CCAMP Working Group Meeting

-----------------------------------------

First Session    

Monday, April 4, 2016 (ART)    

14:00-15:30 - Monday  Afternoon session I

-----------------------------------------

0 14:00 10

Title: Administrivia - WG Status - Reporting on WG drafts not being presented

Presenter: Chairs

- Fatai Zhang: This time our agenda is full. Next time we might ask for 2 hours session if we have more drafts to be discussed.

* Reports on WG drafts not being presented                                

- draft-ietf-ccamp-flexible-grid-ospf-ext:

- Xian Zhang: No comment received. Requesting last call

- draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-iv-info

- Xian Zhang: No updates since last IETF. Not received any feedback from the list for the ITU liaison.

- Daniele Ceccarelli: please send a reminder to the list and collect comments

- draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-signal-type-subregistry

- Fatai Zhang: a lot of discussion on the list. Agreement to go for standard track. The subregistry will be updated allowing for Standards Action or Specification Required.

- draft-ietf-ccamp-additional-signal-type-g709v3

- Fatai Zhang: Passed working group last call. Waiting for the otn-signal-type-subregistry draft to move forward.

- draft-ietf-ccamp-wson-yang

- Young Lee: Need to remove some unclear text. Need to run Yang model verification. Now there is compilation error. There is a procedural issue with Yang tool. This model extends other model (TE topology). 

Daniele Ceccarelli: Please solve the issue offline with the TE topology authors. 

1 14:10 10

Title: Ethernet Traffic Parameters with Availability Information Draft: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ccamp-rsvp-te-bandwidth-availability-04

Title: OSPF Routing Extension for Links with Variable Discrete Bandwidth

Draft: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ccamp-ospf-availability-extension-04

Presenter: Gregory Mirsky

(no questions)

2 14:20 10

Title: Link Management Protocol Extensions for Grid Property Negotiation

Draft: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-ccamp-grid-property-lmp-02

Presenter: Qilei Wang

- Daniele Ceccarelli: It is nice to see there is an implementation. At the last meeting we did a polling, there was not much support. 

- [Polling] How many people thinks the draft is ready to go? No one.

- [Polling] How many people have read the draft? A lot of people

- Daniele Ceccarelli: A lot of people have read the draft, but none say it is ready to go. Why? Go to the mic and say why please.

- Dieter Beller: The comments where already provided. Negotiation of flexi-grid capabilities does not make sense because you’d probably operate your network in full flexi-grid capability or you’d operate your network in the traditional way without flexi-grid support.

- Daniele Ceccarelli: Would like to hear more comments before taking a decision. In addition to that we’d like to know if there’s any plan for implementation in order to decide if and how to progress the draft.

3 14:30 10

Title: YANG Models for the NBI of a Transport Network Controller: Requirements, Functions, and a List of YANG Models

Draft: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zhang-ccamp-transport-ctrlnorth-yang-00

Presenter: Xian Zhang

- Igor Bryskin: You say that we need technology specific models for tunnels. Which parameters do you think are missing? For example OTN tunnel.

- Xian Zhang: For OTN tunnels you might need the ability to set particular timeslots. 

- Igor Bryskin: You can do it in any case using the ERO and augmenting it with labels.

- Mr. Sharma: Why is the data center use case different from other any other use case?

- Xian Zhang: It is a typical use case for SDN for transport networks.

- Mr. Sharma: UC2 (interdomain). It is covered by the TE Topology, like inter-domain links and so on. What is not covered?

- Xian Zhang: Nothing is missing in the TE model with respect to the inter domain link.

- Mr. Sharma: The two use cases are very generic. I’m not sure what the draft tries to cover in the model itself.

- Lou Berger: What part is technology specific?

- Xian Zhang: It is under debate.

- Lou Berger: If you have something specific to a technology, it is CCAMP, otherwise, if it is generic, it should belong to TEAS. 

- Xian Zhang: Point taken.

- Yuji Tochio: Does this document try to provide services? Or it describes services? Please clarify transport services in this draft. (eg. E-LAN)

- Daniele Ceccarelli: For sure there is something in the draft that is NOT technololgy specific. Suggestion, take the generic away to TEAS, and leave to CCAMP (if it exists) the tech specific.

- Loa Andersson: All the specific technologies are in ccamp. Do you still take it off to TEAS?

- Daniele Ceccarelli: If there is some generic in the new things defined in this draft, take them out, take them to TEAS, either in an specific new draft or as new text to an existing one. The decision is that we need to do the analysis and understand what is technology agnostic and what is technology specific. The draft will be presented in the joint session with TEAS and PCE

4 14:40 10

Title: A YANG model to manage the optical parameters for in a WDM network

Draft: https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-galimbe-ccamp-iv-yang-00.txt

Presenter: Gabriele Galimberti

- Yuji Tochio: Section 7.3 in the draft says: “The ietf-opt-parameters-wdm is an augment to the ????” what do the question marks stand for?

- Gabriele Galimberti: For some parameters it was difficult to find a link to something existing, like for example “amplifier tilt”. Is it a node parameter or an interface parameter? Basically it means that this is a work in progress.

- Dieter Beller: This draft reminds me a discussion we had years ago with Q6 on how to validate optical feasibility. The outcome was that we need to define the mathematical formulas to be applied to state whether an optical path is feasible or not. It was stated that it was fairly complex, mostly with respect to the non linear impairments and it required further study. What has been the advance in Q6? I guess almost no progress. What do we gain by having a yang model here if we don’t have the parameters?

- Gabriele Galimberti: We want to provide a media to transfer the parameters. If you think of an SDN controller it can be general and then can provide a way to include some plugins (vendor specific) to compute the feasibility of a path with the vendor’s secret sauce. What we want to provide is an interface with the possibility to pass those parameters from the network to the SDN controller and the applications to check the feasibility.

- Dieter Beller: If I correctly understand the draft includes the parameters applicable to optical transmitters, receivers and amplifiers, what is still missing is the optical impairment parameters for the fiber links. They have impacts on the impairments, please add them.

- Fatai Zhang: A lot of descriptions are taken from black link draft (now called IP-WDM i/f). Please decouple the WSON impairments from the black links. Please don’t mix them together.

5 14:50 10

Title: Microwave Radio Link YANG Data Models

Draft: https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-ahlberg-ccamp-microwave-radio-link-00.txt

Presenter: Jonas Ahlberg

- Lou Berger: How much of the model is specific to microwave and how much is generic to radio links?

- Jonas Ahlberg: There are a lot of microwave specific parameters in the interfaces.

- Lou Berger: I see good portion of the model is related to a radio link and has nothing to do with the fact that it is a microwave radio link. I think this work could be good but it would be good to structure it in such a way that the next time that someone comes with a RF link we don’t have to re-do the whole model but just add the part that is specific to that technology.

- Ruediger Kunze: There is an ongoing activity similar to this one in ONF which is multi-vendor. I would like to focus on multi-vendor aspects and the focus on vendor specific ones. I suggest to do this work together with the guys from the ONF.  

- Daniele Ceccarelli: That would be good. Since you’re part of this multi-vendor activity, if you could bring the other vendors to the IETF to discuss this work together that would be great.

- Carlos Bernardos: Knowing there is an effort in ONF, why it is not done in collaboration with ONF at the ONF?

- Daniele Ceccarelli: It can be done in cooperation in IETF.

- Jonas Ahlberg: This work has not been done in cooperation with the ONF but with full visibility of the ONF microwave forum. The reason for bringing the draft here is not to cover minor changes between the models but we would like to understand if the IETF structure is more suitable for the management of microwave radio links (compared to the ONF one). The hope is to work together.

6 15:00 10

Title: A framework for Management and Control of DWDM optical interface parameters

Draft: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-kdkgall-ccamp-dwdm-if-mng-ctrl-fwk-01

Presenter: Ruediger Kunze

- Daniele Ceccarelli: I had a chat with the authors and I proposed to rearrange the table of contents to improve readability. There is no change in the content of the draft with respect to the polled one. Changes will be proposed in version 01.

- Ruediger Kunze: We will restructure it a publish the draft before the end of the IETF week.

7 15:10 10

Title: An SNMP MIB extension to RFC3591 to manage optical interface parameters of "G.698.2 single channel" in DWDM applications

Draft: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-galikunze-ccamp-dwdm-if-snmp-mib-01

Title: Extension to LMP for DWDM Optical Line Systems to manage the application code of optical interface parameters in DWDM application

Draft: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dharinigert-ccamp-dwdm-if-lmp-01

Title: A YANG model to manage the optical interface parameters for an external transponder in a WDM network

Draft: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-dharini-ccamp-dwdm-if-yang-00

Presenter: Gert Grammel

- Daniele Ceccarelli: It is nice to see that you put effort to work on both Yang and SNMP. Is this just in order to provide the same features to new devices supporting Yang and old devices supporting SNMP, or you are planning to use Yang and SNMP for different purposes on the same devices?

- Gert Grammel: There are existing implementation of the SNMP, the way SNMP works, including also the controller site. I don't think, from router or switch perspective, change SNMP to Yang changes everything, but on the non-control site, people like to keep using SNMP, so we decided instead of just leave it in site, don't define it, just make sure they are aligned. 

8 15:20 10

Title: Framework and Requirements for GMPLS-based Control of Flexible Ethernet Network

Draft: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wang-ccamp-flexe-fwk-00

Title: RSVP-TE Signaling Extensions in support of Flexible Ethernet networks

Draft: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wang-ccamp-flexe-signaling-00

Presenter: Qilei Wang

- Fatai Zhang: FlexE only provides interfaces. It does not provide networking, which means that FlexE cannot support switching. So, from the control plane perspective, we only care about adaptation.

Adjourn 15:30