idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ospf-g709v3-13.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 : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == There are 1 instance of lines with non-RFC2606-compliant FQDNs in the document. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year -- The document date (December 11, 2013) is 3782 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: 'G.709-2012' is mentioned on line 226, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'G.805' is mentioned on line 313, but not defined == Missing Reference: 'G.798-a2' is mentioned on line 416, but not defined == Outdated reference: A later version (-15) exists of draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g709-framework-13 == Outdated reference: A later version (-13) exists of draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-g709-info-model-09 == Outdated reference: A later version (-12) exists of draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-11 -- Obsolete informational reference (is this intentional?): RFC 5226 (Obsoleted by RFC 8126) == Outdated reference: A later version (-15) exists of draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g709-framework-13 -- Duplicate reference: draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g709-framework, mentioned in 'SWCAP-UPDT', was also mentioned in 'OTN-FWK'. Summary: 0 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 9 warnings (==), 3 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 CCAMP Working Group D. Ceccarelli, Ed. 3 Internet-Draft Ericsson 4 Intended status: Standards Track F. Zhang 5 Expires: June 14, 2014 Huawei Technologies 6 S. Belotti 7 Alcatel-Lucent 8 R. Rao 9 Infinera Corporation 10 J. Drake 11 Juniper 12 December 11, 2013 14 Traffic Engineering Extensions to OSPF for Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) 15 Control of Evolving G.709 OTN Networks 16 draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-ospf-g709v3-13 18 Abstract 20 This document describes Open Shortest Path First - Traffic 21 Engineering (OSPF-TE) routing protocol extensions to support 22 Generalized MPLS (GMPLS) control of Optical Transport Networks (OTN) 23 specified in ITU-T Recommendation G.709 as published in 2012. It 24 extends mechanisms defined in RFC4203. 26 Status of this Memo 28 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 29 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 31 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 32 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 33 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 34 Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 36 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 37 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 38 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 39 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 41 This Internet-Draft will expire on June 14, 2014. 43 Copyright Notice 45 Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 46 document authors. All rights reserved. 48 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 49 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 50 (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 51 publication of this document. Please review these documents 52 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 53 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 54 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 55 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 56 described in the Simplified BSD License. 58 Table of Contents 60 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 61 1.1. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 62 2. OSPF-TE Extensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 63 3. TE-Link Representation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 64 4. ISCD format extensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 65 4.1. Switching Capability Specific Information . . . . . . . . 7 66 4.1.1. Switching Capability Specific Information for 67 fixed containers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 68 4.1.2. Switching Capability Specific Information for 69 variable containers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 70 4.1.3. Switching Capability Specific Information - Field 71 values and explanation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 72 5. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 73 5.1. MAX LSP Bandwidth fields in the ISCD . . . . . . . . . . . 12 74 5.2. Example of T,S and TS granularity utilization . . . . . . 14 75 5.2.1. Example of different TS Granularities . . . . . . . . 15 76 5.3. Example of ODUflex advertisement . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 77 5.4. Example of single stage muxing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 78 5.5. Example of multi stage muxing - Unbundled link . . . . . . 22 79 5.6. Example of multi stage muxing - Bundled links . . . . . . 24 80 5.7. Example of component links with non-homogeneous 81 hierarchies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 82 6. OSPFv2 scalability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 83 7. Compatibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 84 8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 85 9. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 86 9.1. Switching types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 87 9.2. New sub-TLVs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 88 10. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 89 11. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 90 12. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 91 12.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 92 12.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 93 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 95 1. Introduction 97 G.709 Optical Transport Network (OTN) [G.709-2012] includes new fixed 98 and flexible ODU (Optical channel Data Unit) containers, two types of 99 Tributary Slots (i.e., 1.25Gbps and 2.5Gbps), and supports various 100 multiplexing relationships (e.g., ODUj multiplexed into ODUk (jODUk 152 format is used to indicate the ODUj into ODUk multiplexing 153 capability. 155 This notation can be repeated as needed depending on the number of 156 multiplexing levels. In the following, the term "multiplexing tree" 157 is used to identify a multiplexing hierarchy where the root is always 158 a server ODUk/OTUk and any other supported multiplexed container is 159 represented with increasing granularity until reaching the leaf of 160 the tree. The tree can be structured with more than one branch if 161 the server ODUk/OTUk supports more than one hierarchy. 163 For example, if a multiplexing hierarchy like the following one is 164 considered: 166 ODU2 ODU0 ODUflex ODU0 167 \ / \ / 168 | | 169 ODU3 ODU2 170 \ / 171 \ / 172 \ / 173 \ / 174 ODU4 176 The ODU4 is the root of the muxing tree, ODU3 and ODU2 are containers 177 directly multiplexed into the server and then ODU2, ODU0 are the 178 leaves of the ODU3 branch, while ODUflex and ODU0 are the leaves of 179 the ODU2 one. This means that it is possible to have the following 180 multiplexing capabilities: 182 ODU2->ODU3->ODU4 183 ODU0->ODU3->ODU4 184 ODUflex->ODU2->ODU4 185 ODU0->ODU2->ODU4 187 3. TE-Link Representation 189 G.709 ODUk/OTUk Links are represented as TE-Links in GMPLS Traffic 190 Engineering Topology for supporting ODUj layer switching. These TE- 191 Links can be modeled in multiple ways. 193 OTUk physical Link(s) can be modeled as a TE-Link(s). Figure 1 below 194 provides an illustration of one hop OTUk TE-links. 196 +-------+ +-------+ +-------+ 197 | OTN | | OTN | | OTN | 198 |Switch |<- OTUk Link ->|Switch |<- OTUk Link ->|Switch | 199 | A | | B | | C | 200 +-------+ +-------+ +-------+ 202 |<-- TE-Link -->| |<-- TE-Link -->| 204 Figure 1: OTUk TE-Links 206 It is possible to create TE-Links that span more than one hop by 207 creating FAs between non-adjacent nodes (see Figure 2). As in the 208 one hop case, multiple hop TE-links advertise ODU switching capacity. 210 +-------+ +-------+ +-------+ 211 | OTN | | OTN | | OTN | 212 |Switch |<- OTUk Link ->|Switch |<- OTUk Link ->|Switch | 213 | A | | B | | C | 214 +-------+ +-------+ +-------+ 215 ODUk Switched 217 |<------------- ODUk Link ------------->| 218 |<-------------- TE-Link--------------->| 220 Figure 2: Multiple hop TE-Link 222 4. ISCD format extensions 224 The ISCD describes the switching capability of an interface and is 225 defined in [RFC4203]. This document defines a new Switching 226 Capability value for OTN [G.709-2012] as follows: 228 Value Type 229 ----- ---- 230 110 (TBA by IANA) OTN-TDM capable (OTN-TDM) 232 When supporting the extensions defined in this document, for both 233 fixed and flexible ODUs, the Switching Capability and Encoding values 234 MUST be used as follows: 236 - Switching Capability = OTN-TDM 237 - Encoding Type = G.709 ODUk (Digital Path) as defined in [RFC4328] 239 The same switching type and encoding values must be used for both 240 fixed and flexible ODUs. When Switching Capability and Encoding 241 fields are set to values as stated above, the Interface Switching 242 Capability Descriptor MUST be interpreted as defined in [RFC4203]. 244 Maximum LSP Bandwidth 246 The MAX LSP Bandwidth field is used according to [RFC4203]: i.e., 0 247 <= MAX LSP Bandwidth <= ODUk/OTUk, and intermediate values are those 248 on the branch of OTN switching hierarchy supported by the interface. 249 For example, in the OTU4 link it could be possible to have ODU4 as 250 MAX LSP Bandwidth for some priorities, ODU3 for others, ODU2 for some 251 others, etc. The bandwidth unit is in bytes per second and the 252 encoding MUST be in Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers 253 (IEEE) floating point format. The discrete values for various ODUs 254 are shown in the table below (please note that there are 1000 bits in 255 a kbit according to normal practices in telecommunications). 257 +---------------------+------------------------------+-----------------+ 258 | ODU Type | ODU nominal bit rate |Value in Byte/Sec| 259 | | |(floating p. val)| 260 +---------------------+------------------------------+-----------------+ 261 | ODU0 | 1,244,160 kbit/s | 0x4D1450C0 | 262 | ODU1 | 239/238 x 2,488,320 kbit/s | 0x4D94F048 | 263 | ODU2 | 239/237 x 9,953,280 kbit/s | 0x4E959129 | 264 | ODU3 | 239/236 x 39,813,120 kbit/s | 0x4F963367 | 265 | ODU4 | 239/227 x 99,532,800 kbit/s | 0x504331E3 | 266 | ODU2e | 239/237 x 10,312,500 kbit/s | 0x4E9AF70A | 267 | | | | 268 | ODUflex for CBR | 239/238 x client signal | MAX LSP | 269 | Client signals | bit rate | BANDWIDTH | 270 | | | | 271 | ODUflex for GFP-F | | MAX LSP | 272 |Mapped client signal | Configured bit rate | BANDWIDTH | 273 | | | | 274 | | | | 275 |ODU flex resizable | Configured bit rate | MAX LSP | 276 | | | BANDWIDTH | 277 +---------------------+------------------------------+-----------------+ 279 A single ISCD MAY be used for the advertisement of unbundled or 280 bundled links supporting homogeneous multiplexing hierarchies and the 281 same TS (Tributary Slot) granularity. A different ISCD MUST be used 282 for each different muxing hierarchy (muxing tree in the following 283 examples) and different TS granularity supported within the TE Link. 285 When a received LSA includes a sub-TLV not formatted accordingly to 286 the precise specifications in this document, the problem SHOULD be 287 logged and the wrongly formatted sub-TLV MUST NOT be used for path 288 computation. 290 4.1. Switching Capability Specific Information 292 The technology specific part of the OTN-TDM ISCD may include a 293 variable number of sub-TLVs called Bandwidth sub-TLVs. Each sub-TLV 294 is encoded with the sub-TLV header as defined in [RFC3630] section 295 2.3.2. The muxing hierarchy tree MUST be encoded as an order 296 independent list. Two types of Bandwidth sub-TLV are defined (TBA by 297 IANA). Note that type values are defined in this document and not in 298 [RFC3630]. 300 - Type 1 - Unreserved Bandwidth for fixed containers 302 - Type 2 - Unreserved/MAX LSP Bandwidth for flexible containers 304 The Switching Capability-Specific Information (SCSI) MUST include one 305 Type 1 sub-TLV for each fixed container and one Type 2 sub-TLV for 306 each variable container. Each container type is identified by a 307 Signal Type. Signal Type values are defined in [OTN-SIG]. 309 With respect to ODUflex, three different signal types are allowed: 20 310 - ODUflex Constant Bit Rate (CBR), 21 - ODUflex Generic Framing 311 Procedure-Frame mapped (GFP-F) resizable and 22 - ODUflex (GFP-F) 312 non-resizable. Each MUST always be advertised in separate Type 2 313 sub-TLVs as each uses different adaptation functions [G.805]. In the 314 case that both GFP-F resizable and non-resizable (i.e., 21 and 22) 315 are supported, only Signal Type 21 SHALL be advertised as this type 316 also implies support for type 22 adaptation. 318 4.1.1. Switching Capability Specific Information for fixed containers 320 The format of the Bandwidth sub-TLV for fixed containers is depicted 321 in the following figure: 323 0 1 2 3 324 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 1 325 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 326 | Type = 1 (Unres-fix) | Length | 327 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 328 | Signal type | Num of stages |T|S| TSG | Res | Priority | 329 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 330 | Stage#1 | ... | Stage#N | Padding | 331 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 332 | Unreserved ODUj at Prio 0 | ..... | 333 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 334 | Unreserved ODUj at Prio 7 | Unreserved Padding | 335 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 337 Figure 3: Bandwidth sub-TLV - Type 1 - 339 The values of the fields shown in figure 3 are explained in section 340 4.1.3. 342 4.1.2. Switching Capability Specific Information for variable 343 containers 345 The format of the Bandwidth sub-TLV for variable containers is 346 depicted in the following figure: 348 0 1 2 3 349 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 1 350 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 351 | Type = 2 (Unres/MAX-var) | Length | 352 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 353 | Signal type | Num of stages |T|S| TSG | Res | Priority | 354 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 355 | Stage#1 | ... | Stage#N | Padding | 356 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 357 | Unreserved Bandwidth at priority 0 | 358 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 359 | ... | 360 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 361 | Unreserved Bandwidth at priority 7 | 362 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 363 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 0 | 364 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 365 | ... | 366 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 367 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 7 | 368 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 370 Figure 4: Bandwidth sub-TLV - Type 2 - 372 The values of the fields shown in figure 4 are explained in section 373 4.1.3. 375 4.1.3. Switching Capability Specific Information - Field values and 376 explanation 378 The fields in the Bandwidth sub-TLV MUST be filled as follows: 380 - Signal Type (8 bits): Indicates the ODU type being advertised. 381 Values are defined in [OTN-SIG]. 383 - Number of stages (8 bits): This field indicates the number of 384 multiplexing stages used to transport the indicated signal type. 385 It MUST be set to the number of stages represented in the sub-TLV. 387 - Flags (8 bits): 389 - T Flag (bit 17): Indicates whether the advertised bandwidth 390 can be terminated. When the signal type can be terminated T 391 MUST be set, while when the signal type cannot be terminated T 392 MUST be cleared. 394 - S Flag (bit 18): Indicates whether the advertised bandwidth 395 can be switched. When the signal type can be switched S MUST 396 be set, while when the signal type cannot be switched S MUST be 397 cleared. 399 The value 0 in both T and S bits MUST NOT be used. 401 - TS Granularity: Tributary Slot Granularity (3 bits): Used for 402 the advertisement of the supported Tributary Slot granularity. 403 The following values MUST be used: 405 - 0 - Ignored 407 - 1 - 1.25Gbps/2.5Gbps 409 - 2 - 2.5Gbps only 411 - 3 - 1.25Gbps only 413 - 4-7 - Reserved 415 A value of 1 MUST be used on interfaces which are configured to 416 support the fall back procedures defined in [G.798-a2]. A value 417 of 2 MUST be used on interfaces that only support 2.5Gbps time 418 slots, such as [RFC4328] interfaces. A value of 3 MUST be used on 419 interfaces that are configured to only support 1.25Gbps time 420 slots. A value of 0 MUST be used for non-multiplexed signal types 421 (i.e., a non-OTN client). 423 - Res (3 bits): reserved bits. MUST be set to 0 and ignored on 424 receipt. 426 - Priority (8 bits): A bitmap used to indicate which priorities 427 are being advertised. The bitmap is in ascending order, with the 428 leftmost bit representing priority level 0 (i.e., the highest) and 429 the rightmost bit representing priority level 7 (i.e., the 430 lowest). A bit MUST be set (1) corresponding to each priority 431 represented in the sub-TLV, and MUST NOT be set (0) when the 432 corresponding priority is not represented. At least one priority 433 level MUST be advertised that, unless overridden by local policy, 434 SHALL be at priority level 0. 436 - Stage (8 bits): Each Stage field indicates a signal type in the 437 multiplexing hierarchy used to transport the signal indicated in 438 the Signal Type field. The number of Stage fields included in a 439 sub-TLV MUST equal the value of the Number of Stages field. The 440 Stage fields MUST be ordered to match the data plane in ascending 441 order (from the lowest order ODU to the highest order ODU). The 442 values of the Stage field are the same as those defined for the 443 Signal Type field. When the Number of stage field carries a 0, 444 then the Stage and Padding fields MUST be omitted. 446 - Padding (variable): The Padding field is used to ensure the 32 447 bit alignment of stage fields. The length of the Padding field is 448 always a multiple of 8 bits (1 byte). Its length can be 449 calculated, in bytes, as: 4 - ( "value of Number of Stages field" 450 % 4). The Padding field MUST be set to a zero (0) value on 451 transmission and MUST be ignored on receipt. 453 - Unreserved ODUj (16 bits): This field indicates the Unreserved 454 Bandwidth at a particular priority level. This field MUST be set 455 to the number of ODUs at the indicated the Signal Type for a 456 particular priority level. One field MUST be present for each bit 457 set in the Priority field, and is ordered to match the Priority 458 field. Fields MUST NOT be present for priority levels that are 459 not indicated in the Priority field. 461 - Unreserved Padding (16 bits): The Padding field is used to 462 ensure the 32 bit alignment of Unreserved ODUj fields. When 463 present the Unreserved Padding field is 16 bits (2 byte) long. 464 When the number of priorities is odd, the Unreserved Padding field 465 MUST be included. When the number of priorities is even, the 466 Unreserved Padding MUST be omitted. 468 - Unreserved Bandwidth (32 bits): This field indicates the 469 Unreserved Bandwidth at a particular priority level. This field 470 MUST be set to the bandwidth, in Bytes/sec in IEEE floating point 471 format, available at the indicated Signal Type for a particular 472 priority level. One field MUST be present for each bit set in the 473 Priority field, and is ordered to match the Priority field. 474 Fields MUST NOT be present for priority levels that are not 475 indicated in the Priority field. 477 - Maximum LSP Bandwidth (32 bit): This field indicates the maximum 478 bandwidth that can be allocated for a single LSP at a particular 479 priority level. This field MUST be set to the maximum bandwidth, 480 in Bytes/sec in IEEE floating point format, available to a single 481 LSP at the indicated Signal Type for a particular priority level. 482 One field MUST be present for each bit set in the Priority field, 483 and is ordered to match the Priority field. Fields MUST NOT be 484 present for priority levels that are not indicated in the Priority 485 field. The advertisement of the MAX LSP Bandwidth MUST take into 486 account HO OPUk bit rate tolerance and be calculated according to 487 the following formula: 489 Max LSP BW = (# available TSs) * (ODTUk.ts nominal bit rate) * 490 (1-HO OPUk bit rate tolerance) 492 5. Examples 494 The examples in the following pages are not normative and are not 495 intended to imply or mandate any specific implementation. 497 5.1. MAX LSP Bandwidth fields in the ISCD 499 This example shows how the MAX LSP Bandwidth fields of the ISCD are 500 filled accordingly to the evolving of the TE-link bandwidth 501 occupancy. In the example an OTU4 link is considered, with supported 502 priorities 0,2,4,7 and muxing hierarchy ODU1->ODU2->ODU3->ODU4. 504 At time T0, with the link completely free, the advertisement would 505 be: 507 0 1 2 3 508 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 1 509 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 510 | SwCap=OTN_TDM | Encoding = 12 | Reserved (all zeros) | 511 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 512 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 0 = 100Gbps | 513 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 514 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 1 = 0 | 515 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 516 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 2 = 100Gbps | 517 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 518 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 3 = 0 | 519 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 520 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 4 = 100Gbps | 521 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 522 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 5 = 0 | 523 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 524 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 6 = 0 | 525 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 526 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 7 = 100Gbps | 527 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 528 | Switching Capability Specific Information | 529 | (variable length) | 530 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 532 Figure 5: Example 1 - MAX LSP Bandwidth fields in the ISCD at T0 534 At time T1, an ODU3 at priority 2 is set-up, so for priority 0 the 535 MAX LSP Bandwidth is still equal to the ODU4 bandwidth, while for 536 priorities from 2 to 7 (excluding the non-supported ones) the MAX LSP 537 Bandwidth is equal to ODU3, as no more ODU4s are available and the 538 next supported ODUj in the hierarchy is ODU3. The advertisement is 539 updated as follows: 541 0 1 2 3 542 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 1 543 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 544 | SwCap=OTN_TDM | Encoding = 12 | Reserved (all zeros) | 545 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 546 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 0 = 100Gbps | 547 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 548 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 1 = 0 | 549 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 550 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 2 = 40Gbps | 551 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 552 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 3 = 0 | 553 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 554 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 4 = 40Gbps | 555 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 556 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 5 = 0 | 557 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 558 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 6 = 0 | 559 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 560 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 7 = 40Gbps | 561 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 562 | Switching Capability Specific Information | 563 | (variable length) | 564 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 566 Figure 6: Example 1 - MAX LSP Bandwidth fields in the ISCD at T1 568 At time T2, an ODU2 at priority 4 is set-up. The first ODU3 is no 569 longer available since T1, as it was kept by the ODU3 LSP, while the 570 second is no more available and just 3 ODU2 are left in it. ODU2 is 571 now the MAX LSP Bandwidth for priorities higher than 4. The 572 advertisement is updated as follows: 574 0 1 2 3 575 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 1 576 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 577 | SwCap=OTN_TDM | Encoding = 12 | Reserved (all zeros) | 578 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 579 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 0 = 100Gbps | 580 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 581 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 1 = 0 | 582 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 583 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 2 = 40Gbps | 584 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 585 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 3 = 0 | 586 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 587 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 4 = 10Gbps | 588 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 589 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 5 = 0 | 590 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 591 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 6 = 0 | 592 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 593 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 7 = 10Gbps | 594 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 595 | Switching Capability Specific Information | 596 | (variable length) | 597 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 599 Figure 7: Example 1 - MAX LSP Bandwidth fields in the ISCD at T2 601 5.2. Example of T,S and TS granularity utilization 603 In this example, an interface with Tributary Slot Type 1.25Gbps and 604 fallback procedure enabled is considered (TS granularity=1). It 605 supports the simple ODU1->ODU2->ODU3 hierarchy and priorities 0 and 606 3. Suppose that in this interface the ODU3 signal type can be both 607 switched or terminated, the ODU2 can only be terminated, and the ODU1 608 switched only. Please note that since the ODU1 is not being 609 advertised to support ODU0, the value of is "ignored" (TS 610 granularity=0). For the advertisement of the capabilities of such 611 interface, a single ISCD is used and its format is as follows: 613 0 1 2 3 614 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 1 615 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 616 | Type = 1 (Unres-fix) | Length = 12 | 617 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 618 |Sig type=ODU1 | #stages= 2 |0|1| 0 |0 0 0|1|0|0|1|0|0|0|0| 619 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 620 | Stage#1=ODU2 | Stage#2=ODU3 | Padding (all zeros) | 621 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 622 | Unres ODU1 at Prio 0 | Unres ODU1 at Prio 3 | 623 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 624 | Type = 1 (Unres-fix) | Length = 12 | 625 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 626 |Sig type=ODU2 | #stages= 1 |1|0| 1 |0 0 0|1|0|0|1|0|0|0|0| 627 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 628 | Stage#1=ODU3 | Padding (all zeros) | 629 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 630 | Unres ODU2 at Prio 0 | Unres ODU2 at Prio 3 | 631 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 632 | Type = 1 (Unres-fix) | Length = 8 | 633 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 634 |Sig type=ODU3 | #stages= 0 |1|1| 1 |0 0 0|1|0|0|1|0|0|0|0| 635 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 636 | Unres ODU3 at Prio 0 | Unres ODU3 at Prio 3 | 637 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 639 Figure 8: Example 2 - TS granularity, T and S utilization 641 5.2.1. Example of different TS Granularities 643 In this example, two interfaces with homogeneous hierarchies but 644 different Tributary Slot Types are considered. The first one 645 supports a [RFC4328] interface (TS granularity=2) while the second 646 one supports G.709-2012 interface with fallback procedure disabled 647 (TS granularity=3). Both of them support ODU1->ODU2->ODU3 hierarchy 648 and priorities 0 and 3. Suppose that in this interface the ODU3 649 signal type can be both switched or terminated, the ODU2 can only be 650 terminated, and the ODU1 switched only. For the advertisement of the 651 capabilities of such interfaces, two different ISCDs are used and the 652 format of their SCSIs is as follows: 654 SCSI of ISCD 1 - TS granularity=2 655 0 1 2 3 656 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 1 657 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 658 | Type = 1 (Unres-fix) | Length = 12 | 659 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 660 |Sig type=ODU1 | #stages= 2 |0|1| 0 |0 0 0|1|0|0|1|0|0|0|0| 661 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 662 | Stage#1=ODU2 | Stage#2=ODU3 | Padding (all zeros) | 663 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 664 | Unres ODU1 at Prio 0 | Unres ODU1 at Prio 3 | 665 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 666 | Type = 1 (Unres-fix) | Length = 12 | 667 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 668 |Sig type=ODU2 | #stages= 1 |1|0| 1 |0 0 0|1|0|0|1|0|0|0|0| 669 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 670 | Stage#1=ODU3 | Padding (all zeros) | 671 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 672 | Unres ODU2 at Prio 0 | Unres ODU2 at Prio 3 | 673 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 674 | Type = 1 (Unres-fix) | Length = 8 | 675 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 676 |Sig type=ODU3 | #stages= 0 |1|1| 2 |0 0 0|1|0|0|1|0|0|0|0| 677 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 678 | Unres ODU3 at Prio 0 | Unres ODU3 at Prio 3 | 679 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 681 Figure 9: Example 2.1 - Different TS Granularities utilization - ISCD 682 1 684 SCSI of ISCD 2 - TS granularity=3 685 0 1 2 3 686 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 1 687 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 688 | Type = 1 (Unres-fix) | Length = 12 | 689 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 690 |Sig type=ODU1 | #stages= 2 |0|1| 0 |0 0 0|1|0|0|1|0|0|0|0| 691 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 692 | Stage#1=ODU2 | Stage#2=ODU3 | Padding (all zeros) | 693 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 694 | Unres ODU1 at Prio 0 | Unres ODU1 at Prio 3 | 695 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 696 | Type = 1 (Unres-fix) | Length = 12 | 697 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 698 |Sig type=ODU2 | #stages= 1 |1|0| 1 |0 0 0|1|0|0|1|0|0|0|0| 699 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 700 | Stage#1=ODU3 | Padding (all zeros) | 701 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 702 | Unres ODU2 at Prio 0 | Unres ODU2 at Prio 3 | 703 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 704 | Type = 1 (Unres-fix) | Length = 8 | 705 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 706 |Sig type=ODU3 | #stages= 0 |1|1| 3 |0 0 0|1|0|0|1|0|0|0|0| 707 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 708 | Unres ODU3 at Prio 0 | Unres ODU3 at Prio 3 | 709 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 711 Figure 10: Example 2.1 - Different TS Granularities utilization - 712 ISCD 2 714 A particular case in which hierarchies with the same muxing tree but 715 with different exported TS granularity MUST be considered as non- 716 homogenous hierarchies. This is the case in which an H-LPS and the 717 client LSP are terminated on the same egress node. What can happen 718 is that a loose Explicit Route Object (ERO) is used at the hop where 719 the signaled LSP is nested into the Hierarchical-LSP (H-LSP) 720 (penultimate hop of the LSP). 722 In the following figure, node C receives from A a loose ERO towards 723 node E and must choose between the ODU2 H-LSP on if1 or the one on 724 if2. In this case, the H-LSP on if1 exports a TS=1.25Gbps, and if2 a 725 TS=2.5Gbps, the service LSP being signaled needs a 1.25Gbps tributary 726 slot, only the H-LSP on if1 can be used to reach node E. For further 727 details, please see section 4.1 of the [OTN-INFO]. 729 ODU0-LSP 730 ..........................................................+ 731 | | 732 | ODU2-H-LSP | 733 | +-------------------------------+ 734 | | | 735 +--+--+ +-----+ +-----+ if1 +-----+ +-----+ 736 | | OTU3 | | OTU3 | |---------| |---------| | 737 | A +------+ B +------+ C | if2 | D | | E | 738 | | | | | |---------| |---------| | 739 +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ +-----+ 741 ... Service LSP 742 --- H-LSP 744 Figure 11: Example - Service LSP and H-LSP terminating on the same 745 node 747 5.3. Example of ODUflex advertisement 749 In this example, the advertisement of an ODUflex->ODU3 hierarchy is 750 shown. In case of ODUflex advertisement, the MAX LSP Bandwidth needs 751 to be advertised and, in some cases, information about the Unreserved 752 bandwidth could also be useful. The amount of Unreserved bandwidth 753 does not give a clear indication of how many ODUflex LSP can be set 754 up either at the MAX LSP Bandwidth or at different rates, as it gives 755 no information about the spatial allocation of the free TSs. 757 An indication of the amount of Unreserved bandwidth could be useful 758 during the path computation process, as shown in the following 759 example. Supposing there are two TE-links (A and B) with MAX LSP 760 Bandwidth equal to 10 Gbps each. In the case where 50Gbps of 761 Unreserved Bandwidth are available on Link A, 10Gbps on Link B, and 3 762 ODUflex LSPs of 10 GBps each have to be restored, for sure only one 763 can be restored along Link B and it is probable, but not certain, 764 that two of them can be restored along Link A. T, S and TS 765 granularity fields are not relevant to this example (filled with Xs). 767 In the case of ODUflex advertisement, the Type 2 Bandwidth sub-TLV is 768 used. 770 0 1 2 3 771 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 1 772 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 773 | Type = 2 (Unres/MAX-var) | Length = 72 | 774 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 775 |S. type=ODUflex| #stages= 1 |X|X|X X X|0 0 0| Priority(8) | 776 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 777 | Stage#1=ODU3 | Padding (all zeros) | 778 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 779 | Unreserved Bandwidth at priority 0 | 780 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 781 | Unreserved Bandwidth at priority 1 | 782 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 783 | Unreserved Bandwidth at priority 2 | 784 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 785 | Unreserved Bandwidth at priority 3 | 786 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 787 | Unreserved Bandwidth at priority 4 | 788 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 789 | Unreserved Bandwidth at priority 5 | 790 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 791 | Unreserved Bandwidth at priority 6 | 792 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 793 | Unreserved Bandwidth at priority 7 | 794 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 795 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 0 | 796 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 797 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 1 | 798 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 799 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 2 | 800 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 801 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 3 | 802 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 803 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 4 | 804 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 805 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 5 | 806 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 807 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 6 | 808 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 809 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 7 | 810 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 812 Figure 12: Example 3 - ODUflex advertisement 814 5.4. Example of single stage muxing 816 Supposing there is 1 OTU4 component link supporting single stage 817 muxing of ODU1, ODU2, ODU3 and ODUflex, the supported hierarchy can 818 be summarized in a tree as in the following figure. For sake of 819 simplicity, we also assume that only priorities 0 and 3 are 820 supported. T, S and TS granularity fields are not relevant to this 821 example(filled with Xs). 823 ODU1 ODU2 ODU3 ODUflex 824 \ \ / / 825 \ \ / / 826 \ \/ / 827 ODU4 829 and the related SCSIs as follows: 831 0 1 2 3 832 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 1 833 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 834 | Type = 1 (Unres-fix) | Length = 8 | 835 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 836 |Sig type=ODU4 | #stages= 0 |X|X|X X X|0 0 0|1|0|0|1|0|0|0|0| 837 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 838 | Unres ODU4 at Prio 0 =1 | Unres ODU4 at Prio 3 =1 | 839 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 840 | Type = 1 (Unres-fix) | Length = 12 | 841 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 842 |Sig type=ODU1 | #stages= 1 |X|X|X X X|0 0 0|1|0|0|1|0|0|0|0| 843 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 844 | Stage#1=ODU4 | Padding (all zeros) | 845 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 846 | Unres ODU1 at Prio 0 =40 | Unres ODU1 at Prio 3 =40 | 847 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 848 | Type = 1 (Unres-fix) | Length = 12 | 849 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 850 |Sig type=ODU2 | #stages= 1 |X|X|X X X|0 0 0|1|0|0|1|0|0|0|0| 851 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 852 | Stage#1=ODU4 | Padding (all zeros) | 853 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 854 | Unres ODU2 at Prio 0 =10 | Unres ODU2 at Prio 3 =10 | 855 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 856 | Type = 1 (Unres-fix) | Length = 12 | 857 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 858 |Sig type=ODU3 | #stages= 1 |X|X|X X X|0 0 0|1|0|0|1|0|0|0|0| 859 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 860 | Stage#1=ODU4 | Padding (all zeros) | 861 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 862 | Unres ODU3 at Prio 0 =2 | Unres ODU3 at Prio 3 =2 | 863 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 864 | Type = 2 (Unres/MAX-var) | Length = 24 | 865 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 866 |S. type=ODUflex| #stages= 1 |X|X|X X X|0 0 0|1|0|0|1|0|0|0|0| 867 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 868 | Stage#1=ODU4 | Padding (all zeros) | 869 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 870 | Unreserved Bandwidth at priority 0 =100Gbps | 871 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 872 | Unreserved Bandwidth at priority 3 =100Gbps | 873 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 874 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 0 =100Gbps | 875 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 876 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 3 =100Gbps | 877 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 878 Figure 13: Example 4 - Single stage muxing 880 5.5. Example of multi stage muxing - Unbundled link 882 Supposing there is 1 OTU4 component link with muxing capabilities as 883 shown in the following figure: 885 ODU2 ODU0 ODUflex ODU0 886 \ / \ / 887 | | 888 ODU3 ODU2 889 \ / 890 \ / 891 \ / 892 \ / 893 ODU4 895 and supported priorities 0 and 3, the advertisement is composed by 896 the following Bandwidth sub-TLVs (T and S fields are not relevant to 897 this example and filled with Xs): 899 0 1 2 3 900 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 1 901 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 902 | Type = 1 (Unres-fix) | Length = 8 | 903 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 904 |Sig type=ODU4 | #stages= 0 |X|X| 1 |0 0 0|1|0|0|1|0|0|0|0| 905 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 906 | Unres ODU4 at Prio 0 =1 | Unres ODU4 at Prio 3 =1 | 907 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 908 | Type = 1 (Unres-fix) | Length = 12 | 909 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 910 |Sig type=ODU3 | #stages= 1 |X|X| 1 |0 0 0|1|0|0|1|0|0|0|0| 911 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 912 | Stage#1=ODU4 | Padding (all zeros) | 913 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 914 | Unres ODU3 at Prio 0 =2 | Unres ODU3 at Prio 3 =2 | 915 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 916 | Type = 1 (Unres-fix) | Length = 12 | 917 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 918 |Sig type=ODU2 | #stages= 1 |X|X| 1 |0 0 0|1|0|0|1|0|0|0|0| 919 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 920 | Stage#1=ODU4 | Padding (all zeros) | 921 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 922 | Unres ODU2 at Prio 0 =10 | Unres ODU2 at Prio 3 =10 | 923 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 924 | Type = 1 (Unres-fix) | Length = 12 | 925 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 926 |Sig type=ODU2 | #stages= 2 |X|X| 0 |0 0 0|1|0|0|1|0|0|0|0| 927 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 928 | Stage#1=ODU3 | Stage#2=ODU4 | Padding (all zeros) | 929 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 930 | Unres ODU2 at Prio 0 =8 | Unres ODU2 at Prio 3 =8 | 931 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 932 | Type = 1 (Unres-fix) | Length = 12 | 933 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 934 |Sig type=ODU0 | #stages= 2 |X|X| 0 |0 0 0|1|0|0|1|0|0|0|0| 935 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 936 | Stage#1=ODU3 | Stage#2=ODU4 | Padding (all zeros) | 937 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 938 | Unres ODU0 at Prio 0 =64 | Unres ODU0 at Prio 3 =64 | 939 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 940 | Type = 1 (Unres-fix) | Length = 12 | 941 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 942 |Sig type=ODU0 | #stages= 2 |X|X| 0 |0 0 0|1|0|0|1|0|0|0|0| 943 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 944 | Stage#1=ODU2 | Stage#2=ODU4 | Padding (all zeros) | 945 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 946 | Unres ODU0 at Prio 0 =80 | Unres ODU0 at Prio 3 =80 | 947 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 948 | Type = 2 (Unres/MAX-var) | Length = 24 | 949 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 950 |S.type=ODUflex | #stages= 2 |X|X| 0 |0 0 0|1|0|0|1|0|0|0|0| 951 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 952 | Stage#1=ODU2 | Stage#2=ODU4 | Padding (all zeros) | 953 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 954 | Unreserved Bandwidth at priority 0 =100Gbps | 955 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 956 | Unreserved Bandwidth at priority 3 =100Gbps | 957 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 958 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 0 =10Gbps | 959 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 960 | MAX LSP Bandwidth at priority 3 =10Gbps | 961 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 963 Figure 14: Example 5 - Multi stage muxing - Unbundled link 965 5.6. Example of multi stage muxing - Bundled links 967 In this example, 2 OTU4 component links with the same supported TS 968 granularity and homogeneous muxing hierarchies are considered. The 969 following muxing capabilities trees are supported: 971 Component Link#1 Component Link#2 972 ODU2 ODU0 ODU2 ODU0 973 \ / \ / 974 | | 975 ODU3 ODU3 976 | | 977 ODU4 ODU4 979 Considering only supported priorities 0 and 3, the advertisement is 980 as follows (T, S and TS granularity fields are not relevant to this 981 example and filled with Xs): 983 0 1 2 3 984 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 1 985 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 986 | Type = 1 (Unres-fix) | Length = 8 | 987 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 988 |Sig type=ODU4 | #stages= 0 |X|X|X X X|0 0 0|1|0|0|1|0|0|0|0| 989 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 990 | Unres ODU4 at Prio 0 =2 | Unres ODU4 at Prio 3 =2 | 991 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 992 | Type = 1 (Unres-fix) | Length = 12 | 993 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 994 |Sig type=ODU3 | #stages= 1 |X|X|X X X|0 0 0|1|0|0|1|0|0|0|0| 995 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 996 | Stage#1=ODU4 | Padding (all zeros) | 997 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 998 | Unres ODU3 at Prio 0 =4 | Unres ODU3 at Prio 3 =4 | 999 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1000 | Type = 1 (Unres-fix) | Length = 12 | 1001 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1002 |Sig type=ODU2 | #stages= 2 |X|X|X X X|0 0 0|1|0|0|1|0|0|0|0| 1003 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1004 | Stage#1=ODU3 | Stage#2=ODU4 | Padding (all zeros) | 1005 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1006 | Unres ODU2 at Prio 0 =16 | Unres ODU2 at Prio 3 =16 | 1007 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1008 | Type = 1 (Unres-fix) | Length = 12 | 1009 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1010 |Sig type=ODU0 | #stages= 2 |X|X|X X X|0 0 0|1|0|0|1|0|0|0|0| 1011 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1012 | Stage#1=ODU3 | Stage#2=ODU4 | Padding (all zeros) | 1013 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1014 | Unres ODU0 at Prio 0 =128 | Unres ODU0 at Prio 3 =128 | 1015 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1017 Figure 15: Example 6 - Multi stage muxing - Bundled links 1019 5.7. Example of component links with non-homogeneous hierarchies 1021 In this example, 2 OTU4 component links with the same supported TS 1022 granularity and non-homogeneous muxing hierarchies are considered. 1023 The following muxing capabilities trees are supported: 1025 Component Link#1 Component Link#2 1026 ODU2 ODU0 ODU1 ODU0 1027 \ / \ / 1028 | | 1029 ODU3 ODU2 1030 | | 1031 ODU4 ODU4 1033 Considering only supported priorities 0 and 3, the advertisement uses 1034 two different ISCDs, one for each hierarchy (T, S and TS granularity 1035 fields are not relevant to this example and filled with Xs). In the 1036 following figure, the SCSI of each ISCD is shown: 1038 SCSI of ISCD 1 - Component Link#1 1040 0 1 2 3 1041 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 1042 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1043 | Type = 1 (Unres-fix) | Length = 8 | 1044 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1045 |Sig type=ODU4 | #stages= 0 |X|X|X X X|0 0 0|1|0|0|1|0|0|0|0| 1046 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1047 | Unres ODU4 at Prio 0 =1 | Unres ODU4 at Prio 3 =1 | 1048 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1049 | Type = 1 (Unres-fix) | Length = 12 | 1050 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1051 |Sig type=ODU3 | #stages= 1 |X|X|X X X|0 0 0|1|0|0|1|0|0|0|0| 1052 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1053 | Stage#1=ODU4 | Padding (all zeros) | 1054 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1055 | Unres ODU3 at Prio 0 =2 | Unres ODU3 at Prio 3 =2 | 1056 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1057 | Type = 1 (Unres-fix) | Length = 12 | 1058 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1059 |Sig type=ODU2 | #stages= 2 |X|X|X X X|0 0 0|1|0|0|1|0|0|0|0| 1060 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1061 | Stage#1=ODU3 | Stage#2=ODU4 | Padding (all zeros) | 1062 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1063 | Unres ODU2 at Prio 0 =8 | Unres ODU2 at Prio 3 =8 | 1064 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1065 | Type = 1 (Unres-fix) | Length = 12 | 1066 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1067 |Sig type=ODU0 | #stages= 2 |X|X|X X X|0 0 0|1|0|0|1|0|0|0|0| 1068 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1069 | Stage#1=ODU3 | Stage#2=ODU4 | Padding (all zeros) | 1070 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1071 | Unres ODU0 at Prio 0 =64 | Unres ODU0 at Prio 3 =64 | 1072 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1074 Figure 16: Example 7 - Multi stage muxing - Non-homogeneous 1075 hierarchies - ISCD 1 1077 SCSI of ISCD 2 - Component Link#2 1079 0 1 2 3 1080 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 1081 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1082 | Type = 1 (Unres-fix) | Length = 8 | 1083 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1084 |Sig type=ODU4 | #stages= 0 |X|X|X X X|0 0 0|1|0|0|1|0|0|0|0| 1085 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1086 | Unres ODU4 at Prio 0 =1 | Unres ODU4 at Prio 3 =1 | 1087 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1088 | Type = 1 (Unres-fix) | Length = 12 | 1089 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1090 |Sig type=ODU2 | #stages= 1 |X|X|X X X|0 0 0|1|0|0|1|0|0|0|0| 1091 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1092 | Stage#1=ODU4 | Padding (all zeros) | 1093 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1094 | Unres ODU2 at Prio 0 =10 | Unres ODU2 at Prio 3 =10 | 1095 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1096 | Type = 1 (Unres-fix) | Length = 12 | 1097 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1098 |Sig type=ODU1 | #stages= 2 |X|X|X X X|0 0 0|1|0|0|1|0|0|0|0| 1099 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1100 | Stage#1=ODU2 | Stage#2=ODU4 | Padding (all zeros) | 1101 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1102 | Unres ODU1 at Prio 0 =40 | Unres ODU1 at Prio 3 =40 | 1103 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1104 | Type = 1 (Unres-fix) | Length = 12 | 1105 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1106 |Sig type=ODU0 | #stages= 2 |X|X|X X X|0 0 0|1|0|0|1|0|0|0|0| 1107 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1108 | Stage#1=ODU2 | Stage#2=ODU4 | Padding (all zeros) | 1109 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1110 | Unres ODU0 at Prio 0 =80 | Unres ODU0 at Prio 3 =80 | 1111 +-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ 1113 Figure 17: Example 7 - Multi stage muxing - Non-homogeneous 1114 hierarchies - ISCD 2 1116 6. OSPFv2 scalability 1118 This document does not introduce OSPF scalability issues with respect 1119 to existing GMPLS encoding and does not require any modification to 1120 flooding frequency. Moreover, the design of the encoding has been 1121 carried out taking into account bandwidth optimization, and in 1122 particular: 1124 - Only unreserved and MAX LSP Bandwidth related to supported 1125 priorities are advertised 1127 - With respect of fixed containers, only the number of available 1128 containers is advertised instead of available bandwidth so to use 1129 only 16 bits per container instead of 32 (as per former GMPLS 1130 encoding 1132 In order to further reduce the amount of data advertised it is 1133 RECOMMENDED to bundle component links with homogeneous hierarchies as 1134 described in [RFC4201] and illustrated in Section 5.6. 1136 7. Compatibility 1138 All implementations of this document MAY also support advertisement 1139 as defined in [RFC4328]. When nodes support both advertisement 1140 methods, implementations MUST support the configuration of which 1141 advertisement method is followed. The choice of which is used is 1142 based on policy and beyond the scope of this document. This enables 1143 nodes following each method to identify similar supporting nodes and 1144 compute paths using only the appropriate nodes. 1146 8. Security Considerations 1148 This document extends [RFC4203]. As with[RFC4203], it specifies the 1149 contents of Opaque LSAs in OSPFv2. As Opaque LSAs are not used for 1150 SPF computation or normal routing, the extensions specified here have 1151 no direct effect on IP routing. Tampering with GMPLS TE LSAs may 1152 have an effect on the underlying transport (optical and/or SONET-SDH) 1153 network. [RFC3630] notes that the security mechanisms described in 1154 [RFC2328] apply to Opaque LSAs carried in OSPFv2. An analysis of the 1155 security of OSPF is provided in [RFC6863] and applies to the 1156 extensions to OSPF as described in this document. Any new mechanisms 1157 developed to protect the transmission of information carried in 1158 Opaque LSAs will also automatically protect the extensions defined in 1159 this document. 1161 For security threats, defensive techniques, monitoring/detection/ 1162 reporting of security attacks and requirements please refer to 1163 [RFC5920]. 1165 9. IANA Considerations 1166 9.1. Switching types 1168 Upon approval of this document, IANA will make the assignment in the 1169 "Switching Types" section of the "GMPLS Signaling Parameters" 1170 registry located at 1171 http://www.iana.org/assignments/gmpls-sig-parameters: 1173 Value Name Reference 1174 --------- -------------------------- ---------- 1175 110 (*) OTN-TDM capable (OTN-TDM) [This.I-D] 1177 (*) Suggested value 1179 Same type of modification needs to applied to the IANA-GMPLS-TC-MIB 1180 at https://www.iana.org/assignments/ianagmplstc-mib/ianagmplstc-mib, 1181 where the value: 1183 OTN-TDM (110), -- Time-Division-Multiplex OTN-TDM capable 1185 Will be added to the IANAGmplsSwitchingTypeTC ::= TEXTUAL-CONVENTION 1186 syntax list. 1188 9.2. New sub-TLVs 1190 This document defines 2 new sub-TLVs that are carried in Interface 1191 Switching Capability Descriptors [RFC4203] with Signal Type OTN-TDM. 1192 Each sub-TLV includes a 16-bit type identifier (the T-field). The 1193 same T-field values are applicable to the new sub-TLV. 1195 Upon approval of this document, IANA will create and maintain a new 1196 sub-registry, the "Types for sub-TLVs of OTN-TDM SCSI (Switch 1197 Capability-Specific Information)" registry under the "Open Shortest 1198 Path First (OSPF) Traffic Engineering TLVs" registry, see http:// 1199 www.iana.org/assignments/ospf-traffic-eng-tlvs/ 1200 ospf-traffic-eng-tlvs.xml, with the sub-TLV types as follows: 1202 This document defines new sub-TLV types as follows: 1204 Value Sub-TLV Reference 1205 --------- -------------------------- ---------- 1206 0 Reserved [This.I-D] 1207 1 Unreserved Bandwidth for [This.I-D] 1208 fixed containers 1209 2 Unreserved/MAX Bandwidth for [This.I-D] 1210 flexible containers 1212 3-65535 Unassigned 1214 Types are to be assigned via Standards Action as defined in 1215 [RFC5226]. 1217 10. Contributors 1219 Diego Caviglia, Ericsson 1221 Via E.Melen, 77 - Genova - Italy 1223 Email: diego.caviglia@ericsson.com 1225 Dan Li, Huawei Technologies 1227 Bantian, Longgang District - Shenzhen 518129 P.R.China 1229 Email: danli@huawei.com 1231 Pietro Vittorio Grandi, Alcatel-Lucent 1233 Via Trento, 30 - Vimercate - Italy 1235 Email: pietro_vittorio.grandi@alcatel-lucent.com 1237 Khuzema Pithewan, Infinera Corporation 1239 140 Caspian CT., Sunnyvale - CA - USA 1241 Email: kpithewan@infinera.com 1243 Xiaobing Zi, Huawei Technologies 1245 Email: zixiaobing@huawei.com 1247 Francesco Fondelli, Ericsson 1248 Email: francesco.fondelli@ericsson.com 1250 Marco Corsi 1252 EMail: corsi.marco@gmail.com 1254 Eve Varma, Alcatel-Lucent 1256 EMail: eve.varma@alcatel-lucent.com 1258 Jonathan Sadler, Tellabs 1260 EMail: jonathan.sadler@tellabs.com 1262 Lyndon Ong, Ciena 1264 EMail: lyong@ciena.com 1266 Ashok Kunjidhapatham 1268 akunjidhapatham@infinera.com 1270 Snigdho Bardalai 1272 sbardalai@infinera.com 1274 Steve Balls 1276 Steve.Balls@metaswitch.com 1278 Jonathan Hardwick 1279 Jonathan.Hardwick@metaswitch.com 1281 Xihua Fu 1283 fu.xihua@zte.com.cn 1285 Cyril Margaria 1287 cyril.margaria@nsn.com 1289 Malcolm Betts 1291 Malcolm.betts@zte.com.cn 1293 11. Acknowledgements 1295 The authors would like to thank Fred Gruman and Lou Berger for the 1296 precious comments and suggestions. 1298 12. References 1300 12.1. Normative References 1302 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 1303 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. 1305 [RFC3630] Katz, D., Kompella, K., and D. Yeung, "Traffic Engineering 1306 (TE) Extensions to OSPF Version 2", RFC 3630, 1307 September 2003. 1309 [RFC4201] Kompella, K., Rekhter, Y., and L. Berger, "Link Bundling 1310 in MPLS Traffic Engineering (TE)", RFC 4201, October 2005. 1312 [RFC4203] Kompella, K. and Y. Rekhter, "OSPF Extensions in Support 1313 of Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS)", 1314 RFC 4203, October 2005. 1316 [RFC4328] Papadimitriou, D., "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label 1317 Switching (GMPLS) Signaling Extensions for G.709 Optical 1318 Transport Networks Control", RFC 4328, January 2006. 1320 12.2. Informative References 1322 [OTN-FWK] F.Zhang, D.Li, H.Li, S.Belotti, D.Ceccarelli, "Framework 1323 for GMPLS and PCE Control of G.709 Optical Transport 1324 networks, work in progress 1325 draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g709-framework-13", June 2013. 1327 [OTN-INFO] 1328 S.Belotti, P.Grandi, D.Ceccarelli, D.Caviglia, F.Zhang, 1329 D.Li, "Information model for G.709 Optical Transport 1330 Networks (OTN), work in progress 1331 draft-ietf-ccamp-otn-g709-info-model-09", June 2013. 1333 [OTN-SIG] F.Zhang, G.Zhang, S.Belotti, D.Ceccarelli, K.Pithewan, 1334 "Generalized Multi-Protocol Label Switching (GMPLS) 1335 Signaling Extensions for the evolving G.709 Optical 1336 Transport Networks Control, work in progress 1337 draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-signaling-g709v3-11", June 2013. 1339 [RFC2328] Moy, J., "OSPF Version 2", STD 54, RFC 2328, April 1998. 1341 [RFC5226] Narten, T. and H. Alvestrand, "Guidelines for Writing an 1342 IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26, RFC 5226, 1343 May 2008. 1345 [RFC5920] Fang, L., "Security Framework for MPLS and GMPLS 1346 Networks", RFC 5920, July 2010. 1348 [RFC6163] Lee, Y., Bernstein, G., and W. Imajuku, "Framework for 1349 GMPLS and Path Computation Element (PCE) Control of 1350 Wavelength Switched Optical Networks (WSONs)", RFC 6163, 1351 April 2011. 1353 [RFC6566] Lee, Y., Bernstein, G., Li, D., and G. Martinelli, "A 1354 Framework for the Control of Wavelength Switched Optical 1355 Networks (WSONs) with Impairments", RFC 6566, March 2012. 1357 [RFC6863] Hartman, S. and D. Zhang, "Analysis of OSPF Security 1358 According to the Keying and Authentication for Routing 1359 Protocols (KARP) Design Guide", RFC 6863, March 2013. 1361 [SWCAP-UPDT] 1362 F.Zhang, D.Li, H.Li, S.Belotti, D.Ceccarelli, "Framework 1363 for GMPLS and PCE Control of G.709 Optical Transport 1364 networks, work in progress 1365 draft-ietf-ccamp-gmpls-g709-framework-13", June 2013. 1367 Authors' Addresses 1369 Daniele Ceccarelli (editor) 1370 Ericsson 1371 Via E.Melen 77 1372 Genova - Erzelli 1373 Italy 1375 Email: daniele.ceccarelli@ericsson.com 1377 Fatai Zhang 1378 Huawei Technologies 1379 F3-5-B R&D Center, Huawei Base 1380 Shenzhen 518129 P.R.China Bantian, Longgang District 1381 Phone: +86-755-28972912 1383 Email: zhangfatai@huawei.com 1385 Sergio Belotti 1386 Alcatel-Lucent 1387 Via Trento, 30 1388 Vimercate 1389 Italy 1391 Email: sergio.belotti@alcatel-lucent.com 1393 Rajan Rao 1394 Infinera Corporation 1395 140, Caspian CT. 1396 Sunnyvale, CA-94089 1397 USA 1399 Email: rrao@infinera.com 1401 John E Drake 1402 Juniper 1404 Email: jdrake@juniper.net