Network Working Group J.P. Lang Internet Draft (Rincon Networks) Category: Standards Track Expires: September 2003 D. Papadimitriou (Alcatel) March 2003 SONET/SDH Encoding for Link Management Protocol (LMP) Test messages draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-test-sonet-sdh-01.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." The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. Abstract This document details the Synchronous Optical NETwork (SONET)/ Synchronous Digital Hierarchy (SDH) technology specific information needed when sending Link Management Protocol (LMP) test messages. J. Lang and D. Papadimitriou [Page 1] Internet Draft draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-test-sonet-sdh-01.txt Feb. 2003 [Editor's note: "Changes from previous version" notes can be removed prior to publication as an RFC.] Changes from previous version: o Editorial changes. o Removed J0-64 and J1-64 Test message formats. o Added a mechanism to request the insertion of a trace. 1. Introduction For scalability purposes, multiple physical resources that interconnect LSRs can be combined to form a single traffic engineering (TE) link for the purposes of path computation and signaling. These resources may represent one or more physical links that connect the LSRs, or they may represent a Label Switched Path (LSP) if LSP hierarchy [LSP-HIER] is used. The management of TE links is not restricted to in-band messaging, but instead can be done using out-of-band techniques. The Link Management Protocol (LMP) [LMP] is being developed as part of the Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) protocol suite to manage traffic engineering (TE) links. LMP currently consists of four main procedures, of which, the first two are mandatory and the last two are optional: 1. Control channel management 2. Link property correlation 3. Link verification 4. Fault management Control channel management is used to establish and maintain control channel connectivity between adjacent nodes. This is done using a Config message exchange followed by a lightweight keep-alive message exchange. Link property correlation is used to aggregate multiple data links into a single TE Link and to synchronize the link properties. Link verification is used to verify the physical connectivity of the data links and to exchange the Interface_Ids of the data links. Fault management is primarily used to suppress alarms and to localize failures in both opaque and transparent networks. When LMP is used with SONET/SDH, however, the fault management procedures may not be needed as existing SONET/SDH mechanisms can be used. In this document, we define SONET/SDH technology specific information needed when running LMP. Specifically, we define the SONET/SDH test procedures used for Link verification and link property correlation. This requires a new trace monitoring function that is discussed in this document. Once the data links have been verified, they can be grouped to form TE links. 2. Terminology J. Lang and D. Papadimitriou [Page 2] Internet Draft draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-test-sonet-sdh-01.txt Feb. 2003 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]. The reader is assumed to be familiar with the terminology in [LMP], [G.707], and [T1.105]. The following abbreviations are used in this document: CRC-N: Cyclic Redundancy Check-N. DCC: Data communications channel. LOVC: Lower order virtual container HOVC: Higher order virtual container MS: Multiplex section. MSOH: Multiplex section overhead. POH: Path overhead. RS: Regenerator section. RSOH: Regenerator section overhead. SDH: Synchronous digital hierarchy. SOH: Section overhead. SONET: Synchronous Optical Network STM(-N): Synchronous Transport Module (-N) (SDH). STS(-N): Synchronous Transport Signal-Level N (SONET). VC-n: Virtual Container-n (SDH). VTn: Virtual Tributary-n (SONET). 3. Verifying Link Connectivity In [LMP], a link verification procedure is defined whereby Test messages are transmitted in-band over the data links. This is used for data plane discovery, Interface_Id exchange (Interface_Ids are used in GMPLS signaling, either as port labels [RFC 3471] or component link identifiers [BUNDLE], depending on the configuration), and physical connectivity verification. Multiple data links can be verified using a single verification procedure; the correlation is done using the Verify_Id that is assigned to the procedure. As part of the link verification procedure, a BeginVerify message exchange is used to agree upon parameters for the Test procedure. This can be initiated by sending a BeginVerify message over the control channel. This message includes a BEGIN_VERIFY object that contains a number of fields specifying, among other things, the transmission (bit) rate, encoding type, and transport mechanisms for the Test messages. If the remote node receives a BeginVerify message and is ready to begin the procedure, it sends a BeginVerifyAck message specifying the desired transport mechanism for the Test messages. The remote node also assigns a Verify_Id to the procedure and includes it in the BeginVerifyAck message. The transmission rate of the data link over which the Test messages will be transmitted is represented in IEEE floating point format J. Lang and D. Papadimitriou [Page 3] Internet Draft draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-test-sonet-sdh-01.txt Feb. 2003 using a 32-bit number field and expressed in bytes per second. See [RFC 3471] for values defined for SONET/SDH. The encoding type identifies the encoding supported by an interface. The defined encoding is consistent with the LSP Encoding Type as defined in [RFC 3471]. For SONET/SDH, this value must equal the value given for "SDH ITU-T G.707/ SONET ANSI T1.105". The transport mechanism is defined using the Verify Transport Mechanism bit mask. The scope of this bit mask is restricted to the link encoding type. Multiple bits may be set when this field is included in the BeginVerify message; however, only one bit may be set when it is included in the BeginVerifyAck message. In the following subsection, we define the various options for Verify Transport Mechanism when the encoding is SONET/SDH. 3.1. Verify Transport Mechanism This field is 16 bits in length. In this document, we define the flags for SONET/SDH encoding. Note that all values are defined in network byte order (i.e., big-endian byte order). 0x01 J0-16: 16 byte J0 Test Message Capable of transmitting Test messages using J0 overhead bytes with frame length of 16 bytes (with CRC-7). See table 9-1 of ITU G.707 [G.707] for the 16-byte J0 definition. The definition of CRC-7 is found in Annex B of ITU G.707. Note that due to the byte limitation, the Test message is NOT sent as an IP packet and as such, no layer 2 encapsulation is used. A dedicated Test message format is defined as follows: The Test message (i.e., the string inserted into the frame) is a 15-byte message, where the 7 most significant bits (msb) of each byte are usable. Due to the byte limitation, the LMP Header is not included. The first usable 4 bits are reserved. These bits MUST be sent as zero and ignored on receipt. The next usable 2 bits are used to identify the message type. For the Test message, this value is 0. The next usable bit is used to determine the address type of the Interface_Id. For IPv4, this value is 0. For unnumbered, this value is 1. The next usable 32 bits MUST be the Interface_Id. The next usable 32 bits MUST be the Verify_Id that was received in the VERIFY_ID J. Lang and D. Papadimitriou [Page 4] Internet Draft draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-test-sonet-sdh-01.txt Feb. 2003 object of the BeginVerifyAck message. The remaining bits are reserved and should be sent as zero and ignored on receipt. Note that this Test Message format is only valid when the Interface_Id is either IPv4 or unnumbered. 0x02 DCCS: Test Message over the Section/RS DCC Capable of transmitting Test messages using the DCC Section/RS Overhead bytes with bit-oriented HDLC framing format [RFC1662]. The Test message is sent as defined in [LMP]. 0x04 DCCL: Test Message over the Line/MS DCC Capable of transmitting Test messages using the DCC Line/MS Overhead bytes with bit-oriented HDLC framing format [RFC1662]. The Test message is sent as defined in [LMP]. 0x08 J0-trace: J0 Section Trace Correlation Capable of transmitting SONET/SDH Section/RS trace over J0 Section/RS overhead byte as defined in ANSI T1.105/ITU-T G.707. The Test message is not transmitted using the J0 bytes (i.e., over the data link), but is sent over the control channel and correlated for consistency to the received J0 pattern. In order to get the mapping between the Interface_Id over which the J0 test message is sent and the J0 pattern sent in-band, the transmitting node must provide the correlation between this pattern and the J0 test message. This correlation is done using the TRACE object as defined in Section 4 .. The format of the test message is as follows: ::= Note that no change is required for the TestStatusSuccess or TestStatusFailure messages. 0x10 J1-16: 16 byte J1 Test Message J. Lang and D. Papadimitriou [Page 5] Internet Draft draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-test-sonet-sdh-01.txt Feb. 2003 Capable of transmitting Test messages using the SDH HOVC J1 Path Trace byte (frame length of 16 bytes with CRC-7), see [G.707]. Note that due to the byte limitation, the Test message is NOT sent as an IP packet and as such, no layer 2 encapsulation is used. The Test message format defined above for J0-16 is used. Note that this Test Message format is only valid when the Interface_Id is either IPv4 or unnumbered. 0x20 J2-16: 16 byte J2 Test Message Capable of transmitting Test messages using the SONET/SDH VT SPE/LOVC J2 Path Trace byte (frame length of 16 bytes with CRC-7), see [T1.105] and [G.707]. Note that due to the byte limitation, the Test message is NOT sent as an IP packet and as such, no layer 2 encapsulation is used. The Test message format defined above for J0-16 is used. 0x40 J1-trace: J1 Path Trace Correlation Capable of transmitting SONET/SDH STS SPE/HOVC Path trace over J1 Path overhead byte as defined in [T1105] and [G707]. The Test message is not transmitted using the J1 bytes (i.e., over the data link), but is sent over the control channel and correlated for consistency to the received J1 pattern. In order to get the mapping between the Interface_Id over which the J1 test message is sent and the J1 pattern sent in-band, the transmitting node must provide the correlation between this pattern and the J1 test message. This correlation is done using the TRACE object as defined in Section 4 .. The Test Message format is identical to that defined above in J0-trace. Note that no change is required for the TestStatusSuccess or TestStatusFailure messages. 0x80 J2-trace: J2 Section Trace Correlation Capable of transmitting SONET/SDH VT SPE/LOVC Path trace over J2 Path overhead byte as defined in [T1.105] and [G.707]. J. Lang and D. Papadimitriou [Page 6] Internet Draft draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-test-sonet-sdh-01.txt Feb. 2003 The Test message is not transmitted using the J2 bytes (i.e., over the data link), but is sent over the control channel and correlated for consistency to the received J2 pattern. In order to get the mapping between the Interface_Id over which the J2 test message is sent and the J2 pattern sent in-band, the transmitting node must provide the correlation between this pattern and the J2 test message. This correlation is done using the TRACE object as defined in Section 4 .. The Test Message format is identical to that defined above in J0-trace. Note that no change is required for the TestStatusSuccess or TestStatusFailure messages. 4. Trace Monitoring The trace monitoring features described in this section allow a node to do trace monitoring by using the SONET/SDH capabilities. o A node may request its neighbor (the remote node) to monitor a link for a specific pattern in the overhead using the TraceMonitor Message. An example of this overhead is the SONET Section Trace message transmitted in the J0 byte. If the actual trace message does not match the expected trace message, the remote node MUST report the mismatch condition. o A node may request the value of the current trace message on a given data link using the TraceReq Message. o A node may request a remote node to send a specific trace message over a data link using the InsertTrace Message. 4.1.1. TraceMonitor Message The TraceMonitor message (message type TBA by IANA) is sent over the control channel and is used to request the remote node to monitor a data link for a specific trace value. This value is inserted in the object. The format of the TraceMonitor message is as follows: ::= The above transmission order SHOULD be followed. The remote node MUST respond to a TraceMonitor message with either a TraceMonitorAck or TraceMonitorNack Message. J. Lang and D. Papadimitriou [Page 7] Internet Draft draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-test-sonet-sdh-01.txt Feb. 2003 4.1.1.1. TRACE Object Class Class = TBA by IANA. o C-Type = 1, Trace 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |N| C-Type | Class | Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Trace Type | Trace Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | | // Trace Message // | | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Trace Type: 16 bits The type of the trace message. The following values are defined. All other values are reserved and should be sent as zero and ignored on receipt. 1 = SONET Section Trace (J0 Byte) 2 = SONET Path Trace (J1 Byte) 3 = SONET Path Trace (J2 Byte) 4 = SDH Section Trace (J0 Byte) 5 = SDH Path Trace (J1 Byte) 6 = SDH Path Trace (J2 Byte) Trace Length: 16 bits This is the length in bytes of the trace message (as specified by the Trace Type). Trace Message: This is the value of the expected message to be received in- band. The valid length and value combinations are determined by the specific technology: for SONET see [T1.105] and for SDH see [G.707]. The message MUST be padded with zeros to a 32-bit boundary, if necessary. Trace Length does not include padding zeroes. This object is non-negotiable. 4.1.2. TraceMonitorAck Message The TraceMonitorAck message (Message Type TBA by IANA) is used to acknowledge receipt of the TraceMonitor message and indicate that J. Lang and D. Papadimitriou [Page 8] Internet Draft draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-test-sonet-sdh-01.txt Feb. 2003 all of the TRACE Objects in the TraceMonitor message have been received and processed correctly (i.e. no Trace Mismatch). The format is as follows: ::= The above transmission order SHOULD be followed. The MESSAGE_ID_ACK object is defined in [LMP]. The contents of the MESSAGE_ID_ACK object MUST be obtained from the TraceMonitor message being acknowledged. 4.1.3. TraceMonitorNack Message The TraceMonitorNack message (Message Type TBA by IANA) is used to acknowledge receipt of the TraceMonitor message and indicate that the TRACE Object in the TraceMonitor message was not processed correctly. This could be because the trace monitoring requested is not supported or there was an error in the TRACE object value(s). The format is as follows: ::= The above transmission order SHOULD be followed. The MESSAGE_ID_ACK and ERROR_CODE objects are defined in [LMP]. The contents of the MESSAGE_ID_ACK object MUST be obtained from the TraceMonitor message being acknowledged. If the Trace type is not supported, the ERROR_CODE MUST indicate, "Unsupported Trace Type" defined in Section 4.1.3.1. If the TRACE object was not equal to the value seen in the trace, the TraceMonitorNack message MUST include the ERROR_CODE indicating, "Invalid Trace Message". The TraceMismatch message (see Section 4 ..1.4) SHOULD NOT be sent as a result of the mismatch. The TraceMonitorNack message uses a new ERROR_CODE C-Type defined in Section . 4.1.3.1. 4.1.3.1. ERROR_CODE Class C-Type = TBA by IANA, TRACE_ERROR The following new error code bit-values are defined: 0x01 = Unsupported Trace Type 0x02 = Invalid Trace Message J. Lang and D. Papadimitriou [Page 9] Internet Draft draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-test-sonet-sdh-01.txt Feb. 2003 All other values are Reserved. Multiple bits may be set to indicate multiple errors. This Object is non-negotiable. 4.1.4. TraceMismatch Message The TraceMismatch message (Message Type TBA by IANA) is sent over the control channel and is used to report a trace mismatch on a data link for which trace monitoring was requested. The format is as follows: ::= [ ...] The above transmission order SHOULD be followed. A neighboring node that receives a TraceMismatch message MUST respond with a TraceMismatchAck message. The LOCAL_INTERFACE_ID object is defined in [LMP]. The LOCAL_INTERFACE_ID in this message is the local Interface Id of the data link that has a trace mismatch. A trace mismatch for multiple LOCAL_INTERFACE_ID's may be reported in the same message. 4.1.5. TraceMismatchAck Message The TraceMismatchAck message (Message Type TBA by IANA) is used to acknowledge receipt of a TraceMismatch message. The format is as follows: ::= The MESSAGE_ID_ACK object is defined in [LMP]. The contents of the MESSAGE_ID_ACK object MUST be obtained from the TraceMismatch message being acknowledged. 4.1.6. TraceReq Message The TraceReq message (Message Type TBA by IANA) is sent over the control channel and is used to request the current trace value of a data link. ::= The above transmission order SHOULD be followed. The format of the TRACE_REQ object is as follows: Class = TBA by IANA. J. Lang and D. Papadimitriou [Page 10] Internet Draft draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-test-sonet-sdh-01.txt Feb. 2003 O C-Type = 1, TraceReq 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 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ |N| C-Type | Class | Length | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ | Trace Type | (Reserved) | +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ Trace Type: 16 bits Defined in Section 4 ..1.1.1. Reserved: 16 bits This field MUST be set to zero when sent and ignored when received 4.1.7. TraceReport Message The TraceReport message (Message Type TBA by IANA) is sent over the control channel after receiving a TraceReq message. ::= The TraceReport message MUST include a TRACE Object (as described in Section 4 ..1.1.1) for the requested data link. The MESSAGE_ID_ACK object is defined in [LMP]. The contents of the MESSAGE_ID_ACK object MUST be obtained from the TraceReq message being acknowledged. 4.1.8. TraceReqNack Message The TraceReqNack message (Message Type TBA by IANA) is sent over the control channel after receiving a TraceReq message. ::= The above transmission order SHOULD be followed. The MESSAGE_ID_ACK object is defined in [LMP]. The contents of the MESSAGE_ID_ACK object MUST be obtained from the TraceReq message being acknowledged. The TraceReqNak message MUST include an ERROR_CODE Object (as defined in Section 4 ..1.3.1) for the requested data link. 4.1.9. InsertTrace Message J. Lang and D. Papadimitriou [Page 11] Internet Draft draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-test-sonet-sdh-01.txt Feb. 2003 The InsertTrace message (Message Type TBA by IANA) is sent over the control channel and is used to request a remote node to send a specific trace message over a data link (this assumes that the remote knows the mapping between the local and remote interface_Ids before fulfilling such request). The format is as follows: ::= The above transmission order SHOULD be followed. A node that receives an InsertTrace message MUST respond with either an InsertTraceAck or an InsertTraceNack Message. Once the InsertTraceAck message is received, the TraceMismatch message (see Section 4 ..1.4) is used to indicate a trace mismatch has occurred. The MESSAGE_ID_object is defined in [LMP]. 4.1.10. InsertTraceAck Message The InsertTraceAck message (Message Type TBA by IANA) is used to acknowledge receipt of the InsertTrace message and indicate that the TRACE Object in the InsertTrace message has been received and processed correctly (i.e. no Trace Mismatch). The format is as follows: ::= The MESSAGE_ID_ACK object is defined in [LMP]. The contents of the MESSAGE_ID_ACK object MUST be obtained from the InsertTrace message being acknowledged. 4.1.11. InsertTraceNack Message The InsertTraceNack message (Message Type TBA by IANA) is used to acknowledge receipt of the InsertTrace message and to indicate that the TRACE Object in the InsertTrace message was not processed correctly. This could be because the trace monitoring requested is not supported or there was an error in the value. The format is as follows: ::= The above transmission order SHOULD be followed. J. Lang and D. Papadimitriou [Page 12] Internet Draft draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-test-sonet-sdh-01.txt Feb. 2003 The MESSAGE_ID_ACK object is defined in [LMP]. The InsertTraceNack message MUST include an ERROR_CODE Object (as defined in Section 4 ..1.3.1) for the requested data link. 5. Security Considerations No new security considerations are introduced in this document. 6. IANA Considerations LMP defines the following name spaces that require management: - LMP Message Type. - LMP Object Class. - LMP Object Class type (C-Type) unique within the Object Class. - LMP Sub-object Class type (Type) unique within the Object Class. This memo introduces the following name spaces which need assignment: LMP Message Type name space o TraceMonitor message (Message type = TBA) o TraceMonitorAck message (Message type = TBA) o TraceMonitorNack message (Message type = TBA) o TraceMismatch message (Message type = TBA) o TraceMismatchAck message (Message type = TBA) o TraceReq message (Message type = TBA) o TraceReport message (Message type = TBA) o TraceReqNack message (Message type = TBA) o InsertTrace message (Message type = TBA) o InsertTraceAck message (Message type = TBA) o InsertTraceNack message (Message type = TBA) LMP Object Class name space and Class type (C-Type) o TRACE Class name (Class = TBA) - Type 1 (suggested C-Type = 1) o TRACE REQ Class name (Class = TBA) - Type 1 (suggested C-Type = 1) 7. Intellectual Property Considerations The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any intellectual property or other rights that might be claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in this document or the extent to which any license under such rights might or might not be available; neither does it represent that it J. Lang and D. Papadimitriou [Page 13] Internet Draft draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-test-sonet-sdh-01.txt Feb. 2003 has made any effort to identify any such rights. Information on the IETF's procedures with respect to rights in standards-track and standards-related documentation can be found in BCP-11. Copies of claims of rights made available for publication and any assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this specification can be obtained from the IETF Secretariat. The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary rights which may cover technology that may be required to practice this standard. Please address the information to the IETF Executive Director. 8. References 8.1. Normative References [BUNDLE] Kompella, K., Rekhter, Y., Berger, L., "Link Bundling in MPLS Traffic Engineering," (work in progress). [LMP] Lang, J., ed., "Link Management Protocol (LMP)," (work in progress). [RFC1662] W. Simpson, ed., "PPP in HDLC-like Framing", IETF RFC 1662, STD 51, July 1994. [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, IETF RFC 2119, March 1997. [RFC3471] L. Berger, ed., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Functional Description", IETF RFC 3471, January 2003. [G.707] ITU-T Recommendation G.707, "Network node interface for the synchronous digital hierarchy (SDH)," October 2000. [T1.105] T1.105, "Revised Draft T105 SONET Base Standard," January 2001. 8.2. Informative References [LSP-HIER] Kompella, K., Rekhter, Y., " LSP Hierarchy with Generalized MPLS TE," (work in progress). 9. Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank Bernard Sales, Emmanuel Desmet, Gert Grammel, Jim Jones, Stefan Ansorge, John Drake, and James Scott for their many contributions to this document. J. Lang and D. Papadimitriou [Page 14] Internet Draft draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-test-sonet-sdh-01.txt Feb. 2003 We would also like to thank Greg Bernstein and Michiel van Everdingen for their insightful comments and for acting with a strong combination of toughness, professionalism, and courtesy. 10. Author's Addresses Jonathan P. Lang Dimitri Papadimitriou Rincon Networks Alcatel 110, El Paso Francis Wellesplein 1 Goleta, CA 93101 B-2018 Antwerpen, Belgium Email: jplang@ieee.org email: dimitri.papadimitriou@alcatel.be J. Lang and D. Papadimitriou [Page 15] Internet Draft draft-ietf-ccamp-lmp-test-sonet-sdh-01.txt Feb. 2003 11. Full Copyright Statement Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2001). All Rights Reserved. This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it or assist in its implementation may be prepared, copied, published and distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than English. The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns. This document and the information contained herein is provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. J. Lang and D. Papadimitriou [Page 16]