatenated signals is done via the order of the labels that are specified in the signaling. The first set of labels must describe the first component (set of individual signals belonging to the first virtual concatenated signal), the second set must describe the second component (set of individual signals belonging to the second virtual concatenated signal) and so on. This field is set to one (default value) to indicate that exactly one instance of a signal is being requested. Zero is an invalid value. Transparency (T): 32 bits This field is a vector of flags that indicates the type of transparency being requested. Several flags can be combined to provide different types of transparency. Not all combinations are necessarily valid. E. Mannie Editor Internet-Draft November 2001 6 draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-sonet-sdh-00.txt May, 2001 Transparency is only applicable to the fields in the SONET/SDH frame overheads. In the SONET case, these are the fields in the Section Overhead (SOH), and the Line Overhead (LOH). In the SDH case, these are the fields in the Regenerator Section Overhead (RSOH), the Multiplex Section overhead (MSOH), and the pointer fields between the two. With SONET, the pointer fields are defined as being part of the LOH. Note as well that transparency is only applicable when using the following Signal Types (ST's): STM-1, STM-4, STM-16, STM- 64, STM-256, STS-1, STS-3, STS-12, STS-48, STS-192, and STS- 768. At least one transparency type must be specified when requesting such a signal type. Transparency indicates precisely which fields in these overheads must be delivered unmodified at the other end of the LSP. An ingress LSR requesting transparency will pass these overhead fields that must be delivered to the egress LSR without any change. From the ingress and egress LSR's point of views, these fields must be seen as unmodified. Note that B1 in the SOH/RSOH is computed over the complete previous frame, if one bit changes, B1 must be re-computed. Note that B2 in the LOH/MSOH is also computed over the complete previous frame, except the SOH/RSOH. This specification neither addresses how this process is achieved nor network deployment scenarios. The signaling is independent of these consideration (For example, fields could be simply unmofified or could be tunneled into unused overhead bytes). Several transparency types are defined below. Other transparency types are for further study. The transparency field is used to request an LSP that supports the requested transparency, it may also be used to setup the transparency process to be applied in each intermediate LSR. The different transparency flags are the following: flag 1 (bit 1) : Section/Regenerator Section layer. flag 2 (bit 2) : Line/Multiplex Section layer. flag 3 (bit 3) : J0. flag 4 (bit 4) : SOH/RSOH DCC (D1-D3). flag 5 (bit 5) : LOH/MSOH DCC (D4-D12). flag 6 (bit 6) : LOH/MSOH Extended DCC (D13-D156). flag 7 (bit 7) : K1/K2. flag 8 (bit 8) : E1. flag 9 (bit 9) : F1. flag 10 (bit 10): E2. Where bit 1 is the low order bit. Others flags are reserved, they should be set to zero when sent, and should be ignored E. Mannie Editor Internet-Draft November 2001 7 draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-sonet-sdh-00.txt May, 2001 when received. A flag is set to one to indicate that the corresponding transparency is requested. Section/Regenerator Section layer transparency means that the entire frames must be delivered unmodified. This implies that pointers cannot be adjusted. When using Section/Regenerator Section layer transparency all other flags must be ignored. Line/Multiplex Section layer transparency means that the LOH/MSOH must be delivered unmodified. This implies that pointers cannot be adjusted. Line/Multiplex Section layer transparency can be combined only with any of the following transparency types: J0, SOH/RSOH DCC (D1-D3), E1, F1; and all other transparency flags must be ignored. Note that the extended LOH/MSOH DCC (D13-D156) is only applicable to (defined for) STS-768/STM-256. 2.2. RSVP-TE Details For RSVP-TE, the SONET/SDH traffic parameters are carried in the SONET/SDH SENDER_TSPEC and FLOWSPEC objects. The same format is used both for SENDER_TSPEC object and FLOWSPEC objects. The contents of the objects is defined above in Section 2.1. The objects have the following class and type: For SONET ANSI T1.105 and SDH ITU-T G.707: SONET/SDH SENDER_TSPEC object: Class = 12, C-Type = 4 (TBA) SONET/SDH FLOWSPEC object: Class = 9, C-Type = 4 (TBA) There is no Adspec associated with the SONET/SDH SENDER_TSPEC. Either the Adspec is omitted or an int-serv Adspec with the Default General Characterization Parameters and Guaranteed Service fragment is used, see [RFC2210]. For a particular sender in a session the contents of the FLOWSPEC object received in a Resv message SHOULD be identical to the contents of the SENDER_TSPEC object received in the corresponding Path message. If the objects do not match, a ResvErr message with a "Traffic Control Error/Bad Flowspec value" error SHOULD be generated. E. Mannie Editor Internet-Draft November 2001 8 draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-sonet-sdh-00.txt May, 2001 2.3. CR-LDP Details For CR-LDP, the SONET/SDH traffic parameters are carried in the SONET/SDH Traffic Parameters TLV. The contents of the TLV is defined above in Section 2.1. The header of the TLV has the following format: 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |U|F| Type | Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ The type field indicates either SONET or SDH: For SONET ANSI T1.105 : 0xTBA. For SDH ITU-T G.707 : 0xTBA. 3. SDH and SONET Labels SDH and SONET each define a multiplexing structure. These two structures are trees whose roots are respectively an STM-N or an STS-N; and whose leaves are the signals (time-slots) that can be transported and switched, i.e. a VC-x or a VT-x. An SDH/SONET label will identify the exact position of a particular signal in a multiplexing structure. SDH and SONET labels are carried in the Generalized Label per [GMPLS-RSVP] and [GMPLS-LDP]. These multiplexing structures will be used as naming trees to create unique multiplex entry names or labels. Since the SONET multiplexing structure may be seen as a subset of the SDH multiplexing structure, the same format of label is used for SDH and SONET. As explained in [GMPLS-SIG], a label does not identify the "class" to which the label belongs. This is implicitly determined by the link on which the label is used. However, in some cases the encoding specified hereafter can make the direct distinction between SDH and SONET. In case of signal concatenation or multiplication, a list of labels can appear in the Label field of a Generalized Label. In case of any type of contiguous concatenation (e.g. standard or arbitrary concatenation), only one label appears in the Label field. That label is the lowest signal of the contiguously concatenated signal. By lowest signal we mean the one having the lowest label when compared as integer values, i.e. the first component signal of the concatenated signal encountered when descending the tree. In case of virtual concatenation, the explicit ordered list of all labels in the concatenation is given. Each label indicates a component of the virtually concatenated signal. The order of the E. Mannie Editor Internet-Draft November 2001 9 draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-sonet-sdh-00.txt May, 2001 labels must reflect the order of the payloads to concatenate (not the physical order of time-slots). The above representation limits virtual concatenation to remain within a single (component) link. In case of multiplication (i.e. using the multiplier transform), the explicit ordered list of all labels that take part in the Final Signal is given. In case of multiplication of virtually concatenated signals, the first set of labels indicates the first virtually concatenated signal, the second set of labels indicates the second virtually concatenated signal, and so on. The above representation limits multiplication to remain within a single (component) link. The format of the label for SDH and/or SONET TDM-LSR link is: 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | S | U | K | L | M | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ For SDH, this is an extension of the numbering scheme defined in G.707 section 7.3, i.e. the (K, L, M) numbering. For SONET, the U and K fields are not significant and must be set to zero. Only the S, L and M fields are significant for SONET and have a similar meaning as for SDH. Each letter indicates a possible branch number starting at the parent node in the multiplex structure. Branches are considered as numbered in increasing order, starting from the top of the multiplexing structure. The numbering starts at 1, zero is used to indicate a non-significant field. When a field is not significant in a particular context it MUST be set to zero when transmitted, and MUST be ignored when received. When hierarchical SDH/SONET LSPs are used, an LSP with a given bandwidth can be used to tunnel lower order LSPs. The higher order SDH/SONET LSP behaves as a virtual link with a given bandwidth (e.g. VC-3), it may also be used as a Forwarding Adjacency. A lower order SDH/SONET LSP can be established through that higher order LSP. Since a label is local to a (virtual) link, the highest part of that label is non-significant and is set to zero. For instance, a VC-3 LSP can be advertised as a forwarding adjacency. In that case all labels allocated between the two ends of that LSP will have S, U and K set to zero, i.e., non- significant, while L and M will be used to indicate the signal allocated in that VC-3. 1. S is the index of a particular STM-1/STS-1 signal. S=1->N indicates a specific STM-1/STS-1 inside an STM-N/STS-N E. Mannie Editor Internet-Draft November 2001 10 draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-sonet-sdh-00.txt May, 2001 multiplex. For example, S=1 indicates the first STM-1/STS-1, and S=N indicates the last STM-1/STS-1 of this multiplex. 2. U is only significant for SDH and must be ignored for SONET. It indicates a specific VC inside a given STM-1. U=1 indicates a single VC-4, while U=2->4 indicates a specific VC-3 inside the given STM-1. 3. K is only significant for SDH and must be ignored for SONET. It indicates a specific branch of a VC-4. K=1 indicates that the VC-4 is not further subdivided and contains a C-4. K=2->4 indicates a specific TUG-3 inside the VC-4. K is not significant when the STM-1 is divided into VC-3s (easy to read and test). 4. L indicates a specific branch of a TUG-3, VC-3 or STS-1 SPE. It is not significant for an unstructured VC-4. L=1 indicates that the TUG-3/VC-3/STS-1 SPE is not further subdivided and contains a VC-3/C-3 in SDH or the equivalent in SONET. L=2->8 indicates a specific TUG-2/VT Group inside the corresponding higher order signal. 5. M indicates a specific branch of a TUG-2/VT Group. It is not significant for an unstructured VC-4, TUG-3, VC-3 or STS-1 SPE. M=1 indicates that the TUG-2/VT Group is not further subdivided and contains a VC-2/VT-6. M=2->3 indicates a specific VT-3 inside the corresponding VT Group, these values MUST NOT be used for SDH since there is no equivalent of VT-3 with SDH. M=4->6 indicates a specific VC-12/VT-2 inside the corresponding TUG- 2/VT Group. M=7->10 indicates a specific VC-11/VT-1.5 inside the corresponding TUG-2/VT Group. Note that M=0 denotes an unstructured VC-4, VC-3 or STS-1 SPE (easy for debugging). The M encoding is summarized in the following table: M SDH SONET ---------------------------------------------------------- 0 unstructured VC-4/VC-3 unstructured STS-1 SPE 1 VC-2 VT-6 2 - 1st VT-3 3 - 2nd VT-3 4 1st VC-12 1st VT-2 5 2nd VC-12 2nd VT-2 6 3rd VC-12 3rd VT-2 7 1st VC-11 1st VT-1.5 8 2nd VC-11 2nd VT-1.5 9 3rd VC-11 3rd VT-1.5 10 4th VC-11 4th VT-1.5 In case of contiguous concatenation, the label that is used is the lowest label of the contiguously concatenated signal as explained before. The higher part of the label indicates where the signal starts and the lowest part is not significant. For instance, when requesting an STS-48c the label is S>0, U=0, K=0, L=0, M=0. E. Mannie Editor Internet-Draft November 2001 11 draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-sonet-sdh-00.txt May, 2001 Examples of labels: Example 1: S>0, U=1, K=1, L=0, M=0 Denotes the unstructured VC-4 of the Sth STM-1. Example 2: S>0, U=1, K>1, L=1, M=0 Denotes the unstructured VC-3 of the Kth-1 TUG-3 of the Sth STM-1. Example 3: S>0, U=0, K=0, L=0, M=0 Denotes the unstructured STM-1/STS-1 SPE of the Sth STM-1/STS-1. Example 4: S>0, U=0, K=0, L>1, M=1 Denotes the VT-6 in the Lth-1 VT Group in the Sth STS-1. Example 5: S>0, U=0, K=0, L>1, M=9 Denotes the 3rd VT-1.5 in the Lth-1 VT Group in the Sth STS-1. 4. Examples of SONET and SDH signals As stated above, signal types are Elementary Signals to which successive concatenation, multiplication and transparency transforms can be applied. 1. A VC-4 signal is formed by the application of CCT with value 0, NVC with value 0 (no concatenation), MT with value 1 and T with value 0 to a VC-4 Elementary Signal. 2. A VC-4-7v signal is formed by the application of CCT with value 0, NVC with value 7 (virtual concatenation of 7 components), MT with value 1 and T with value 0 to a VC-4 Elementary Signal. 3. A VC-4-16c signal is formed by the application of CCT with value 1 (standard contiguous concatenation), NCC with value 16, NVC with value 0, MT with value 1 and T with value 0 to a VC-4 Elementary Signal. 5. An STM-16 signal with Multiplex Section layer transparency is formed by the application of CCT with value 0, NVC with value 0, MT with value 1 and T with flag 2 to an STM-16 Elementary Signal. 6. An STM-64 signal with RSOH and MSOH DCC's transparency is formed by the application of CCT with value 0, NVC with value 0, MT with value 1 and T with flag 4 and 5 to an STM-64 Elementary Signal. 7. An STM-4c signal (i.e. VC-4-4C with the transport overhead) with Multiplex Section layer transparency is formed by the application of CCT with value 1, NCC with value 4, NVC with value 0, MT with value 1 and T with flag 2 applied to an STM-4 Elementary Signal. 8. An STM-256c signal with Multiplex Section layer transparency is formed by the application of CCT with value 1, NCC with value 256, E. Mannie Editor Internet-Draft November 2001 12 draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-sonet-sdh-00.txt May, 2001 NVC with value 0, MT with value 1 and T with flag 2 applied to an STM-256 Elementary Signal. 9. An STS-1 SPE signal is formed by the application of CCT with value 0, NVC with value 0, MT with value 1 and T with value 0 to an STS-1 SPE Elementary Signal. 10. An STS-3c SPE signal is formed by the application of CCT with value 1 (standard contiguous concatenation), NCC with value 3, NVC with value 0, MT with value 1 and T with value 0 to an STS-1 SPE Elementary Signal. 11. An STS-48c SPE signal is formed by the application of CCT with value 1 (standard contiguous concatenation), NCC with value 48, NVC with value 0, MT with value 1 and T with value 0 to an STS-1 SPE Elementary Signal. 12. An STS-1-3v SPE signal is formed by the application of CCT with value 0, NVC with value 3 (virtual concatenation of 3 components), MT with value 1 and T with value 0 to an STS-1 SPE Elementary Signal. 13. An STS-3c-9v SPE signal is formed by the application of CCT with value 1 (standard contiguous concatenation), NCC with value 3, NVC with value 9 (virtual concatenation of 9 STS-3c), MT with value 1 and T with value 0 to an STS-1 SPE Elementary Signal. 14. An STS-12 signal with Section layer (full) transparency is formed by the application of CCT with value 0, NVC with value 0, MT with value 1 and T with flag 1 to an STS-12 Elementary Signal. 15. An STS-192 signal with K1/K2 and LOH DCC transparency is formed by the application of CCT with value 0, NVC with value 0, MT with value 1 and T with flags 5 and 7 to an STS-192 Elementary Signal. 16. An STS-48c signal with LOH DCC and E2 transparency is formed by the application of CCT with Type 1, NCC with value 48, NVC with value 0, MT with value 1 and T with flag 5 and 10 to an STS-48 Elementary Signal. 17. An STS-768c signal with K1/K2 and LOH DCC transparency is formed by the application of CCT with Type 1, NCC with value 768, NVC with value 0, MT with value 1 and T with flag 5 and 7 to an STS-768 Elementary Signal. 18. 4 x STS-12 signals with K1/K2 and LOH DCC transparency is formed by the application of CCT with value 0, NVC with value 0, MT with value 4 and T with flags 5 and 7 to an STS-12 Elementary Signal. 19. 3 x STS-768c SPE signal is formed by the application of CCT with value 1, NCC with value 768, NVC with value 0, MT with value 3, and T with value 0 to an STS-1 SPE Elementary Signal. E. Mannie Editor Internet-Draft November 2001 13 draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-sonet-sdh-00.txt May, 2001 20. 5 x VC-4-13v composed signal is formed by the application of CCT with value 0, NVC with value 13, MT with value 5 and T with value 0 to a VC-4 Elementary Signal. 21. 2 x STS-4a-5v SPE signal is formed by the application of CCT with value 2 (for arbitrary concatenation), NCC with value 4, NVC with value 5, MT with value 2 and T with value 0 to an STS-1 SPE Elementary Signal. 5. Acknowledgments Valuable comments and input were received from many people. 6. Security Considerations This draft introduce no new security considerations to either [GMPLS-RSVP] or [GMPLS-LDP]. 7. References [GMPLS-LDP] Ashwood-Smith, P. et al, "Generalized MPLS Signaling - CR-LDP Extensions", Internet Draft, draft-ietf-mpls-generalized-cr-ldp-02.txt, April, 2001. [GMPLS-SIG] Ashwood-Smith, P. et al, "Generalized MPLS - Signaling Functional Description", Internet Draft, draft-ietf-mpls-generalized-signaling-02.txt, February 2001. [GMPLS-RSVP] Ashwood-Smith, P. et al, "Generalized MPLS Signaling - RSVP-TE Extensions", Internet Draft, draft-ietf-mpls-generalized-rsvp-te-02.txt, April, 2001. [GMPLS-ARCH] E. Mannie Editor, "GMPLS Architecture", Internet Draft, draft-many-gmpls-architecture-00.txt, March, 2001. [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels," RFC 2119. [RFC2210] Wroclawski, J., "The Use of RSVP with IETF Integrated Services," RFC 2210, September 1997. E. Mannie Editor Internet-Draft November 2001 14 draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-sonet-sdh-00.txt May, 2001 8. Authors' Addresses Peter Ashwood-Smith Nortel Networks Corp. P.O. Box 3511 Station C, Ottawa, ON K1Y 4H7 Canada Phone: +1 613 763 4534 Email: petera@nortelnetworks.com Ayan Banerjee Calient Networks 5853 Rue Ferrari San Jose, CA 95138 Phone: +1 408 972-3645 Email: abanerjee@calient.net Lou Berger Movaz Networks, Inc. 7926 Jones Branch Drive Suite 615 McLean VA, 22102 Phone: +1 703 847-1801 Email: lberger@movaz.com Greg Bernstein Ciena Corporation 10480 Ridgeview Court Cupertino, CA 94014 Phone: +1 408 366 4713 Email: greg@ciena.com Angela Chiu Celion Networks One Sheila Drive, Suite 2 Tinton Falls, NJ 07724-2658 Phone: +1 732 747 9987 Email: angela.chiu@celion.com John Drake Calient Networks 5853 Rue Ferrari San Jose, CA 95138 Phone: +1 408 972 3720 Email: jdrake@calient.net Yanhe Fan Axiowave Networks, Inc. 100 Nickerson Road Marlborough, MA 01752 Phone: +1 508 460 6969 Ext. 627 Email: yfan@axiowave.com E. Mannie Editor Internet-Draft November 2001 15 draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-sonet-sdh-00.txt May, 2001 Michele Fontana Alcatel TND-Vimercate Via Trento 30, I-20059 Vimercate, Italy Phone: +39 039 686-7053 Email: michele.fontana@netit.alcatel.it Gert Grammel Alcatel TND-Vimercate Via Trento 30, I-20059 Vimercate, Italy Phone: +39 039 686-7060 Email: gert.grammel@netit.alcatel.it Juergen Heiles Siemens AG Hofmannstr. 51 D-81379 Munich, Germany Phone: +49 89 7 22 - 4 86 64 Email: Juergen.Heiles@icn.siemens.de Suresh Katukam Cisco Systems 1450 N. McDowell Blvd, Petaluma, CA 94954-6515 USA e-mail: skatukam@cisco.com Kireeti Kompella Juniper Networks, Inc. 1194 N. Mathilda Ave. Sunnyvale, CA 94089 Email: kireeti@juniper.net Jonathan P. Lang Calient Networks 25 Castilian Goleta, CA 93117 Email: jplang@calient.net Zhi-Wei Lin 101 Crawfords Corner Rd Holmdel, NJ 07733-3030 Phone: +1 732 949 5141 Email: zwlin@lucent.com Ben Mack-Crane Tellabs Email: Ben.Mack-Crane@tellabs.com E. Mannie Editor Internet-Draft November 2001 16 draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-sonet-sdh-00.txt May, 2001 Eric Mannie EBONE Terhulpsesteenweg 6A 1560 Hoeilaart - Belgium Phone: +32 2 658 56 52 Mobile: +32 496 58 56 52 Fax: +32 2 658 51 18 Email: eric.mannie@ebone.com Dimitri Papadimitriou Senior R&D Engineer - Optical Networking Alcatel IPO-NSG Francis Wellesplein 1, B-2018 Antwerpen, Belgium Phone: +32 3 240-8491 Email: Dimitri.Papadimitriou@alcatel.be Mike Raftelis White Rock Networks 18111 Preston Road Suite 900 Dallas, TX 75252 Phone: +1 (972)588-3728 Fax: +1 (972)588-3701 Email: Mraftelis@WhiteRockNetworks.com Bala Rajagopalan Tellium, Inc. 2 Crescent Place P.O. Box 901 Oceanport, NJ 07757-0901 Phone: +1 732 923 4237 Fax: +1 732 923 9804 Email: braja@tellium.com Yakov Rekhter Juniper Networks, Inc. Email: yakov@juniper.net Debanjan Saha Tellium Optical Systems 2 Crescent Place Oceanport, NJ 07757-0901 Phone: +1 732 923 4264 Fax: +1 732 923 9804 Email: dsaha@tellium.com Vishal Sharma Jasmine Networks, Inc. 3061 Zanker Road, Suite B San Jose, CA 95134 Phone: +1 408 895 5030 Fax: +1 408 895 5050 Email: vsharma@jasminenetworks.com E. Mannie Editor Internet-Draft November 2001 17 draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-sonet-sdh-00.txt May, 2001 George Swallow Cisco Systems, Inc. 250 Apollo Drive Chelmsford, MA 01824 Voice: +1 978 244 8143 Email: swallow@cisco.com Z. Bo Tang Tellium, Inc. 2 Crescent Place P.O. Box 901 Oceanport, NJ 07757-0901 Phone: +1 732 923 4231 Fax: +1 732 923 9804 Email: btang@tellium.com Eve Varma 101 Crawfords Corner Rd Holmdel, NJ 07733-3030 Phone: +1 732 949 8559 Email: evarma@lucent.com Maarten Vissers Botterstraat 45 Postbus 18 1270 AA Huizen, Netherlands Email: mvissers@lucent.com Yangguang Xu 21-2A41, 1600 Osgood Street North Andover, MA 01845 Email: xuyg@lucent.com E. Mannie Editor Internet-Draft November 2001 18